Richard Murphy Profile picture
Nov 2, 2022 26 tweets 4 min read Read on X
The Bank of England began quantitative tightening yesterday. It sold £750 million of its supposed bond holding acquired during quantitative easing programmes back to financial markets. That is very bad news for ordinary people. A thread...
[Please note that this is a long thread. If it appears to stop mid-flow click on the part tweet you can see and more should appear.]
First, quantitative easing (or QE) was used to fund government deficits after the 2008 financial crisis and during the Covid era. The government has never admitted that, but since when did a politician tell the truth?
In those periods the government created money, via the Bank of England, to pay for its spending. Then it issued bonds to supposedly reclaim that money from the financial markets. Then the Bank of England created more money to buy those bonds back from the financial markets.
It that seems a convoluted mechanism, it is, and that was deliberate. The whole thing was designed to pretend d that the Bank of England (BoE) can't create new money whenever it is desired for the government, when in fact it can and does so every day.
QE was always a con in that case: it was a sham to cover up the fact that the so-called magic money tree that politicians were desperate to claim did not exist was in use and was paying for government spending. Everything about QE has always been a lie.
The result of QE was not that government debt in terms of bonds in issue rose. The figures that suggested that was the case issued by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) were also a lie.
Since over 30% of the government debt they have said is owing is owned by the government now their claim was obviously not true: you cannot owe yourself money. The Whole of Government Accounts (WGA) prove this: QE is shown in them as cancelling debt.
The WGA say there were £1.1trn of gilts in issue in March 2020. The ONS reports a figure of more than £1.5trn. The difference was QE, which at that time was a bit over £400bn. Only one of these figures is right and it is not the ONS data: QE effectively cancelled gilts.
The logic for this is easy to explain. If the BoE creates money as debt it has to be owed to someone. It was owed to the commercial banks, and not to itself as the owner of government bonds. It would have been so much easier to tell the truth.
So having covered the mechanics, why was QE done? 1) To fund the government when tax and borrowing could not 2) To keep interest rates low as a matter of policy 3) To recapitalise the banks after 2008 by placing lots of cash on their balance sheets (that £900bn, again).
Now the BoE has decided it wants high interest rates because a) it thinks this will control inflation, which it will not (see yesterday's thread) and b) it wants to trash the economy for reasons I have speculated on elsewhere.
To assist achievement of these goals it now wants to do QT. This involves it supposedly selling the bonds it had previously bought back to the financial markets. There is, as usual, a massive pretence (call it a lie) in this process.
The pretence is that it is these old bonds that are being sold. That is nonsense, of course. They have effectively been cancelled. I repeat: the government cannot owe itself money. It's a pretence that old bonds are being sold in the QT process.
What is actually happening is that, in effect, new bonds bearing the characteristics of the old bonds are being sold. Most people are being fooled by that, but we should not be: it is the substance that matters here, and the substance is that these are new bond issues.
So why is this being done? A) To use up market capacity to buy government bonds so that new bonds cannot be issued to supposedly finance current government spending, so reinforcing the policy of austerity B) To force up interest rates to support the policy of trashing the economy
C) To reduce the size of the BoE balance sheet by reducing the amount of money on deposit with it held by the UK's commercial banks. The proceeds of these bond sales are not, in that case, being released for public benefit.
In other words, not only is the BiE trying to directly harm the well-being of individuals and companies within the economy by increasing interest rates, it is also seeking to undermine the possible use of bond sales by the government to prevent austerity.
The government then has the excuse that there is no market for selling its bonds and so it cannot use them to fund what it claims to be a black hole in its finances and so as a result it must impose both austerity and tax rises.
What can be concluded from this? First, that the Bank of England is not in any way operating independently of the government in pursuing these policies. It is clearly working very closely with the Treasury to create this artificial supposed public spending crisis.
Second, it is actively supporting penal government fiscal policy that involves austerity and tax increases by suggesting the capacity to sell bonds does not exist simply because it has already extinguished it by making wholly unnecessary bond sales.
Third, the unelected BoE is actively supporting the undermining of public services and public well-being as a result.
I would suggest that the BoE is partaking in a not very subtle, largely unnoticed game of double bluff. The whole intention of its policy is to support the Treasury by saying it is impossible to fund public spending using bonds precisely because it is blocking the means to do so.
QT is not then about reducing the size of the BoE's balance sheet, as the Bank of England claims.
It is instead all about supporting a policy of undermining the public services whilst deliberately trashing the UK economy by creating a wholly unnecessary recession in which the conditions for mass privatisation of the public services are created.
In that case, no one should welcome quantitative tightening: it is a weapon being used by the Bank of England to harm the people of this country. Economics rarely comes much nastier or more deceitful than this.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Richard Murphy

Richard Murphy Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RichardJMurphy

Oct 30
Most budgets end in tears for Chancellors within days of being delivered.

The trouble is that even if Chancellors understand economics, and few do, they do not understand the real-world consequences of what they propose.
I think, based on what we know already, that the backlash on this one will be on employer's NIC increases.

A 2% increase, as expected, will hit all employers, and especially small ones, really hard.
If they realise government departments have been compensated for this cost and they are not going to be the result will be severalfold.

First, there will be anger. The press will feed on this.
Read 12 tweets
Sep 12
Keir Starmer will say the NHS must "reform or die" today. What he is really saying is that to balance Rachel Reeves' books, you might die because he's not willing to raise the funds to deliver the NHS this country needs. How does it feel to be a human sacrifice to austerity?
That, I think, summarises what Starmer will really be saying today.

He's refusing to provide the new money the NHS requires even though he knows, and will say, the Tories underfunded it.
Then he will claim he has no choice about that - which is completely untrue.

As a result, he is deliberately supporting the Tory plan, which was to collapse the NHS.
Read 11 tweets
Sep 2
Would the UK economy really have collapsed as Labour is saying if it had not cut the winter fuel allowance for most pensioners within days of coming into office, whilst announcing more more ‘pain’ to come? Of course it wouldn’t have done. A thread…..
Lucy Powell MP, Leader of the House of Commons, made the absurd claim that cutting winter fuel allowance saved the economy from collapse when taking on television on Sunday morning.
I suspect that she would have said the same of keeping the two child benefit cap in place. Together these policies saved maybe £4 billion. They reduced the well-being of more than 10 million low income people, many living in poverty.
Read 32 tweets
Aug 27
There is literally no need at all for Labour to deliver a painful budget in October. There is a massive capacity to increase taxes on wealth. If Labour wanted to borrow they could. And there are people who want good work.
So, the ‘pain’ is all about Starmer & Reeves’ choice to deliver hardcore neoliberal dogma and not meet people’s needs.
Starmer is worse than the Tories. They at least admitted to their pleasure at imposing austerity. He pretends he has no choice but do it when that’s completely untrue. He’s choosing to undertax wealth, under deliver services, and over deliver misery.
Read 6 tweets
Jul 21
Rachel Reeves told Laura Kuenssberg this morning that the pensions industry had failed the people of this country. Some obvious questions follow as a result. A short thread...
Why, if the pension industry has failed so badly, does she want to force people to pay more it in pension contributions, as seems to be her plan?
Why, if the pension industry has invested so badly for this country, does she think it will start doing better now if she gives it more money?
Read 9 tweets
May 23
The most useful thing I think I can do this morning is suggest questions to ask politicians in this election. A thread.
The following list builds on work referenced on my blog, and most especially the Taxing Wealth Report that I published recently. taxingwealth.uk
The list of questions is not necessarily in any order of priority. Themes are repeated quite deliberately because that is necessary when all politicians are evasive.
Read 19 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(