neilj
Member
Posts: 5,908
|
Post by neilj on Dec 4, 2023 19:17:36 GMT
Interest rates are no higher today than was the case for much of the 1960s when the Treasury was in the hands of Reginald Maudling , James Callaghan and Roy Jenkins. Bank rate was then frequently in the range of 6% - 8% - rather higher than current rates.Of course, they appear high relative to where rates stood 2008 - 2022 but that simply reflects the absurdly low levels at which rates were kept for so long. Effectively rates have been normalised rather than having been raised to historically high levels. The other big difference is house prices have risen substantially more than wages, meaning people have to borrow a lot more. So that even a couple of percent increase in interest rates can leave people in serious financial trouble
|
|
|
Post by graham on Dec 4, 2023 19:23:10 GMT
Interest rates are no higher today than was the case for much of the 1960s when the Treasury was in the hands of Reginald Maudling , James Callaghan and Roy Jenkins. Bank rate was then frequently in the range of 6% - 8% - rather higher than current rates.Of course, they appear high relative to where rates stood 2008 - 2022 but that simply reflects the absurdly low levels at which rates were kept for so long. Effectively rates have been normalised rather than having been raised to historically high levels. The other big difference is house prices have risen substantially more than wages, meaning people have to borrow a lot more. So that even a couple of percent increase in interest rates can leave people in serious financial trouble Whilst that is true , it is itself a cosequence of interest rates being kept so low for too long.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 5,908
|
Post by neilj on Dec 4, 2023 19:26:37 GMT
The other big difference is house prices have risen substantially more than wages, meaning people have to borrow a lot more. So that even a couple of percent increase in interest rates can leave people in serious financial trouble Whilst that is true , it is itself a cosequence of interest rates being kept so low for too long. Also a big shortage in housing due to low house building rates
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2023 19:32:54 GMT
No doubt folk at your end of the LOC spectrum will immediately retort that the constraint of State Debt is some sort of figment of the imagination when that State can print its own money. If so I would respond that this is as empty headed as the trust placed in a mere change of Government Party , or indeed in a change of Government Leadership ! Or in returning to a 2015 EU in some Time Travel machine.! Actually no. I thought one thing you and me were in agreement on was that tax and spending is an economic concept that goes hand in hand, and that government borrowing often is an issue. I'm sure we disagree on how much tax and how much spending and the economic "damage" of raising taxes. I do think too much borrowing can be an issue whatever economic mumbo jumbo comes up to suggest it isn't ("print our own money", "borrowing from ourselves" etc). It doesn't work the same as personal finances but various elements of borrowing do precisely that when they work their way through the system, it's just that government has more levers it can pull. Also you have to take into account how static the economy was during austerity (still ongoing and still static to be honest) so if Labour wants to grow the economy to improve public services then Austerity Lite is going to hold them back. So when you look at the tough decisions to be made in the next parliament I can accept these are tough and a government "can't do everything" but I also cannot accept it is tough to raise certain taxes without damaging our economy if you get the percentages right and don't cause a panic in "the markets". Online retailers like Amazon for example can't just walk away because of a tough taxation policy targeted at them and others like them and in many ways it evens the playing field if they decide it will be the customer who pays. Capital Gains Tax should be taxed at a higher rate than earned income or at least equalised. Inheritance Tax starts way too late (pretty much £1m before you pay anything in most cases 2 x personal allowance plus 2 x home if to children and you don't even have to still own the home). Trusts and pensions can be regulated better and fit for purpose- ie to provide for someone in retirement rather than just tax free cash for the wealthy. Certain investment borrowing can probably be justified if the return to the government or country adds up. So that's my criticism both of the Tories and especially Labour, who shouldn't be buying into this, that they seem to have decided the Thatcher orthodoxy holds when most of the growth during Thatcher's time came from selling the family silver and North Sea Oil revenues while not looking long term. We have now reached a long term stagnation and a low wage high cost economy where the old ways of producing a mini boom no longer work. I do share your feelings about taxes.I agree that the base-if not rates-will probably have to increase. There is nowhere near enough honesty in any political party about public finances in the post QE/post Pandemic/POst Ukraine era. And I also think that the whole Continent is in dire need of a Statesman .
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Dec 4, 2023 20:03:49 GMT
colin
You need to help me here. In which country, or countries, on the "continent", do you wish this putative "statesman", or "statesmen" to emerge? What would he/she/they have to do to deserve the mantle anyway? What vision should they fashion that navigates an escape from the doomsday gloom that you are keen to say is our inevitable fate? How would they point us towards the distant light at the end of the long tunnel? Low taxes, high interest rates, green economic plans, god like diplomatic gifts to bring peace to the continent, a bonfire of regulations? What's the solution our putative statesman may decide that we should all follow. Will he/she/they subordinate their national self-interest for the international common good? They lead we all follow. I'm starting to think this sounds a little like a continental government by another name. The EU on steroids possibly.
It wasn't long ago that you were arguing that Kwarteng and Truss may be about to ignite a beacon of hope and economic salvation for us, then when that hit the rocks, possibly Sunak and Hunt, the only honest adults in the room, might ride to the rescue. You promised us honesty and realism with them but now, with Starmer looking like he's shortly to take over the reins, all we have to look forward to, it would appear, is fantasy, self-delusion, dishonesty and disappointment. You've given up on Starmer very very early but, maybe, despite your record on Johnson and the rest, you know something we don't.
So, if Starmer's not up to it, who is? Kemi Badenoch I suppose.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,087
|
Post by steve on Dec 4, 2023 20:18:48 GMT
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,318
|
Post by pjw1961 on Dec 4, 2023 20:23:12 GMT
Surely, even by Johnson's standards, the raid would have been a bridge too far. We need a domjg comment on this story, as our resident Netherlands expert.
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Dec 4, 2023 20:25:31 GMT
That's entirely correct, which is why I used the word "enforce" rather than investigate. Criminal law without sanction is an incomplete system. I'm not sure about that as it appears the ICC has enforced against Sudan (Dhafur) and Libya, neither of which is a signatory. In each case the process was initiated by the UN Security Council. I suppose I think too much like a lawyer. The security council imposing a sanction is some distance from the treaty intent where signatory states would use their own justice system to enforce the ICC verdict. The security council approach is closer to the Nuremberg system of might is right. Some legal philosophers consider that to be retrospective law (generally frowned upon) the system of UN and human rights international law since then was created, in part, to avoid that type of criticism. The justification for Nuremberg is that the crimes were so obvious that they did not need to be written down (an argument that I, with some reservations, accept). The Christian underpinning causes me some concerns e.g. the writing of a medieval monk on what amounts to a just war, but nonetheless the universal nature of many of the precepts relied upon were to be found in many modern societies at the time. The best justification I heard was from a fellow law student in the 1980's who said "killing people who aren't trying to hurt you is wrong".
|
|
|
Post by alec on Dec 4, 2023 20:51:57 GMT
For those interested, I've just posted a recent paper over on the covid thread detailing how mild covid had a significant impact on lung oxygen uptake in firefighters for up to 300 days post infection. The results were stated as having implications for the operation and safety of firefighting crews.
Lots of this kind of stuff coming through. Last week a Canadian navy frigate had to abandon a deployment because of a covid outbreak on board, and UK army chiefs have been reported as having concerns about fitness and operational readiness with soldiers suffering repeat bouts of covid. All of societies safety and security systems depend on a group of fit, healthy individuals, and we are discovering that these levels of fitness are significantly impacted by even mild covid.
|
|
|
Post by alec on Dec 4, 2023 20:57:52 GMT
colin - good to see you posting again. On your post about the headwinds to growth, I have to say you forgot one; covid will remain a drag on growth for some time, I fear. Currently, 1.5% of the working age population have been added to the long term sick category since 2020, after a period where this flatlined. Not all of this is due to covid, but a good deal of it is, directly or indirectly. I think this will be a significant problem in the next few years.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,087
|
Post by steve on Dec 4, 2023 21:04:04 GMT
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,074
|
Post by domjg on Dec 4, 2023 21:17:22 GMT
Surely, even by Johnson's standards, the raid would have been a bridge too far. We need a domjg comment on this story, as our resident Netherlands expert. Thanks but I'm far from being an expert I can assure you.. I lived there for a few short years a long time ago, speak the language and have tried to keep track of events there since. I'm not really in contact anymore with anyone living there and my main source of info these days is my subscription to a Dutch paper, NRC Handelsblad. For me this story just underlines, if that were ever needed, that Johnson is completely away with the fairies and is/was always totally unsuitable for any high office. Obviously he would never have been allowed to put such a fairytale into effect but the fact that he thought it was an option, even for a second, shows that he seems to have the personality of a spoilt child who understands little of the world. It also reminds me that he stole from us the country that I once respected and liked, and yes was even proud of on occasion, a country respected in the world more often than not and replaced it with some contrived, tinpot version from his own fevered imagination which the world regards with wry, confused amusement. Looking at the NRC front page now this story does not figure anywhere so it does not appear to be being taken seriously. It also doesn't appear on the main page of De Volkskrant where there is none the less a report on the migrant salary story.
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Dec 4, 2023 21:52:20 GMT
Have the Lanour Party said whether they support the increase in the Minimum Income Requirement for the spouses of British citizens:
I seem to recall Starmer once said Labour would abolish it.
|
|
|
Post by jib on Dec 4, 2023 22:08:12 GMT
More law suits for the traitor. Someone is finally suing him for crimes against progressive politics? About time. Let's hope it's porridge for him. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by jib on Dec 4, 2023 22:18:25 GMT
Have the Lanour Party said whether they support the increase in the Minimum Income Requirement for the spouses of British citizens: I seem to recall Starmer once said Labour would abolish it. The last but one is just too cruel. Imagine getting the news just before Christmas that your mail order bride, or groom, has been cancelled due to insufficient funds. F*****g Tories.
|
|
|
Post by alec on Dec 4, 2023 22:36:47 GMT
It's very hard to imagine that this immigration policy announcement has much to do with a strategic plan for economic growth, as opposed to a perceived need to 'do something' on immigration.
It's going to hammer health and care sectors, just at a time when they are both weakened through austerity while simultaneously facing very substantial increases in demand.
There are good arguments for reducing reliance on foreign labour and therefore reducing immigration, but to do this needs a long term, coordinated, strategic plan. Just choking off a key labour supply mechanism won't do anything other that create inflation and cripple key service sectors, which will in turn damage the economy.
Not very Cleverly done.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,318
|
Post by pjw1961 on Dec 4, 2023 23:02:28 GMT
It's very hard to imagine that this immigration policy announcement has much to do with a strategic plan for economic growth, as opposed to a perceived need to 'do something' on immigration. It's going to hammer health and care sectors, just at a time when they are both weakened through austerity while simultaneously facing very substantial increases in demand. There are good arguments for reducing reliance on foreign labour and therefore reducing immigration, but to do this needs a long term, coordinated, strategic plan. Just choking off a key labour supply mechanism won't do anything other that create inflation and cripple key service sectors, which will in turn damage the economy. Not very Cleverly done. The government has decided to destroy the health, social care and university sectors to appease the racists on their backbenches. They have no intention to raise wages and will simply let social care collapse for the majority. They are lower than vermin.
|
|
|
Post by isa on Dec 4, 2023 23:47:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Dec 5, 2023 0:09:41 GMT
athena"The fuss on here over Starmer saying something nice about Thatcher seems indicative of the forum's rather elderly contributorship. Thatcher left office 33 years ago. I doubt she has much emotional resonance for anyone under 50, maybe 45 for the small band of strongly political citizens." etc Your name and avatar are well chosen. Always wise words and no abuse. 👍
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Dec 5, 2023 0:17:38 GMT
Whilst that is true , it is itself a cosequence of interest rates being kept so low for too long. Also a big shortage in housing due to low house building rates And mass immigration.
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Dec 5, 2023 0:26:34 GMT
colin ... It wasn't long ago that you were arguing that Kwarteng and Truss may be about to ignite a beacon of hope and economic salvation for us, then when that hit the rocks, possibly Sunak and Hunt, the only honest adults in the room, might ride to the rescue. You promised us honesty and realism with them but now, with Starmer looking like he's shortly to take over the reins, all we have to look forward to, it would appear, is fantasy, self-delusion, dishonesty and disappointment. You've given up on Starmer very very early but, maybe, despite your record on Johnson and the rest, you know something we don't. So, if Starmer's not up to it, who is? Kemi Badenoch I suppose. Unlike you to launch an unprovoked attack on a returning poster. Welcome back colin by the way.
|
|
|
Post by isa on Dec 5, 2023 1:08:32 GMT
colinA ... It wasn't long ago that you were arguing that Kwarteng and Truss may be about to ignite a beacon of hope and economic salvation for us, then when that hit the rocks, possibly Sunak and Hunt, the only honest adults in the room, might ride to the rescue. You promised us honesty and realism with them but now, with Starmer looking like he's shortly to take over the reins, all we have to look forward to, it would appear, is fantasy, self-delusion, dishonesty and disappointment. You've given up on Starmer very very early but, maybe, despite your record on Johnson and the rest, you know something we don't. So, if Starmer's not up to it, who is? Kemi Badenoch I suppose. Unlike you to launch an unprovoked attack on a returning poster. Welcome back colin by the way. Unprovoked attack? I wouldn't attempt to try to recall the precise nature of colin's contributions at the times crossbat11 refers to, but I'm assuming he is paraphrasing them reasonably accurately. If I'm wrong on that, I hold my hand up, but if not, I would hardly characterise his post as an unprovoked attack.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,087
|
Post by steve on Dec 5, 2023 6:20:10 GMT
Liz Cheney was a far right republican politician, but as I'm sure most will recall unlike most of her spineless fellow party representatives believed in the democratic process and called out consistently and vociferously for the removal and prosecution of the traitor. It cost her her political career, she had been the most high ranking woman in the GOP. Here's her take on the danger of dictatorship in the USA as a result of the failed Coup leader , famously unapologetic, being allowed to run for office again. An office he's already proved unwilling to relinquish because of electoral defeat. The danger is real the impact on the world immense particularly for countries like the UK isolated from our friends and neighbours by the doctrinal stupidity of brexit . If ever there was a time when membership of a powerful economic and political entity such as the European union was vital it's now. youtu.be/LuDLLV7Kd7g?si=TjWxDOjaUhTo8QVZ
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,605
|
Post by Danny on Dec 5, 2023 6:39:43 GMT
Thankfully? You are pleased to have given the energy companies an interest free loan of your money for six months? Surely thats really another scam fleecing customers? That makes it sound like I'm haemorrhaging wheelbarrows full of cash to the energy providers. I'm not. If the amount of my (now declining) credit balance were invested in a savings account, even at current rates, six months interest would be less than a tenner. For the peace of mind of knowing that there is sufficient in the pot to meet the higher bills likely over the coming months without too much concern, I'm prepared to accept that. If they have a million customers, then thats ten million extra they got. I noticed that octopus has a handy tool for estimating your balance with them over the next year and it recommends a monthly payment. What I also noticed is it seeks to ensure you never owe them any money. Only what it really ought to do is balance what you owe so that times when you owe them balance out times they owe you. So it ought to aim for you to be in deficit in the winter. Maybe you too are looking at the wrong target? News this morning spoke more about the holding company for Thames water being insolvent, not just Thames water. Which simply begged the question who owns the holding company and did they get the money extracted, or has this disappeared in a long historic chain of owners?
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,087
|
Post by steve on Dec 5, 2023 6:47:33 GMT
The GOP not to be distracted by the industrial scale criminal enterprise that is their cult leader, continue in their relentless focus on exposing the crimes of individuals not in or seeking public office at the time accused of lending money to family members who then paid them back. The transparency of the attempted deflection is mind numbing as is the total lack of evidence of any criminality at all. But that's not going to stop their efforts to further undermine the elected president. youtu.be/hvID9zW75Wg?si=pNNd492nc1aZWUhs
|
|
|
Post by moby on Dec 5, 2023 6:53:35 GMT
Look we can probably all accept that Starmer was saying these things to take the fear away from Telegraph readers (and a wider stage) of either voting Labour or simply not worried about a Labour government as they were with Corbyn. But the Starmer apologists on here are missing what he said specifically- he wasn't talking about the general character of strong leader, got things done, knew where she stood and believed passionately in her vision- he was specifically talking about how she (OK "tried" in the small print) produced a generation of entrepreneurs. On one level you can accept this is an www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/16/latvia-baltic-population-demographic-crisisand nothing more but the disturbing element is that he hints that there were positives from the Thatcher government and this does fit in with the economic model that Reeves seems to be pursuing. It's quite ironic that the "positive" traits you can at least acknowledge that Thatcher had are the complete opposite with Starmer. We don't know where he stands on anything much apart from lefties and Israel and this is witnessed in opinion polls and the wildly different interpretations on here of what a Starmer government will look like. crossbat11 Yes of course there is a danger that the left (including myself) will look unfavourably on anything Starmer says but it is equally true, as I said before, that the Starmer apologists don't seem to show any nuance in defending things he says and does which if done by a Tory politician they would be outraged about. There is no need for nuance from the folk you refer to shevii because what he says is immaterial to them so long as it keeps Lab 20 points ahead in the polls.. The sole objective being the defeat of this Tory Government by a Labour administration. Any Labour administration. It is taken for granted that this alone will "improve" things in the years to come. Folk like you who do listen to what he says-and as a result ask ; " how will it improve things ?" are at least trying to think about what "things" might be faceing us all in those years. And because you are interested in means as well as ends , I personally think you have correctly divined that both Reeves and Starmer see the Private Sector as the key to economic growth.( as did Thatcher). I don't think this is a surprise is it ? With post QE interest rates , and post Pandemic Debt levels , UK Gov. has little or no scope for significant borrowing- which will push the current eye-watering levels of Debt Interest to "doom loop" proportions 1). They will tinker with Planning and a raft of other supply side reforms as facilitators-but the spending & investment will be Private Sector. They hope. No doubt folk at your end of the LOC spectrum will immediately retort that the constraint of State Debt is some sort of figment of the imagination when that State can print its own money. If so I would respond that this is as empty headed as the trust placed in a mere change of Government Party , or indeed in a change of Government Leadership ! Or in returning to a 2015 EU in some Time Travel machine.! The difficulties which will be faced by our country in the next years are little different, imo, from those facing the whole Continent. And they are very significant. I suggest just a few :- + The difficulty in generating economic growth and the (adequate ) tax revenues which result . in the post QE era of high interest rates 2) + The difficulty of achieving a balanced workforce in an ageing population, in a technological world ,without allowing immigration ( legal and undocumented ) levels to impact social cohesion. 3) + The difficulty of agreeing how , and by what structures and at what cost , to sustain preparedness for dealing with a belligerent and antagonistic Russia across its borders with Democratic Europe 4) + Climate change-. If this sounds a bit futuristic , I wonder if you remember the dreadful fires which swept across Europe this year-they cost $ 4bn. I was looking at the effects of Schengen Free Movement on the populations of Eastern Europe 5) -when this popped up -6) !! UK will not be immune to the effects any of these things whilst dealing with its own particular problems. So just to finish on your observation about Starmer's attempt to woo Tory voters-this one has no illusions about the task Starmer faces when he gets into No 10, as I am sure he will. And I really have no more idea how he will cope with it all than I do for Sunak. 1) Paul Johnson ( IFS) quoting Jumana Salaheen ( Chief Economist Vanguard Europe) in today's Times. 2) www.politico.eu/article/high-interest-rates-growth-eurozone-inflation-climate-change-war-eu/#:~:text=Europe's%20economy%20will%20grow%20less,Gaza%20could%20trigger%20further%20deterioration. apnews.com/article/global-economy-inflation-growth-interest-rates-ukraine-bc4b66c3de107f99cee057c183f04c933) www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/10/11/brussels-sounds-alarm-about-eus-rapidly-ageing-population-recommends-migration-to-fill-vacbmmagazine.co.uk/news/skills-shortage-holds-back-uk-smes/www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/interview/nobel-economist-rapid-technological-changes-drive-eu-skills-shortages/www.reuters.com/world/europe/european-countries-tighten-borders-2023-11-24/www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/11/how-denmarks-ghetto-list-is-ripping-apart-migrant-communities4) www.politico.eu/article/stalemate-best-describes-the-state-of-war-in-ukraine/www.economist.com/the-world-ahead/2023/11/13/the-war-in-ukraine-may-be-heading-for-stalematewww.reuters.com/world/europe/everything-front-russia-allots-third-2024-spending-defence-2023-10-02/www.politico.eu/article/russia-border-migrants-hybrid-action-finland-minister-anders-adlercreutz/apnews.com/article/moldova-local-elections-russia-shor-fa44f9c9a49b0f1812821fe362384e575) www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/local-leaders-call-on-eu-commission-to-act-on-depopulation-brain-drain-across-eastern-europe/www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/16/latvia-baltic-population-demographic-crisis6) www.europeandatajournalism.eu/cp_data_news/depopulation-is-changing-the-fire-map-of-europe/Imo your post is a strange mix of straw man arguments interlaced with assumptions about how other people see the world. I certainly take nothing for granted. You assert that many of us lack the wit or foresight to understand the harsh reality the 'whole continent might be facing' because we don't have the critical faculties to ask ourselves 'how Starmer will improve things'. I think that is both quite insulting, (possibly intended to be so) and also rather hypocritical from a person who clearly didn't do due diligence and saw a vote for Boris Johnson as an appropriate response to the existential problems you actually chose to put 16 links to above.....not that I'll be reading any of them. I don't know and neither do you know how our collective futures are going to pan out over such huge issues as population growth, the movement of peoples, huge state debt etc. You choose to highlight that Starmer and Reeves have said nothing to date that convinces you that they will be any better than what we have now. I reckon nothing Starmer said would make any difference to you anyway. When your own man has proven to be such a disastrous false prophet and the brexit you hoped for has turned out to be such a pile of shite it is much easier to default into an orgy of self indulgent bed wetting about the future of the world than to do the hard yards in looking for solutions. That is an understandable psychological reaction disillusioned people often indulge in. In any event non of us believe Starmer is the answer to the issues you worry about. How on earth could he be. He is simply your straw man to put up there to 'have a pop' at people who irritate you.The leftists on here find common cause with you and do the same thing. It's all very boring really. As socialists, (despite the obvious failings of Keir Starmer), I nevertheless assume they will be a tad more optimistic about the capacity of humanity to find a way through our quagmire. .....Richard Burgeon .....now there's a man who would never ever say anything positive about Margaret Thatcher and who has probably attended more meetings and demonstrations in support of Palestine than the whole shadow cabinet put together. See colin there may be a way through things after all, right under our eyes perhaps lies the statesman we have all been waiting for.😉
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,605
|
Post by Danny on Dec 5, 2023 6:54:08 GMT
.I do think Sunak is staring down a very long barrel here, and he is a politician without very much at all to fall back on when times get tough. What? He or at least his family are billionairs? Could buy himself a country like Rwanda to live in. But talking about government, last night it lost a vote on the haemophiliac compensation bill, for people who became ill from contaminated blood products 40 years ago. This just the same as the post office victims compansation, once a clear reason for compensation was established, there was no justification whatsoever for delay. The situation here however seems to be the bill will be measured in billions of pounds, and the government wants to push this bill like so many others into the next parliament. It wants to use those billions to bribe rich voters, instead of compensating victims who by now must be pretty old and at risk of dying before they get anything.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,087
|
Post by steve on Dec 5, 2023 6:54:47 GMT
jibEveryone remembers Nick Clegg's desperate attempts to retain the office of deputy prime minister after electoral defeat in 2015! Said nobody ever. You really are uniquely obsessed, equating a ex politician with no wish to return to office with a failed coupster who wants to be president for life in the most powerful country in the world.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,605
|
Post by Danny on Dec 5, 2023 6:59:23 GMT
.So when you look at the tough decisions to be made in the next parliament I can accept these are tough and a government "can't do everything" but I also cannot accept it is tough to raise certain taxes without damaging our economy if you get the percentages right and don't cause a panic in "the markets". Thing is, Sunak still has a year to run in which to make some of thse tough choices. Better sooner than later. And he had 2 years when he took office. The tough choices he took were to further downgrade state services and maintain benefits for the rich. Even HS2 could be seen as choosing to scrap a luxury train serice for rich commuters in favour of direct cash refunds for same by the state.
|
|
|
Post by moby on Dec 5, 2023 7:03:29 GMT
.I do think Sunak is staring down a very long barrel here, and he is a politician without very much at all to fall back on when times get tough. What? He or at least his fmily ara billionairs? Could buy himself a country like Rwanda to live in. Perhaps I'm wrong but I assumed alec was talking about political/moral capital?
|
|