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?

Invest in places that have been forgotten.
Invest in mental health, addiction centres in this areas.
Subsidise discounted rates on boarded up retail stores.
Most areas shops are chippers, bookies, charity shops.

When a place looks desperate, the people feel worthless.

Taxation needs to be shifted from earned to unearned income. So more tax on assets such as housing through CGT and less on salary.

Importing tons of people while we have hundreds of thousands on the dole is crazy. A lot of people are on the dole because a) there are no training opportunities b) benefits are too good and c) there is no prospect of a decent life through work as things like house prices are too high.

So increase training opportunities for lower skilled jobs and especially trades which there appears to be a huge shortage of at the moment. Incentivize people to work by making work pay significantly more than benefits. And ensure that when people do get the training and salary they can afford a decent place to live through building more housing and reducing house prices through taxation.

The above is what is necessary. The VIs will ensure it isn't done. Even Labour, the supposed party of the working class refuses to significantly increase CGT and taxing the assets of the middle class while preferring to reduce the benefits of those that really can't work themselves out of poverty, the disabled and pensioners.

Over the last 30 years there has been a massive influx of low quality people into the UK. They need upgrading or removing or the downward trajectory will continue.

The proportion of people "working" is getting smaller compared to those not working (young, disabled, old, lifestyle, etc), made worse by emigration of our better educated/skilled professionals etc who are leaving to work in other countries.

We need to find ways to get more people working, and part timers to work more, people to stop retiring too early, getting younger people into work etc. It's the only way to create genuine economic growth. We also need to look at ways to "do more" within the country, i.e. manufacture and produce more, offshore less, etc., which will create more jobs.

Quite simply, the problem is that we have too few people working long enough. Workers are being taxed till the pips squeak and we have too many disincentives to work more, via the insane tax and benefits systems.

We can't keep expecting a minority of workers (out of total population) to pay for themselves AND the majority who aren't working (and who are taking far more "out" than putting in themselves in terms of education, health, social care, public services etc).

Not just immigrants either. We've also too many "home grown" unskilled people who have no interest in education nor working legitimately and are happy to live life on benefits or illegally working. The "underclass" is growing among home grown people too. But yes, also far too many immigrants who go straight into the black economy too.

Agree with almost all of this. Especially as somebody who has been an immigrant myself. Immigration to tackle low birth rates is a ponzi scheme.

I would just add that “net contributor” should be considered in terms not just financial. Some of the most valuable migrants we have are not in highly paid sectors (such as nursing and care work.)

Yup, this.

It can all be solved if the government really taxed the billionaires and the mega corporations. But that won’t happen so what’s the point.

I did not even vote for Labour and agree with this.

YIKES! (Specifically the point on voluntary euthanasia as a solution for care needs.)

Tax levels are already crippling for many and what do you mean the cost of direct contributions? schemes are crippling for government? Surely it helps subsidise state pensions?

Reverse the London centricity and centralisation of decent jobs etc over the past few decades. Get back to people in the regions being able to get decent local jobs, not just minimum wage care work, retail or hospitality.

In a town near us, we used to have two large "insurance" firms employing thousands. Both were closed down and jobs were redundant or moved to London. So basically, no one in our region has commutable jobs in the insurance industry anymore. Youngsters in the area who want to become actuaries know that they'll have to leave their home towns to move to London or a handful of other big cities. Multiple that across lots of different professions and industries and you see why the regions are run down. Everyone thinks it was just the closure of mines, steel works, mills and shipyards etc., but there was also a massive "shift" of white collar and professional jobs away from the regions to London at the same time.

London has been sucking the life out of the regions for a few decades and the only way to bring life back into the run down regions is a reversal of London centricity. However, it won't happen. All that is happening is that the politicians are relocating London's "problem" people out into the regions, thus making the regions even worse.

It's why Boris was so popular and won so many "red wall" seats - these are the constituencies abandoned by the politicians who are obsessed with London. It's why Reform have won some of these county council areas as the locals see nothing but deprivation, run down town centres, money laundering shops everywhere, and see a very bleak future.

It's all very well demanding that more people need to be working, but you need to examine the ever shifting job market. Technology and AI are impacting professions left, right and centre. There are threads on here where people who had "safe" careers with previously good long term prospects and relative security, finding themselves out of employment for a variety of reasons, and then hitting a brick wall when they get back into it. Age and sex are documented barriers.

At the lower end of the job market, NMW are increasingly zero hours and part time because it's better for employers, and the slack is picked up by the state.

I can see a point where jobs are back to service at the bottom for low wages with little protection from exploitation, and mainly tech at the top which not everyone can aspire too.

There is a wealth divide growing exponentially and it really accelerated during Covid.

Yes, this is all very sensible.

All this 'tax corporations' is pointless - they will just move. Places like Amazon already pay the legal tax they need to pay. They also employ thousands of people. But there's nothing to stop them re-jigging their corporate offices to avoid massive taxes if they were imposed. And then all those jobs could go as well.

I agree that CGT should be due on property rises. It's crazy to me. Can't believe Reform are actually proposing scrapping things like inheritance tax and stamp duty!

So if there are no jobs, why the need to import lots of human resources ?

There are jobs. It's just that those jobs don't pay enough to make it worthwhile for people on benefits to do them.

Stop importing people. Wages will have to go up to get people to do the jobs. This will effectively be a tax on the middle class who pay for the services these people provide.

There isn't really much avoiding economics. You can either pay 20k in tax that allows you to train people to build walls and lower the cost of walls to 1K. Or you can pay zero tax and pay 20K for the wall because there is no one around to build it and those that will/can charge a heap of money.

@AlertCat Just going to highlight one thing that you haven't mentioned

(I don't necessarily agree with your givens either)

But here's another important problem

The level of bureaucracy has reached insane levels. It inhibits efficiency and costs us a lot. Best example - NHS procurement.

Another - The environment secretary said it would cost us more than 100 billion to renationalise water.

Moody's - the finance experts - think it would cost 14 billion.

Because anything run by government is now a massive gravy train.

therefore the cost of running anything by the state is now extortionate. There is actually a very good chance it would be cheaper in private hands. I would want it to be heavily regulated in private hands though. The mixed economy I grew up in was better balanced.

In terms of the unending bureaucracy, the only person who suggested addressing that was Liz Truss.

Unfortunately I think it now makes it one of those suggestions that will be tainted by association for awhile. ( I think that's ridiculous. Even somebody whose ideas are usually crap, they're going to have a good one occasionally).

I genuinely think that money will be available for important things if a lot of things are changed. But I don't know if anyone's ready for that change. It would take someone with an efficiency mission and decent ethics.

But there's a lot of entrenched attitudes that would get in the way.

It's my personal view for myself. I grew up poor, I've worked bloody hard and saved hard and I want to make sure my house goes to my kids. I don't want to spend years languishing a care home with a long term illness or in terminal decline. It doesn't benefit me, my child or the state. It's voluntary. You should be free to make the choice that suits you.

Oh yes, we have more than enough of our own underclass to contend with that we don’t need to be adopting those of other countries!

Reform wanting to stop inheritance tax is just a play for votes from the core demographic. Similar to the cynical Labour policy of adding VAT to private schools.

People really hate inheritance tax for some weird reason. Because hardly any estate actually pays it. So it is an easy thing to go after to boost popularity and making up the numbers from other taxation sources would probably be fairly easy.

Cynical, yes. But sometimes in politics you have to sacrifice doing what is right for doing what is popular if you want power.

Except once you have a culture where you introduce VE then there become little incentive to properly offer care solutions which then ends up pressuring others to go the “voluntary” euthanasia route which we see examples of in Canada. It does quickly from voluntary to coerced and changes the way we view the sick and elderly in society.

It’s the stuff of dystopian novels.

It's scary because it's not the culture you've grown up with.

Care homes are not the norm in many places, the norm is intergenerational living.

Many places would consider it shocking to place inconvenient elderly relatives into a communal home to be overseen by staff instead of being cared for by family.

I don't think it is any coincidence that there is an uptick on here in threads from people fighting about inheritances.

Why ? Because inheritance is the only realistic way of clawing your way up the ladder to a better house and lifestyle for a lot of people these days.

In a country where a huge amount cannot afford to fund the lifestyle they want, inheritance becomes the only way out. And if inheritance becomes the only way out, how does that influence peoples willingness to a) try to get that inheritance at all costs and b) try to get it sooner rather than later ?

Christ on a bike.

Could your language be any more dehumanising?

So far we've had voluntary euthanasia, mention of workhouses and underclass (Untermensch?) crop up on this thread.

Some people are determined to find a bogeyman and demonise them rather than really examining the economy and where all the money is really going.

Stamp Duty is the on tax which inhibits economic growth more than any other. It stops people moving house. This is bad as:

People are prevented from taking a job (which may pay more / may fit their skills better) in a new area. We need to use the skills our citizens have as efficiently as possible. Stamp Duty inhibits this.

People are dissuaded from moving to a property that best meets their needs. I. A country with a housing crisis this is madness.

When people move house they redecorate/ redevelop and this is great for the trades economy.

Taxation experts see Stamp Duty as the most ludicrously bad tax we have. It actively hampers our economy and anyone who suggests binning it should be cheered to the rafters!

Everyone had much lower expectations post war, the NHS was a wonderful innovation, but it didn't have to provide modern extremely expensive treatments. The welfare state hardly existed for a long time, I grew up in a poor area in the 1960s and no one was on any sort of benefits. It all costs huge amounts of money now.