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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.