What will life be like under Reform?

[Easipeelerie]

I have accepted the likelihood of the next government being Reform. I don’t think the government after that will necessarily be Reform. But in the 4 Reform years, what do people think life will be like for the different groups in our country? Will we see very immediate changes?

@AbsenceOfLoveIsJustAsBad

That wasn't quite my point.
It sounds as if you have had an extremely difficult life,and it is good that you are getting help now via the NHS
But - my point really is what happens to those who cannot get work. Not "don't want to", or " hiding behind mental health issues" but those who employers look at and choose not to employ.People can try desperately to cope, manage and hide mental health problems and not succeed.
In your case you have found work ( though I note that your parents also helped you with money?)
And yes, I do expect people to care about the suffering of others even without a personal connection ( in that I think that is beneficial and good for society rather than in that I expect everyone is actually doing it, not having been born yesterday...)
I get that you don't personally care but I want solutions that don't ignore social support.
I don't think pigeonholing/ stereotyping people is at all helpful either into left/right or the kind of "snowflakes hiding behind ( implied minimal or made up )mental health issues"comments that are so common.And I think people who want to work should be supported and not threatened.
(People with Downs syndrome do work , as I'm sure do people with spinal bifida , because like mental illness those conditions affect different people differently)

The only bit of this I agree with is
The more I read these threads, the more I worry.

I'm an immigrant here, always felt welcome and now I feel constantly scrutinized as one of the reasons this country is on its knees.

I have faith though that Reform won't be the answer come election time, their very short fuse will have burnt out.

Did you come across in a small boat illegally? Do you claim benefits and not work? Well yes then I am speaking to you.

If you came here legally. Work hard, pay taxes and contribute to the country then i think you will find most people like me have no issue with you.

That said we do need to accept that now our country is actually full to bursting and so stopping all immigration while we sort out the country would be a good idea.

It’s interesting isn’t it, many of the people who voted for Brexit and Johnson, are now saying that Farage is the answer to the many issues the current government are having to clean up and deal with because of Brexit, and Johnson (plus others), and Farage. And those who highlight this are accused of being patronising, delusional, problematic, morally judgemental.

I understand all of the reasons and factors as to how we have got here - it’s beyond and more complex than just name-calling or finger-pointing, or pitching left vs right. Seriously, this isn’t criticising a policy brought out by John Major, or moaning about Theresa May, this is being aware of a very real threat about Farage - a man who has been on Russian state TV 17 times, is funded by some very concerning donors and his former leader of Reform Wales has just pleaded guilty to 8 counts of pro-Russia bribery.

I think you should research Biden and stifling google / youtube etc. - Google released a statement a few days ago about it. Which means you photo applies to the Biden administration.

I would seriously be looking at leaving the country! Very worried for DC’s future in the current political climate.

Let’s bloody hope voters aren’t taken in by Farage’s dangerous vanity project… 😬

The media are desperate for a Reform government. Their hate has been trickling since Brexit. Even Jeremy Vine, which used to be a balanced show just speaks about immigration now.

For me personally, my life with two disabled children will become significantly harder. I'm mixed race and although have only been to my dad's country to visit once, I may be forced to leave.

I suspect they will follow the US.

First they came for illegal migrants, then they came for the trans, then they came after abortion rights, then they tampered with pain relief for women, now they're coming after legal migration, then they came for me.

Oh that’s ok then. For the Labour Party it’s just ‘ill judged’, harmless.
Other names I remember: Nazi’s; scum sucking pigs; far right thugs.
The rhetoric has been disgusting.
If Donald Trump has said these things people would be up in arms. Perhaps Donald Trump has just made a few “ill judged comments”.

My point is, they are all as bad as one another. The difference is that you agree with one parties politics more than another, so you can overlook the issues that arise with that party. Same as I’m willing to overlook the actions of certain MPs who I share concerns or opinions with. However, I will respect your right to vote how you want, but I’m called names, have essays addressed to me about all the ills of the other side and people try to gaslight me into believing I’d be a terrible person to vote a certain way.

I simply don’t care anymore. I’m quite happy to be told I’m whatever - I just don’t take it seriously. I know I’m not racist, half my family are black or Asian. The left has lost that power I’m afraid and I feel proud to vote Reform for my country. I don’t know what sort of job they’ll do yet, but I’m not willing to put up with this rubbish any longer.

You really are comparing apples with pears. The ‘scum sucking pigs’ was a remark by one Labour whip FIFTEEN years ago. The ‘Far Right thugs’ was used to describe the rioters who attacked police and wrecked our streets in the aftermath of the Southport killings. Those people were subsequently found guilty of being far right thugs, and jailed.

Trump has form for using disgusting, hateful, inciteful language against immigrants and democrats seemingly on a daily basis. You cannot compare the behaviour of a handful of individual comments from more than one person over the span of decades to the shit that the LEADER of a country spouts routinely. Starmer has never said or done anything in the same league.

Well, I personally disagree, but there you go. Just my opinion I guess.

@24karatPalamino You say that you’re ‘proud to vote Reform for my country’ and I was wondering what their vision and policy is for the future of our country. Genuinely. Let’s take immigration and culture wars out of it: what is their plan for housing, education, health, employment, transport, etc.? I’ve asked this before and tried to find it, but I can never quite grasp exactly what it is they want to build, or develop, or improve. I hear a lot of looking back to the past, and a lot of blame, but never any real positive, constructive, forward-thinking policy or vision on how they will improve things for ordinary people.
My worry is that it will be like Brexit - empty promises, wide criticism, angry protest votes and then no real substance or framework to follow.

My opinion is that first and foremost, we need to get our economy moving. If the economy is stagnant, or goes into a recession, then we have no money for services. We end up with forced austerity anyway.

Tax rises might boost services in the short term, but they are going to impact the economy fairly quickly.

In order to boost the economy, we need to boost the private sector. The public sector does not make the country money.

So as I see it we have 2 options:

1: Squeeze the middle; tank the economy, end up with austerity and cut welfare anyway, with long term impact.

2: Cut welfare to those who could work; cut welfare to non-UK citizens and illegal migrants. No more hand outs unless it’s necessary (elderly; disabled; short term emergency e.g. someone is made redundant or a father leaves suddenly). Make working pay and reward those who work with lower tax, increasing spending and vat intake. Boost the economy. Create wealth. Long term improvement to services.

And Reform is the only party willing to do things the way I believe they need to be done.

Labour did want to do it, but their back benchers stopped them. So they are stuck.

@Didyousaysomethingdarling, I finally got round to watching it. Whilst I agree that "the historical accounting errors" at Windsor and Maidenhead sound worrying and should obviously be investigated, overall, I was very unimpressed by the video.

Sasha Yanshin speaks for 13 minutes about Council funding and supposed incompetence, yet he doesn't discuss the main cause of so many Councils falling into debt - namely the national crisis in social care funding. In fact he doesn't refer to this once! The reason that Councils couldn't plan for this crisis better is because it accelerated very fast - some private care providers hiked up their prices by as much as 100% in a single year! Given that Social Services now take up around 2/3 of some Councils' budgets, that's an enormous amount of extra money to find in a very short timeframe.

Social Services are statutory services which have to be provided in accordance with very strict guidelines, and have to be provided regardless of how many residents need them. That gives Councils very little scope to make cutbacks to fit the budget. Some of the other Council services are more discretionary.

Sasha presumes that the cost of providing Council services in Windsor and Maidenhead will be similar to the areas around it. I don't know that region well, but I wouldn't assume that at all. I'm generalising, but before the current crisis, the areas with higher than average Council tax tended to be the wealthier areas whose residents were thought to be better able to afford increases. Councils in poorer areas, who tried to keep their Council tax increases as low as possible, were harder hit by the social care crisis, not just due to their lower tax rates, but because impoverished areas tend to have a higher demand for Social Services.

I have read most of the thread but not quite all, so I'm sorry if I am repeating what another poster has said.
If you like Reform, or if you dislike Reform, if you support Labour or don't support Labour, if you vote Conservative, or don't vote Conservative: please take a few minutes to watch a few of Gary Stevenson's videos on his YouTube channel, 'Gary's Economics'. He posted an interesting video last week, 'Will Reform win the next UK election?'
If you only have time for one extra thing today and you are open to considered ideas and a clear speaking economist's perspective, please listen to this.

This! Raynor apologised for her ONE comment. Whereas Trump et al are daily using this type of dehumanising language daily. To bring up a comment from 15 years ago is wild in the context of the language the Trump administration is unapologetically using daily. No one is perfect, neither side is, but one is a mole hill and the other is mount kilimanjaro!!!

Why does everyone say ‘I’ve accepted Reform will be our next government’? It’s not a foregone conclusion conclusion despite the fact the press seem determined to make it so. You can resist and object to it! The General Election is years away.

It will be shit, but I would be amazed if Reform could achieve even 10% of what has been suggested in this thread. It would involve doing some work, for a start.

My DS is currently working on his UCAS application and we are encouraging him to apply for courses that have an international element to them. Many of his friends are doing the same. They are sensible, intelligent kids who are all looking at the long game.

Back in 2016 when the Brexit vote was announced, I said to my DH that I think any future grandchildren we have will be raised outside of the UK. 9 years on and my prediction hasn’t changed.

Just to add, I do not think a Reform govt is a foregone conclusion. They are likely to do well in the council elections next year and then possibly implode. But Labour would be naive to rely on this. Extremely naive.

I’m half way through the video and so far I have decided that Gary is left leaning, and that Gary believes in wealth taxes.

Wealth taxes are the only choice really according to Gary “what else is there”.

I’m hoping Gary goes on to explain who are the wealthy?

Are they A) the multimillionaires who can move, taking their businesses with them and their employment opportunities. The millionaires who can avoid wealth taxes by putting money in trust; putting it into companies; using clever timing etc.

or are the wealthy now considered B) the middle. Those who don’t earn enough to avoid tax legally, but earn enough to target for additional tax. Those on £55,000 a year, like myself, who don’t get any benefits at all and don’t have anything left at the end of the month. Who get by without going into massive debt, and have enough for a holiday, but aren’t exactly comfortable.

I’ll have to save it for later though as I’m at work.

If it was so easy to tax the wealthy, they’d be doing it already. I agree in wealth taxes in principle, but I also know if anyone can avoid UK raising taxes, it will be the wealthy.

As it is an ongoing series, he perhaps does not answer your questions in this video. He does in many of the others: his line is 'tax wealth not work'. The middle are not the wealthy. In fact, he sees the excessive taxation of the middle as a huge problem and is concerned about the eradication of the middle classes. He argues that the economy needs the middle classes as they consume, whereas, given that the asset owners represent a tiny proportion of the population, they don't represent a significant level of the type of consumption that can support a thriving economy.

The wealthy are those with many millions/billions of the country's assets who are benefitting from wealth transfer. These are the people that now own much of the country's housing, infrastructure and debt. As they outcompete the middle classes/working professionals for housing etc, they own more and more and so the wealth transfer rate increases (because renters are paying them/they own the land and buildings upon which our supermarkets are built/mortgage and government debt etc). The wealth that he describes is basically the millions and millions in passive income earned on this.

He may or may not be left leaning. I don't think it necessarily matters. I think he is interested in placing the economics arguments at the centre of his message. I do think it is worth watching some of his other videos as these will answer your questions and be much much clearer than my quite poor attempt.

Thank you

Thank you for watching the video and taking the time to give a consideration reply.
I don’t think a Reform government will be any different to any other party before them in the last 15 years. As soon as any of them are in place, they soon learn the Bond Market, the Judiciary and the civil servants are in control and probably in that order.

Before we had the NHS countless children and adults faced agonising preventable deaths and ill health. A healthy population is a productive one. The NHS has been trashed and is by no means perfect but it’s something the UK should be immeasurably thankful for. The costs associated with an American style healthcare system should terrify us. Yes, understand that people are fed up and desperate for a change but not this surely?
www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2014/10/hunger-filth-fear-and-death-remembering-life-nhs

Except we aren't a productive one are we.

We have a huge benefit bill. We have people misusing 999 all the time. We have people going to A&E with colds.
We have lots of lazy people who have been given lots of free stuff (benefits, healthcare) are now entitled, spoiled and definately not productive.

You are correct in so far as the theory is true. A healthy workforce has the ability to be a productive workforce. However a healthy workforce can choose not to work as well because they get more on benefits which seems to be what is happening.

Lots of deaths that happened years ago were because certain things just didn't exist. So for example I take an inhalor for mild asmtha which gives me no bother most of the time. So going forward I would have to pay for that inhalor privately. 100 years ago that inhalor did not exist. The medical science has not been discovered. Same for lots and lots of things. They didn't exist even if you were mega rich and could pay for them. Women used to die in childbirth because doctors didn't wash their hands because they didn't understand germs. We didn't have vacinations for things because they hadn't been invented yet. Same for antibiotics.

So people would not necessary be sicker. What they would be is more careful. They would budget for medical insurance. They would look after the health better. The certaintly wouldn't call an ambulance unless it was a real emergency. They wouldn't not turn up for a GP appointment.

Does the US not have county hospitals that are free if you don't have healthcare? They look alot like our A&E does now. Overrun and exhausted doctors etc. Presumably we might have something similar.

The NHS was a great idea when our population was smaller, being on benefits was embarrassing and nobody would have had the audacity to give cheek to a policeman or abuse a paramedic trying to help. These are not the times we live in now.