Post

The truth is the first casualty in any conflict.

It's always funny to me when you lads try and come the hard man. What happened, did a young one turn you down on the apps again?

I remember when I did my A Level Economics the teacher said '..and the demand curve slopes down depending on the thickness and coverage of the hair of the current chancellor'

Have you hired Kelvin McKenzie to guest edit this edition or something?

Yes. In the olden days they could keep a balance between *serious* and *jokey*. They seem to have lost their way lately.

You're not exactly making me regret giving up my subscription. Do better.

Wow. Serious misjudgement with this headline and commentary. I would have expected better from The Economist. I suggest a retraction and apology.

Well at least thats another subscription I can dump

Cheap, nasty and childish. . . are just some of the adjectives to describe what The Economist is doing here. I thought you were supposed to be a serious publication, not a right-wing tabloid? Looks like the neoliberals are running scared.

Did he piss in your cornflakes?

You seem to have forgotten that you’re meant to at least look like a serious outlet.

This article is so bad it could have been in the Spectator.

You’ve lost your way. This stuff is a big reason why I shalln’t be resubscribing any time soon.

Why are you burning your brand? Seriously?

Pathetic - confirms my decision to cancel my subscription.

I can see a fraud here, piss off.

Just to think, The Economist once took itself seriously.

This is pathetic - as a subscriber I expect a certain level from the economist not this gutter press bullshit

Are you The Daily Mail now?

Reminding me yet again why I cancelled my sub

What the hell has happened to the Economist?

Same here! What on earth were they thinking about?

How embarrassing for you.

They think they are been edgy using football language banter but really they come across as tossers

I’m bald, I’m not a fraud, and the Economist can Fuck Off.

This is the kind of trash you expect to read in the Sun, not the Economist

Stop embarrassing yourselves with this childish trumpian nonsense. 🙄

@michaeltsb.bsky.social

Quite apart from the unnecessary personal attack on his appearance, the column contains no argument of substance whatsoever. If this is the kind of vacuous nonsense the magazine is going to publish in future I’ll cancel my subscription.

The Economist shouldn't have left Piccadilly.

I used to read it devotedly when I was studying economics at school.

This is a crazy post/article/framing

Don't think you've understood the piece

Haven't looked at a copy for years. Occasionally I see headlines like this and I think that I'm doing the right thing by ignoring them.

To keep with the Football metaphor Are you the Spectator in disguise?

Which drooling numbskull at The Economist came up with this nonsense? @zannymb.economist.com are you OK with your publication referring to the UK chancellor as a "bald fraud"? Reminder: John Healey hasn't even announced the Budget yet.

What on earth is this, lads?

Imagine John Healey isn't right-wing enough for you.

That's certainly the impression I get from distressing headlines like the above. Sad because it was a good periodical when I was young.

Absolute state of this shite

Just a ghastly article, vituperative and humourless. No rational analysis whatsoever. Yes the writer has got some quotes from civil servants, but any idiotic can get a supercilious HMT official to criticise their ministers. Not news and not analysis, just vacuous rubbish.

The Economist has been descending to sewer-level for years. The stench its degraded editorial now emits is pretty foul and rather rank...

What the fuck is this?

How distasteful. Whoever wrote and approved this should be ashamed of themselves.

At least you're no longer pretending to be a publication anyone should take seriously (a number that has been decreasing steadily over the past few years).

This is still The Economist, yeah? Not The Sun?

It's always adopted a *light* tone, but that creates a danger of slipping into silliness.

How can editorial comment that starts like that be considered anywhere close to being objective, balanced or even erudite?

TF is this crap….? Seriously….?

This drivel almost made me cancel my subscription of 30 years. You are supposed to be journalists. Try doing your job not wahatever this is. Made me give up on the rest of the issue. I want my money back!

And the Economist resembles a comic whose megalomaniac editor chooses articles from crayon eating "journalists" every week. How long can this "rag of a mag" prosper?