Do you want to discuss boring politics? (26 Viewers)

[Brighton Sky Blue]

In opposition Labour should’ve prepared a short and medium term industrial strategy, linking in public/private employers and further education. What sectors are growing, what are the employment requirements and where, what migration is required, what do we need kids to study, do we subsidise/partially subsidies some Uni courses and further education etc etc

Why/how no government has done one recently I’ll never know as this should then drive policy in those areas as well as infrastructure requirements etc. might not work out but it’s at least a starting point rather than just pissing in the wind

Believe it or not James Callaghan spoke of pretty much exactly this 50 years ago…it’s never happened.

 

---

[fernandopartridge]

In opposition Labour should’ve prepared a short and medium term industrial strategy, linking in public/private employers and further education. What sectors are growing, what are the employment requirements and where, what migration is required, what do we need kids to study, do we subsidise/partially subsidies some Uni courses and further education etc etc

Why/how no government has done one recently I’ll never know as this should then drive policy in those areas as well as infrastructure requirements etc. might not work out but it’s at least a starting point rather than just pissing in the wind

Because Labour like the Tories are utterly wedded to neoliberalism, Reform will be the same. The market will provide.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Immigration hasn’t gone down… the number of people that have emigrated has gone up. Most EU and young Britons, around 2/3rds being 18-34 years old.

Successful net-contributors are leaving and meanwhile, we’re importing low income, low skill people.

Not sure the figures bear that out

 

[SBAndy]

I was expecting one after Covid and then again when rates spiked around Ukraine war and it’s just not happened (moral of the story don’t follow my predictions !!!). The problem is net migration has significantly outpaced house building, throw in people living longer and demand has just been outstripping supply for a while. So I’m not sure where the big correction is coming from, unless it’s a decent recession…also not particularly politically palatable

I was hoping we'd see real property tax reform as part of the Budget but, alas, not so. It wouldn't cure all ills, but if it meant we could stop disincentivising the elderly moving out of traditionally family homes then we can make the existing housing stock go a bit further.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The real reason Reeves is making you pay more tax - BBC News

This is about buying breathing space, politically and economically. The two factors are now inseparable.

www.bbc.com

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

BBC said:
Just under 900,000 (898,000) people immigrated to the UK between July 2024 and June 2025, down more than 400,000 people the year before that.

Emigration was little changed: At the same time, 693,000 people emigrated from the UK, up by 43,000 on the previous year.

@chiefdave quoting last years statistics alone is incredibly misleading. Immigration numbers have been well above historical norms since the Boriswave. 900k immigration is still massive and I feel like you also know this but don’t want to confront it or that non-EU migration is largely damaging for the economy.

 

[Captain Dart]

Just seen an interview with Rachel Thieves and Martin Lewis , from 2027 - if you only have a state pension and it takes you over the threshold slightly , you won’t have to pay the minimal tax on it.

I’m then assuming you will still be taxed on any private pension that comes your way.

Have you been using that time machine too?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Not sure the figures bear that out

Which ones specifically Pete?

Non-EU migration is by and large, a net-tax drain to the economy and this uncomfortable truth is something that most of our left-leaning contributors on here and politicians just do not want to confront.

 

[SBT]

The starting point for any government is to enact polices to favour marriage and family building.

You mean like removing the two child benefit cap, for example?

 

[Captain Dart]

All money is created from nothing mate, how could taxes be paid without it?

Nixon and fiat money.

There have been many predictions of an imminent and massive crash Weimar Republic style but more widespread because there really is no asset base except worker debt behind the money.

Knowing my luck it will happen before I die.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

You mean like removing the two child benefit cap, for example?

Not for unemployed imo. Creating generational dependency on welfare does not lift people out of poverty.

I believe in tax breaks for families, an increasing personal allowance or tax break for households based on children have. Civilisations collapse with birth rates over time so this is something we need to incentivise.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Which ones specifically Pete?

Non-EU migration is by and large, a net-tax drain to the economy and this uncomfortable truth is something that most of our left-leaning contributors on here and politicians just do not want to confront.

I suppose the argument goes and I’ll need to be careful with my words

before Brexit it was Eastern Europeans who were coming here taking our jobs increasing the welfare state spending

let’s get rid of them it will be a bed of roses

Brexit tick

since oops immigration down but non eu through the roof. I’d like to see definite proof that this is all bad

however Farage and reform answer appears to be the same as Brexit remove them all it will all be a bed of roses

It’s not that simple

you don’t think Labour politicians are confronting immigration wow!

I work and live and worship with lots of non eu migrants they are human beings like you and me

there’s a small proportion who are monsters and we need to do a much better job at not letting them in

 

[SBAndy]

Not for unemployed imo. Creating generational dependency on welfare does not lift people out of poverty.

I believe in tax breaks for families, an increasing personal allowance or tax break for households based on children have. Civilisations collapse with birth rates over time so this is something we need to incentivise.

Can't say I'd agree with the first point, but every so often in this chat an interesting idea is floated. Increased PTA based on children I quite like on the face of it.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Not for unemployed imo. Creating generational dependency on welfare does not lift people out of poverty.

I believe in tax breaks for families, an increasing personal allowance or tax break for households based on children have. Civilisations collapse with birth rates over time so this is something we need to incentivise.

People become unemployed, are you saying that if I (father of three children and working constantly since the age of 16) should not be entitled to claim benefits for more than three of them if i need to?

 

[SBT]

Not for unemployed imo. Creating generational dependency on welfare does not lift people out of poverty.

I believe in tax breaks for families, an increasing personal allowance or tax break for households based on children have. Civilisations collapse with birth rates over time so this is something we need to incentivise.

The fact that you’re apparently prepared to tolerate a higher risk of civilizational collapse in the name of stopping people without jobs from getting welfare suggests to me that you may not be as committed to ‘family building‘ as you claim to be.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Not for unemployed imo. Creating generational dependency on welfare does not lift people out of poverty.

I believe in tax breaks for families, an increasing personal allowance or tax break for households based on children have. Civilisations collapse with birth rates over time so this is something we need to incentivise.

Just again comes back to wanting to punish rather than help unemployed people doesn’t it? You’re unemployed because you’re lazy, not because things happened outside your control.

 

[chiefdave]

@chiefdave quoting last years statistics alone is incredibly misleading. Immigration numbers have been well above historical norms since the Boriswave. 900k immigration is still massive and I feel like you also know this but don’t want to confront it or that non-EU migration is largely damaging for the economy.

Once again you're leaping to conclusions about what other people believe. Merely point out that emigration is largely unchanged in the latest figures.

Not sure what you want tbh. Labour won the election in July 2024 so these are the first year of figures for a Labour government and show a significant drop. Unless you were expecting a drop to zero surely this is good news and a step in the right direction.

I haven't seen anyone claim immigration is 'solved' off the back of these figures.

 

[chiefdave]

however Farage and reform answer appears to be the same as Brexit remove them all it will all be a bed of roses

You've got to hand it to Farage really. Years of 'it's all the EU's fault, we need to get out' and then when he finally gets his wish says it's nothing to do with him.

But then repeats the exact same arguments but this time it's the ECHR and the same people that believed him last time believe him again.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Can't say I'd agree with the first point, but every so often in this chat an interesting idea is floated. Increased PTA based on children I quite like on the face of it.

Hungary exempts women from an income tax after a few children.

The tax code, as a very basic principle should be used to incentivise or disincentivise certain behaviours. The state shouldn’t subsidise families, but incentivise it.

I have no qualms with people claiming for a short period of time when tough times fall but have a massive issue funding idle families. This is the big shift post-COVID, most people on UC were in work pre-COVID (like many of my friends and family) but now this is 35% of claimants. Most people are out of work and only a small % of that have a requirement to find work.

People become unemployed, are you saying that if I (father of three children and working constantly since the age of 16) should not be entitled to claim benefits for more than three of them if i need to?

If it’s temporary, yes. If it’s on a permanent basis, no.

There’s a few things I’d like to see government consider:
1. Tax breaks to people who get ‘income protection insurance’ - promotes personal responsibility and cheaper than handouts
2. Perhaps even Social Security Cooperatives that
Frank Field proposed. Which includes proposals for long term unemployed to work for their benefits like volunteering/national service (see overview linked)
3. Perhaps a personal contributions system where if you fall on tough times, you can drawback your contributions for whatever you need in hard times - similar to how Singapore funds healthcare

The welfare system was designed to be a safety net for when people fall on tough times. Not an alternative lifestyle which is increasingly becoming the case. 4m people on UC have no requirement to find work, that is fundamentally a problem. Cash handouts for nothing creates dependency and this is not a good way to do welfare.

Frank Field unveils radical new plan to make the welfare system fit for the 21st Century - Politeia

Lord Field of Birkenhead and Andrew Forsey propose replacing existing National Insurance system with a new Social Security Mutual

www.politeia.co.uk

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Just again comes back to wanting to punish rather than help unemployed people doesn’t it? You’re unemployed because you’re lazy, not because things happened outside your control.

I don’t fancy being punished for being productive and paying more tax to pay for more welfare claimants.

Why do you and @SBT just not interact with the data? The number of people claiming benefits has increased at an unsustainable rate. Your base assumption that no one is choosing this lifestyle is naive.

Have either of you been around genuine poverty?

Once again you're leaping to conclusions about what other people believe. Merely point out that emigration is largely unchanged in the latest figures.

Not sure what you want tbh. Labour won the election in July 2024 so these are the first year of figures for a Labour government and show a significant drop. Unless you were expecting a drop to zero surely this is good news and a step in the right direction.

I haven't seen anyone claim immigration is 'solved' off the back of these figures.

An increase of 43k is significant Dave. Particularly when they tend to be more economically productive.

The fact that you’re apparently prepared to tolerate a higher risk of civilizational collapse in the name of stopping people without jobs from getting welfare suggests to me that you may not be as committed to ‘family building‘ as you claim to be.

You can’t be serious here…

No, I’m not in favour of subsidising unemployed families having larger families paid for by taxpayers. There’s a strong link to generational dependence on welfare.

Working families deserve all the support they need in raising children. Not being taxed to support the former group.

 

[fernandopartridge]

She should resign or be removed from post.

 

[SBT]

You can’t be serious here…

No, I’m not in favour of subsidising unemployed families having larger families paid for by taxpayers. There’s a strong link to generational dependence on welfare.

Working families deserve all the support they need in raising children. Not being taxed to support the former group.

I’m sorry, you can’t be throwing around right-wing Twitter cliches about western civilisation facing collapse if people don’t build their families, only to stop short at any government support for parents who might be unemployed for whatever reason. This is just not ideologically serious behaviour.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

She should resign or be removed from post.

If only her boss had a propensity for telling the truth himself…

It’ll be exactly the same in the next budgets, this government whether it’s led by Starmer or someone else will find the next package of tax rises.

 

[wingy]

Not for unemployed imo. Creating generational dependency on welfare does not lift people out of poverty.

I believe in tax breaks for families, an increasing personal allowance or tax break for households based on children have. Civilisations collapse with birth rates over time so this is something we need to incentivise.

Then we need to move away from home ownership to some extent possibly?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I don’t fancy being punished for being productive and paying more tax to pay for more welfare claimants.

Why do you and @SBT just not interact with the data? The number of people claiming benefits has increased at an unsustainable rate. Your base assumption that no one is choosing this lifestyle is naive.

Have either of you been around genuine poverty?

Well let’s hope for your sake that you never find yourself suddenly unemployed. Stop putting words in our mouths too while you’re at it.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I’m sorry, you can’t be throwing around right-wing Twitter cliches about western civilisation facing collapse if people don’t build their families, only to stop short at any government support for parents who might be unemployed for whatever reason. This is just not ideologically serious behaviour.

Long term unemployment, absolutely.

Birthrates collapsing isn’t a right wing cliche

Then we need to move away from home ownership to some extent possibly?

What good would that do? The average rent is higher than my mortgage…

 

[wingy]

Long term unemployment, absolutely.

Birthrates collapsing isn’t a right wing cliche


What good would that do? The average rent is higher than my mortgage…

Not when it's the government that controls it?

 

[SBT]

Birthrates collapsing isn’t a right wing cliche

*Mucca Mad Boys watching Rome burn as fertility rates continue to plummet*

“Well, at least we didn’t create any generational dependence on welfare for economically unproductive migrants”

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Well let’s hope for your sake that you never find yourself suddenly unemployed. Stop putting words in ours mouths too while you’re at it.

This is a bad cliche BSB, you’re better than this.

In principle, no one has a problem with the welfare state being a temporary safety net for people who fall on tough times. People have a problem when it becomes a subsidy for people who never work.

Right now, with the UC rises, an unemployed person can earn more than someone on minimum wage.

Is that an incentive to get people off benefits? No.
Is it fair on low income earners who go out to work? No.

The numbers of people being on UC in the long term with no requirement to find work is growing aggressively. 3+ million from COVID and 1+ million since Labour elected and this is growing.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

*Mucca Mad Boys watching Rome burn as fertility rates continue to plummet*

“Well, at least we didn’t create any generational dependence on welfare for economically unproductive migrants”

Quite ironic you invoke Rome when you definitely haven’t looked into the reasons why Rome collapsed.

 

[fernandopartridge]

This is a bad cliche BSB, you’re better than this.

In principle, no one has a problem with the welfare state being a temporary safety net for people who fall on tough times. People have a problem when it becomes a subsidy for people who never work.

Right now, with the UC rises, an unemployed person can earn more than someone on minimum wage.

Is that an incentive to get people off benefits? No.
Is it fair on low income earners who go out to work? No.

The numbers of people being on UC in the long term with no requirement to find work is growing aggressively. 3+ million from COVID and 1+ million since Labour elected and this is growing.

Can you show the workings that show how somebody receiving UC can receive more than somebody working full time on minimum wage?

 

[SBT]

Quite ironic you invoke Rome when you definitely haven’t looked into the reasons why Rome collapsed.

I’m all too aware of Elon’s favourite argument. My point is that if the stakes for you are as high as *civilisational collapse*, you should have a very very good reason for opposing policies that would incentivise people to have more children.

The alternative explanation is that you’re not so much interested in “building families” as you are filtering out certain kinds.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

This is a bad cliche BSB, you’re better than this.

In principle, no one has a problem with the welfare state being a temporary safety net for people who fall on tough times. People have a problem when it becomes a subsidy for people who never work.

Right now, with the UC rises, an unemployed person can earn more than someone on minimum wage.

Is that an incentive to get people off benefits? No.
Is it fair on low income earners who go out to work? No.

The numbers of people being on UC in the long term with no requirement to find work is growing aggressively. 3+ million from COVID and 1+ million since Labour elected and this is growing.

Well they do because some people want to cut off all support as a punishment for not finding work quickly enough.

 

[LarryGrayson]

Then we need to move away from home ownership to some extent possibly?

dont selloff council houses and build more

 

[eastwoodsdustman]

The whole Idea of the welfare state was to help people through short term hard times. It wasn't set up as a lifestyle which for some (too many in my eyes) people it has clearly become.
Currently it promotes a dependance on the state and a care free attitude that someone will pay for their life choices from cradle to grave. Most of us know of at least one person or family who have never worked and have no intention of doing so.