Keir Starmer has warned us to prepare for inflation in a recent speach.

[EvangelicalAboutButteredToast]

errr haven’t we just had a 50% ruse in food prices alongside huge utility and energy/fuel hikes? I heard that and thought how much fucking higher are we going before people are unable to pay their bills?!

Yes, billions spent to bail out the feckless greedy bankers and we’re still paying for it in the interest payments on the debt

We’ve got Trumps war, increasing amounts being thrown about everywhere, including benefits, so, yes, inflation is predicted to rise as are interest rates.

I was quite clearly suggesting that the U.K. taxed its own billionaires.

I may have confused the issue by decrying the financial and political mismanagement that has enabled politicians to sell off everything we once owned, many of which have found their way into foreign hands, and most of which we still pay for. The money raised from billionaires should be ploughed straight back into nationalising Britains resources and services. We can’t afford to pay foreigners for our own.

you didn't answer my question though - there is only 619bn of total wealth owned by UK billionaires. They are already leaving the country, according to the link you shared this wealth dropped 10% in the first year of Labour coming into power alone.

619bn will last to cover one year spend on welfare and NHS. Once we exhausted this money, what's next?

Which resources and services exactly do you want to nationalise?
Thames Water? it's market value is about 18bn, so you need to put 3% wealth tax to cover this one only. How many billionaires will be left?
Who will invest in Britain afterwards?

Any other genius high tax ideas which will drive away the only people who produce and generate jobs for Britain? Honestly. 🤦🏽‍♀️

We have to become more productive. That’s the key.

Starmer loyalist urges prime minister to go further on tax

You couldn't make this up

You probably also couldn't make up Rayner's own goal (and possibly two laws broken) on a school visit this afternoon, or the fact that the BOE's chief economist told Reeves this week that Labour's policies to help young people in the job market by paying higher NMW to young people and taxing employers more has actually had the opposite effect of harming younger peoples chances in the job market - seriously, the woman in charge of the countries financies couldn't see that coming?

Agree. Eg look at why the UK has a higher number of NEETs than most other European countries

“Only” 600 odd billion shared between less than 200 individuals. “Only” 2/3 if the annual tax take of the entire country shared between less than 200 individuals. While people who work and keep the country’s lights on can’t afford proper meals and one house to live in.

Its fucking obscene and a joke.

Talk about productivity? How the fuck dare you. We are working more than ever and getting far less. The true story of productivity of the working people has gone through the roof. The super rich now cumulatively produce less than ever, more and more of their wealth comes from fleecing those of us who work and turning us into slaves. It comes from the rentier economy, making us pay for the water falling from the sky. It is honestly said that if you could force us to buy back the air itself you would.

To be perfectly honest if it takes turning the rest of us into slaves to run this country now then it is not worth it, people working and working with nothing to spend on themselves to maintain - what exactly? A few lines on the ground?, .But of course it is all a lie. This country has given many more people a decent living for the work they do, with far less work, within living memory. It’s done it with far less money.

We would be taking a very small percentage of the billionaires wealth to rebuild the country and take back our own resources. Take them back, not magic them up. There are those who point out that due to the financial shenanigans the privatised industries engaged in it’s quite possible to take them back very cheaply indeed. At the end of the day, a few billionaires have no more natural rights to them than a baby newly born down the road. They only have the rights they have lied and taken by force and told us we can do nothing about , because of laws they’ve created. We can create others. They ve had the benefit for 20-40 years, it’s quite long enough.

I really couldn’t give a fuck what happens to them once the country can stand on its own feet by owning its own resources and letting funds migrate around its system instead of paying for a few billionaires to live in luxury unimaginable.

@WaryCrow It’s just not true that working people are working more than ever and getting less than ever. Nor that wealth is concentrating with the ultra rich.

Expropriating assets has been tried and usually ends up a disaster: Bolshevik Russia, Maoist China, Cambodia, Venezuela, Zimbabwe.

Charts:

Would love to see the end of those charts up until today.

Here they are:

You are wrong. The money is accumulating in the hands of few at an unprecedented rate. There are plenty of studies and statistics and graphs. You only have to google it and you will get plenty of info.

Many people are working very hard. With this of wfh and having a laptop and emails at home, many check emails and complete tasks beyond their working hours. But the crude reality is that we get much less for our taxes. GP, almost mission impossible. Surgery, join the queue. Education, they are dropping subjects in secondary and leaving the poor kids hanging out. Transport, expensive, may not have many options. Roads and lighting in streets- well, ducks could leave in some potholes if they do not fix them soon and you better have a torch with you at night. Bins.... they are collected every 3 weeks here, recycling weekly, but there is litter everywhere, which means they are not collected often enough.

Not just wrong I fear. There are many vested interests in lying and little of the infosphere left to stop them.

Of course people are working harder than ever for less. I hope at least people have the sense to trust their own experiences over the increasing lies and propaganda. The anger in the country suggests they do.

I agree with much of what you say and I do not think you meant expropriating as the way to renationalise assets.
I think nationalising water, energy, care homes, nurseries, transport and many other will create employment for us and make the cost cheaper than outsourcing to private companies. But I would go for building our own companies. Maybe buying some of the failing already existing infraestructures, as you say. They are likely to need investment to keep them going. As private companies tend to use plants just as cash cows and invest the minimum in keeping them viable. Proof if the shite we are getting from water companies.
I am hoping for manufacturibg to return to our shores. Let's make our own things, here.

OK let’s cut through any lies and propaganda. Share some studies.

Your claims was that we are “working more than ever and getting far less”.

Do you really think average hours worked is the highest it’s ever been? Or that that labour buys less than it ever has? They are extraordinarily wrong claims.

The fact you point to your frustrations with universal healthcare and education as proof that this is the worst we’ve had it shows a pretty poor grasp of history.

Which of my claims do you say is wrong?

If you’d like to share some of these studies that would be great. Becuase all I’ve seen is you dismiss my data with none of your own and say “Google agrees, trust me!”

No they aren’t and I don’t know how you have the gall to claim so.

Working hours used to be 9-5, with an hours lunch break and 2 tea breaks on top. That was standard through the 80s and really started shifting with so much else at the turn of the millennium. Management of course frequently buggered off for 2 hr working lunches in pubs. 35 hours was full time. Now working hours are usually 8.30-5.30, hour long linch breaks are increasingly uncommon and tea breaks very much curtailed. Staff are usually much thinner on the ground relative to service needs and are all working harder. The crap about productivity and cuts, cuts, cuts everywhere result in one person doing jobs that would in the 90s have been done by 3 or 4 from my experience, looking at council, NHS, journalism and cleaning jobs. Formal full time hours are considered to be 37.5 in some public organisations, 40 in many others, and I know far too many youngsters working 60 hours a week to make ends meet. That used to be called Victorian, and Victorian was considered bad.

Those staff also have to be much more qualified to get the jobs - do you want to dispute that too? - and requirements to carry out higher skilled tasks have been passed down the chain in every public sector organisation, every ex-public sector organisation (eg higher education) and the private sectors that I know of too. We aren’t given more staff to do these extra tasks: it’s just normalised and expected. Tbh I always feel a bit guilty of having been one of those who enabled that. I used to do more than was expected of my level because I was building my own confidence, coming from a shit background, and building up proof that I could do the higher jobs. Only for those higher jobs to be made redundant and to be told that I could carry on doing that formally, and nowadays it’s expected.

Training is constantly required in all employment now, with portfolios and CPD mostly done on your own time elsewhere it won’t get done. You never had that in the 90s.

Women of course could retire at 60, men at 65, and many women were still not working once they had kids. Those that did usually worked part time. The phrase “working mum” became common again around the millennium. Nowadays it would be considered a patronising term, because it’s normality.

The claim that wealth is not concentrating in the hands of few.

https://www.oxfam.org.uk/media/press-releases/billionaire-wealth-jumps-three-times-faster-in-2025-to-highest-peak-ever-sparking-dangerous-political-inequality-says-oxfam/

For that to be true, we’d expect the share of wealth owned by the top 1% to be rising, right? But long term it’s fallen a lot.

This is global data, which I’m not so familiar with, whereas the thread is about this country. I do know that billionaire wealth is very volatile though.

Do you have any data to support your claim that wealth is concentrating at an unprecedented rate? If that’s a claim about the globe then it seems iffy. If it’s a claim about this country then it’s just flat wrong. Black Death, Enclosures, Industrial Revolution all blow the current era out of the water, and from much higher levels of wealth concentration too not just direction.

Of course it is global data, because billionaires do not live in a set country and off we go. They can live anywhere for 5 min at a time, or own their own island.
With personal big wealth and corporation wealth you have to go global to get the real picture.

This is a screenshot of one of the parts of the Oxfam report, the inequality one. They highlight UK due to the mahoosive inequality in wealth.