Westminster Politics 2024-2029

finneh said:
The Tories returned spending to where it was pre-crash, a much higher level than it was during Blair's first term. This kind of correction has occurred post war, post crash and post Covid.

I'd also be interested in the timeframe you're referring to in terms of deregulation as we've seen consistently more government regulation over the past 40+ years, e.g. environmental, HSE, Banking (post crash), consumer rights, greater selling regulations, machinery safety regulations, working time directive etc.

Finally with borrowing costs where they are, do you believe more borrowing is an option for Labour?
Click to expand...
I didn't mention anything about deregulation, that might have been someone else's post.

I think it's necessary to borrow more, yeah. Even if the borrowing costs are where they are. The many, many problems this country is facing aren't going to be fixed without money.
 
Mogget said:
I didn't mention anything about deregulation, that might have been someone else's post.

I think it's necessary to borrow more, yeah. Even if the borrowing costs are where they are. The many, many problems this country is facing aren't going to be fixed without money.
Click to expand...

I mentioned deregulation in reference to your original comment regarding both parties' neoliberal outlook. I wasn't sure which part of neoliberal ideology either party has manifested over the last 30 years given we've seen a steady increase in spending and a steady increase in regulation since Thatcher. With Brexit trade barriers I'd also argue the same is true of both parties regarding trade.

I'd argue since the crash Europe have stumbled into an age of post-neoliberlism with higher taxation, greater levels of protectionism, more government spending, stifling levels of regulation and the top 1% / 0.1% contributing far more as a % of tax take than previously.

In terms of greater borrowing, given firstly the fact that interest is already as much of a burden to the treasury as defence/transport combined and will likely overtake education as the third most costly part of the budget imminently (after health and social security); secondly that the rate of bonds is steadily increasing due to cynicism of the UK's ability to sustain it's current debt burden (greater than after Truss' unfunded tax cuts causing her demise); and thirdly the fact that sterling is not the world's reserve currency so we can't QE our way out of it... What level of annual cost to sustain the debt do you believe we're able to endure annually to fix these many problems?
 
finneh said:
I mentioned deregulation in reference to your original comment regarding both parties' neoliberal outlook. I wasn't sure which part of neoliberal ideology either party has manifested over the last 30 years given we've seen a steady increase in spending and a steady increase in regulation since Thatcher. With Brexit trade barriers I'd also argue the same is true of both parties regarding trade.

I'd argue since the crash Europe have stumbled into an age of post-neoliberlism with higher taxation, greater levels of protectionism, more government spending, stifling levels of regulation and the top 1% / 0.1% contributing far more as a % of tax take than previously.

In terms of greater borrowing, given firstly the fact that interest is already as much of a burden to the treasury as defence/transport combined and will likely overtake education as the third most costly part of the budget imminently (after health and social security); secondly that the rate of bonds is steadily increasing due to cynicism of the UK's ability to sustain it's current debt burden (greater than after Truss' unfunded tax cuts causing her demise); and thirdly the fact that sterling is not the world's reserve currency so we can't QE our way out of it... What level of annual cost to sustain the debt do you believe we're able to endure annually to fix these many problems?
Click to expand...
It might not be the dictionary definition of neoliberalism but that feels like the best way to describe their economic outlook, in my opinion. It's certainly been inspired by Thatcher and neoliberalism.

Is this not just because they have far more money than they've ever had?

Honestly, I don't know. But using this logic, there's never a good time to borrow to invest. I'm pretty sure this was the logic used by the 2010-2015 Tory/Lib Dem coalition to justify their austerity but the country would have been in a much better state to deal with the shocks the economy has faced recently if they'd have invested rather than gone with austerity. What is it you think the government should be doing instead?
 
Adisa said:
Time to grow a fecking pair.

Click to expand...


Aside from the obvious idiocy of all of it, and the absolute danger musk is with these ideas, it also reveals just how little he understands about anything he is commenting on.

Reform UK is not a political party, it is a PLC, a limited company. Nigel Farage is its sole director, and everyone who calls themselves a member of reform, are in fact, subscribers to Reform as a business. They have no voting rights, no way of having input into the workings of Reform, and no say on policies decided by Reform.

In short, its Farages thing, and he'd shut it down before he would let another person lead it.
 
Mogget said:
It might not be the dictionary definition of neoliberalism but that feels like the best way to describe their economic outlook, in my opinion. It's certainly been inspired by Thatcher and neoliberalism.

Is this not just because they have far more money than they've ever had?

Honestly, I don't know. But using this logic, there's never a good time to borrow to invest. I'm pretty sure this was the logic used by the 2010-2015 Tory/Lib Dem coalition to justify their austerity but the country would have been in a much better state to deal with the shocks the economy has faced recently if they'd have invested rather than gone with austerity. What is it you think the government should be doing instead?
Click to expand...

I disagree and would say that Blair/Brown dismantled Thatcher era neoliberalism and May/Johnson/Starmer have killed it off entirely.

In terms of investing most people would say there is a good time to borrow to invest which is when the economy is growing at a rate of 3-4% per annum, debt is relatively low (1997 - 2006) and interest rates are low (or at least 2 of the 3), which is exactly what Blair/Brown did.

Most people would also say that there is a terrible time to borrow to invest, which is where growth is slow. debt is sky high and interest rates are also sky high, which is where we are now.
 
finneh said:
I disagree and would say that Blair/Brown dismantled Thatcher era neoliberalism and May/Johnson/Starmer have killed it off entirely.

In terms of investing most people would say there is a good time to borrow to invest which is when the economy is growing at a rate of 3-4% per annum, debt is relatively low (1997 - 2006) and interest rates are low (or at least 2 of the 3), which is exactly what Blair/Brown did.

Most people would also say that there is a terrible time to borrow to invest, which is where growth is slow. debt is sky high and interest rates are also sky high, which is where we are now.
Click to expand...
So how do you arrive at a place where the economy is growing at 3-4% per annum from our current position without investing?
 
thisisnottaken1 said:
Why do they keep cutting public services? They’re going to run out of spending to cut at this rate.
Click to expand...
poor people are getting too big for their boots. elon wants them ill and desperate and happy to work for next to nothing in their slums. there’s no point being rich if chantelle and gary can afford to go to the same exclusive beach club in their moncler whilst leaving their range rover evoques at the airport.
 
Mogget said:
So how do you arrive at a place where the economy is growing at 3-4% per annum from our current position without investing?
Click to expand...

The easiest answer in my view is to look at the first world countries with the highest GDP per capita whereby oil isn't the main factor. What do the top 5 have on common: Ireland, Luxembourg, US, Singapore & Switzerland.

I would argue that they generally have a low level of government spending as a proportion of GDP in comparison to other first world nations (Singapore < 20%, Ireland < 30% and the others mid 30's).

They tend to have very low taxation on businesses and/or high net worth individuals who in turn invest in the economy, resulting in growth and greater wealth. They create a great environment for businesses and the people who run them, who do the hard work so government don't have to.

My view is driving growth via governmental debt is like pushing a snowball uphill. The snowball will slowly get bigger but it'll get increasingly difficult until you get crushed under its weight. The countries I mention tend to let the snowball roll down hill.

Either that or we pray to the AI gods that it can replace a significant portion of the quarter of a trillion pounds per annum spent on public sector salaries; which in turn can be redirected to pay back the ever increasing debt burden; whilst we also pray that those same people who have lost their jobs don't get added to the welfare bill.
 
Last edited:
11101 said:
Probably not a lot would have happened either way


20231125_BRC481.png
Click to expand...
If you don't invest in public services their productivity will stagnate.
 
Frosty said:
Reduce government spending? I wonder what that will mean. Pensions triple lock stays, in work benefits cut. Young people denied any unemployment assistance? Courts cut further, local governments go to the wall, transport subsidies reduced, green plans shelved.
Click to expand...
Probably. Tbh managed decline and then a big pay check in the private sector was always the goal of this Labour government.
 
rimaldo said:
poor people are getting too big for their boots. elon wants them ill and desperate and happy to work for next to nothing in their slums. there’s no point being rich if chantelle and gary can afford to go to the same exclusive beach club in their moncler whilst leaving their range rover evoques at the airport.
Click to expand...
It always concerns me when I see you being serious.
 
“We are writing as Jewish Holocaust survivors, and descendants of survivors, to protest against this clear attempt to dissuade people from opposing the Gaza genocide,” the letter reads. “Along with thousands of other openly Jewish protesters, we have attended numerous Palestine demos in London and have received nothing but support and warmth from our fellow demonstrators.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...rch-from-gathering-outside-broadcasting-house

It reads as politicians orchestrating with the police, BBC and pro-Israeli groups to politically suppress dissent from British people.
 
TheGame said:
Click to expand...

Their media coverage is so overwhelmingly disproportionate. Yet they get upset at the media. :lol:

One thing I have wondered is with Labour and Tory’s misfiring, the quiet and eventual huge beneficiary will end up being the Lib Dem’s. They need to get the coverage that Reform get really.
 
"I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."
Winston S. Churchill

Edit:
The Government has not announced the funding allocations for the Police Grantand, for the purposes of this draft budget, it has been assumed that an increase of £85 million will be received in 2025-26

Based on the assumption in the Mayor’s Budget guidance of a 2 per cent increase in the Council Tax Precept based on rate and a 1 per cent increase based on increase in the council tax base.

This is from: MOPAC
 
Last edited:
Berbasbullet said:
Their media coverage is so overwhelmingly disproportionate. Yet they get upset at the media. :lol:

One thing I have wondered is with Labour and Tory’s misfiring, the quiet and eventual huge beneficiary will end up being the Lib Dem’s. They need to get the coverage that Reform get really.
Click to expand...

It's Brexit all over again, and morons will fall for it again
 
England should be allowed to play next month’s cricket match against Afghanistan, the culture and sport secretary has said, despite calls for a boycott over the Taliban government’s treatment of women.

Lisa Nandy backed a decision by the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) to allow the game to go ahead, saying on Friday that cancelling it would “deny sports fans the opportunity that they love”.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...lls-england-boycott-afghanistan-cricket-match

:lol:

Wtf is this labour government
 
Last edited:
M16Red said:
"I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."
Winston S. Churchill

Edit:
The Government has not announced the funding allocations for the Police Grantand, for the purposes of this draft budget, it has been assumed that an increase of £85 million will be received in 2025-26

Based on the assumption in the Mayor’s Budget guidance of a 2 per cent increase in the Council Tax Precept based on rate and a 1 per cent increase based on increase in the council tax base.

This is from: MOPAC
Click to expand...

Winston Churchill was a famously shit peace time Prime Minister of course, and the Labour government that succeeded him one of the most successful ever, both economically and socially.

I do agree that Council Tax is particularly regressive though, and that we ought to be taxing big businesses more than people, as opposed to significantly less.
 
Sweet Square said:
Gg6zD0FXYAAa_h3
Click to expand...

So the regulators didn't give a good enough response when she asked them the other week, now she's asking cabinet ministers.

Maybe she should try asking businesses aka the ones responsible for the growth.

Or shock horror we could try appointing a Chancellor with qualifications for a change, like the Americans do. Somebody who might have some ideas themselves.
 
11101 said:
Ah, i forget youre in Singapore. Germany and France have debt troubles too but not to the extent we have. Trump's tariffs are the looming spectre and I suspect when he doesn't implement them things will improve.

We do not have austerity. I don't know why people think we do. Reeves increased spending hugely but she cut it to growth enhancers like transport in order to fund giveaways to the voterbase.
Click to expand...
Yep, watching all this from afar, while paying low taxes.
There was actually quite a bit of talk about the potential for positive surprises from Trump, eg less hawkish on China than expected, ending Ukraine war etc...

The outlooks are a load of shite though. They all said everything will continue as is in the first half, then it's uncertain...so do nothing for now, then we haven't got a clue.
 
TwoSheds said:
Winston Churchill was a famously shit peace time Prime Minister of course, and the Labour government that succeeded him one of the most successful ever, both economically and socially.

I do agree that Council Tax is particularly regressive though, and that we ought to be taxing big businesses more than people, as opposed to significantly less.
Click to expand...
I just liked the quote, i think it frames it very well.

I knew she'd spike the Gilt yields.
 
TwoSheds said:
Winston Churchill was a famously shit peace time Prime Minister of course, and the Labour government that succeeded him one of the most successful ever, both economically and socially.

I do agree that Council Tax is particularly regressive though, and that we ought to be taxing big businesses more than people, as opposed to significantly less.
Click to expand...

The issue with taxing big business is most of it ultimately ends up being passed onto individuals anyway. Taxing individuals or capital at least allows governments to propose progressive taxation policy, it's just a harder sell to the electorate.
 
M16Red said:
I just liked the quote, i think it frames it very well.

I knew she'd spike the Gilt yields.
Click to expand...

Well Donald Trump is claiming to intend to slash taxes and US gilt yields went up as much as UK ones. I think it has cock all to do with the Chancellor really, the whole world economy is fecked and needs starting again as far as I can tell.
 
Smores said:
The issue with taxing big business is most of it ultimately ends up being passed onto individuals anyway. Taxing individuals or capital at least allows governments to propose progressive taxation policy, it's just a harder sell to the electorate.
Click to expand...

She screwed herself from the off by saying no tax rises for workers. If she hadn't said that we'd have the usual story of Labour tax rises to give to the public sector, but as she's done that anyway might as well own it.

A percent or two on income tax would have us totally out of this mess and most people would barely notice.
 
TwoSheds said:
Well Donald Trump is claiming to intend to slash taxes and US gilt yields went up as much as UK ones. I think it has cock all to do with the Chancellor really, the whole world economy is fecked and needs starting again as far as I can tell.
Click to expand...
Well for a long time the US gilt were inverted, so 2 year had a high return than a 10 year.

5 year was higher in October and the UK one wasn't this high for what.... 24 years, anyway... its going to cost her more too borrow and if she doesn't sort out the falling GDP and/or the employment problem we're going to see over the few months we are fecked! Personally I think all she need to do is bin the insurance tax raise - maybe that might spook businesses

NHS is a huge employer, she'll probably say "we're given them more than anyone has" but it's just to cover the extra tax she is putting against this businesses, and bring all back in with Taxes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.