Off Topic Politics Thread

Good idea for the UK too, round it up to a tenner and, as In 2023, the number of overseas resident visits to the United Kingdom totalled 38 million, it would be a good wedge in the bin but far short of filling the 22bn black hole.

 

All in all they're just another brick in the wall.

 

https://fullfact.org/live/2024/aug/keir-starmer-ellie-reeves-22-bn/

Paul Johnson from the IFS was saying pre election that both major parties were lying about the deficit gap present within the budget, and it was widely reported that the incoming PM would quickly announce budget cuts or tax raises.

It is also true that the Tories left a few billion of hidden surprises.

To have both Tory lite austerity from Reeves and tax raises is going to hit the Labour Party hard.

They are really banking on some serious economic growth over the next few years.

Its a serious gamble.

 

It’s not really clear what choice they had. The country is ****ed largely due to the trade impact of Brexit which no one is allowed to mention or even try to start reversing because the right wing press with scream bloody murder. They also can’t try and prompt a recovery by spending / borrowing because the right wing press will…you get the idea.

Labour governments are held to a much different standard. Indeed “centre left” type ones always are in more broadly centrist anglosphere countries. Note how in both the USA and the U.K. the “centre right” (relative to the country in question) party is just automatically presumed to be better on the economy. Pretty much by default. And it’s a lie in most cases (especially America). The deregulation, decentralisation and reduced public spending that is always implements by Tories/Republicans immediately after coming in after a more left of centre government basically wrecks things and undoes lots of gains. And I’m talking about for the majority of the population and notably the most vulnerable people in society

I’m not going to pretend that the rich didn’t benefit from Trump tax cuts or that plenty of people benefited from some of Thatcher’s policies (although there were two recessions in her time and she only got away with one due to the falklands).

It’s a myth that is reinforced by the media and people just accept uncritically

It’s how the Tories always seemed to have a magic money tree they could shake - to the extent that they thought they could do the Liz Truss budget and get away with it. And that was finally a step too far. And that is what it also took to finally get people to trust them less on the economy. Trust me - it will take far less for Labour to lose trust on the economy and people to go back to think the last lot of thieves and chancers are better. They are just primed for it and only need a nudge

 

Some people will want to say this isn't true, yet these same people will say Labour want to put up taxes. Well, if Labour want to put up taxes then there is a reason they cannot be honest about it in an election.

The reason is that the Tories and Reform were allowed to be spectacularly dishonest about spending in the last election, while any sniff of Labour maybe suggesting we might possibly have to spend more money to fix the country was fallen on like a pack of teenagers on a Taylor Swift ticket. You only have to go back through these pages to the election build up to find multiple: Labour are greedy, money-wasting taxers who I cannot stand type posts.

The truth is that people say they want honesty from their politicians but will not vote for it. The country needs massive investment after 15 years of neglect - and Labour have hamstrung themselves by saying they won't raise the primary taxes to fix it.

Sadly, the alternative was not to be elected as we live in a society that genuinely hates the idea we all owe our share.

What a world. From 1990 to 2010 the poorest in society rose steadily in social mobility. Moreso than economic powerhouses like Germany. From 2010 onwards social mobility has stalled and then nosedived, so the poor are getting poorer. But we won't spend to fix it.

The last time the UK relied on charity to feed its starving poor was pre WW2 - and we said never again. Never again until today.

 

I keep reading that a 1% tax on the assets of the wealthiest 1% would raise enough to cover the black hole. Starmer says that those with the broadest shoulders need to bear the brunt of any tax increases, so this gives him a chance to show if he is just words.
Shares dividends must be another area for increasing taxes in line with the 20% paid by the lowest workers.

 

Your last few paragraphs are just so on point. Labour have hamstrung themselves. No point rehashing a previous conversation too much but rejoining the single market or doing something brave was what Labour needed to do.

Presently they are wasting a generationally significant amount of political capital to try not to offend anyone. It's piss poor politics and as a lifelong member, I am incredibly disappointed in the optics of their initial performance.

Everyone gives mistruths during campaigns but Os isn't exactly wrong on this. The date on his letter isn't some kind of gotcha, similar to before...., to be honest. The IFS and OBR did say prior to the election that neither major party was telling the truth on public finances. They both said within weeks of winning, the new PM would announce a raft of 'unexpected findings', surprising no one.

 

Yes, but the other side of this is that Labour knew they were being judged at a different standard to the tories. People are being taught to be taxation averse - but poor people should ALWAYS vote FOR tax. It helps them the most.

 

Absolutely labour are judged to a different standard through the media.

But people aren't stupid and shouldn't be willfully misled..

Labour have 5 years to improve the standard of living of people before they go back to the polls. Incoming governments usually win 2 terms.

We both agree now is the time to be brave. But if being brave to Starmer/ Reeves is austerity and a raft of minor tax rises then I worry the UK will have a reform coalition next time around, as the opportunity gap isn't closed in the former industrial parts of this country.

 

The reasons we won’t spend to fix lack of social mobility and the poor getting poorer is that the money required would need to come from taxing those who are on the opposite end - not suffering from lack of mobility and not getting poorer.

There is also a general attitude that if you are struggling it is because you don’t work hard enough. This was highlighted a lot in discussions when people were complaining about VAT on private school fees. The people complaining pretty much to a person said “I work really hard to send my kids to private school”. As if there aren’t people out there in their millions who work just as hard or harder (albeit that’s sometimes a subjective term) who could never afford such school fees in their wildest dreams

And I can’t help but feel it was definitely the attitude of previous government members who were mostly all very wealthy through either their own efforts or (in most cases) significant support from the efforts of their parents / grandparents etc.
They simply didn’t understand or have any real concept of the idea that the gap between them and their success and the people who struggle is not solely down to how hard each of them worked every day

And it’s not an attitude that is likely to change quickly

 

I totally agree. I want Labour to give us some kind of New Deal. A massive defibrillator to the UK economy. Housing and green energy, massive investment in business and social services. Education at the core of everything.

But we are scared to do anything at all.

 

I expect the latter (and capital gains) will be areas looked at. And probably inheritance as well.

Not sure on the former idea. That’s a “wealth tax” and i gather that was spectacularly unsuccessful in France but i’ve not read into it in detail. But if it failed in a naturally more left leaning country than ours then it isn’t going to work here

 

Some may take issue with part of your post,
"people aren't stupid and shouldn't be willfully misled", given the number of people hoodwinked by leave propaganda during the brexshit campaign.

 

Without wanting to be too pedantic - it is more like 4 years. Very few governments risk running out the clock on a parliament

 

Stupid is not be the word. Under informed and not engaged. And that’s not meant as a slight. Most people don’t have the time, let alone the interest to dig into the details

Note that in the original democracy the decisions were all voted on by citizens who were basically slave owners who had the time to engage in the process more effectively than the average citizen now. Democracy as a concept and theory assumes far more engagement than happens in practice. But In paraphrasing Churchill, it is bad but it’s better than the alternatives

 

There should be a return to fixed term parliaments.

 

And the other side spent the campaign infantilising the electorate saying, let me explain it again and again until you understand why you're wrong.

There is a real sneering, grandiose streak to the metropolitan liberal types in this country that is totally at odds to the mindset of half of the British population.

 

Hooked.

 

The Remain campaign was pathetic. But again we allow the agenda to be set by lies and liars. If you lie during a major political campaign - and I mean tell stark untruths rather than change your mind later on - then there should be stern punishments and prison terms.

 

Huh?

Its amazes me how you can be so routinely pompous in your view point, despite it differing ever so slightly to my own. I don't know if it's intentional how willfully you perpetuate identity politics. You'd be better off understanding why people think differently to yourself rather than writing them off out of hand.