Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Economic growth doesn’t necessarily mean prosperous
Economic growth doesn’t necessarily mean prosperousHappiness and a prosperous society go hand in hand...
Most people just want enough money to buy a house, run a household and start a family. Particularly the latter is seem out of reach for many ordinary people which fuels our tanking fertility rates and exacerbates our future demographic crisis.
Economic growth doesn’t necessarily mean prosperous
So do men get their pensions a few years earlier?In Denmark the retirement age moves with the average age expectancy. It’s 15 years short of it. Sensible I think
Winner of the least surprising news of the year award.Lol at Corbyn and Sultana’s party already coming apart at the seams
So do men get their pensions a few years earlier?
They have had 4 female leaders
Lol at Corbyn and Sultana’s party...
Winner of the least surprising news of the year award.
Was listening to a podcast the other day and they had someone who was a supporter of Reform and went on Tommy Robinson marches who was talking about how those groups are happy to unite behind a vague idea of having some things in common and wanting to move in roughly the same direction. Therefore you can end up with people with pretty wide ranging views happily co-existing and in the main putting sometimes big differences aside for the benefit of the bigger picture.
But on the left as we all know the opposite is true. Any slight difference of opinion over policy becomes an issue which sidetracks everyone from the bigger picture. So much time and energy is spent dealing with shit that is in the grand scheme of things largely irrelevant that things never move forward.
There's clearly an appetite for a party on the left but nobody ever seems able to get their act together. Although if they did it would just highlight the problems with a two party system. As we see with Reform it takes the collapse of an existing party to create the space for something new.
To be honest the triple lock is one thing we could get rid of. As long as it increases with inflation then that's acceptable.But people keep talking about cuts and yet the extra borrowing and tax this government have brought in should generate an extra £300-400bn during the parliament. Unfortunately spending is accelerating also
Nobody wants to take the tough choices, do we keep triple lock, do we allow an ever growing number to claim welfare, can we afford to keep making above inflation public sector pay rises unless productivity improves?
As I’ve said before, we’re not the only ones. Been reading about Frances state pension situation, they’re fucked
We've been that for a little while now with DC pensions etc, but the trouble with that is it will have an horrific lag - decades probably.The fundamental problem the country has is the lack of economic growth. It's fairly basic economics that a historically high tax burden is not conducive for growth. Previous governments have actually raised more revenue when cutting some taxes (notably, Osborne cutting corporation tax increased revenues). The goal of a tax system is to maximise revenue hence Italy is attracting a lot of wealthy Europeans (particularly from the UK) with attractive tax schemes.
Labour should just scrap it the triple lock, electorally they're in the toilet anyway and particularly with the 'grey vote'. Politically, Keir Starmer and his government are cowardly.
Frankly, the government needs to admit the truth that the pension wasn't built in the context of people living into their 80s. Rather than looking at pension pots as something to tax, government needs to do everything to push people to take ownership of their retirement and invest in their own pension pots.
I agree.Isn't Pete just talking about how GDP as 'the' measure of success might not be the way to go, rather than saying growth shouldn't be a goal? I've thought the same thing for a long time. Feels too crude a measure and totally detached from reality for people, at least as a headline measure in isolation.
Economic growth doesn’t necessarily mean prosperous
Indeed - and to talk about growth whilst ignoring inequality is, imho, ridiculous. This isn't a poor country but what wealth we have is increasingly being funneled towards a very small number of people.
By 2023, the richest 50 families in the UK held more wealth than half of the UK population, comprising 34.1 million people. If the wealth of the super rich continues to grow at the rate it has been, by 2035, the wealth of the richest 200 families will be larger than the whole UK GDP (see link below).
And that's before we even start talking about giant corporates paying their fair share of tax, and the private monopolies in utilities earning millions if not billions from a uniquely anti-capitalist system.
There's money out there beyond just extending austerity and cutting welfare. It's just the lack of political will to look seriously at getting it.
The Scale of Economic Inequality in the UK - Equality Trust
The UK has very high inequality of income compared to other developed countries. The UK's wealth inequality is much more severe than income inequality.equalitytrust.org.uk
She's a professional victim.Good timing from Corbo
‘Ex-Labour MP Zarah Sultana has accused Jeremy Corbyn of overseeing a "sexist boys' club" locking women out of the founding of a new left-wing party the pair announced earlier this year’
Corbyn and Sultana clash over new party membership - BBC News
MP Zarah Sultana says she is a victim of a "sexist boys' club" in row over setting up new left wing party.www.bbc.co.uk
The Top 25% of earners make up and the ‘top 1%’ are paying a higher % of tax revenues that in the 1970s. They are paying their fair share and an ever increasing share of tax revenue. This sounds good but, it puts public finances in a precarious position as it’s reliant on a v narrow tax base. Britain already has the highest amount of millionaires leaving in the G7.Indeed - and to talk about growth whilst ignoring inequality is, imho, ridiculous. This isn't a poor country but what wealth we have is increasingly being funneled towards a very small number of people.
By 2023, the richest 50 families in the UK held more wealth than half of the UK population, comprising 34.1 million people. If the wealth of the super rich continues to grow at the rate it has been, by 2035, the wealth of the richest 200 families will be larger than the whole UK GDP (see link below).
And that's before we even start talking about giant corporates paying their fair share of tax, and the private monopolies in utilities earning millions if not billions from a uniquely anti-capitalist system.
There's money out there beyond just extending austerity and cutting welfare. It's just the lack of political will to look seriously at getting it.
The Scale of Economic Inequality in the UK - Equality Trust
The UK has very high inequality of income compared to other developed countries. The UK's wealth inequality is much more severe than income inequality.equalitytrust.org.uk
In your view, what is the way out of the situation the UK finds itself in?The Top 25% of earners make up and the ‘top 1%’ are paying a higher % of tax revenues that in the 1970s. They are paying their fair share and an ever increasing share of tax revenue. This sounds good but, it puts public finances in a precarious position as it’s reliant on a v narrow tax base. Britain already has the highest amount of millionaires leaving in the G7.
Wealth inequality has been driven by an asset boom caused by years of quantitative easing.
The Top 25% of earners make up and the ‘top 1%’ are paying a higher % of tax revenues that in the 1970s. They are paying their fair share and an ever increasing share of tax revenue. This sounds good but, it puts public finances in a precarious position as it’s reliant on a v narrow tax base. Britain already has the highest amount of millionaires leaving in the G7.
Wealth inequality has been driven by an asset boom caused by years of quantitative easing.
I wonder what agenda ‘Tax justice’ is peddling here…Turns out that "millionaires leaving" bit, is a bit of a myth.
Millionaire exodus did not occur, study reveals - Tax Justice Network
The number of millionaires widely reported in the news to be leaving countries in "exodus" represented near-0% of all millionaires.taxjustice.net
Wealth inequality has been rising steadily since the 1970s, so it's not just QE that's caused it, it's an ongoing reluctance to even attempt to redistribute.
Facts are facts, wealth distribution has grown increasingly and massively unequal in this country and yet the centrists and the right conclude that the only solution is to make it harder for the poor and the sick.
I always wonder why wealth distribution is talked about by some as an impossibility yet it seems entirely possible, as has been happening for years, for the opposite to occur.‘Wealth redistribution’ sounds nice. What does that mean specifically and what mechanisms are used to achieve that end?
I always wonder why wealth distribution is talked about by some as an impossibility yet it seems entirely possible, as has been happening for years, for the opposite to occur.
If you can create the perfect conditions for the biggest transfer of wealth to the richest in the country then should it not be possible for something to be devised which does the opposite?
it never does, but it always manages to find a way to flow one way and never the other“Wealth redistribution” in this context doesn’t mean a direct transfer of ‘£xxx’ from one group to another.
Has she also committed fraud?She's a professional victim.
“Wealth redistribution” in this context doesn’t mean a direct transfer of ‘£xxx’ from one group to another. The vehicle for ‘redistribution’ is public services; social housing, schools and healthcare (you get the picture). If you don’t use public services often, you don’t feel the benefit. For example, most skint and healthy 20-30 year old don’t directly benefit from a well functioning NHS whilst they’re young and healthy.
When the government is spending £100+ bn on debt repayments alone all new taxation is going on paying this back. For context, the ‘wealth tax’ would only generate around £25bn (this is not a net figure as France found out).
The big area where the government could ‘redistribute’ is a massive social housing program. Given both Tory + Labour haven’t met housing targets for years, designed to keep up with net migration of 300k… This isn’t going to happen.
Is this where we just sack grant and say it’s all okGot any belief Rachel won't make the mess worse?
View attachment 46126
Turns out that "millionaires leaving" bit, is a bit of a myth.
Millionaire exodus did not occur, study reveals - Tax Justice Network
The number of millionaires widely reported in the news to be leaving countries in "exodus" represented near-0% of all millionaires.taxjustice.net
Wealth inequality has been rising steadily since the 1970s, so it's not just QE that's caused it, it's an ongoing reluctance to even attempt to redistribute.
Facts are facts, wealth distribution has grown increasingly and massively unequal in this country and yet the centrists and the right conclude that the only solution is to make it harder for the poor and the sick.
Far too reasonable and not left wing enough and also not right wing enoughNearly everyone in the country wants the wealthiest to pay more. If you can find a wealth tax that will generate significant revenue (and not lead to an exodus of the very richest) then I’d be all for it. Out of interest and from what you’ve read, what would your proposal be and how much would it generate ? (I’m not being funny about that by the way, just trying to understand how much it would help our current predicament)
It’s so hard to find a clear picture on wealth inequality which takes into account asset values, inflation, changing demographics, population increases etc etc. We all know the very richest have got a lot wealthier though and at least partly due to population increase of a number of low paid migrants and more on welfare, I’d imagine there’s likely been an increase in the number of poorest
As I’ve said before, all I’m seeing is the majority of normal working people paying more and getting less for their public services. Unless we can show we have a semblance of control over public spending (welfare/pensions are forecast to balloon), we will continue to pay more for debt and unless we grow significantly, the situation will continue to spiral. If the government/left continues to ignore this problem any wealth tax will likely be a drop in the ocean.
Ps nobody knows for sure about the potential exodus of non doms and apparently we won’t do until self assessments are submitted in a year or twos time
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?