To think we are becoming a much poorer country?

[Felixss]

I keep seeing on threads increase taxes on the rich , increase salaries, increase nhs spending and increase benefits. People are acting like we are still hugely wealthy and everyone wants to come over. Poland is predicted to overtake us economically. I can earn twice my salary abroad and I'm thinking of leaving. Where is the money going to come from with a shrinking work force and low investment in new technology? AIBU to think the UK is hugely declining ?

"I think one problem is that there is a 'human default setting' which means that (unless we think hard about what's really going on) we instinctively look up to and trust those who have power and wealth."

Why does this 'human default setting' not exist in some other European societies - Scandinavia, Austria, Netherlands, much of the former eastern bloc - and yet it exists in the Anglo-Saxon dominated societies such as UK and USA?

Could it be something to do with how social history is taught? How the UK media worships money and promotes financial measures as being the sole indicators of success? Is it because every European country except one has some form of proportional representation, as opposed to the UK/USA model of FPTP resulting largely in two binary parties? Could it be because many countries suffered devastation on such a scale under WW2 that everyone had to pull together and the old order was swept aside, while in the UK, the Conservatives have spent the last 70 years trying to undo the post-war welfare reforms?

In a few weeks time the UK population will be forced to endure the sight of a non-elected Head of State and his cronies and hangers-on parading their obscene wealth in front of a country in which for all its wealth, millions of people cannot afford the basics, people wait 17 hours for an ambulance, cannot see a GP, are forced to lie on a trolley for 4 days in a Birmingham hospital while they wait for someone to see them and where the sick and elderly can barely access the services and support that they desperately need.

Re, the default setting, the key is in the name!
A default is what happens unless you intervene. What I'm saying is that this is what humans will default to unless there are other influences.

Surely the 'human default setting' is to share? Mothers share their milk with their babies, otherwise the babies die. Hunter/gatherers share their food and shelter otherwise the tribe quickly dies out.

We are inherently a very tribal species. I was watching a documentary about chimps and two tribes were at war over food and resources. They would go out patrolling and they would pick off rival lone chimps and kill them. We are very similar to chimps we only want to share wealth with a very small pool of people that's usually our kin. The kin groups are getting smaller as we live in smaller nuclear or single parent families

Humans have evolved further than apes and have become civilised - they recognise that there is an advantage in concepts such as co-operating, sharing and not killing each other. However some political parties seem not to have advanced as much as others and still believe that their clan is born to rule, preferably when led by a rich and/or charismatic, scheming silver-back alpha male.

In a few weeks time the UK population will be forced to endure the sight of a non-elected Head of State and his cronies and hangers-on parading their obscene wealth in front of a country in which for all its wealth, millions of people cannot afford the basics, people wait 17 hours for an ambulance, cannot see a GP, are forced to lie on a trolley for 4 days in a Birmingham hospital while they wait for someone to see them and where the sick and elderly can barely access the services and support that they desperately need.

The thing that really needs to be remembered, is that there really are those that walk among us that consider that a perfectly equitable state of affairs. We've seen it on this thread. When confronted with it, rather than being incensed and storming the Winter Palace they go "but Jeremy Corbyn" which makes it alright.

Humans are not civilised. We have a veneer of civilisation which hides the true characteristics. Most people abide by social convention to avoid the veneer slipping.

Yes exactly. I’m not talking about the small to medium sized business owners who are by most standards ‘rich’. I’m talking about obscene
levels of wealth that we’ve allowed the few to hoard without sharing it back into the economy. These people are a drain on the economy, yet we are meant to worship their status as if they’ve ‘done good’.

YANBU that the UK is massively declining but we DO need to increase taxes on the rich , increase salaries, increase nhs spending and increase benefits. Income inequality with many super rich and many super poor is driving the problem and we need to balance it with higher taxes for the rich and improved support for the poor.
It won't happen under this government, so at the next election vote tactically to get them out. ABC. Anything But Conservative. Whoever is most likely to get them out or keep them out in your constituency.
And in the meantime, something we can all do positively as individuals is to do what you can not to catch or spread covid - which is having a massive impact on the economy, workforce, NHS, and disproportionately impacting the poor.

This is fact. There are more rich, who are getting richer. The rest of us are getting poorer. The rich, and those supporting them, have a habit of developing policies to get us to pay out more, too.

Well there still seems to be plenty of money around. Huge ‘executive’ housing developments everywhere, retail parks rammed every day, not just weekends.
The majority of cars on the road are under 5 years old. The number of trendy £50k+ day vans/ campers out and about is unreal.
Massive queues for drive thru Starbucks/Costa.
Airport full to bursting for the Easter break.
Tourist attractions costing £100 for family entrance really busy.
I don’t live in a wealthy area, far from it, typical northern ex pit village.
I remember the 70’s/ early 80’s - this is nothing in comparison with back then.

"I think one problem is that there is a 'human default setting' which means that (unless we think hard about what's really going on) we instinctively look up to and trust those who have power and wealth.
I suppose we need to look at the reasons why most of us do not think really hard about what's going on, why we don't see under the surface etc? I think much of it is because we are too stressed and angry and so we default to our kneejerk responses."

@Thesharkradar I don't know, I definitely don't trust or look up to any of them, I thought most of us were more intelligent than that 🤷‍♀️

That's because people can't be trusted as someone will try and steal from you. Have you read Hobbes philosophy? That's also why we need to be tribal it's for survival. I mean look at colonisation etc Countries are in alliances for this very reason. Unfortunately people aren't actually inherently nice.

Infact people are inherently greedy. How many people just keep what they need and give the rest away to those less fortunate? I doubt any on this thread, I know I certainly don't.

@socialmedia23
Sorry, I think we cross-posted.

Regarding the decline in marriage, yes, I am aware of the arguments but I'm not at all convinced by them. While I accept that life for ordinary people, across the West, has got a bit more pinched in recent years, it's still more comfortable than it was for a great many people a few decades ago, but there wasn't a rise in family values in the meantime. I think it's a straightforward change in social norms, and the economic pressures are a red herring. Families are a pretty economical way to operate and they give protection if anything goes wrong. In places a lot poorer than the west, they're essential, and the people who come up with these theories have (in my opinion) little knowledge beyond their own societies. I'm not sure that it's even true that the vast majority of the middle class - if that remains a meaningful term - end up marrying. I'm the only one of a large number of (probably middle-class) siblings who is and when I compare myself to my siblings, it's because I have slightly different values to them..

I'm generally suspicious of the argument that social norms are driven by economics. I think the opposite is truer.

Regarding property: I agree with you. I think there are certain basics that profit shouldn't be made from, and housing is one of those things. For a period, housing was very affordable in the UK because the existence of social housing made the private rental business unprofitable, which in turn reduced the market value of houses because you can't make money from owning them. But all that has been undone. The problem with co-ops is that the members can, I suppose, always vote to dissolve the co-op and put their properties on the market. You basically have to stop people making money from their own property somehow.

Well, I'm one of them.

Would you prefer a settled system that has a benign, enormously tamed monarchy that continues to exist purely because of tradition or, for example, a republic like South Africa (to give one of an enormous number of examples) where corruption is simply a way of life?

I'm not suggesting that monarchies are better than republics, but in countries like the UK (and NZ) which are, functionally speaking, republics, storming the Winter Palace / local equivalent looks like at best a waste of energy, and at worst, downright destablising. The existence of the monarchy is irrelevant to how well the UK functions. As for Corbyn, looking from the outside in, I had no beef with his policies but I really cannot fathom why anyone would think that a career backbencher and instinctive contrarian like him, a man who had run nothing in his life, would have made any sort of statesman. He's nothing like Farage or Johnson in his views, but he commanded support for the same reasons: an outsider who would save everyone because, reasons. It's sad, because the UK's institutions are, in the main, pretty good, even when compared to other developed countries.

I think you have to start moving out of PAYE and looking at 'wealth' to hit 'the rich' and to me I think we are talking about multimillionaires in wealth terms.

I mean 100k is nice, and far beyond anything like my earnings, but as you say its just an income that someone has earned by putting effort in, in the right field. Its already taxed more than fairly as we dont have flat tax.

Its very different from having lots and lots of shares or inheriting lots and lots of properties.

Absolutely. It's the higher earning PAYE employees who have been royally screwed ever since the financial crisis with ever increasing tax rates and carrying everyone else, while self employed people and business owners and people who are actually rich, and have wealth, contribute very little. You can't squeeze higher PAYE earners more, they have nothing left.

I dont know how we tax wealth not income without everyone just putting their wealth somwhere else though.

A good start would be a US-type approach: all UK citizens are made liable for UK taxes on their global income regardless of where it is earned, and all UK residents likewise, plus change the tax code to crack down on transfer pricing out profits earned here lower tax jurisdictions. And a big increase in capital gains tax.

Meanwhile though of course there also needs to be a proper industrial strategy, reversal of Brexit or as a minimum rejoin the SM and CU immediately, at least doubling of the funding for state education and adult education, energy, food and water security strategies, huge infrastructure investment, total overhaul of the dysfunctional health service model and state pensions and public sector pension funding. It would require capable politicians with foresight and vision and some conviction to do what is needed. So it won't happen.

And yes people do need to understand also that the better systems in our Northern European neighbours' countries are funded by those on lower and a averages paying more tax. The rates paid by higher earning PAYE earners here are broadly comparable. It is the narrowing of our tax base that has led to the lack of funding by increasing the personal allowance to a level where many pay no or very little tax. Social taxes are MUCH higher for the majority of these workers.

The clamouring is always for "the rich" to pay but it's unclear what people mean by this usually except "not me". The reality is that the UK needs to tax the lower and average workers far more if it wants a model with public services like the countries we used to be comparable with. The higher earning PAYE employees are paying at the levels you see in those countries already but not getting the services in return because they are carrying everyone else. And the actual rich with lots of assets are not paying their way either. That part people usually recognise but they ignore the narrowing of the tax base which is just as important to fix as otherwise you'll never raise sufficient revenue with only a small minority being net contributors, and also create social instability. So we are extremely reliant on those in the middle of the spectrum, which is precarious and unstable and unsustainable.

Decades of mismanagement and a largely deluded population who have repeatedly voted to make it worse.

Prior to Brexit the UK's economy was 90% of the size of Germany's. It's now 70%. That is HUGE decline in just a few years, and cannot be blamed on the war in Ukraine or Covid as all countries suffered these. Similar stats comparing to other countries that used to be our comparators. Nobody else in the G7 still has double digit inflation. So why do we?

Politicians must think we are so fucking thick if they don't think we can work it out. Although perhaps the problem is that enough people ARE that thick and still haven't woken up from their delusions.

Tax property speculators til the pips squeak

Dennis Healey, 1974, Labour Chancellor

Plus ca change.

Maybe people already pay 45%+ once you take into account NI and other deductions it's close to 50%.

Where's the incentive to work if you just keep increasing tax; highly suspect that public services will not catch up as quickly if at all!

It's worse than that. At £50k earnings now if someone has two children and a student loan their tax rate can reach 85% with withdrawal of child benefit.

At £100k, if you have two children, the tax rate is over 100% because of the withdrawal of the personal allowance and childcare funding.

Nobody is going to work for free or at a loss!

And yet politicians wave their hands in the air claiming they don't understand why UK productivity is so low. 🤦‍♀️

Exactly why would immigrants come here when lots of western countries will be fighting over them? And we will see more of our young leave eg HCPs going to Oz

Well that's not very bright of them given that fresh water will be one of the most scarce resources on Earth in 10-15 years time.

The reality is that the UK needs to tax the lower and average workers far more if it wants a model with public services like the countries we used to be comparable with.

no let's get this right, it's your reality, that doesn't make it "reality"

what sort of daft logic is it that says by taxing "the lower and average workers far more" that it will sort out the economy in UK when those are the very people who are already on their knees financially having to go to food banks, use prepayment meters for their energy, have benefit top ups even when working 2 jobs just to afford their weekly grocery shop.

i can only presume you're not a Turkey voting for Christmas, that you aren't a lower paid worker and you're alright Jacques.

Walked past the bus stop yesterday and noticed a new poster, stating that 49% of children in single parent families are living in poverty. That’s horrific.

That's largely because the UK tax system deliberately penalised single parents (over 90% women) by charging them more tax on the same household income as a couple, despite them obviously having higher costs on average due to needing more childcare. The UK is an outlier on this - unsurprisingly most choose not to compound disadvantage by penalising people even more and making it virtually impossible for them to work their way out of poverty - and any Government that wanted to address child poverty could make huge inroads into this overnight by simply changing the tax code so single parents are taxed the same on the same household income as a couple. But they won't.

The UK has never had "open borders".