Both of those are crisis situations, though the pandemic case is more straightforward. Every government in the West had some choice between passing the entire cost of the economic dislocation produced by the pandemic and countermeasures on to society immediately - with the countermeasures in most cases being the larger cost. To some degree, all of them increased spending to face the crisis, financed by debt. One way or another, that is being paid back now. In the US, fiscal irresponsibility is seeing it paid back by way of the de facto tax of inflation, but that is playing out everywhere to some degree - and bond investors are deciding they do not wish to pay that tax.
In 2019, few economists would have suggested the level of borrowing we saw in 2020 would make sense, but in 2023 very were arguing that it didnât. The avoided costs (simply from economic destruction) would have been far higher. That just isnât the case for 2026 business as usual social spending.
Wealth inequality in the UK is severe and getting worse.
Wealth inequality is deeply entrenched across the UK. Fifty families now hold more wealth than the poorest half of the population â over 34 million people. At the same time, more of us are struggling to pay our bills, heat our homes, and put food on the table.
For advocates, the solution is clear: addressing Britainâs âwealth gapâ and its consequences must be a priority for our government. And this means taking bold action to redistribute and reinvest wealth in our communities â from greater taxation at the very top, to the radical redesign of local and national economies.
There is enough to go around, we just live in a system that is incredibly effective at concentrating wealth in an increasingly smaller number of hands.
There should be no question that a couple working full time is guaranteed to be able to put a roof over their heads with enough left over to put food on the table, clothes on their kidsâ backs and to turn the heater onâŚbut here we are.
Maybe Iâm old fashioned, but Iâve always felt if you believe in an issue enough to protest about something, you believe in it enough to put your face to it. Iâm a protest veteran, and Iâve never felt the need to cover my face up.
Nowadays people who show their faces risk getting doxed and cancelled or targeted online. People go to your employer and try get you fired. Plus potentially being targeted by the police for whatever reason or increasingly weak justification.
I totally understand why people on either side of the political spectrum would cover their faces.
Hey, would people be interested to know what Iâd rather be doing on a Saturday night instead of deleting continuous posts about âthe rightâ and âthe leftâ just like we asked people not to do in the opening post?
Yes,a few things,but they werenât bullshit protests.Certainly donât regret any of them,the ongoing wars the Oz Govt followed the US into wars were cases in point.
I dont think anyone goes a protest like that thinking there will be a direct corresponding response in Israel because of protests on the other side of the world But if you look at how public sentiment has changed in the US regarding what our own government should enable, how that is changing the political discussion and what politicians are having to stand for to be viable, then its pretty clear that protests have had an impact.
You can say the same about the UK experience too. At the last general election Labour lost at least 2 or 3 seats to independents on that issue and it undoubtedly was a factor where the Greens were picking up votes (including the Bristol seat Labour unexpectedly lost). It has been a factor continually dogging Starmers time as PM (and led to Burnham making a point about the UK governmentâs position shortly after taking over from him).
Aye. The big and hugely angering inducing issue is how much easier it seems to say the right thing once youâre out of power than it is to get your government to act in that way when youâre in government.
I listen a foreign policy podcast hosted by two former Obama guys who have always been reflective of where their admin went wrong, and even from the beginning it was hugely fueled with a big dose of âNetenyahu is a prick and its bad for our countryâs interests to not tell him no.â When Biden won and his team started coming together they were very excited with the appointment of former Obama admin guys they claimed had come to similar conclusions as them in their time out of government. Yet you then have Jake Sullivan and Anthony Blinken acting like absolute ghouls when heading the adminstration, and within months of becoming private citizens again are back to being reflective about what they should have done differently to rein in Israel.
