Rachel Reeves, often dubbed "Rachel from Accounts," has reached a critical juncture. With her policies under intense scrutiny and market trust waning, many believe it's time for her to face the consequences—whether that means collecting her P45 or seeking solace in China, a country perceived as ideologically closer to her.

 

Since Labour's rise to power last July, business confidence in the UK has taken a significant hit. When Reeves and Starmer assumed control, they inherited the fastest-growing economy in the G7. However, their approach, reminiscent of Jeremy Corbyn's governance rather than Tony Blair's, has alienated wealth creators both domestically and internationally. The global financial markets, well-informed and vigilant, have not been impressed by the duo’s governance, which appears overly aligned with union interests and a leftward tilt.

 

The financial world is keenly aware of Labour’s decisions. The inflationary pay awards for train drivers and doctors did not go unnoticed, especially since these raises came without corresponding productivity improvements in the public sector. This, combined with the decision to halt the planned reduction of 66,000 Whitehall jobs, signaled a retreat from essential governmental reforms, further unsettling the markets. Trust, a vital currency in economic circles, has eroded as Reeves’ actions seemed to signal a commitment to old-fashioned, high-tax governance.

 

Reeves’ stance on independent schools has drawn particular ire. Her social media activity suggests a satisfaction in the decline of fee-paying schools, which have been harshly affected by Labour’s imposition of a 20% VAT on their fees. This policy stands out in Europe and has led to the closure of many storied institutions, a move that seems more punitive than pragmatic. The closures bring no tax benefit and only add pressure to the state education system, a move many view as ideologically driven rather than fiscally sound.

 

Trust in Reeves has further deteriorated due to her perceived dishonesty. In the last General Election, she and Starmer promised not to raise taxes on working people, a pledge that resonated deeply with British businesses. Yet, this promise was swiftly broken with an October Budget that introduced a £25 billion hike in National Insurance, a direct hit to private sector workers.

 

This Budget exacerbated an already dire situation, discouraging investment and halting job creation. The resulting economic slowdown has ironically led to lower tax revenues, perpetuating a cycle of economic distress. Inflation remains stubbornly high, exacerbated by Labour’s policies, and precludes the possibility of reducing domestic interest rates to stimulate growth.

 

Reeves now faces a dire choice: cut spending and risk the ire of her backbenchers, or raise taxes again, further stifling economic activity. Both options are fraught with peril and threaten to deepen the ongoing economic malaise.

 

Ultimately, the blame for this predicament falls squarely on Reeves. Her fiscal misjudgments and lack of a coherent growth strategy have undermined market confidence. The private sector, a cornerstone of national prosperity, feels neglected and demoralized.

 

As the economic indicators flash red at the dawn of 2025, it’s evident that Reeves’ approach has faltered. The calls for her resignation grow louder, suggesting it’s time for Rachel from Accounts to step aside. Whether Starmer can recover from this debacle remains to be seen, but a new Chancellor may be a necessary first step in restoring faith in Labour's economic management.

 

Based on a report by Daily Mail 2024-01-13

 

 

'Fake it till you make it' Reeves.

3 hours ago, Social Media said:

 

Rachel Reeves, often dubbed "Rachel from Accounts," has reached a critical juncture. With her policies under intense scrutiny and market trust waning, many believe it's time for her to face the consequences—whether that means collecting her P45 or seeking solace in China, a country perceived as ideologically closer to her.

 

Since Labour's rise to power last July, business confidence in the UK has taken a significant hit. When Reeves and Starmer assumed control, they inherited the fastest-growing economy in the G7. However, their approach, reminiscent of Jeremy Corbyn's governance rather than Tony Blair's, has alienated wealth creators both domestically and internationally. The global financial markets, well-informed and vigilant, have not been impressed by the duo’s governance, which appears overly aligned with union interests and a leftward tilt.

 

The financial world is keenly aware of Labour’s decisions. The inflationary pay awards for train drivers and doctors did not go unnoticed, especially since these raises came without corresponding productivity improvements in the public sector. This, combined with the decision to halt the planned reduction of 66,000 Whitehall jobs, signaled a retreat from essential governmental reforms, further unsettling the markets. Trust, a vital currency in economic circles, has eroded as Reeves’ actions seemed to signal a commitment to old-fashioned, high-tax governance.

 

 

Reeves’ stance on independent schools has drawn particular ire. Her social media activity suggests a satisfaction in the decline of fee-paying schools, which have been harshly affected by Labour’s imposition of a 20% VAT on their fees. This policy stands out in Europe and has led to the closure of many storied institutions, a move that seems more punitive than pragmatic. The closures bring no tax benefit and only add pressure to the state education system, a move many view as ideologically driven rather than fiscally sound.

 

Trust in Reeves has further deteriorated due to her perceived dishonesty. In the last General Election, she and Starmer promised not to raise taxes on working people, a pledge that resonated deeply with British businesses. Yet, this promise was swiftly broken with an October Budget that introduced a £25 billion hike in National Insurance, a direct hit to private sector workers.

 

This Budget exacerbated an already dire situation, discouraging investment and halting job creation. The resulting economic slowdown has ironically led to lower tax revenues, perpetuating a cycle of economic distress. Inflation remains stubbornly high, exacerbated by Labour’s policies, and precludes the possibility of reducing domestic interest rates to stimulate growth.

 

Reeves now faces a dire choice: cut spending and risk the ire of her backbenchers, or raise taxes again, further stifling economic activity. Both options are fraught with peril and threaten to deepen the ongoing economic malaise.

 

Ultimately, the blame for this predicament falls squarely on Reeves. Her fiscal misjudgments and lack of a coherent growth strategy have undermined market confidence. The private sector, a cornerstone of national prosperity, feels neglected and demoralized.

 

As the economic indicators flash red at the dawn of 2025, it’s evident that Reeves’ approach has faltered. The calls for her resignation grow louder, suggesting it’s time for Rachel from Accounts to step aside. Whether Starmer can recover from this debacle remains to be seen, but a new Chancellor may be a necessary first step in restoring faith in Labour's economic management.

 

Based on a report by Daily Mail 2024-01-13

 

 

wow,written by someone who knows nothing,hates women,hates thr labour party and hates himselfe.writen by someone who forgets that they lost the last election because there main achiement was trashing the uk econamy,even that took them 14 years !!

51 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

'Fake it till you make it' Reeves.

thank you 'forrest gump ' !!

Pensioners, for verification, check out the UKP v Thai baht rate on your frozen State pension.

55 minutes ago, portisaacozzy said:

wow,written by someone who knows nothing,hates women,hates thr labour party and hates himselfe.writen by someone who forgets that they lost the last election because there main achiement was trashing the uk econamy,even that took them 14 years !!

The above is obviously written by someone with his labour blinkers on!

Opinions differ.

 

My opinions don’t need photoshopped images to support them.

5 hours ago, Social Media said:

 

Rachel Reeves, often dubbed "Rachel from Accounts," has reached a critical juncture. With her policies under intense scrutiny and market trust waning, many believe it's time for her to face the consequences—whether that means collecting her P45 or seeking solace in China, a country perceived as ideologically closer to her.

 

Since Labour's rise to power last July, business confidence in the UK has taken a significant hit. When Reeves and Starmer assumed control, they inherited the fastest-growing economy in the G7. However, their approach, reminiscent of Jeremy Corbyn's governance rather than Tony Blair's, has alienated wealth creators both domestically and internationally. The global financial markets, well-informed and vigilant, have not been impressed by the duo’s governance, which appears overly aligned with union interests and a leftward tilt.

 

The financial world is keenly aware of Labour’s decisions. The inflationary pay awards for train drivers and doctors did not go unnoticed, especially since these raises came without corresponding productivity improvements in the public sector. This, combined with the decision to halt the planned reduction of 66,000 Whitehall jobs, signaled a retreat from essential governmental reforms, further unsettling the markets. Trust, a vital currency in economic circles, has eroded as Reeves’ actions seemed to signal a commitment to old-fashioned, high-tax governance.

 

 

Reeves’ stance on independent schools has drawn particular ire. Her social media activity suggests a satisfaction in the decline of fee-paying schools, which have been harshly affected by Labour’s imposition of a 20% VAT on their fees. This policy stands out in Europe and has led to the closure of many storied institutions, a move that seems more punitive than pragmatic. The closures bring no tax benefit and only add pressure to the state education system, a move many view as ideologically driven rather than fiscally sound.

 

Trust in Reeves has further deteriorated due to her perceived dishonesty. In the last General Election, she and Starmer promised not to raise taxes on working people, a pledge that resonated deeply with British businesses. Yet, this promise was swiftly broken with an October Budget that introduced a £25 billion hike in National Insurance, a direct hit to private sector workers.

 

This Budget exacerbated an already dire situation, discouraging investment and halting job creation. The resulting economic slowdown has ironically led to lower tax revenues, perpetuating a cycle of economic distress. Inflation remains stubbornly high, exacerbated by Labour’s policies, and precludes the possibility of reducing domestic interest rates to stimulate growth.

 

Reeves now faces a dire choice: cut spending and risk the ire of her backbenchers, or raise taxes again, further stifling economic activity. Both options are fraught with peril and threaten to deepen the ongoing economic malaise.

 

Ultimately, the blame for this predicament falls squarely on Reeves. Her fiscal misjudgments and lack of a coherent growth strategy have undermined market confidence. The private sector, a cornerstone of national prosperity, feels neglected and demoralized.

 

As the economic indicators flash red at the dawn of 2025, it’s evident that Reeves’ approach has faltered. The calls for her resignation grow louder, suggesting it’s time for Rachel from Accounts to step aside. Whether Starmer can recover from this debacle remains to be seen, but a new Chancellor may be a necessary first step in restoring faith in Labour's economic management.

 

Based on a report by Daily Mail 2024-01-13

 

 

A very one sided view. Not worth to read.

Utterly clueless and incompetent.

 

Rachel from accounts and her budget for recession will crash the pound and ruin the economy. 

 

Then they will blame the Tories, same as they always do. 

True or not.

 

2 minutes ago, norfolkandchance said:

True or not.

Is stuff anonymously posted on social true or not?

 

why do you even ask?!

1 hour ago, portisaacozzy said:

wow,written by someone who knows nothing,hates women,hates thr labour party and hates himselfe.writen by someone who forgets that they lost the last election because there main achiement was trashing the uk econamy,even that took them 14 years !!

people who turn a blind eye to what is happening since labour won the election on a false manifesto have their head in the sand. Six months to turn a massive vote of support into a majority of regretful voters. 

1 minute ago, norfolkandchance said:

True or not.

 

This was widely reported in the media a few weeks / months ago.

 

It broke at the same time that someone else called out her time and function at the BoE.

 

It would appear that her CV is an understatement in embellishment. Which would get normal people sacked on the spot.

 

 

39 minutes ago, jippytum said:

people who turn a blind eye to what is happening since labour won the election on a false manifesto have their head in the sand. Six months to turn a massive vote of support into a majority of regretful voters. 

False manifesto?

She certainly is careless about the fit of her cap!

She is a complete charlatan. A fraud.

 

But because Starmer is too stubborn to accept his mistake and replace her, huge damage is unfolding in the UK economy.

 

Shameful. 

 

I think this is not a totally unfair representation of many politicians.....not to detract from this particular criticism of Reeves.

 

Many/most politicians are in the positions they find themselves simply because that is where they want be......not because they are eminently qualified to do the job......

 

It always amazed me that someone who struggled to make Captain in the army was appointed secretary of defence, or someone who was a sea cadet and could hold a sword for an hour might have been appointed to the same position.

 

I'm sure the list could go on and on for all parties in the UK and elsewhere.

 

Feel free to add your own.

 

Sebastian Fox

Michael Green

Corinne Stockheath

 

to name but one.

 

 

Deeply worrying for all Brits that Starmer has sent his co-marxist Reeves to visit China as a priority. I wonder what comes next ..

1 hour ago, Will B Good said:

 

I think this is not a totally unfair representation of many politicians.....not to detract from this particular criticism of Reeves.

 

Many/most politicians are in the positions they find themselves simply because that is where they want be......not because they are eminently qualified to do the job......

 

It always amazed me that someone who struggled to make Captain in the army was appointed secretary of defence, or someone who was a sea cadet and could hold a sword for an hour might have been appointed to the same position.

 

I'm sure the list could go on and on for all parties in the UK and elsewhere.

 

Feel free to add your own.

 

Sebastian Fox

Michael Green

Corinne Stockheath

 

to name but one.

 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, portisaacozzy said:

wow,written by someone who knows nothing,hates women,hates thr labour party and hates himselfe.writen by someone who forgets that they lost the last election because there main achiement was trashing the uk econamy,even that took them 14 years !!

And your qualifications are what?

 

If YOU are so smart. so clever, knows everything in the world that there is to know about national and international finance, why are YOU not the Chancellor?

 

You seem to have no idea about spelling or punctuation but knock both men and women who have spent many years working in finance.

 

IMHO the Labour party and Rachel Reeves have dome more damage to the UK economy in 6 months, than the Tories with all their PM's and Chancellors did in 14 years.

 

You have not even come up with any alternative plans or options.

8 hours ago, mikebell said:

Pensioners, for verification, check out the UKP v Thai baht rate on your frozen State pension.

I do, every day.

7 hours ago, billd766 said:

And your qualifications are what?

 

If YOU are so smart. so clever, knows everything in the world that there is to know about national and international finance, why are YOU not the Chancellor?

 

 

7 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

 

You have not even come up with any alternative plans or options.

 

 

B   -   And neither have *you*.

 

*

 

   ---  If you *do* have any alternative plans/options for the UK to balance its Books, let's hear it. 

 

6 hours ago, andersonat said:

 

 

 

 

B   -   And neither have *you*.

 

*

 

   ---  If you *do* have any alternative plans/options for the UK to balance its Books, let's hear it. 

 

 

Something like this...

 

 

22 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

there main achiement was trashing the uk econamy,even that took them 14 years !!

But it has only taken Labour less than 6 months to kill a growing economy!

14 hours ago, billd766 said:

If YOU are so smart. so clever, knows everything in the world that there is to know about national and international finance, why are YOU not the Chancellor?

Didn't go to the right school and have the right parents is the probable answer.

It's not what you know that gets you the job!

1 hour ago, James105 said:

 

Something like this...

 

 

 

The UK doesn't an economy problem, per se.

 

The UK has a problem has a problem with the money it wastes, as pointed out by Ben Habib and many, many others.

 

Quote

The Treasury will be “ruthless” over public spending cuts to help meet the government’s fiscal rules at this summer’s spending review, Keir Starmer has said, despite previous promises over austerity.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jan/13/keir-starmer-says-treasury-will-be-ruthless-on-public-spending-cuts

 

The Public Sector Unions are now putting plans in place for

 

1. Strikes

 

2. Work to rule.

 

3. 3 day weeks

 

4. Lawfare to challenge these cuts where it is possible to do so.

 

Perhaps this Government is so far removed from reality, that they thought the above tactics would only be deployed against a Tory Government.

8 hours ago, andersonat said:

 

 

 

 

B   -   And neither have *you*.

 

*

 

   ---  If you *do* have any alternative plans/options for the UK to balance its Books, let's hear it. 

 

Agreed. However as I am responding to your post, you brought it up and not me.

 

So what are your alternative plans and options?

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

Agreed. However as I am responding to your post, you brought it up and not me.

 

So what are your alternative plans and options?

 

B,

 

5 years ago I did read a 1st-Year undergraduate Economics textbook, cover-to-cover.

 

However Economics/Public-Finances is not my area of expertise; I make no pretence to being knowledgable on the subject, and I know that I don't know enough to make any practical suggestions.

 

A Host of Posters on this and other Threads have stated that *they* know that the UK Government is currently doing Things wrong, but I don't see any suggestions (here) about what could be done to improve the situation.

 

I would like the UK Government to be able to balance-the-Books, but currently (it seems that) the Government just doesn't have enough money available to keep a-large-fraction-of-The-Public even remotely "pleased" with current Public-Spending decisions.   --   Rachel Reeves, as Chancellor, is in a *really* tight bind.  

 

1 hour ago, andersonat said:

 

B,

 

5 years ago I did read a 1st-Year undergraduate Economics textbook, cover-to-cover.

 

However Economics/Public-Finances is not my area of expertise; I make no pretence to being knowledgable on the subject, and I know that I don't know enough to make any practical suggestions.

 

A Host of Posters on this and other Threads have stated that *they* know that the UK Government is currently doing Things wrong, but I don't see any suggestions (here) about what could be done to improve the situation.

 

I would like the UK Government to be able to balance-the-Books, but currently (it seems that) the Government just doesn't have enough money available to keep a-large-fraction-of-The-Public even remotely "pleased" with current Public-Spending decisions.   --   Rachel Reeves, as Chancellor, is in a *really* tight bind.  

 

 

Lots of people have suggested improvements and Reeves could easily fix this if she wasn't blinded by leftist ideology.  I referenced a tweet that Ben Habib posted with basic common sense measures that could be taken:

 

Ditch net zero - save £50 billion per annum

Slash benefits for 3 million people not even looking for a job - save £30 billion a year

Eliminate benefits for foreigners - save £10 to £15 billion per annum

Mass deportation of all illegals migrants - save a minimum of £10 billion per annum

Sack half the civil service - save a minimum of £8 billion per annum

That’s over £100 billion per annum saving

Slash regulations on business.

Slash taxes on SMEs, working and middle classes, employment

Slash corporation tax

Stop cheap imported labour

 

Implement those measures and the UK will experience a golden age of unprecedented growth and prosperity.   

8 hours ago, andersonat said:

 

B,

 

5 years ago I did read a 1st-Year undergraduate Economics textbook, cover-to-cover.

 

However Economics/Public-Finances is not my area of expertise; I make no pretence to being knowledgable on the subject, and I know that I don't know enough to make any practical suggestions.

 

A Host of Posters on this and other Threads have stated that *they* know that the UK Government is currently doing Things wrong, but I don't see any suggestions (here) about what could be done to improve the situation.

 

I would like the UK Government to be able to balance-the-Books, but currently (it seems that) the Government just doesn't have enough money available to keep a-large-fraction-of-The-Public even remotely "pleased" with current Public-Spending decisions.   --   Rachel Reeves, as Chancellor, is in a *really* tight bind.  

 

I agree with you 100%.

 

Finance has never been interesting to me and certainly not at that level. I have enough problems just balancing my bank accounts, let alone trying to balance the national accounts.

 

What I can understand is that it is not truly possible to fund any nation on external borrowing as at sometime it has to be paid back with interest, and if you borrow more to repay the loan then the loan costs more each time.

 

Eventually nobody will lend the country ANY more money unless they are allowed to take over the country's finances, THEN the country is in real trouble and become heavily taxed all around, and sometimes the government will collapse.

 

The last time that happened in the UK was in 1976 under a Tory government.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_and_the_International_Monetary_Fund

 

"The 1976 Debt Crisis
Anthony Barber, a member of the conservative party in Britain, created a budget in 1972 in an attempt to have his party seize power in the 1974 election. This budget lead to a period of growth followed by a time that would result in high levels of inflation, almost 25%, for the pound. In 1976 investors later became wary of the value of sterling causing the value of the pound to become very low against the US dollar."

 

IMHO I can see this happening again. perhaps in 2025 or 2026, but this time I feel that the current Labour government will collapse.