Technically, with all the in-breeding, doesn’t make them worse than everyone else?
In a recent discussion on this, a friend made the argument that what you are really seeing is the actual price tag of Brexit. In his view, the UK voted to make itself less wealthy, under the aegis of a Government that has been determined not to allow certain almost inevitable consequences/adjustments. What is happening is essentially the shift in fundamental standards of living to reflect that the UK is not actually as wealthy as it was a decade ago, notwithstanding nominal wealth.
1 Like
But surely as Government revenues are astronomically high, it raises the question of where the hell that money is going?
I think this is the crux of Labour’s plan. They can’t borrow, and they can’t raise taxes. But what they can do is run everything with more competence, less waste, and less naked profiteering. That’s their pitch, and nobody can really offer a better one.
1 Like
The argument is that the billions aren’t missing. On points like the exchange rate (principally versus Euro), the government has been prioritizing maintaining it in a narrow range not very much different from 2016 - where there should have been an embarrassing shock/adjustment. Insulating the entire economy from that form of adjustment to loss of wealth is to the very great benefit of the financial sector. Nominally, social spending on areas like the NHS are high, as high as they have ever been - but underlying value delivered is what is making the adjustment. Productivity growth is incredibly low, possibly even negative.
While there is likely considerable waste - it is government, there always is. Hoping for a fix that way is dubious.
Unlikely to make much difference in the medium to long term. If the Tories survive the next GE, then by the following one they will have recouped a lot of their support.
Could we be seeing the impact of over privatisation? Privatisation without any brakes that reign back on over profiteering and the like?
I’m thinking energy companies here for example where they’ve been allowed to effectively rape the public and fill their pockets. Similarly, water companies allowed to take profit without any return into managing and improving the network.
Not the full answer by any means but the imbalance in money in Vs service out is striking.
1 Like
This is still the right approach, real property can be taxed as it is even more immobile than Ciro.
1 Like
The country is in shit state financially.
Everyone knows where the responsibility for that lies.
Let’s spend tens of millions on a public enquiry to prove it.
Yup, sounds like a Starmer level plan.
Sometimes you have to spell things out to people.
1 Like
That’s the bit where your post falls apart.
1 Like
No it doesn’t.
A blind man on a galloping horse can see that the current government have fucked the economy.
Many won’t admit it, but that doesn’t mean they don’t know it.
Spending the equivalent of a couple of hundred additional nurses salaries in an inquest to prove it is plain dumb
I really think you are giving the public too much credit.
There isn’t a lot of love for the Tories out there, but there is still lots of people who will happily blame Covid, The situation in Ukraine, energy companies, etc.
The extent of the countries fuckedness and the Tories culpability are still understated.
2 Likes
But those people are still likely to not change their stance just because a new government’s inquiry says so (Trump shouldn’t be anywhere near winning the next US presidential election but there he is with a very good chance of doing so).
With such a short window for a new government to make a favourable impression it is more important for it to make things happen as quickly as possible and that it is meaningful.
And immigrants. Never forget the immigrants.
2 Likes
Ok so, Starmer becomes Prime Minister, and he decides to spunk tens of millions of pounds on a public enquiry to prove it was the dastardly Tories who fucked the economy.
Other than being able to gloat “I told you so”, WTF is to be gained from spunking said sum of money?
Complete sidetrack, but I’m a person who would like to see a public inquiry on good government, and how to enshrine that into the political system as much as possible. It won’t make for good publicity, and should be really boring and technical. But that’s the point, because many issues we face are hard and require hard work to resolve, which is something that the political system doesn’t quite allow.
Given Starmer’s track record of interest in such issues as the House of Lords, I can see him being interested in this one.
2 Likes
You can then put a legislative programme in place to ensure it never happens again.
1 Like
You can do that anyway
You’ve just saved the country about £30 million