To ask where has all the money gone/where does it go

3 Trillion in debt means over a BILLION per year in interest alone - more than the entire education budget.

Covid lockdowns etc cost us 500 BILLION - our children and grandchildren will be repaying that all their lives, causing massive lost productivity, huge numbers of ruined businesses etc.

We've been conditioned to think "cheap" imports are brilliant so we can have cheap tat made in China, but that has caused mass unemployment in the UK, not just costing in terms of benefits, but also crime and other social problems, mental health problems, etc all of which cost money to manage,

Alongside cheap imports, we've a negative balance of trade, i.e. money flowing OUT of the country, which no politicians seem to talk about anymore yet it was a big thing in the 70s and 80s. Presumably, we're now relying on "invisibles" such as the service industry and of course foreign investors buying UK property as investments and the Universities - partially contributing to the house price inflation due to increasing demand.

Still paying for the old style gold plated public sector pensions.

£100 BILLION spunked on the stupid HS2.

But that's the point. The civil service is packed with managers and consultants....and people like your family are working like stink because there's not enough people actually delivering what they are meant to.

I did, but can't tell the time on it!

So what are you going to cut, benefits, pensions, the NHS, Council spending, infrastructure spending? Would any government dare touch most of those, tax increases? Even if you tax the rich until the pips squeak it will be a drop in the ocean there just aren't enough rich people and they would vote with their feet and go somewhere more tax friendly. It's the masses of earners in the middle income range that would have to be taxed more (again).

Blaming everything on Brexit when most of Europe is in similar or worse plight just doesn't hold water. There was huge extra spending during Covid and world events recently have impacted economies around the world. And Trump's ever changing pronouncements don't help stability.

Perhaps they should use NS&I more to raise funds so at least the interest goes to the people of the UK. They used to do tax free index linked and fixed rate certificates which were quite good investments.

The national debt for public sector pensions is in the multiple TRILLIONS of pounds.

People are living for a lot longer than expected, so those guaranteed pensions are costing far far more than expected. Those people also receive the state pension, which is not means tested.

Added to this an astronomical amount of people on welfare, and the huge amount of mass immigration which costs more than we benefit from in terms of taxes being paid in (those from non European countries on the whole we pay for over their lifetime). Caveating I'm all for skilled immigration, its a necessity.

The wealth is tied up with the older generations in their homes, huge DB pensions, savings etc.

Those people who simply state "Brexit" - what is the cost to us per year compared to pre Brexit? We paid in hundreds of billions pre Brexit, I'm interested to know.

I don’t know about Australia, but America most certainly had the equivalent of furlough payments and government support of people who lost income due to Covid in some states. Paying people not to work during Covid, as you put it, was not unique to the UK.

The problem with threads/discussions like this, is they think that all other countries are doing so much better than the UK despite facing the same macroeconomic factors. And that’s just not true at all. What has screwed the UK over (wars, Covid, hyperinflation) has screwed over pretty much the rest of the world.

I think a lot of people feel this way now. We’re paying more tax but public services and everyday life feel worse, which makes people wonder where the money is going.

It’s probably a mix of things rather than one cause... Brexit, Covid, wars, energy prices, inflation, huge government debt, and years of weak economic growth. At the same time, frozen tax thresholds mean ordinary workers are paying more tax without big pay rises.

The result is the country looks “busy” economically, but normal people feel poorer because wages just haven’t kept up with the cost of living.

We aren’t generating enough money. We spend more than we make. Jobs are taxed. What companies make matters. Make nothing - have no jobs. Pension funds invest for pensions.

We have a ludicrously expensive nhs with poor productivity. The civil service grows and grows, as do benefits and pension payments. We spend £110 billion a year on government loans. Brexit and Covid are partly to blame but so are stupid argumentative politicians.

Everyone in this country needs economics lessons - mandatory before being allowed to vote! We think we can have it all, but we simply cannot.

It’s very simple we continue to have an ageing population. People are living longer and fewer children are being born.
The burden on the state pension continues to grow and as fewer people are contributing more are ‘withdrawing’ money.
In very simple terms (like it or not) the country cannot afford the triple lock.
The state pension is considered a ‘benefit’ and we as a country are paying out more in ‘benefits’ than we are receiving tax revenues.
I absolutely do not begrudge anyone a decent state pension but it is not affordable.
Any government that scraps the triple lock or increases state pension age would immediately become unbelievably unpopular and would be voted out at the following election. Principally older people tend to vote more than younger people and any government knows what would happen.
its been a ticking time bomb since I was taught O Level economics (50+ years ago).

But who decides what is a natural lifespan? Do we pick an age and just stop ALL treatment? Even simple treatment that could save someone? So at 70 we ban any prescriptions or surgeries. Except painkillers maybe or them as well? If someone had type I diabetes from childhood can they continue getting insulin etc after 70? If so, why should a 71 year old be denied blood pressure medication or blood thinners which could be a simple solution to extend their life significantly?

Don’t get me wrong, there should come a point where treatments should stop in very elderly, frail people. But a lot of doctors already will advise against certain treatments for very old people. But there are some generally very healthy 80 year olds and some very unwell 50 year olds. It’s not as simple as not letting people live past their natural lifespan, because everyone’s is different.

And if you feel that guilty about being kept alive, you really do have the option to just refuse any more medications or whatever it is that you feel is keeping you alive.

Oh, and teachers. Also predictable. Teacher pay in UK is pitiful compared to say, Canada, lower than Ireland, and teachers are more respected in those places too.

Check out the millions being paid to Palantir and other AI companies in advance of digital ID.
And the books for many government departments can't be audited due to fraud and negligence, so no one knows where the money has gone

So fucking boring seeing the civil service slagged all the time. Half my family are in it and work their arses off. And a lot of the stupid stuff is handed down by government ministers.

Keeping old people alive past their natural lifespan. Think how much that costs in pension, attendance allowance, constant Gp/ hospital visits.
Before I get slated I am one of those old people and I do feel guilty about it.

So why don't they just borrow more money then?

There are lots of reasons already mentioned on this thread. An additional one is the effect of healthcare rationing during and following the arrival of covid. There is the obvious and well documented effect of repeated covid infections on health too.

A lot of it is ageing demographics. I understand people become disabled with old age, but i do believe attendance allowance & pip should be stopped at a certain point as it’s pretty much granted you’ll be disabled as you go into old age. That would save a lot of money.

We have a massive massive number of people "taking out" far more than they ever put in, and too few people working full time paying

@ToffeeCrabApple this isn't unusual, more pensioners increases the state burden. In the 60s it was 5 workers to 1 pensioner, we are at 3:1 now and not far off 2:1.

There are already more over 60s than under 25s, that’s an insane shift!

I agree that there's enormous wastage in the public sector. School senior leadership teams are too big - teams of six or more where you'd previously have had a head and a deputy.

Ah but this is not so simple. This has happened because of the huge erosion in basic teaching pay that means no one can afford to be a classroom teacher in the more expensive parts of the country any more. No one will stay unless they can secure additional responsibility to improve their pay.

If teaching pay had kept pace with inflation, this would probably not be happening.

any solution will take years & need cross party consensus but a lot of the electorate want which fixes.

This

We have a massive massive number of people "taking out" far more than they ever put in, and too few people working full time paying in.

Tax revenue is paying for

• schools/colleges/childcare funding
• the NHS & social care
• the armed forces
• the police & things like border services
• welfare
• infrastructure like HS2, roads, bridges
• welfare, including vast buckets on state pension, pension credit, pip & DLA, universal credit in all it's forms
• the environment - forestry, parks, national parks, coastlines, waterways including canals
• interest on national debt
• government employee wages, from MPs to civil servants

Its a huge amount of cost, and we need more people working to pay for it. Its no good assuming the money can come from corporates, loads of sectors have been hammered by the weak economy and are barely making any money.

Making ever increasing house prices the economy has fucked it.

The solution, if any, does not lie with one single party or policy a but rather a cross section to really strategise the future of the UK over the long term

Absolutely, any solution will take years & need cross party consensus but a lot of the electorate want which fixes.

One of these billionaires is the King 🤯

There are 157 UK billionaires in the UK.

In 1990 there were 15, in 2010 there were 53 in 2020 there were 147. Adjusted for inflation those figures would be 40, 90 and 160.

They have wealth that is equivalent to 22% of UK GDP. They own around 4.3% of UK houshold wealth.

Between 25% and 28% of them keep their wealth off shore to avoid paying tax on that wealth.

They pay around 1% of their wealth in tax. The tax that they pay equates to just 0.7% of the UK tax take.

Uk billionaires have the highest amount of non-productive wealth in the G7. This means they don't acquire their wealth through job creation and industry development but through passive means like rent and property portfolios.

They don't spend their money in the economy the same way that ordinary UK citizens do. Their spend is global so they are not contributing to VAT or the economy like ordinary people.

Wealth is not taxed at anywhere near the rate of work so even when it is kept on shore, they don't pay enough tax to appear on the list of top tax payers.