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?

Curious article here about how Americans are turning against Trump for - er - doing exactly what he said he would do when they voted for him and having exactly the consequences that anybody with half a brain could have foreseen.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/dec/27/trump-republicans-midterm-elections-approval-rating

In an ideal world most people would have more than half a brain and be able to understand simple chains of cause and effect without having to see them happen first. But sadly that seems not to be the case, so they need to Vote Nige because "at least it's a change!" (yeah right) and "it couldn't possibly be worse!" - and then when it gets worse, say "oh well" and blame it on whoever they're told to blame it on. We've just been through this entire playbook with Brexit so the fact that people want to do it all over again indicates there's little to be achieved by trying to reason with them.

All of which is fine by Trump, Nige etc. because each disastrous episode of social and political disintegration is accompanied by a massive transfer of wealth from the government, working and middle classes to the rich - which nobody seems to have room to notice in their less-than-half-a-brain, already overflowing as it is with righteous outrage about asylum seekers and their £9 a week.

Reform are in control of Derbyshire County Council and are in the process of closing down 8 care homes, 🤦‍♀️

In Warwickshire they are want to reform SEND school transport

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/reform-uk-council-leader-set-33110360

Definition of populism: In simple terms, populism is a political idea that divides society into two groups: the "pure people" and the "corrupt elite," claiming to represent the true will of ordinary citizens against a self-serving establishment that ignores them. Populist leaders offer simple solutions, often promising to restore power to "the people," but this can involve distrust of experts, institutions, and outsiders, creating an "us vs. them" mentality.

Lefties are keen to say that we can afford this, that and the other because 'the UK is a rich country'. They seem oblivious to the fact that the reason the UK is a 'rich' country is because a small proportion of the population create an enormous amount of value every year - a full half of which is appropriated by the government and handed out to the population. But that value needs to be made, every single year. We don't have a huge sovereign wealth fund. We don't have huge mineral deposits (actually, we still have a reasonable amount - but Labour are busily destroying that industry too).

How utterly stupid does a government have to be to frame the people who create all that value every year as the baddies, and create policies to stop them being able to create value, and eventually to drive them away?!?

Would you encourage your children to take minimum wage jobs to help the elite?

I encourage my DC to get the best work she can according to her abilities and what is available, obviously. That's a rather stupid strawman: who would want any DC (not only their own) who was capable of getting work as an engineer to instead become a cleaner for some 'moral' reason .

But everyone has a responsibility to support themselves. I will absolutely encourage my DC to be self-sufficient - not funded by other people - and do NMW work if she can't get something she'd rather do. Won't you?!?

I have many family members who have worked NMW jobs, including 2 young ones and one post-kids work-returner who have worked as carers in care homes, and 2 who have done cleaning work as part of broader care. The ones who did care work all said that it was very rewarding, and I truly believe that if care salaries weren't suppressed by importing immigrant labour, that would be a great career for young people: emotionally rewarding, practical and with great opportunities for learning skills (eg dementia care, or tracheostomy care) which would give career progression.

Stupid strawman?

You are the one wanting lower minimum wage and less protection.

Rewarding jobs deserve rewarding wages indeed.

Yes, stupid strawman. You say as though it's a gotcha that I couldn't possibly encourage my DC to do NMW work.

It's a strawman, because everyone obviously wants all DC to get as good a job as possible. What on earth were you trying to imply?

Increasing NMW and worker protection above what that job is worth destroys the job: it doesn't make sense for that business to exist.

But then the person is doing nothing - and is funded from someone else doing a job but getting less money for it (because they have to support the jobless person as well as themselves,through higher tax).

Better to allow the job to exist - even if it isn't worth that much - than to have the person jobless, earning nothing.

I am just wondering why you have such a problem with the minimum wage being raised.

That's because you don't think of the economy, population, taxes and benefits as a whole interconnected system.

Like I said, if you study some economics - not opinion articles, but the nuts and bolts of how it actually works - it will change your world view.

We are never going to find out!

Yeah maybe I will start worrying about IHT and PS VAT instead of worrying about people relying on foodbanks and benefits to top up their low wages.

Maybe you'll start thinking about how to maximise the size of the pie (or at least how not to explode it) instead of only worrying about who has a bigger slice than you.. of the pie they baked.

It certainly changed Gary Stevenson’s. Odd that his view is diametrically opposite to yours.

The Tories had 14 years to put into practice these ideas.

None of it worked, nothing, everything is worse compared to 2010.... yet you want more....

Madness.

There are plenty of economists who do not support the 'rightwing way of doing things.

The Tories had v poor growth, worse in the 18months prior to the July 24 GE, than Labour have had in the 18 months since.

Plus their overall growth since 2010, has had to be downgraded and it was poor before the downgrade.

This isn't hysteria. If you know anything about the rise of the Nazis in Germany, you will see so many parallels. The increase in nationalism (flag-shagging), the manipulation of the general public to turn against foreigners (small boat people are raping our women) etc etc.

If you avail yourself of even a few actual facts of Germany through the 1930s then you will see what a far right party can do.

I'm far from hysterical; you, however, have your head firmly in the sand.

You do love to lecture people, it's true. But even if you are an economist, the fact of the matter is that economics is not a hard science, and that economists do not have a universal consensus on how best to run an economy to befit the population of a country.

If you lower the minimum wage, two things can happen:

1. The government pays benefits as top ups, as it does now but in greater measure;

2. The government chooses not to pay benefits as top ups, leaving an increased number of people in poverty, which increases crime, social division and unrest.

Which outcome do you prefer?

I suspect she would prefer people worked longer hours and/or took another job.

Farage and others want to lower the wage for 18 to 20yo's, he has said £10ph, so people on this wage will get the most shifts and those on the full NMW get less work, esp true in Hospitality, i know this happens even now.

I'm old enough to remember how people were exploited for peanuts before Labour brought in the NMW. It wasn't acceptable then, it isn't acceptable now.

Also her definition of 'value' comes from a Wikipedia page that has so many issues it's highlighted right at the top that it reads like an essay by someone promoting a particular point of view. When you look more widely, you learn that there isn't an agreed economic definition of 'value' - because not all economists agree on everything. Amazing, that.

They certainly can. How about some critical thinking?
Reform bot.

@pointythings
@Alexandra2001
I agree with your points that anything (including health insurance) that leads to employers paying more out at the moment would not be a good idea right now unless at the same time NI for employers came down. I think NI needs to come down though to increase employment. I also think that it would better to raise the income tax on middle earners (£35,000 + so that the UK is more in line with Europe). There are also arguments for making capital gains tax in line with income tax (but not taxing any investment in the business). This would also act as a wealth tax as more wealthy people hold there money in businesses and assets. I know that some people think that this would reduce the incentive to set up a business but there are other ways to incentivise this and many entrepeneurs argue that an increase in capital gains tax would not have affected their desire to start a business. However, it would stop people setting up businesses to avoid the higher rates of income tax whilst paying themselves in dividends/capital gains. It is also not right that the wealthiest people in the UK pay less tax than top earners on 45% tax.
We need reduce spending alongside tax reform in order to do reduce the budget deficit. You advocate for spending more but at the moment we can't afford it.
I think that all the parties are ignoring the fundamental problem-which is that they shouldn't be spending more (labour) or lowering taxes (conservatives/reform) in our current situation. I believe that the conservatives under Margaret Thatcher did not actually reduce the tax revenue. She reduced income tax and corporation tax but increased VAT (consumption tax). We could move to a flat rate of VAT (whilse compensating those on low income) and this would generate considerable revenue for the government.

I think that all the parties are ignoring the fundamental problem-which is that they shouldn't be spending more (labour) or lowering taxes (conservatives/reform) in our current situation. I believe that the conservatives under Margaret Thatcher did not actually reduce the tax revenue. She reduced income tax and corporation tax but increased VAT (consumption tax). We could move to a flat rate of VAT (whilst compensating those on low income) and this would generate considerable revenue for the government

Without increased state spending ie investment - Transport, Hospitals, Research, Uni's Colleges & Skills, the country just stagnates.... this is pretty much what has been happening since the GFC.

Keynesian economics says private sector spend follows the state spend, leading to growth, its similar to what Blair did with his 3rd way... taking the best from right and left, with emphasis on state investment, not least in people.

On VAT, so we create another cliff edge? the M/C pay more but also subsidise the poorest and anyone who improves themselves, gets caught in a VAT trap and if the threshold was high, then it wouldn't raise much money.

Many of the health insurance systems in Europe have absolutely nothing at all to do with employers, @Alexandra2001 and @fairyring25 . That is a quirk of the US model and we don't even want to think about going there.

So the whole screed about health insurance and NI is meaningless. I'm from the Netherlands - health insurance is something you pay for as a citizen. Each year your insurance company gives you a quote and you then look for something better (or not) - much like car insurance in the UK. If you have a chronic, incurable condition there is no bar to you getting insured because that is where the government steps in. It's not a perfect system, but it doesn't bankrupt people. And employers are not involved at all - but the Netherlands is one of those countries that spends more per capita on health than the UK.

You can't fix the health system in the UK without investment. Sorry, but them's the breaks. We have an ageing and increasingly less healthy population and so it's going to cost us. Anyone who says it can be otherwise is lying, delusional or on the grift.