The Politics Thread

[Worthy4England]

Money leaving the UK economy is money leaving, just don't get it do you Mr EU obsessed.

So we shouldn't be able to spend our money on what the hell we want to?

There are items and goods that have to be purchased from overseas, I agree, but the vast majority of stuff could be produced in this country at good prices if successive governments and the unions hadn't fecked things up.

Two of our larger gaps are holidays, so best of luck turning Morecambe into Ibiza and motors. I don't want a Trabant, how's your knocker Norton?

I wouldn't want an unreliable, overinflated Merc or BMW, just because I have the look at me mentality either, nor would I holiday with all the 'hip' druggies that seem to be bred by the haven't a clue parents these days aided by the stupid fawing grandparents in a shithole called ibiza, thank you. Let's just say the EU holiday resorts are slowly kicking off to kill themselves.
You lost, your arrogant I'm right vote leave are wrong, deluded, will get pasted, etc got shown up as to how out of touch you were with, 'the people' just like you bury your head in the sand about Reform with all the name calling.
You lost, get over it or are you remainers slowly losing the plot?

I'm guessing the drugs don't kick in early? We are having "a bit of a morning" aren't we? What a bitter post. I mean the Master of School Yard Name Calling getting his leopard skin thong (made in China), in a twist.

First up, there is no name calling in my post - I make the observation that two of our largest gaps in business people from the UK do with the EU are motor industry and tourism.

I've never been to Ibiza either, but more people from the UK are likely to want to go to EU destinations than there are EU people wanting to visit Scarborough. What EU holiday resorts do to themselves is entirely up to them. I mean it could be any EU holiday destination and a Skoda for a car. The fact you don't want a Merc or BMW shouldn't mean no one else could buy one. I mean we had British Leyland before we opened up markets, and everyone knows how good and reliable they were. Pretty sure at one point you said you had a Japanese bike - that's you making your choice for you, I'm not going to tell you what to go and buy. Similar, I'm sure I've heard you say you've been on holiday to Europe, so giving them a trade benefit. I'm not going to crucify you for that either.

I have nothing to get over. Pretty much everything I said about Brexit is rather closer to what I said would likely happen than what Boris, Farage, JRM said would likely happen. They've admitted as much. I might allow myself a glass of serious bubbles, just to treat myself for being sooooo fcuking right, as always (I just threw that in to annoy you). Being a pal, I'll get you a pint of bitter.

I don't think I've called anyone for siding with Reform - I might have called a few barking or even swivel eyed loons, but that's not because they're part of or vote for Reform, just that it's pretty self evident (whoever they support), they're fcuking swivel eyed loons.

[Worthy4England]

Steady on Hobes. If there is a name caller in chief on here its you. The whole win/lose thing is actually the problem. Its not about winning or losing as populists would have you believe. Its about choosing to do things based on logic and common sense, whether that is in or out. The problem remainers have is not losing, its the proven lying and doubling down contrary to the evidence. We now have significantly more red tape than the promised reduction and we now have significantly more legal migration than we had. This is all a result of taking back control. We were told we wouldn't need to leave the customs agreements, yet the morning of the leave result we're informed by leading leavers that actually we would. The whole thing is bullshit.

If you voted for Starmer (Iknow you didn't) and it was on the basis of him saying we're going to do xyz and not do abc, then proceeded to do exactly the opposite. You'd be furious and rightly so. A lot of Labour voters feel this way now and I can see why.

We were always able to control immigration whilst in the EU, but successive governments chose not to because they wanted the immigration to fuel the economy. It was convenient to blame immigrants for the lack of everything, but the culprit was not investing in services and allowing the large builders to get away without building adequate infrastructure. There is no joined up plan and that is the problem. Build build build, but no plan for the additional GPs, schools, roads, water etc etc. That has feck all to do leaving or remaining. We need to focus on rebuilding our relationship with the EU, whether that is in or out in the long term, it needs to be based on friction free trade, less red tape than we currently have and cooperation.

True, but it seems some try to make out it was only leave telling the lies, some of us haven't quite forgotten war breaking out if we left for one.
Main problem is, we haven't due to a lot of obstruction by various parties, actually left as such, we simply caved in on the real issues.
Yep, totally true, we are screwed by poor politicians and policy's.

What do you think actually leaving, looks like? That we do no trade with Europe? Give us more on what we "caved in" on. David Frost, our lead negotiator wasn't noted for being an avid remainer.

[Hoboh]

Money leaving the UK economy is money leaving, just don't get it do you Mr EU obsessed.

So we shouldn't be able to spend our money on what the hell we want to?

There are items and goods that have to be purchased from overseas, I agree, but the vast majority of stuff could be produced in this country at good prices if successive governments and the unions hadn't fecked things up.

Two of our larger gaps are holidays, so best of luck turning Morecambe into Ibiza and motors. I don't want a Trabant, how's your knocker Norton?

I wouldn't want an unreliable, overinflated Merc or BMW, just because I have the look at me mentality either, nor would I holiday with all the 'hip' druggies that seem to be bred by the haven't a clue parents these days aided by the stupid fawing grandparents in a shithole called ibiza, thank you. Let's just say the EU holiday resorts are slowly kicking off to kill themselves.
You lost, your arrogant I'm right vote leave are wrong, deluded, will get pasted, etc got shown up as to how out of touch you were with, 'the people' just like you bury your head in the sand about Reform with all the name calling.
You lost, get over it or are you remainers slowly losing the plot?

I'm guessing the drugs don't kick in early? We are having "a bit of a morning" aren't we? What a bitter post. I mean the Master of School Yard Name Calling getting his leopard skin thong (made in China), in a twist.

First up, there is no name calling in my post - I make the observation that two of our largest gaps in business people from the UK do with the EU are motor industry and tourism.

I've never been to Ibiza either, but more people from the UK are likely to want to go to EU destinations than there are EU people wanting to visit Scarborough. What EU holiday resorts do to themselves is entirely up to them. I mean it could be any EU holiday destination and a Skoda for a car. The fact you don't want a Merc or BMW shouldn't mean no one else could buy one. I mean we had British Leyland before we opened up markets, and everyone knows how good and reliable they were. Pretty sure at one point you said you had a Japanese bike - that's you making your choice for you, I'm not going to tell you what to go and buy. Similar, I'm sure I've heard you say you've been on holiday to Europe, so giving them a trade benefit. I'm not going to crucify you for that either.

I have nothing to get over. Pretty much everything I said about Brexit is rather closer to what I said would likely happen than what Boris, Farage, JRM said would likely happen. They've admitted as much. I might allow myself a glass of serious bubbles, just to treat myself for being sooooo fcuking right, as always (I just threw that in to annoy you). Being a pal, I'll get you a pint of bitter.

I don't think I've called anyone for siding with Reform - I might have called a few barking or even swivel eyed loons, but that's not because they're part of or vote for Reform, just that it's pretty self evident (whoever they support), they're fcuking swivel eyed loons.

Nothing personal mate, just woke up a tad early. There is one substance widely used up here
Had a good conversation with an SNP fella, it seems other than the independence bit, the grass root members are lurking in Reform type territory.
I'm not an out and out Reform voter but like many, I'm sick to death of the other two and don't get me started on that clown leader of the Lib Dems.

[BWFC_Insane]

True, but it seems some try to make out it was only leave telling the lies, some of us haven't quite forgotten war breaking out if we left for one.
Main problem is, we haven't due to a lot of obstruction by various parties, actually left as such, we simply caved in on the real issues.
Yep, totally true, we are screwed by poor politicians and policy's.

Many problems stem from certain politicians deciding we had to trigger leaving immediately and then announce unrealistic red lines in public. Because there was no consensus or real thought to how outside the EU should look, all sides should have paused, debated and then negotiated with the EU. Boris just wanted to be seen to be the hero and rebranded the disastrous May plan. We've all seen the problems and cost of that.

The problems stem from an embrace of populism and rejection of evidence and logic.

Brexit was the first symptom. People can argue about the politics of Cameron and Osborne - but their governance was at least built on a theory grounded in some evidence. Was it optimal is a debate.

From then onwards it became a rejection of experts and evidence in favour of what some ill informed and angry bloke down the pub ‘feels’.

It’s literally that. Populism in history always is that. And as it’s gone on it’s become more and more problematic. To the point that even some of the original brexiteers are now having to fight their colleagues over the absolute drivel they are spouting.

If things are based on rationality and evidence then a debate can be had about which is the optimal way and what the trade offs are. But when they are based off the feelings of people who haven’t got a clue - you might as well not bother.

[Worthy4England]

I don't take it personal, Hobes.

I have no doubt that people want a change from this status quo. I do too. It's not one where we cut ourselves off from everywhere outside of mainland UK. If I look at tax cuts for small businesses - I agree with that as a broad policy - paying for it by refusing to pay interest on Government Bonds - well best of luck with future investments in the bond markets and I doubt the banks will sit idly by and not raise their own interest rates and we'd need to know the impact on pension funds. Them's the bits they never tell you. Because they don't know.

[BWFC_Insane]

It’s interesting that for months the right wing hacks and terminally online morons have told us we were definitely ‘already in a recession’. Not ‘we might be’ or even things are worrying. But they’ve spoken to their city mates and we are in a recession for sure.

The reality is we in fact have the fastest growing G7 economy.

Maybe the government could take these pieces of information and do something with them instead of trying to ape Farage who is aping Trump. I mean we all see how Trump took an American economy growing at close to record rates and crashed it.

I don’t have time for the terminally online left idiots either who pretend that any discussion about immigration is racist and invoking fascism. That’s as nonsensical as the other side. But given we are the fastest growing economy in the G7 and have seen GDP per capita rise 0.5% doesn’t that blow most of starmers economic arguments re immigration out?

[Worthy4England]

No. It doesn't. You can't really take one month's GDP figures as much of value, which is why there's typically 2 quarters to declare a recession, because 1 month in isolation can be better or worse than expected, by quite a chunk.

[BWFC_Insane]

No. It doesn't. You can't really take one month's GDP figures as much of value, which is why there's typically 2 quarters to declare a recession, because 1 month in isolation can be better or worse than expected, by quite a chunk.

This is a quarter not a month. And I realise that it’s one quarter. And bounces about.

But given the growth has resulted in a rise per capita of GDP - and that the growth is following periods of high immigration (I’m not arguing it’s not too high btw) there is I think not much to back Starmer’s assertion that immigration hasn’t been pretty significant in driving even the paltry amount of growth we’ve had over the last few years.

[Worthy4England]

No. It doesn't. You can't really take one month's GDP figures as much of value, which is why there's typically 2 quarters to declare a recession, because 1 month in isolation can be better or worse than expected, by quite a chunk.

This is a quarter not a month. And I realise that it’s one quarter. And bounces about.

But given the growth has resulted in a rise per capita of GDP - and that the growth is following periods of high immigration (I’m not arguing it’s not too high btw) there is I think not much to back Starmer’s assertion that immigration hasn’t been pretty significant in driving even the paltry amount of growth we’ve had over the last few years.

Yeah spotted that after I posted, but it's still more important to look at longer term trends. It's followed on from 2 quarters of 0% and 0.1% and lags the 0.9 we did in Q1 2024. So I wouldn't draw the type of conclusions that you are doing from it, personally. Always good to see a bit of growth though.

[BWFC_Insane]

No. It doesn't. You can't really take one month's GDP figures as much of value, which is why there's typically 2 quarters to declare a recession, because 1 month in isolation can be better or worse than expected, by quite a chunk.

This is a quarter not a month. And I realise that it’s one quarter. And bounces about.

But given the growth has resulted in a rise per capita of GDP - and that the growth is following periods of high immigration (I’m not arguing it’s not too high btw) there is I think not much to back Starmer’s assertion that immigration hasn’t been pretty significant in driving even the paltry amount of growth we’ve had over the last few years.

Yeah spotted that after I posted, but it's still more important to look at longer term trends. It's followed on from 2 quarters of 0% and 0.1% and lags the 0.9 we did in Q1 2024. So I wouldn't draw the type of conclusions that you are doing from it, personally. Always good to see a bit of growth though.

I guess my point was less that ‘oh economy is fixed and turned round’ more that it should allow Labour some confidence to stop being so scared and go on the offensive and also to stop Starmer saying ‘lack of growth shows that immigration isn’t helping’ given that he has no control. He doesn’t know what growth or economic picture would be without the levels of immigration we’ve seen and given economic activity suggest any growth we’ve had has been a result of migration he is talking nonsense.

I completely agree with him that the levels we’ve seen are ridiculous and unsustainable and don’t think saying that is some dreadful affront. But the balance is that we need to grow the workforce still and that means importing people - or alternatively saying ‘it’s not all about growth’ but he can’t have it both ways.

[Worthy4England]

Oh, I agree there's a lot of nonsense talked.

[Hoboh]

Oh, I'd love to know where all these jobs are to 'grow' the workforce seeing youth employment is starting to dive. Ah well, carry on with your globalist nonsense.

[BWFC_Insane]

Oh, I'd love to know where all these jobs are to 'grow' the workforce seeing youth employment is starting to dive. Ah well, carry on with your globalist nonsense.

Growth either comes from greater efficiency - for which AI might offer some moderate gains but isn’t going to do that much or through expansion of the workforce - or of course a combination of the two.

Our workforce is getting smaller - there are only 3 working people for every retiree and that ratio gets worse year by year. 20 years ago it was 20 per retiree.

We aren’t talking short term job market fluctuation we are talking long term that is necessary for growth. Even the Trump lala lot know it it’s why musk keeps banging on about birth rates.

That is not globalist it’s simple reality. The boomer generation retiring leaves us in this situation. Like every other western nation especially the US.

[Worthy4England]

Don' think it's correct to say "our workforce is getting smaller." It's the highest it's ever been. Also, the proportion of working people per retiree was around 4, in 1960 and is just over 3, now. I don't think anyone knows where Campbell got his "20:1" number from...

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

I think the problem is at least partly the government needing ever increasing tax receipts to cover the stupid spending they make. Probably help if the very rich paid meaningful rates of tax too. Oh, and instead of the government .paying for yesterdays folk with today folk money, maybe invest some of it and use the returns off that.

[BWFC_Insane]

Don' think it's correct to say "our workforce is getting smaller." It's the highest it's ever been. Also, the proportion of working people per retiree was around 4, in 1960 and is just over 3, now. I don't think anyone knows where Campbell got his "20:1" number from...

Ok - numbers might be wrong but ultimately we have a workforce declining proportionally to a welfare state increasing proportionally. We can cut that any number of ways but however we do it’s problematic.

[BWFC_Insane]

I think the problem is at least partly the government needing ever increasing tax receipts to cover the stupid spending they make. Probably help if the very rich paid meaningful rates of tax too. Oh, and instead of the government .paying for yesterdays folk with today folk money, maybe invest some of it and use the returns off that.

Reform will just cut everything so I guess that’s their theory. For years I’ve worked alongside public sector organisations and the ‘oh they are so wasteful’ is continuous. Yet our health and public sector inflation mirrors pretty much most other comparables. Except we have spent significant periods paying under the rate. Maybe a false economy.

But I just know that like in the US slashing expenditure simply won’t work, won’t address the problems and will cost more in the end. And that whilst there are some obvious inefficiencies the vast bulk is not.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

I think the problem is at least partly the government needing ever increasing tax receipts to cover the stupid spending they make. Probably help if the very rich paid meaningful rates of tax too. Oh, and instead of the government .paying for yesterdays folk with today folk money, maybe invest some of it and use the returns off that.

Reform will just cut everything so I guess that’s their theory. For years I’ve worked alongside public sector organisations and the ‘oh they are so wasteful’ is continuous. Yet our health and public sector inflation mirrors pretty much most other comparables. Except we have spent significant periods paying under the rate. Maybe a false economy.

But I just know that like in the US slashing expenditure simply won’t work, won’t address the problems and will cost more in the end. And that whilst there are some obvious inefficiencies the vast bulk is not.

I'm talking about choosing with more wisdom what we spend it on at government level. Worthy will talk about procurement feck* and rightly so. Our, and many other governments are very good at handing large amounts of cash to the likes of G4S, Capita and the ilk. These companies are only good for sucking up money for shareholders and executive pay. They deliver nothing better than a far cheaper competent civil servant.

Instead of pissing money up the wall of migrant removal, hotels and detention centres (how many G4S et al contract are involved here?) (all of which costs a fortune), we could look at either re-joining the schemes and conventions we left during Brexit, or negotiating similar arrangements. I don't think its an accident that the leaving of these conventions and the increase in illegal migration happened at the same time. Instead, we could invest a relatively modest amount in providing safe legal routes for asylum and use the aforementioned arrangements for removal of those that should be removed.

Did we really need to spend £12b plus on aircraft carriers (plus ongoing maintenance) and then stick really expensive F35s on them? How much money was spent on HS2? We all knew it wouldn't get north of Birmingham, yet we spent billions. Should we be subsidising fine dining in Parliament? A more basic canteen cafe set-up would save millions. If MPs want fine dining then they can pay full price for it. How many billions are we spending on the Houses of Parliament to keep it useable despite it not being fit for purpose regardless of what they do or spend. Either sell it, or turn it into a museum and build something fit for purpose for a fraction of the cost.

There are thousands of examples and fixing a few would make a difference and put more money in the pot for things that actually matter.

[Prufrock]

https://youtu.be/Zoz5EuIF_y8?si=h3R96tRf48p4iHwH

[Worthy4England]

Don' think it's correct to say "our workforce is getting smaller." It's the highest it's ever been. Also, the proportion of working people per retiree was around 4, in 1960 and is just over 3, now. I don't think anyone knows where Campbell got his "20:1" number from...

Ok - numbers might be wrong but ultimately we have a workforce declining proportionally to a welfare state increasing proportionally. We can cut that any number of ways but however we do it’s problematic.

For sure it is. The out-turn expenditures under the government's Public Expenditure Statistical Analysis show some interesting trends - but if I'm recalling correctly, there's lots being put down to the "aging demographic" - since 2004, the following have occurred (using the government's figures)

Sickness and Disability benefits have increased from £25bn to £61bn (obvs using rounded figures)
Social Exclusion benefits (fam benefits, income support and tax credits) have increased from £34bn to £80bn

That's £141bn on people who are not working or need support whilst working.

Pensions over the same time have gone from £59bn to £140bn - so pretty much identical on rate of change...

The health budget over the same time has gone from £80bn to £217bn

It's not all about demography in its entirety....at all.

I think like AT says, NHS needs to determine what it should offer and what it should cut.

As a % of GDP, the whole of Social Protections (which includes pensions and benefits has increased from 11.9% to 13.3% over 20 years.
Health has increased from 5.2% to 8.1% - some of this will undoubtedly be down to "age related" things, but there's plenty that isn't.