FT Alphaville » Bets against pound reach record.
Speculators raised their bets against sterling to record levels after the recent UK general election, as worries escalated over the government’s finances, the FT said.
I thought the Tories said electing them would stop this happening?
Another rune George must have read incorrectly is all I can presume.
Which assumes George uses things as sophisticated as runes to help him manage the economy, of course.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Richard
Either you didn’t read the entire article or chose not understand it.
It clearly said that the pound had weakened as a consequence of the Greek crisis and also due to the discovery that Labour had Labour had left a legacy of uncosted and unfunded spending commitments plus the concern that Britain may be unable to service the budget deficit (surely Osborne’s fault eh?)
While the markets have not responded positively in a rise in sterling, they have indicated that spending cuts are the preferred approach by the new government.
@JayPee
“It clearly said that the pound had weakened as a consequence of the… discovery that Labour had Labour had left a legacy of uncosted and unfunded spending commitments”
Um, no, you obviously misunderstood the article. That was a report of comments from the government itself.
This is one of the little memes the Right is so desperate to get out there. That somehow Labour “hid” billions in uncosted commitments that were going to ruin the country and it is just damned luck that the Tories came along just in the nick of time to save the finances from even greater shocks!
All cobblers of course. But as Jaypee shows, there are plenty of people around that are ready and willing to believe such nonsense.
Richard – are you really an economist, or just a hired hand for Labour, laying into anything the coalition does?
@BenM
Thanks Ben
Comment appreciated
@RogerRoger
If you had read how often I have criticised Labour over the last few years you would know how absurd your comment is
I am also not a member of the Labour party, or any other party come to that
I am a social democrat
And a chartered accountant and economist
@BenM
Ben
I would be grateful if you could supply us with some evidence that the LIb/Cons have hoodwinked us over the unbudgeted allegations, particularly as you appear to be pretty unequivocal that it is a pack of lies.
I too read the FT article as saying the market had taken cognisance of these unbudgeted commitments and consequently the £ had seemed less attractive.
If the new government is telling lies and influencing the currency markets it would be a scandal.
@Justin
The reality is this: Labour collected more tax revenue than expected and cut the deficit by £5.5 bn more than planned in January to March 2010
In other words – they out performed market expectation
There was a budgeted underspend in effect, not an overspend
So assuming rational markets (big assumption, but let’s assume for a moment) no adverse movement could be because of anything Labour did. It could therefore only be an adverse reaction to ConDem policy or blatant misinformation by them that could have done this.
So – yes, you’re right – it is a scandal