Can Liz Truss ever stabilise the UK economy?

In her four answers to questions at her press conference today after she had sacked the Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng, Liz Truss, the month-old prime minister, made it clear that she had a duty to stay on as boss in 10 Downing Street because she felt it was vital to stabilise the economy. Excuse me? Truss and her former chancellor have done more in the last week to destabilise the economy than anyone I can think of in recent or even far-off history. Yet she didn't appear to see the contradiction. She destabilised the economy massively with her tax-cutting gamble but still believes she is the one to bring growth and prosperity to the country. All four questions were roughly the same: how can she stay on as prime minister and why hasn't she apologised for messing up the economy. Her replies were pretty much word for word the same. She wanted to "deliver" growth and was determined to stick with her economic mandate that persuaded Conservatives to vote for her rather than Rishi Sunak while at the same abandoning two of the highest-profile components of her "mini-budget" in order to calm the markets. Again she didn't see the contradiction. Many commentators are now saying she has to go and one even claimed she would be gone by the end of the weekend. That's probably tosh. She showed absolutely no sign of considering leaving Number 10 and, quite cleverly, appointed Jeremy Hunt, former foreign secretary and health secretary, as the new chancellor who will no doubt try and reverse even more of the mini-budget pledges. So unless lot of boring men in grey suits come to cart her off in a removal van I suspect she will fight to stay on, using the argument that it's best for economic stability for her to remain prime minister and complete her mandate....eventually. Boris Johnson must be chortling.