Do you want to discuss boring politics? (13 Viewers)

[Mucca Mad Boys]

So how will you beat that direction of travel if you don't mind me asking?

Where to even start? To state the obvious, we need economic growth.

Two areas to focus on:

Energy. We have the most expensive energy in the western world and cutting the green levies and VAT on energy would be a good start to help ‘immediately’. Helps with household bills and helps businesses, particularly manufacturing. Finally, AI businesses required tons of energy which means cheap energy is the key to unlocking these growth industries.

Massive welfare reforms, having as many people as we do on sickness benefits is a major red flag. Particularly in the 18-24 age range who are predominantly claiming for mental health disorders. The welfare state as we know it cannot cope with this many young people being out of work. There are a few scenarios where the welfare state pays more than people who work. For obvious reasons, this is toxic for the economy and public finances.

My personal view is that the tax burden has reached the critical mass where any new taxes will have diminished returns. A pertinent example here has been the disastrous increase of ‘employers NI’ which has resulted in hours being cut, hiring freezes or even redundancies - particularly impacting young people. Payrolls in the private sector has sharply declined (minus 153k) since this ‘jobs tax’ was introduced but simultaneously the public sector has grown by 75k (or thereabouts).

 

---

[fernandopartridge]

My personal view is that the tax burden has reached the critical mass where any new taxes will have diminished returns. A pertinent example here has been the disastrous increase of ‘employers NI’ which has resulted in hours being cut, hiring freezes or even redundancies - particularly impacting young people. Payrolls in the private sector has sharply declined (minus 153k) since this ‘jobs tax’ was introduced but simultaneously the public sector has grown by 75k (or thereabouts).

I agree that the employers NI contributions are the wrong policy to adopt, but I am not sure about your numbers. ONS data seems to show that private sector employment has a greater share of employment in 2025 than it did in 2024, i.e. it has grown quicker.

EMP02: Public and private sector employment - Office for National Statistics

Public and private sector employment, UK, published quarterly, seasonally adjusted.

www.ons.gov.uk

 

[rob9872]

Too soon for Labour policies to have affected we're told with negative stories, so assume this employment gain is thanks to 14 years of Tory government decisions.

You're welcome

 

[wingy]

Too soon for Labour policies to have affected we're told with negative stories, so assume this employment gain is thanks to 14 years of Tory government decisions.

You're welcome

Of course that Ni contribution was okay when it was implemented by Boris and taken away by Hunt.🫣

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I agree that the employers NI contributions are the wrong policy to adopt, but I am not sure about your numbers. ONS data seems to show that private sector employment has a greater share of employment in 2025 than it did in 2024, i.e. it has grown quicker.

EMP02: Public and private sector employment - Office for National Statistics

Public and private sector employment, UK, published quarterly, seasonally adjusted.

www.ons.gov.uk

Also, the ONS:

Earnings and employment from Pay As You Earn Real Time Information, UK - Office for National Statistics

Monthly estimates of payrolled employees and their pay from HM Revenue and Customs’ (HMRC’s) Pay As You Earn (PAYE) Real Time Information (RTI) data.

www.ons.gov.uk

The ONS is also being probed for its data quality and there a serious questions on it’s reliability as a statistics office.

 

[wingy]

Also, the ONS:

Earnings and employment from Pay As You Earn Real Time Information, UK - Office for National Statistics

Monthly estimates of payrolled employees and their pay from HM Revenue and Customs’ (HMRC’s) Pay As You Earn (PAYE) Real Time Information (RTI) data.

www.ons.gov.uk

The ONS is also being probed for its data quality and there a serious questions on it’s reliability as a statistics office.

Just like the US then,?
Does this encompass the SE sector which has grown exponentially over a period of time?

 

[duffer]

Too soon for Labour policies to have affected we're told with negative stories, so assume this employment gain is thanks to 14 years of Tory government decisions.

You're welcome

I believe there's a sudden vacancy for a new spin doctor at Number 10.

Assuming that you've been behaving yourself on social media for the last ten years or so, I think you'd be a good fit.

 

[rob9872]

I believe there's a sudden vacancy for a new spin doctor at Number 10.

Assuming that you've been behaving yourself on social media for the last ten years or so, I think you'd be a good fit.

I'm afraid I've not been a good boy on SM. I don't tweet often as I end up getting embroiled in trolling celebrities (only ever had 2 posts go viral and they were to David Baddiel and Ant McPartlin). My original account was blocked, so now I only follow Cov accounts really,

I was doing well but I've lapsed twice in the past week, once to Ed Balls (I suggested if his team hadn't wasted so much time he might have made the train that left early) but I didn't cover myself in glory today. A WBA fan posted the word "shithole" of her photo driving past the CBS. I went for the most basic trolling on her appearance and I'm not proud of my response.

For that reason I won't be applying

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Too soon for Labour policies to have affected we're told with negative stories, so assume this employment gain is thanks to 14 years of Tory government decisions.

You're welcome

No, the job vacancies and payrolls declining simultaneously is a direct impact of Labour’s policy.

Reform had a similar policy, albeit increased employers NI applied to non-UK workers only, and this was derided (rightly so imo) as a dumb policy.

It’s a job tax. It significantly increased operating costs for all businesses so the following things have happened:
- prices have increased to cover costs - hence inflation has raised
- businesses have cut jobs, hours, hiring freezes
- more so for SMEs, businesses have folded
- young people and lower income people impacted the most who will probably be more reliant on the welfare state either in work, or out of work
- silver lining: will accelerate automation (self-checkouts) but at the cost of phasing out a lot of low paying jobs e.g. retail roles

Seriously, raising employer’s NI was one of the dumbest policy decisions this government has taken. It’s hugely damaging economically and probably won’t raise the sums mooted upon introduction of the policy.

 

[duffer]

I'm afraid I've not been a good boy on SM. I don't tweet often as I end up getting embroiled in trolling celebrities (only ever had 2 posts go viral and they were to David Baddiel and Ant McPartlin). My original account was blocked, so now I only follow Cov accounts really,

I was doing well but I've lapsed twice in the past week, once to Ed Balls (I suggested if his team hadn't wasted so much time he might have made the train that left early) but I didn't cover myself in glory today. A WBA fan posted the word "shithole" of her photo driving past the CBS. I went for the most basic trolling on her appearance and I'm not proud of my response.

For that reason I won't be applying

Ah, you're only human. How about US ambassador, standards are a bit lower for that position.

 

[rob9872]

Ah, you're only human. How about US ambassador, standards are a bit lower for that position.

I'm in! Off to share my knowledge to the University crowds. ..

 

[SkyBlueCharlie9]

Just fuck off you race baiting c**t

Nice language tossp0t. Touched a nerve there. I said one of the main reasons not just that and not everyone. The Consevative & Unionists that switched to Reform have been from the very right side of the party... the more racist extreme fruitcake side of the party.

 

[SkyBlueCharlie9]

More nonsense Charles

In depth political analysis again Grenners.

 

[Grendel]

In depth political analysis again Grenners.

Well your comment was she is black so the right don't like her. The members are always more extreme and odlly voted her in against the very white, very right and very male Robert Jenrick.

I think you need to look at Labour Charles who really seem to have a problem with non whites and females leading the Party

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Well your comment was she is black so the right don't like her. The members are always more extreme and odlly voted her in against the very white, very right and very male Robert Jenrick.

I think you need to look at Labour Charles who really seem to have a problem with non whites and females leading the Party

The Tories objectively have a better record on diversity than Labour and 'the left' can't stand it. In fact, the tory membership have backed two female candidates back-to-back...

Personally, I like Kemi, is a decent leader of the Tories and in ordinary times would probably poll v well. Right now, she's against a seemingly unstoppable force in Farage on the back of widespread anger against the 'uniparty' (Conservatives v Labour).

 

[wingy]

I'm in! Off to share my knowledge to the University crowds. ..

Bloody hell another Don!

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Under the Tories in the 2010s, government spending still steadily increased. Likewise, Labour welfare ‘cuts’ was just slowing down the increase in spending. “Real austerity” would mean actually cutting government spending rather than stymying the spending increases.

If interest rates get past 7-8%, the economy will be in a lot of trouble. Particularly for homeowners and anyone with debt, which is a lot of people. Unfortunately, the rate of spending increases and gilts get more expensive, it’s a doom loop because the government needs to pay more to pay its interest, which increases borrowing further and the cycle repeats.

We’re already spending £100+ bn on debt interest alone.

"Real austerity" would put the economy in massive trouble.

For a start that many people losing jobs means you've now got those people on benefits while not getting ta from their wages. Those people will also not have money to spend and so private businesses will contract, cutting further jobs resulting in more benefits/less tax in a vicious circle, as well as things like CT going down as their business suffers.

Then as those contract you end up with growth growing into reverse and the resultant recession causing our cost of borrowing to go up.

So have more need for welfare, less tax revenue and cost of borrowing going up. Sounds like a great plan.

And that's without even thinking about the human aspect of what those cuts would cause. What do you cut? Welfare? Well in that case crime goes up and so you need more from the police, courts and prisons. Only you've probably cut them too so places are almost like the wild west.

What about health? Cut it for physical health and you'll get even more people unfit to work and so reliant on welfare. Cut mental health provision and you're likely looking at increase in crime as people's conditions aren't being managed properly. We've already seen this in the past.

How about cutting handouts to large businesses to invest in the country? They already have a lot of money so why give them a handout? Because chances are they'll not invest in the country and you don't get the jobs?

It's all well and good saying make cuts but the impact and consequences of that would be absolutely massive. If anything it'd push the country close to civil war.