Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

Time will tell. I haven't seen any coherent policy yet that will boost growth. I've only seen higher taxation on businesses, wealth creators and working people to increase spending on wellfare and public sector pay.

To be fair to them, this government still have 3 years left to come up with, implement and then reap the benefits of some pro growth policies. However, the signs haven't been good so far. Most of what Reeves has done so far sits firmly in the anti-growth camp.

IMO at the very best case they have got things in the wrong order. If they had put in policies to freeze spending while increasing inward investment and growth (and by that I mean real growth, not growth simply driven by immigration and inflation as we have now) and then they had used that growth in real income to fund increased wellfare and increased public sector pay then that is a policy choice they should be free to make and something that perhaps wouldn't alienate a decent portion of the electorate.

At present all they have done is appease their membership who are tend to be the socialist, left leaning types who will all vote Labour anyway. Instead of choosing to implement the manifesto,

Starmer is choosing to save himself from a leadership challenge (that may come anyway as the tax and spend wishes of the Labour left will never be fully sated)

I would just say it’s not just welfare and public sector pay. It is also public services in general that people rely on.

But in general I don’t disagree much with your main point. Time will indeed tell. They do need to deliver. The best case for me is that they have a 5 year program for government, and they have planned out that through their actions people will be feeling better off around 2027-2028.

If they don’t deliver, they’ll be gone and they’ll deserve to be gone. Because it would have been a government with a historically large majority that failed to do what they promised (especially when they were careful not to promise too much) and just presided over terrible comms that allowed an image of chaos to fester for their whole term. I’ll be as annoyed as anyone at them if that happens, because I want the UK to succeed, and I don’t want them to squander their opportunity to improve things. So yeah, they need to deliver or they’ll be out.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Just to state to begin with. The point we are at now is a thankless task for any government. Literally between a rock and a hard place.

In response to @SissokoWasGood (BoL) regarding interest rates...let's drag out a couple of charts from the OBR report




Not heading south anytime soon.
So it follows that Foreign investment is the hope is my guess, at those rates...to do some heavy lifting.


And here's productivity....no relying on that to drive anything.
Gone nowhere since 2008 (for two obvious reasons imo)



Always worth highlighting ...average wage vs top 1% since 2000.

 

[P.D.]

It definitely is tough for a lot of people right now. I agree. I’d just say a couple of things: 1. The difference between a middle / decent / insert whatever phrase makes sense earner struggling, and a low wage poor person struggling I think is quite stark. I think a middle / decent earner still lives, but cuts back. A poor person, especially one relying on public services, it’s barely a life at all. And they aren’t all benefit cheating layabouts. (Not saying you have said that, but in general it’s what a lot of people think). So when I see policies intended to help the very poorest, knowing they have suffered the most through these shocks of the last few years, I don’t mind them. And I say this as someone who is also a decent earner, who benefitted massively from Covid era low interest rates as the sector I work in just went utterly crazy. So I was able to earn extremely well in those years. I am conscious that at the same time, and now, so many people are really really struggling.

Secondly, I agree that some big things need to change, because it is too hard for people. I think a lot of the things that will improve people’s lives, especially cost of living, are big structural things that take time. I think the government is doing long term things that will bear fruit over time, but there are now easy fixes to what has been another global crisis. I think they are doing the right things on growth, on deregulation, and investment that will bear fruit. I think stability is actually a really important thing that will ultimately pay off (and something they will be massively criticised for had they not brought) and I think some of it just takes time.

I’m saying a lot of these measures will bear fruit, of course I don’t know for sure. Labour need to deliver, otherwise they’ll be out and Reform will have a go. We’ll learn a lot in the next couple of years.

The problem is they're doing some decent stuff and talking tough on making the right long term decisions and structural reform etc but in a lot of cases they're kicking the can down the road or hiding behind long term reviews e.g. social care still doesn't have a plan, tax reform is long overdue with council tax being 35 years out of date, lots of odd cliff edges in income bands that put people off working etc. Then there's simpler things like the house of parliament renovation decision delayed again. Even on the EU I'm sure Starmer would prefer he's back in it or in closer alignment yet won't admit it - if he thinks it's in the national interest then go ahead and make the case for it and do it. Right now it seems they have a massive majority yet can't get things through so they're putting party interests first and I don't agree they're providing stability either - there's already been several scandals and resignations, Starmer camp speaking out against Streeting only last week etc.

I hope it all comes to fruition as we'll all benefit from it - it's going to be an interesting period.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I would just say it’s not just welfare and public sector pay. It is also public services in general that people rely on.

But in general I don’t disagree much with your main point. Time will indeed tell. They do need to deliver. The best case for me is that they have a 5 year program for government, and they have planned out that through their actions people will be feeling better off around 2027-2028.

If they don’t deliver, they’ll be gone and they’ll deserve to be gone. Because it would have been a government with a historically large majority that failed to do what they promised (especially when they were careful not to promise too much) and just presided over terrible comms that allowed an image of chaos to fester for their whole term. I’ll be as annoyed as anyone at them if that happens, because I want the UK to succeed, and I don’t want them to squander their opportunity to improve things. So yeah, they need to deliver or they’ll be out.

Which public services?

 

[Gutter Boy]

Who are these 450 people and how much tax does each of them pay?

I read that the 60 wealthiest people in the UK (all having an income of more than £50m) paid over £3 billion of tax between them. They contribute 1.4% of the country's income tax receipt despite making up just 0.0002% of UK taxpayers.

If they own 50% of the wealth, shouldn't they pay 50% of the tax?

It's the dukes and barons and other large landowners (remember 92% of the UK landmass is held by these people, with no public access) who a land value tax would bring into line. With fudges and schemes to get around capital gains, council tax and inheritance tax, they pay very little.

 

[scaramanga]

German healthcare works in pretty much the same way as it does over here, it’s just a defined tax line on your pay slip deductibles rather than being in more general deductions as it is over here.

It couldn't be more different. The only similarity is that it's free at the point of use (for German citizens).

We have a monolithic, prehistoric, broken system of healthcare that started as a ridiculous idea at its inception and has only been made worse by successive governments since.

The Germans have an insurance based model that not only ensures better preemptive care, but also allows people choice. That makes it both more efficient and more effective.

Our reactionary system is still in the dark ages compared to theirs.

 

[scaramanga]

So no credit at all. But if it makes it easier for the government to borrow to invest, and if it drives interest rates down generally, ultimately gets more investment into the country from outside, if business confidence improves, and that creates jobs, and so on and so on, there’s no credit due there? It’s literally just a pure negative for you?

Public services were on their knees, and 500,00 kids were in poverty. She could have cut there to get to the same headroom. I’m not sure it would have been fair considering the raw deal the people who benefit from that have had from the country in the last 14 years.

We had years of lower public spending, and then we had madness. It was plainly obvious the country was not in a good state. Nothing worked, there was anaemic growth, and everyone was miserable. The country needed a government willing to invest in it IMO. It also has to take steps to pay back Covid era borrowing.

You keep talking about poverty. Can you back that up with some data?

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

You keep talking about poverty. Can you back that up with some data?

I will try to later. For now I would just say that children who don’t ask to be born don’t really need to be punished because of the circumstances of their parents. I will try and get in to your definitions later but on principle, these kids don’t ask for it. And this is before we get into whether we actually save money in the long run by increasing the chances that these kids will be more productive members of society.

 

[johnola]

Have you tried accessing healthcare, education, transport or any other services over the past decade? Can you not see they have been starved to 2nd world standards? Primarily because the 450 people who own half the wealth dont pay tax on it

Healthcare yes. I’ve seen quite a lot on the geriatric end of things. Cancer, neurology, cardiac literally hundreds of appointments, every type of scan you can imagine and more, endless blood tests, spoken to lots of staff and visited lots of different institutions, national centres, main hospitals, cottage hospitals, recuperation hospitals and clinics and mobile units from Crawley up to St George’s, nursing homes, care homes, respite and hospice. And three different gp surgeries.
Also have seen private services referrals and operations plus a wide variety of community services. Also not forgetting ER walk in, drop ins, ambulance, air ambulance, paramedic and 111 doctors, and medical social services.

It’s broad and varied and generally excellent.
Transport is also a positive for me as The London Bridge and Blackfriars development has made visiting London so much better and that’s before the Elizabeth Line connections.

education i paid my way through a postgraduate degree a year or so back - evening college at Birkbeck, brilliant.

I am however completely sold on your argument that the money should pay - makes a lot sense to me actually as my own marginal tax rate is completely perverse.

 

[johnola]

Just to state to begin with. The point we are at now is a thankless task for any government. Literally between a rock and a hard place.

In response to @SissokoWasGood (BoL) regarding interest rates...let's drag out a couple of charts from the OBR report

View attachment 20921
View attachment 20922

Not heading south anytime soon.
So it follows that Foreign investment is the hope is my guess, at those rates...to do some heavy lifting.


And here's productivity....no relying on that to drive anything.
Gone nowhere since 2008 (for two obvious reasons imo)

View attachment 20923

Always worth highlighting ...average wage vs top 1% since 2000.

View attachment 20924

productivity stalled in 2006 what do you think are the causes ?

 

[P.D.]

I think I get what you’re saying. I would just say that you might not pat me on the back for taxing you more in a cost of living crisis. But you might hate me even more if I didn’t bring stability and mortgages went sky high, or you couldn’t start a business, or prices in general kept soaring. Because then you’d lose even more. I don’t think this situation will go on forever, but we’re in a time where we need stability and where lots of money needs to be paid back.

You can argue that you don’t like that Labour is paying to lift the 2 child cap, or still paying the WFA, or investing more in the NHS. Those are political choices. I think stability though has to be a non negotiable, and I don’t think she can be criticised for that specifically.

Not jumping on you but just seen this comment, prices are indeed soaring - inflation almost doubled since they came into power and much of that was caused by their policies. Again that's a choice only time will tell if long term it will work out. Mortgages have barely come down - borrowing costs have been pretty high all year I believe and for many days higher than they ever were under Truss.

 

[glasgowspur]

If they own 50% of the wealth, shouldn't they pay 50% of the tax?

It's the dukes and barons and other large landowners (remember 92% of the UK landmass is held by these people, with no public access) who a land value tax would bring into line. With fudges and schemes to get around capital gains, council tax and inheritance tax, they pay very little.

I assume you allow people to wonder around your garden.

 

[Gutter Boy]

I assume you allow people to wonder around your garden.

The distinction between garden and estate is very clear. I think Scotland manages this fine with their more advanced rights to roam laws.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Look at this for example. How Dorset is still owned by slavers:

The ten landowners who own one-sixth of Dorset

Image: The Cerne Abbas Giant, owned by the National Trust. Photo by Pete Harlow, Wikimedia Commons (Creative Commons licence CC BY-SA 3.0). This post is by Guy Shrubsole. Updated 9th Feb 2020 with…

whoownsengland.org

 

[glasgowspur]

The distinction between garden and estate is very clear. I think Scotland manages this fine with their more advanced rights to roam laws.

Is it, both are privately owned.

 

[glasgowspur]

Look at this for example. How Dorset is still owned by slavers:

The ten landowners who own one-sixth of Dorset

Image: The Cerne Abbas Giant, owned by the National Trust. Photo by Pete Harlow, Wikimedia Commons (Creative Commons licence CC BY-SA 3.0). This post is by Guy Shrubsole. Updated 9th Feb 2020 with…

whoownsengland.org

A bit misleading that, out of the 100,00 acres "privately owned" 35000 are the NT and the MOD.