To ask what should be being done about the economy and the country generally

[AlertCat]

I’m fairly Keynesian in my economics (I’m not an economist) but there are so many problems in society at the moment that I’m not sure even a massive programme of work like in the 1950s would really help.
There’s another thread where people are expressing unhappiness at the levels of tax they’re being asked to pay and it’s easy to find lots of threads about benefit claimants and immigration.

If we take as given that (a) our birthrate means we need immigration; (b) we have a benefits system that’s both overly punitive and (apparently) overly lenient if you say the right things (I’m not sure I personally believe the second part, but it’s an opinion I see a lot); (c) climate change means more and more people from the global south moving north; (d) the days of good state services, free at the point of use may be over-

what would you do differently to the government? Could we get back to the kind of services provision we had in the post-war consensus era (up until the Thatcher government)? Is that a pipe dream? Is it even desirable?

Rivypike · Yesterday 08:53
Reduce the influence of the billionaire media barons who basically inform the country and seem to determine the country’s political direction

How would this be done? Would their newspapers be censored?

Happy to lighten your day. ☺️

It won’t work.

Firstly, why would it be on the top two percent of earners if it is a wealth tax? The wealthy don’t earn their money as income, they live from investments and capital gains. The entire problem is that earnings are increasingly no longer a route to genuine wealth even for very high earners (these are the ones currently shouldering the majority of the tax burden and have been doing so increasingly for the last two decades. It is those who have wealth who pay very little proportionately. Earnings and wealth are not the same thing).

How will you value someone’s wealth? Property prices? Investments? What about their possessions: jewellery, art, cars, gold? How will you survey it and identify it all to value their total wealth? How would you even know what they own? Very expensive and almost impossible to do accurately. There are easy ways to conceal wealth. How will you find out what somebody has in a Swiss bank account?

These people are extremely mobile. They will simply leave the jurisdiction if you try to do it, as has been happening already since the changes to non-dom rules were implemented.

Wealth taxes have been a disaster in every country that’s attempted to implement this.

Instead, what we need to look at is why wealthy people are accumulating an ever increasing amount of national income, adding to their wealth, and find a way to change the taxation rules to tax that more fairly, amend the tax and benefits systems to ensure that we mitigate that effect to a fairer balance going forward. Looking at transfer pricing to remove revenues generated in the UK from UK taxation, and off-shore opaque company ownership would be a good start.

It was, of course, the soon-to-be-implemented EU rules around tax transparency and the impact that this would have had due to the requirement to declare beneficial ownership of offshore assets which spurred the billionnaires to contribute enormous funds the Brexit campaign in order to hoodwink the gullible into voting for Brexit so that this wouldn’t be implemented in the UK, hence the enormous rush to push any kind of Brexit deal through Parliament - no matter how catastrophic for the British people - by January 2019 because otherwise this EU directive would have come into effect in the UK and required their offshore holdings to be declared, at which point the constant mantra about how austerity was inevitable and the country “can’t afford” decent services would have been exposed and the game would have been up.

Amending the rules around when dividends can be paid would be another sensible thing to do, to prevent asset stripping at the expense of salaries. Likewise rules to prevent private equity purchasing companies, loading them with debt then selling them on meaning that the company has lower profit margins so can pay far lower wages going forward.

These people are extremely mobile. They will simply leave the jurisdiction if you try to do it, as has been happening already since the non-dom rules were implemented.

Really?

https://patrioticmillionaires.uk/

Very few of those. I mean, 1 in 4 UK pensioners is now a millionnaire because of the values of their homes and pensions. The people who you’d need to be raising taxes from are the ones with hundreds of millions, or billions. Sure, a few may be “patriotic”. The 10,000 who’ve left the UK since Labour were elected (the only country that has had more leave than us in that time is Russia…) shows that the vast majority aren’t keen on paying more tax, and will do what they can to avoid it.

@BIossomtoesThat is a self publicizing group. Almost certainly not big hitters. Some woman representing them is always on the radio but you never know if they are in the Rich List. Probably not. They really are a tiny niche group who seek publicity.

I looked at the Patriotic Millionaires website but it doesn’t say anywhere that these patriotic millionaires actually practice what they preach.
Are they paying the extrarates of tax that they say all millionaires should pay?

The easiest thing we could do as a country would be to go back to using fossil fuels to keep energy prices down, whilst developing new clean technology for the future. Rather than try to reach "net zero" or worry about climate change, we should act as if climate change was inevitable and we need to plan for it.

Climate change does not need to be a disaster for our country if politicians would focus on protecting ourselves from it rather than trying to prevent it. Let's assume sea levels will continue to rise, and improve our sea defences, relocating people to higher ground, before it's too late.

We should see climate change as an opportunity. Someone will exploit it for their own gain, it may as well be us. Exploiting shouldn't be seen as a selfish, negative thing: we can develop the technology that will allow us to thrive in the future environment, whilst allowing some other nations to survive.

Precisely. Anybody is able to contact HMRC and make a donation if they wish to do so. The Government does not refuse additional contributions made voluntarily. Perhaps they’d like to provide the evidence showing they’re doing so?

Alternatively, if you’re very wealthy it’s really not hard to set up charities and endow them with a large amount of your wealth or an annual amount. See the work that Bill and Melinda gates have done and many others. What are these people who claim to be so “patriotic” doing with their excess wealth, to fulfil the aims that (allegedly) they believe they should be charged more tax to fulfil? There’s absolutely nothing to stop them doing so right now.

Presumably if they were, more people might have heard of them (other than in virtue signalling radio interviews).

Meanwhile, an increasing number of the genuinely wealthy are moving to Italy, Dubai, Singapore etc precisely to escape additional taxes on their wealth.

I agree.

We have a massive problem with energy pricing that would be easily fixed. The totally arbitrary system that we have which pegs the price of all energy to the (most expensive) gas generated energy means that no benefit from the cheaper energy that is generated by renewables feeds through to people’s utility bills. This is easily fixable and the Government’s been told they need to fix it but… surprise, surprise - like with everything else of an economic nature - they haven’t/ won’t. The impact on businesses is even worse because they don’t have a pricing cap so we have our businesses being hammered with the highest utility prices in the developed world per kWh. And people wonder why there is economic stagnation and manufacturing in the UK is an impossibility at a competitive price?

The climate issue is a huge problem but without international cooperation what the UK is doing is shooting itself in the foot, yet again. It won’t make any difference to the outcome and it’s quite clear that the likes of China, the US and India have no intention of doing what is necessary to prevent it reaching tipping points of no return so we need to think about our national interest because no matter what we do we won’t be able to prevent it.

We should be investing a lot more money in flood defences, and focusing on long-term strategies for energy, water and food security. And, alongside this, investing in scientific development for new technologies around carbon capture, battery storage, hydro-electric power (wind and solar renewables will never provide baseload in the UK as they are too variable, but we are an island surrounded by sea for goodness sake. The tides are realiable!). Meanwhile, try to get ahead on fusion research.

And there’s no point being purist about it in the meantime while China’s building new coal powered plants all the time, we need to use our oil reserves that we have as it will make not 0.1% of difference to climate change if we don’t. And if we did - and instead of selling off the rights to them to private companies but actually used them ourselves or sold them into the global market, then we could use some of the revenues that generates to invest in carbon capture and other technologies to mitigate the impact of that anyway, as well as the infrastructure that we’re going to need to have energy and fuel and food security in the future.

It’s very precarious to be to reliant on fuel imports but also import of FOOD in a situation where we know that there will be global food shortages, huge population displacement and massive disruption of global supply lines. People thought it was bad during Covid. Well, they’ve seen nothing yet. It’s totally irresponsible for there not to be a national food and energy self-sufficiency stratgey as a paramount matter of national security. And as for the state of our water system, with water shortages regularly in one of the rainiest developed countries on Earth!? It’s totally unacceptable. Money needs to be diverted to these things urgently.

The primary responsibilities of a Government above all else is to ensure that its population are adequately fed, with safe water available, have energy, and are defended from attacks. Education and healthcare even come behind this: these are the very basics. And yet there is NO STRATEGY in place to deal with any of these issues, and apparently it’s fine for us to be reliant on food and energy imports, and not have sufficient infrastructure to capture and process our immense rainfall and process it into safe water to use, or to just expel sewage into rivers and seas every time it rains a lot (as though this is completely unpredictable in the UK climate).

All totally unacceptable. Yet when I see polling on voters’ concerns NONE of these issues feature anywhere in the top 10 or even 20. They’ll certainly care about it when the power cuts out, or there’s no food to buy, or they have no water in their homes. But by then it’ll be far too late.

Sadly, a great many people seem to have very little foresight or ability to think about anything beyond their immediate benefit even when the consequences of refusing to plan for the long-term are staring them in the face. A common theme on pretty much every issue discussed on this thread so far.

Then we had Nick Clegg declaring in 2010 that there was no point in building more nuclear power stations because they wouldn’t be online until around 2020…

Thanks Nick.

Thank you. Yea I'm aware how inheritance tax works! At the moment it's paid by too few ESTATES.

@Dotjones the “net zero” is also an accounting trick, really. It doesn’t take into account the transfers of carbon footprint between countries. So, if we don’t build a power plant here and burn fuel and manufacture something with it but import it from elsewhere, that looks like we’ve cut emissions. No, we haven’t: we’ve simply displaced them to elsewhere, where in all likelihood they’ll be produced in even more carbon intensive ways (powered by an even more polluting coal-powered plant in China, for example). Or, we say “look, we’ve got a power station using renewables!” but it’s actually like the ridiculous Drax situation where they’re shipping wood pellets over from Canada for us to burn, causing an immense carbon footprint that doesn’t get counted in our figures.

Until there’s some kind of proper carbon accounting based on total consumption based on where goods are consumed and the actual carbon footprint of producing them and shipping them to their destination, all international comparisons are totally meaningless.

Yet as a result of this we impoverish our living standards when it won’t make any impact on the outcome of climate change at all without the biggest polluters doing anything about their own emissions, and meanwhile neglect the investment needed to protect ourselves from the inevitable consequences of climate change that we know are coming.

I wish humans were not the way they are, would behave rationally and work together on these problems but the fact is they won’t. Within the UK as we’ve seen on this thread and in UK politics for decades, people are immensely selfish, irrational and self-interested. And the same applies at international level between countries. Therefore, for our Government to be responsible to its own citizens it must take a similar approach and take the required actions to protect us from the inevitable effects as much as it can and it’s utterly negligent that this isn’t happening, instead choosing to try to virtue signal and shout into the vacuum.

While we’re at it, for national security we also need the capability to manufacture necessary medical supplies/ drugs domestically, not be reliant for this on global supply chains which may well be disrupted or collapse. And guess what? Nothing’s being done about that, either.

This has all been quite depressing to think about so I think I’ll go and sit in the sunshine for a bit. I am meant to be “off” after all, so shouldn’t be spending so much time thinking about work-related topics! 🫠

So many MPs talk about all the jobs green energy will bring but I live in an area awash with wind farms and no one works on them once they are built ( from Chinese technology). The glibly say this all the time. True the couple of Plant Hire companies locally have made a fortune digging the roads that wind across the hills and building foundations but after that there is nothing -compared with North Sea oil which has provided 50 years of well paid work.

Yes by all means stump up a few million more. No one will mind.

People post that patriotic millionaires stuff but in reality no one is handing over extra taxes which is easy to do or getting out of big properties which would also help the next generation.

It’s just the usual virtue signalling. No idea why they’d bother.

@InPraiseOfIdleness While I am not thrilled with your vision for my advanced old age, I'd agree that it would be preferable to my late DMIL's experiences after she hit 90. However, she would have chosen the voluntary euthanasia route, at least before her dementia diagnosis.

But I do agree with most of the rest of what you are writing on energy and climate change. Tide and wave energy are starting to develop more traction but there are still barriers to overcome. There's someone on MN who is really well-informed about the issues, as we were both on an alternative energy thread last year that pops up every few months.

I think some sort of means tested and free to poorest health insurance system will be needed, but never ever a godawful system like that in the US. The NHS was set up in a very different (and worse, let's be clear) world where disabled people didn't live long, few people lived long enough to develop dementia and when there was usually someone (let's face it, a woman) at home or next door who could look after someone recuperating for an extended period. The NHS just can't function totally free to cover the needs of an ageing population.

We need much more social housing to people can live with dignity on lower paying jobs and for improved mental and physical health.

Just goddamn tax billionaires, big businesses, apply windfall tax on businesses. They will be fine.

It’s true that we can’t compete. Re both those posts. Although things might change when labour requirements change and it’s not the poor people in compounds but automated.

I really would like to challenge the idea that keeps coming up here that the NHS is free or cannot be cost effective in the modern age .

The NHS used to work really well when it was one integrated system . What has happened is it’s been carved up and given to private companies ( with shareholders) behind the scenes by legislation such as the H & S act of 2012 .
In addition the land that many hospitals stand on has been sold off . Also we have far , far fewer beds than 40 years ago than we do now .
Largely treatment is still free at the point of need but many people who can pay directly for (eg ) hip replacements etc do these days as they get desperate on the waiting list .
Other services have been sold off ,like our blood plasma , obviously given by donors for free ,(under the Cameron government) to Bain capital it the States who later sold it on to a Chinese company . The NHS has to buy it back ( with our tax money ) to use .
The end goal ( supported by Reform ) is for us to go to a US system , which is both sell - your - house expensive & has v poor outcomes .
There is no political will to move us to any European model .
I’ve worked in private hospitals in 3 countries over many years .
The environment might be glossier but the treatment outcomes ,when profit for shareholders underlies everything, are frequently not great .

Getting people fed up with the current NHS is part of the plan … To quote Chomsky :
“That’s the standard technique of privatization: defund, make sure things don’t work, people get angry, you hand it over to private capital"

I am so old that I ranted to anyone who would listen that the way NHS dentistry was being destroyed in the 80s /90s by the legislation being passed then .
This has been especially terrible for children whose parents can’t afford private care .. The biggest reason for admission to hospital for the under 5s today for is tooth extraction under GA . What a wicked waste of tax payer money !
The only way out of this mess I honestly feel is electing politicians who truly understand they’re working for the electorate. That they are legally bound to adhere to their pre election manifesto . How we achieve that I have no idea .

We need compulsory voting. The vote is swayed towards whatever party is going to benefit retirees because young people don't vote while elderly do. Make them, or else they get a fine.

A nuclear power plant, or nuclear fusion plant in the future, would be somewhat different. It would also be different if we lowered energy costs so we were manufacturing the equipment for renewables ourselves, which would be possible for high-tech manufacturing if we lowered our energy costs from their current artificially inflated level. Hydro-electric power plants would also require highly skilled workers, and manufacturing, and contruction, which then comes back to the other points about education, business environment, investment in technological development and start-ups spinning off from scientific research at universities, fostering a good business environment, and reforming the energy pricing formulas etc.

Trust me, you don’t want that to happen yet. Unfortunately it is going to happen and it will be taking place far, far sooner and faster than people realise. Unless the balance of power is redressed a little soon between those who have capital and those who do not, the “utility” of poor people (and, indeed, many currently well-paid people) to perform essential labour will be removed and they will therefore be of very little further “use” to those with the capital and IP for the technology. It should be fairly obvious what happens next, and how they won’t care at all how you vote in elections or what you think about it.

People seem to think UBI will be implemented but why would those with the capital and IP bother to maintain generations of people who are of no further need or use to them? Do you see a hugely philanthropic approach from most of them currently, using all of their wealth for the good of humanity? Is this how human nature works or any evidence in history of this happening?

It’s a pipe dream.

People think we have problems now. I am concerned for my children, and sometimes question my decision to bring them into this world. It needs smart and decent people like them to have any hope, but quite frankly humanity may well be reaching the “great filter” point in the Fermi Paradox.

It’s going to get very, very ugly with the exponential change in technology and the climate change effects, over the next couple of generations.