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?

There’s nothing wrong with self-interest (within limits): it’s a natural human instinct. But trying to present it as virtuous in the face of such cognitive dissonance means the inherent assumption that some lives have more value than others, yet is presented as some kind or morality or virtue and that is distasteful and hypocritical.

I find it hilarious that people think those with all the capital and IP will have a sudden attack of magnanimity and decide to distribute their wealth to billions of people who are not economically productive or useful to them.

Humans don’t implement altruistic systems just because they can do so and it might be sensible and nice for everyone. Look around you.

Do you see such an altruistic approach currently to the poor people of the world, or indeed the poor and disabled in our own country? Much of the population actually joins in willingly with victimising such people already, resents them and dehumanises them.

What makes you think that the capital holders will suddenly completely change their approach and implement UBI when they have no further economic use of the labour of a large proportion of the population and will choose to maintain what they view as a pointless underclass who serve no further purpose to them?

Do you think it’ll be different in your case than in the case of those not economically useful currently because you are more “deserving”? Do you think anybody will care?

Naive in the extreme.

We do not pay enough tax in the UK and the government has gotten themselves in a right mess as they promised they would not raise taxes during the run up to the election they are now stuck and there is very little they can do to make meaningful difference now. Maybe if people were not paying such a high percentage of their incomes on housing they may feel they can pay more in tax.

Immigration should not be used as a sticking plaster for the low birth rate instead we should be helping to address some of the issues causing this. Such as child care costs and housing.

It is sad that it feels like the country is in such as mess but to be honest I see very little changing. I can not see the meaningful discussions we need to be having around pensions and the ageing population happening anytime soon. But it does feel like a bit of a con as we all continue paying into a system with the expectation that the same provisions will be there for us when we reach the same age. But let’s be honest for many of us our retirement age will be far higher than it is now if there is a state pension at all.

If you read my previous post that's exactly what I said - it's the most stable system we have had. My issue is that I just don't believe that Reform aren't going to potentially gain power or a lot of it, and Reform want to tear up the system. So if we fail to listen to and engage with that and build a system that helps the poorest in the UK have a chance...we are never going to create conditions for wins.

@Cr1987 We are higher taxed than many comparable countries. I would prefer less tax and compulsory health insurance for better off. The NHS needs reform. It’s sucking up too many resources. The less well off pay too much tax as thresholds are too low. No one else has a nhs and we need to wean ourselves off it.

Higher rate and additional rate taxpayers in the UK pay some of the highest taxes in the world for their levels of income.

Lower and middle earners in the UK pay much less than those in comparable northern European countries which have the kinds of services they expect to have in the UK. These cannot be funded unless lower and middle earners start to pay far more (simple mathematics due to the numbers in each category) but politicians don’t want to tell them that.

Many lower and middle earners would struggle to afford more unless there is growth therefore the Government needs to take measures that will generate growth per my first post on this thread.

The self-employed in the UK also largely don’t pay a sufficient share of tax for their incomes, and there is much tax evasion due to cash transactions and undeclared income. A proper ID card system and requiring receipts with tax numbers attached for all transactions over a minimum limit could largely address this.

Pensioners not paying NI also needs changing, and over time CGT rates should be raised to reduce the disparity with income tax.

@InPraiseOfIdleness I am mostly in agreement but our higher rate of tax starts too low. Nurses and teachers are higher rate tax payers. It doesn’t lead to people wanting to make the best of themselves. Certainly leads to part time working being attractive.

I think we need NI rolled into income tax. It should be a universal payment. It’s not fair to lump it on to younger working people. Basic rate tax payers only pay 29% of income tax in this country. Higher rate and additional rates pay 79%. Only 3/5 of adults pay income tax at all! (Ifs stats). As personal allowances start to get withdrawn over £100,000 these tax payers can pay 60%.

Self employed. It’s a conundrum. DH was a self employed partner and paid income tax. Those who did not ended up with nothing from the government during COVID - cue much bleating. They paid tax on their dividends, which is of course lower. However they have no employer putting in 25% into their pensions as doctors do and they take risks! They employ people. They train people and certainly do help to grow the economy. A middle way needs to be found. Some Income tax should be paid on earnings - I agree with that. However making it even less attractive to run a business and employ people doesn’t help us either. We cannot all work for the government with “others” paying for our generous pensions if there are no “others”.

We also don’t pay enough for old age care and that should be ring fenced taxation. If not used it’s part of your estate when you die but you get to keep
it. This gives an incentive for saving. At the moment the state pays because too few people save.

None of it’s an easy message though!

This, most of all.

@TizerorFizz

lots of self employed were excluded from covid support despite paying income tax, ie relatively new startups, those caught by the 50 50 rule, those with profits over £50k, - there was”much bleating” by lots of the 3 million excluded because of the illogical and unfair exclusions. Those fraudsters who didn’t declare income and didn’t pay tax weren’t even included in the 3 million!

If we want self employed and want small business to start and grow, we need to treat them better than that!

I don't think a return to the 50s model will work. Full employment as we were rebuilding after the war.we have a population and they have different needs Immigration needs attention, but I don't welcome Nigel as PM ! Years ago ,we watched a documentary suggesting that there would be a 2 tier society, the elite would work and there would be an underclass who wouldn't. Many jobs need computer skills, telephone etiquette and so also a good education with maths and English. Schools are failing and many kids leave well short of these basic skills. We need to accept this and word round it

My take is give SMEs a massive tax break, they bang on about big business and yet SMEs employ 60% of the uk population, and are closing down at one of the highest rates. When they are all gone all we have left are larger corporations mostly not UK owned.

I think we also have a massive childcare issue, give more time and breaks and subsidise nursery’s.

Slightly higher taxes but no more means testing for benefits. The middle classes are sick of paying high taxes to get nothing back. If you offer free childcare hours it should be for everyone. I prefer the scandi set up where they don’t sneer at and punish the successful and benefits are universal.

Also why do we tax small businesses so heavily? Our small business of 4 people paid more corporate tax than Etsy one year. Like how is that even remotely fair. If you don’t look after your small business you will end up being a land of Amazon only employees!

What should the media have been saying or looking at? In what way should it have looked different

As a 45% tax payer making plans to leave the country- I know many such- I am interested in how you plan to " tax the rich" if they leave.

I agree with you 110% here. No other country with universal healthcare has adopted an NHS. Frankly it isn't very good.

Notwithstanding that your givens aren’t given at all (people aren’t migrating here due to climate change tor a start), a couple of suggestions:

a) Get rid of NI and increase income tax to meet the shortfall. The additional income tax payable from those whose income isn’t derived from employment (such as the many wealthy pensioners we have) would a) allow tax to be reduced for lower paid working people, ie new increased income tax rates would be lower than current income tax and NI combined, b) reduce tax on business by setting a payroll tax at a level lower tha current employer NI levels. You’d need to ensure lower income pensioners were protected in this.

b) Reduce the tax relief on pension contributions to the basic rate, so higher rate tax payers don’t get 40% relief. You’d generate billions through this, while nudging those in their 50/60s in high paying skilled jobs that greatly benefit the economy to stay employed for a year or two longer and delay their early retirement somewhat - a win-win.

c) Don’t be dogmatic about net zero… And be realistic about targets and their impact. Making the UK poorer by racing to net zero when others aren’t is the modern equivalent of unilateral nuclear disarmament, and will be counterproductive as it will just lead to a reaction where climate policies are ditched entirely. Political trade offs are required, and that’s not helped by ideological virtue signaling.

To support smaller businesses, as well as reducing employers NI (see last post) I would abolish business rates, and increase corporation tax somewhat to cover the shortfall, reducing the cost of entry, and only taxing when companies could afford to pay.

Oh also your first given- that we need immigration- is not something the public believe any more.
I am an immigrant.

And also,

d) Fund local government pensions like all other public sector employees, and use the vast £450bn in local government pension funds as a national wealth fund to seriously invest in UK infrastructure.

e) Introduce a social care insurance scheme so people who paid would have mitigate the risk of having to lose their entire assets should they get dementia or similar and need exorbitantly expensive care. I’m confident many wealthy retirees would pay into this to provide peace of mind.

We’ve had 3 million migrants since Covid… That’s like importing the population of Wales since 2020… And we wonder why housing is in short supply despite everywhere being a building site! To say it’s a given that we need more immigration is insane! We need to address the social situation that means young people are having fewer children by providing more affordable and secure housing, and reducing the tax burden on them (see my comment about abolishing NI).

But the demands on the tax paid is soooo much higher - look at the different treatments available on the nhs. special schools, they weren't there, prem babies are surviving and costing more in healthcare, people are living 10 years or more longer and that in poor health costing a fortune. If all these demands were there in the 70s a basic rate taxpayer couldn't afford a house. Plus we didn't all own cars, stuff, nice kitchens, huge wardrobes of clothes the vast majority we buy from abroad., or it is made here by foreign companies. So money leaving the country, all the social media, streaming we pay for all that money leave the country.
In the past the money stayed here and was recirculated.

Until we are like Ireland and have huge businesses here (though we do have a lot of financials) we aren't making enough money to provide for our social care, benefits, nhs. So money goes there instead of wages.

@OneLemonGuide I agree with quite a lot of what you say but higher tax rates cut in very very early at the moment. We absolutely need people to save for retirement and making further raids on pensions is absolutely wrong. It’s something we must allow because we cannot afford poor pensioners! The state pays 28% towards doctors pensions. Teachers and others get vast amounts from the state too. I would equalize employer contributions but everyone should get relief on contributions they make.

I’d use, at least in part, the additional tax from restricting pension tax relief to the basic rate to reduce the higher rate threshold, and maybe have an intermediate rate, which combined with the removal of NICs would increase incomes for workers, including those on middle incomes. They wouldn’t then be affected by the removal of higher rate tax relief, and have more money to put into pensions… these are the ones without proper pension pots at the moment, not those on six-figures who can take advantage of the higher rate relief and retire in their late 50s…

So, if implemented right, the removal of higher rate tax relief, combined with lowering the higher rate threshold, could actually help increase pension contributions where it’s needed.

How very convenient. Why should we do that? Surely if there’s to be wealth redistribution based on a moral argument the priority is to redistribute it to the poorest people in the world first and bring them up to a basic standard of living. The poorest people in the UK are among the top 1% of global wealth and in the 0.1% of wealth for humans in history. Why would they be prioritised over people who have no fresh water, no healthcare at all, no education at all, live in warzones etc?