Even though she won a big majority of the Conservative members plus the largest number of MPs declaring, there was a feeling from the very outset that she would not be allowed to govern in the way she wanted.
It quashes the housing market, reduces labour mobility and inescapably reduces the number of transactions. This is not contested: the Treasury accepts the point in its modelling.
One way in which the Government could help would be through a temporary increase in the Gift Aid rate. Conservatives introduced Gift Aid in 1990, and now have the chance to enhance it.
The public sector has just swallowed another semi-autonomous set of institutions with little protest or controversy.
The moral of this story is that these models provide interesting context – a little like horoscopes. But when it comes to decision-making, give me an economic historian in preference to a model any day.
Pity poor Hunt, facing the most miserable in-tray ever to greet a Tory Chancellor when even rising to the challenge will benefit only Starmer.
Hunt faces the conflicting objectives of reassuring the markets at the same time as continuing with as much of her agenda as possible.
The tough inflation requirement which will constrain public spending and borrowing should be complemented by a growth target.
I cannot think of a time when market confidence was plummeting in both the Chancellor or the Governor of the Bank of England at the same time. If neither is up to the job, both should go.
Some Tory members would see such a development as nothing less than an establishment coup: as a conspiracy of bad actors working together to win revenge for Brexit.
The markets expect the Bank’s intervention to continue past Friday. Either Bailey or Kwarteng must deliver something big soon or the financial jitters will get worse.
Rather than unleashing growth where there is strong potential for it, the plan seeks to conjure it where conditions are less favourable.
This is going to be an investment-led recovery, which not only makes the UK a more attractive place in which to invest but also directs new investment into parts of the country which need it most.
At a macro-level, it reinforces prudence and affordability. But at a micro-level, it can be an obstacle to speed, efficiency and innovation.