Starmer says we are going to have more money in our pockets (new year's speach

My home is short of many thousands because of this lot and the previous one. I am one of the families leaving as this government is based on ideology and the country is in decline because of many things happening since 2008 onwards.

@ThisPageIsBlank

"Hence why growth and productivity increases are the only way out of the doom loop. This is what Labour said would be the focus of their economic policy. Perhaps Starmer could explain to us all why every single economic measure announced so far by his Government has (as would very obviously be the case to anybody with the slightest grasp of how the economy works, and was indeed predicted before he and his chancellor decided to put these policies in place so he was fully aware that this would be the result) had the exact opposite effect of generating growth or productivity increases? "

This paragraph hits the nail on the head and is an excellent summary of where we are heading.

How can even the most ardent Labour supporter not see that increasing the NI contributions by employers is going to be anti growth. I mean it's pretty basic economics.

In that case surely the solution is to abolish private schools altogether rather than tax them which only serves to make them accessible to those that are even wealthier than the current parents.

Let's be honest this is not about trying to create an equal education system it's a let's bash the posho rich and grab some tax in the process.

Even then it's likely that this measure will cost more in increased educational spending than it raises in tax.

sorry but the chickens are all dead. chlorine

The lucky ones got chlorinated. The others got eaten by maggots first before the chlorine could "purify" them.

Maybe he thinks he can pull a "Harold Wilson"?

"A pound is a pound..."

🤦🏻‍♀️

sorry but the chickens are all dead. chlorine.

Well, yes. It's pointless raising wages if you haven't raised productivity because all that will happen is inflation will increase to devalue the currency to match supply to demand.

You have to remove the barriers to trade that we've artificially erected, and generate the conditions for investment so that productivity can rise, for a genuine rise in real-terms salaries and living standards to be possible.

Hence why growth and productivity increases are the only way out of the doom loop. This is what Labour said would be the focus of their economic policy. Perhaps Starmer could explain to us all why every single economic measure announced so far by his Government has (as would very obviously be the case to anybody with the slightest grasp of how the economy works, and was indeed predicted before he and his chancellor decided to put these policies in place so he was fully aware that this would be the result) had the exact opposite effect of generating growth or productivity increases?

It's almost like they've done the total opposite of what they promised the electorate prior to the election... surely not? 😆

I re-trained as a teacher at 50, but never got a job. SLTs don't particularly like older confident people as inexperienced teachers whose subject knowledge was often very expert. Without claiming to have been anything special, even at entry level pay scale, age is against you.

For my part, I enjoyed teaching --- apart from the mildly disruptive element that was present in most classes. Also my DH had a business so there was no way I was going to relocate to teach in another area. And then, my subject was removed from mandatory in the 2015 reforms.

Paul has now almost reached his overdraft limit.

The chickens seem to want to roost.

How does this change benefit any children? Sure, it makes things more difficult or worse for some…but how is it going to make it better for the others? We all know that whatever changes they make to the state sector will be exactly the same ones that could have been made without putting tax on a section of the education sector. It’s an ideologically driven attack, consistent with the lefts approach of ‘If I can’t have it, no one can have it’.

The money raised, if anything is immaterial, and irrelevant. The total education budget is around £120 billion. Even Labour, who can’t add up, only claim that VAT on school fees will raise £1.7 billion, so a potential increase of little under 1.5%. But, we already know (because they don’t actually understand how VAT works) that the net gain will be a lot less than £1.7 billion once the effects of VAT reclaim on inputs and capital projects is factored in.

Peter has been living off Paul.

They can pledge all the teachers they want, but not enough people want to teach. For good reason. Although pensions are very good, dc are poorly behaved in too many schools. Dc know what these schools are like. They have been customers for years. I just dislike empty promises without actual detail on how to achieve it. It’s really not just about robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Labour don’t seem to have spotted that those kids have two parents on the whole and grandparents … quite a few voters - up to 30% depending on how many kids a couple have and whether grandparents are still alive

Ooooh a thread on mn - more of the same

But kids in state are divided eg grammars/by catchment areas etc. There is massive inequality in the state sector, to ignore that is incredibly naive.
There is a thread currently which highlights how kids from same socio economic groups tend to stick together within mixed state schools.

Once you divide children from each other, you create a divisive society if that’s what you want, if that’s what you think will improve this country - go ahead and support it

7% which rises to 18% at 6th form. I tell you what is divisive, a policy which brings in very little £ but causes a lot of damage. Indy schools are being scapegoated for all that's wrong with the education system. I can guarantee that if you got rid of all indy schools tomorrow then none of the problems in state sector would be solved/disappear.
You have been sold a lie by Labour. Just 1 example of this is: the pledge to recruit 6,500 extra teachers could cost £5 billion annually, according to research from @TheNFER - far more than the £1.8 billion Labour claimed the policy would fetch in (I say claimed because that was based on half the number of kids leaving Indy for the whole year than actually have already left in 1 term).
It is a nasty, petty, smoke + mirrors policy to distract you from the fact that they aren't doing anything concrete to improve state schools eg increasing the funding per pupil which is what is actually needed.

about 5% of children go to private school and yet this thread is full of them.
The education system of the UK is divisive. It needs changing for the benefit of all children.

As far as I can see only People on NMW will have a little more in their pocket for literally thirty seconds until it goes out again to pay for any good or service they chose or need to use . Everything we buy and use will increase in price as NI increases the costs of supply or production for literally everything.

I can’t think of any other group who will get anymore in their pocket though even for that transient thirty seconds . Their costs just go up.

I don’t believe him and I worry that some do

The problem with a cap is it removes competition. Because if the govt capped something at, say, £1500, no company is going to say "well, we will only charge £1000" they will charge the maximum because they're allowed to.

I suppose the cap prevents companies charging excessively, but any that do that would lose business anyway to more reasonable providers.

She didn;t work at my workplace.

@CamelsForChristmas
“Do they go to an independent school” is a ridiculous indicator of excess wealth in the most part.
Our car is 14 years old. Our house is falling apart. We haven’t had a foreign holiday since before Covid.
Plenty of wealthy people use their cash to tutor for grammar schools (none in my City!) or buy a house in catchment for a great state school.
But they don’t get lambasted for those choices do they? Taking state funds for something you could afford to pay for is a bad thing isn’t it? Except in eduction. 🤯

And yes this is our choice.
As a child of a nurse and lorry driver, I grew up poor and I fully believe education is the best way to escape poverty and I want to invest in my children in this way.
My husband is now in his 50s and is STILL the only person in his family to have gone to university.
I want every child to have a great education. But this policy will not provide that.
And yes I’m pissed about that. I’m not a Tory voter either and I want a better future in the UK too.

The OP asked a very clear question in their post. And I, along with the majority regardless of their life choices, are saying No we won’t have more money in our pockets.
He is lying to everyone.

Even his Councillors don’t trust him. Why should I? www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-broxtowe-labour-councillors-b2672965.html

Their majority was wide but very thin: many seats including those of several cabinet ministers won on just a few hundred votes.

If they do not deliver growth (and therefore rising living standards) as promised then they will be toast, and we are likely to end up with a hung Parliament, potentially ever the swivel-eyed Reform loons holding the balance of power because the electorate proved in 2016 that many of them are stupid enough to vote for such idiotic policies.

It's therefore in everyone's interests that Labour gets its act together and takes measures to improve growth as it said it would, hence the great disappointment that so far everything they have done has actively sabotaged any prospect of it and them spouting a word salad of vague "missions" and "goals" in every speech rather than having any plan whatsoever to improve the economy.

Ticket prices were lower... say £2.10... or £4.05 return so you were only just better off buying the capped single.
In the meantime ticket prices have increased ahead of inflation during the capped time , as they do when a new "target" is set for them (so no one could really complain). So now real ticket prices are £3.25. and the cap is £3. "Isn't it wonderful". Nope. No cap in the first place would have kept prices around the £2.25 sort of rate. But the companies knew the cap would be increasing and went for it on pricing.
It is truly sickening for those of us who rely on public transport and were saying all this when the cap came in, and AGAIN when they said it would increase. The future cap rate quickly became a target to exceed.
£2.25 would have been a fair increased cap, and should have been touted as the future cap rate, to keep baseline actual prices affordable.

What did she do before September 2022?