Rachel from accounts has crashed the economy

[Almn0etd]

So borrowing costs are now even higher than when Liz Truss was around.

The economy is well and truly cooked and in a far worse shape now that Rachel accounts is in charge.

Why isn’t this dominating the news cycle? Because it’s Labour.

The Tories were atrocious. Labour are an indescribable disaster for this country, surpassing the lowest of the low bars. Cue Labour apologists who don’t mind being made poorer and having the country destroyed, as long it’s Labour doing it to them.

Issue is with that. Higher earners already pay their share. It’s everyone else that doesn’t. Lower and middle earners and the huge amount of state dependents. The tax trap at 100k already does a good job of fixing income disparity. The huge marginal rates are way and above 50% - knocking on for 70%. Over 100% if you have children. So those people work less and therefore pay less tax.

I am all for the Danish model. My taxes will go down and everyone else’s will go up.

I am all for the Danish model also. I have no idea how our taxes will be affected (high earners) but it is good for society.

Sympathies on PPs nosy queries about your investments, @BeAzureAnt

Tbf no one asked @BeAzureAnt if they were a millionaire. It was their own need to let people know.

I am all for the Danish model. My taxes will go down and everyone else’s will go up.

I’m not sure pp realise what it would entail

Nope. Less welfare, more people expected to contribute with full time work. All people entitled to state facilities, even those higher earners. Childcare, healthcare and education. Higher taxes for the lower and middle earners. No personal allowance at all. A cap on how much they can take. Higher earners who earn between £100k and £125k will be much better off and those above that will pay less tax on that portion of their income.

Bring it on I say.

I’m glad you are for a Danish model.

There is also a distinction between income disparity and wealth disparity, so tax reform will only solve part of the problem. Wealth inequality is high and rising and more marked than income inequality. So tax reform is important, but the fact remains that inheritance – not hard work – is the principal route to wealth ownership, constituting 60% of all private wealth in the UK (Alvaredo, Garbinti and Piketty, 2017). So, my guess is what people are upset about is that this growth in absolute wealth has created gaps between groups which are no longer recuperable by earning a high income. That’s one of the reasons I suppose that Reeves is changing inheritance tax rules.

I’m glad you are for a Danish model.

Which politician do you think will have success selling in higher taxes on lower to middle income earners?

Whilst taking away their personal allowance. Oh and opening up the free childcare and all the other state benefits in kind to higher earners once again? All the while reducing the taxes higher earners pay via a cap and removing the quirks from the system. That’s before you limit welfare. I’d like to know too. I am all for it personally.

if they reformed the entire tax, pensions and benefits system to encourage work, and make pay rises pay it might be more appealing..

No, it is not possible to have the Danish model - we have over ten times their population, we spend more on a less efficient healthcare system, and we have much lower productivity, for a start.

You can’t just cut and paste.

Meanwhile, noted that you fell silent when pressed.

Well, why do you think we have less productivity and less efficient healthcare system? Lack of preventative care and less healthy population, less capital investment in infrastructure? These were the choices of the Tory government. It is totally possible to have a Danish model or move towards it. It is a matter of priorities. Their priorities resulted in wealthier people keeping a larger proportion of wealth in their hands. And, of course the government debt was exacerbated by COVID.

I also find it interesting that very right wing organisations are often funded by the very wealthy.

Maybe people don’t respond straight away because, well, life?

I’m not sure why citing a previous poster who said something Germane about the issue is forbidden. Is this in the mumsnet guidelines?

This presumably is why we need to be taxing wealth more rather than trying to fiddle with income tax again.

The problem is that if you start increasing inheritance taxes and capital gains taxes or get rid of/lower the tax free portions of those people are still complaining.

what we actually need is lower wages at the top and higher at the bottom but that isn’t something the government have much control over.

I suspect if people saw tangible improvements to their lives as a result of this taxation, it would be possible. What if the NHS worked a lot better, or people had more annual leave, or the public transport system was much improved? What if there were more gender equality? Men could get more paternity leave and are more engaged in child raising. Publicly funded services, such as healthcare and education, that would be of such high quality that private enterprise would have no reason to offer these services or room to improve them. Denmark not surprisingly scores highly on the happiness index. This Nordic model also includes other countries like Finland, Sweden, Norway, Iceland. Surely there are elements of the Nordic model that could be implemented. I’m not seeing winner take all capitalism as working very well.

Cheers.

Did anyone notice how the Chinese just laughed at Rachel from accounts and sent her on her way with a pathetic 600 million ‘investment’. This country spends more than that on debt interest alone in a month.

This government is so out of its depth, it’s unreal. Chasing China which contributes 0.2% investment in the UK. And trashing Trump while US contributes 70% FDI in this country. These morons could not be worse for our economy.

Lamey, Two Tier and slimy Mandelson have all been trashing Trump for years. Trump invited the Chinese leader to his inauguration but not Two Tier. How exactly do these clowns propose to grow the economy?

As EasternStandard has inferred, it would suicidal of Labour to increase taxation to the required level - in the short-term, households would face lower disposable income, and higher taxation would be a further constraint to growth. Note that the UK tax burden has increased despite austerity in government spending.

Secondly, there is no guarantee that higher taxes translate directly into better health outcomes. In recent years, UK public sector productivity has been very poor. Compared to Denmark, the NHS is still behind in areas like digitalisation and management. If you look at health spending as a share of GDP, the two countries are similar.

Lastly, there isn’t the same culture of support for higher taxes and bigger government in the UK. This is why Labour lied during campaigning in the last GE - they knew they would be unelectable if they revealed their true intentions.
They will pay for that duplicity during this Government, and at the ballot box.

About what?

We’ve been lucky enough to have good if very wearying and stressful jobs. Stop making assumptions about my life.
Let’s compare scar tissue.
What sectors/roles are/were you and your DH in?

I think Eastern implied, those reading her post inferred.

Problem is with that - we are in a global economy. Highly paid jobs are often paying for skill. Skills which are often a shortage and in demand. We have really low salaries for skilled jobs as it is. Lowering them further would completely kill any incentive to train.

I feel no need to chat with you about jobs, thanks all the same.

I find bitching sessions rather boring

How predictable.

How original