Dom White
@domw.bsky.social
Chief economist at Absolute Strategy Research in London. But all of the nonsense I spout on here is mine and mine alone. RTs are not endorsements unless they are.
Very simple example of this: the OBR’s supply side forecasts assume that net migration goes back up in the next 3-4 years.
November 29, 2025 at 9:06 AM
Very simple example of this: the OBR’s supply side forecasts assume that net migration goes back up in the next 3-4 years.
I don’t disagree. I’d hoped that this govt would bring about more stability.
But I think I was guilty of an analytical error: thinking that stability in policy and governance was sufficient, when in fact we probably need to see rising living standards and some stability in voter opinions first.
But I think I was guilty of an analytical error: thinking that stability in policy and governance was sufficient, when in fact we probably need to see rising living standards and some stability in voter opinions first.
November 29, 2025 at 9:01 AM
I don’t disagree. I’d hoped that this govt would bring about more stability.
But I think I was guilty of an analytical error: thinking that stability in policy and governance was sufficient, when in fact we probably need to see rising living standards and some stability in voter opinions first.
But I think I was guilty of an analytical error: thinking that stability in policy and governance was sufficient, when in fact we probably need to see rising living standards and some stability in voter opinions first.
Yes, there’s rule that things estimated to have an impact of less than 0.1% pt on annual growth don’t get accounted for. When you look into what they potentially are, it’s things like the trade deal with India (worth £5bn per year). But it’s not a long list.
November 29, 2025 at 8:37 AM
Yes, there’s rule that things estimated to have an impact of less than 0.1% pt on annual growth don’t get accounted for. When you look into what they potentially are, it’s things like the trade deal with India (worth £5bn per year). But it’s not a long list.
Yeah, I think that’s right. I’m not sure the government or Treasury could point to anything concrete that will have a material positive effect on growth.
But Anthony is right that we should be asking how credible it is for the government to lock itself into tax increases the year of the next GE.
But Anthony is right that we should be asking how credible it is for the government to lock itself into tax increases the year of the next GE.
November 29, 2025 at 8:29 AM
Yeah, I think that’s right. I’m not sure the government or Treasury could point to anything concrete that will have a material positive effect on growth.
But Anthony is right that we should be asking how credible it is for the government to lock itself into tax increases the year of the next GE.
But Anthony is right that we should be asking how credible it is for the government to lock itself into tax increases the year of the next GE.
Yep, you can defer it until the property is sold.
November 28, 2025 at 7:50 PM
Yep, you can defer it until the property is sold.
They want the moon on a stick, Katie.
November 28, 2025 at 7:38 PM
They want the moon on a stick, Katie.
Intra-regional trade mounted a bit of a comeback from the early 2010s to around the pandemic, but it's been in decline again since then. And it mostly seems to reflect trade in the Asia-Pacific region. No idea what's behind it.
November 28, 2025 at 10:43 AM
Intra-regional trade mounted a bit of a comeback from the early 2010s to around the pandemic, but it's been in decline again since then. And it mostly seems to reflect trade in the Asia-Pacific region. No idea what's behind it.
The aspect of all this I find super interesting is how this all stacks up at the regional level. Distance should be an impediment to trade, so trade should grow faster within regions than between regions. China's entry to the WTO broke that for a while from the early 2000s to early 2010s.
November 28, 2025 at 10:37 AM
The aspect of all this I find super interesting is how this all stacks up at the regional level. Distance should be an impediment to trade, so trade should grow faster within regions than between regions. China's entry to the WTO broke that for a while from the early 2000s to early 2010s.
Apologies in advance, but I'm gonna get a bit nerdy on yo ass.
Global trade isn't *ackchyually* falling. It's falling in nominal terms vs GDP because the relative price of traded goods declines over time. Services exports have also continued to rise even as global goods trade has stagnated.
Global trade isn't *ackchyually* falling. It's falling in nominal terms vs GDP because the relative price of traded goods declines over time. Services exports have also continued to rise even as global goods trade has stagnated.
November 28, 2025 at 10:28 AM
Apologies in advance, but I'm gonna get a bit nerdy on yo ass.
Global trade isn't *ackchyually* falling. It's falling in nominal terms vs GDP because the relative price of traded goods declines over time. Services exports have also continued to rise even as global goods trade has stagnated.
Global trade isn't *ackchyually* falling. It's falling in nominal terms vs GDP because the relative price of traded goods declines over time. Services exports have also continued to rise even as global goods trade has stagnated.
They can’t get the messaging right on anything, so not really that surprising
November 28, 2025 at 8:59 AM
They can’t get the messaging right on anything, so not really that surprising
Yeah, think it’s clearer like that. Mostly looks like a timing thing around 24/25, 25/26, and 26/27. Biggest difference is that tightening in 29/30.
November 28, 2025 at 8:56 AM
Yeah, think it’s clearer like that. Mostly looks like a timing thing around 24/25, 25/26, and 26/27. Biggest difference is that tightening in 29/30.
Would've loved to listen to this!
November 28, 2025 at 8:26 AM
Would've loved to listen to this!
Happy thanksgiving, George. Looks fkn amazing.
November 27, 2025 at 6:32 PM
Happy thanksgiving, George. Looks fkn amazing.
Just trying to recreate what you've got. Do these numbers look right? Suggests a bit less tightening this fiscal year (0.9%pts vs 1.5) and a bit more in FY26-27 (0.8%pts vs 0.5).
November 27, 2025 at 5:10 PM
Just trying to recreate what you've got. Do these numbers look right? Suggests a bit less tightening this fiscal year (0.9%pts vs 1.5) and a bit more in FY26-27 (0.8%pts vs 0.5).
Oh, found it. Thanks. They don't have it in the 'detailed' spreadsheet but they do have it in the non-detailed one ...
November 27, 2025 at 4:30 PM
Oh, found it. Thanks. They don't have it in the 'detailed' spreadsheet but they do have it in the non-detailed one ...
I couldn't find the OBR's estimate of the cyclically-adjusted deficit in the spreadsheets they released. Where did you get them from?
November 27, 2025 at 4:18 PM
I couldn't find the OBR's estimate of the cyclically-adjusted deficit in the spreadsheets they released. Where did you get them from?
And he had the cheek to go on TV and say it was for the good of the country!
November 27, 2025 at 1:36 PM
And he had the cheek to go on TV and say it was for the good of the country!
I'm glad someone is brave enough to ask this kind of question.
November 27, 2025 at 1:25 PM
I'm glad someone is brave enough to ask this kind of question.
🤨 Can’t tell if you’re being serious or not.
November 27, 2025 at 11:52 AM
🤨 Can’t tell if you’re being serious or not.
It appears to be a "junior member of staff thought they would get half of the job done early so they can grab some lunch before it gets really busy" thing
November 27, 2025 at 11:45 AM
It appears to be a "junior member of staff thought they would get half of the job done early so they can grab some lunch before it gets really busy" thing
.... says a Spurs fan
November 27, 2025 at 11:00 AM
.... says a Spurs fan