I think not reducing spending is also a form of fantasy. Certainly, the UK needs to look at the revenue side, but the brutal truth of the matter is that in 2016 a majority of the electorate chose to reduce British wealth and thereby standard of living. There just seems to be a great deal of trouble in determining how that is allocated throughout the society, but the bond market is now making it abundantly clear that kicking it down the road to Britain 2036+ isn’t credible.
4 Likes
I suggest you look at the numbers on this one. Benefit fraud is relative peanuts compared to the wealth that’s been sucked out of the UK economy through.
Sure let’s try and get people back to work and try and get people off benefits, but we’re not going to make up the hundreds of billions that have been lost by cancelling some unemployment benefits.
1 Like
Why is this only applicable to members ?..see above comment again for the snide allusion.
2 Likes
Can we finally make an example of this prat and lash him in prison?
5 Likes
I don’t see Mascot’s comment as targeting specific individuals here, more just over half the British population, so I don’t see it contravening the bullying rule.
However it is the sort of generalisation that will likely get some people worked up in this thread, so I’ve deleted it for that reason.
3 Likes
No. I did not say fraud. The bill we pay for people being idol is huge. If you can earn more doing nothing you do. I agree it’s back to work.
But it’s not fraud. It’s the rules that allow the expense.
It is unsustainable. It was a safety net. It is not anymore. It is catnip for migrants.
Look after people. Benefits is safety and looks after those who need it. Now it is not.
1 Like
There was a bit of sarcasm in my post. Fwiw I don’t think the rich should be hammered for tax simply for being rich, I just want to see individuals and companies pay what they owe under the prevailing law.
1 Like
FWIW. I have always paid my way. However well I managed to do. But it’s been proven time and time again. Tax people they find ways to avoid it. The rich would pay a decent amount but you squeeze and squeeze and they start to complain. Look at how much income tax is paid by the top 1%.
Personally. I have always been intrigued by flat tax.
Could have put this in the climate change thread too, but it is UK specific.
2 Likes
Whenever I see a comment/s about slashing welfare or many other benefits the simple fact is that most if not all those benefits are spent straightaway, or often in advance, compared with profits (Tory love affair)which wind up anywhere, how often in the UK?
Very old saying,"money makes the world go around,"certainly true of the system we live or exist under!
4 Likes
I’m not from the UK, but a quick search shows that only 0.2% of your Social Welfare budget is spent on unemployment benefits. Is it not a bit lazy to target that as an issue? Do people want to cut pensions or help for people with disabilities?
3 Likes
Unfortunately yes! 
3 Likes
Punching down is awful, I really don’t understand it.
8 Likes
This is me banging my drum.
The UK economy, despite the endemic anemia, is still one of the richest economies in the world. There is more than enough money to go around.
Until the political/cultural will changes, punching down is all that will happen.
3 Likes
I really wasn’t. It’s the UK politics thread and we have to be able refer to to the electorate.
@Arminius point was that the British public by implication voted for their standard of living to collapse. I totally agree, I was just saying that people, especially those that strongly supported Brexit, will not see it that way, and ten years later still don’t accept that Brexit is the biggest reason we’re struggling.
4 Likes
Framed in that way I don’t think there’s an issue, but wording is important and I do think the original post as presented was the sort of unhelpful generalisation we’re trying to steer away from if this thread is going to work.
3 Likes
There’s no money. Until they need to find some. Like during the pandemic, well over £100 billion to fund the furlough scheme. £26 billion so far in aid to Ukraine.
But that triple lock…fuck me…that’s killing us. The equivalent each week of a fucking jar of decent jam.
I’ve always wondered when it ran out though. At what point was there no money left?
Was it when we went a trillion into debt? When we went £2 trillion in debt? Or is it now when it’s over £3 trillion? When exactly did the bean counters look at each other and say “we’d better tell everyone there’s no money left”.
What I dont understand about the Farrage expose is what money like this is even needed for in UK politics. Actual advertising is so limited compared to the US where money is essential that I just dont understand why someone would be soliciting it.
I get in the modern info system putting money into 24/7 rat fucking that circulates social media has a lot of value, but that is not something a vested interest would need to engage a politician over. It’s something you just do. Is the issue here that this isnt for campaigning but for personal enrichment?
4 Likes
When it is politically expedient?
With a fiat currency, you can’t actually run out, however if you keep printing money it loses value due to inflation (think of Zimbabwe, for example).
Gordon Brown introduced a measure when he was Chancellor that inflation shouldn’t exceed 2% (and also shouldn’t dramatically undershoot it). That at least gave some sort of framework. The other measure was that tax receipts should match expenditure for non-investment spending. That also puts a limit on expenditure.
Unfortunately, most decisions on public spending are political rather than economic ones.
3 Likes
Is it really a sensible idea to throw up ‘BORING BORING BORING’ in massive bold letters on the screen behind Farage every time he’s heckled?