Starmer's vision quest
- Thread starter mjr
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
CXRAndy
Epic Member
There are many on this forum that cant define what a woman is
Come back when you've learnt and accepted basic biology
Psamathe
Legendary Member
Reflecting on Starmer's "uselessness" and wondering if it's escalated to jeapordising his position in part because of Ms Reeves' failings as Chancellor.
Whilst Starmer's judgement would still be as bad, had Ms Reeves not sabotaged growth of the economy I wonder if Labour would have a better story to tell, public opinion not threatening negative numbers, etc. and thus Starmer's poor judgement would not have the prominence it now has.
That said, I'm not convinced that under Starmer/Reeves that the population would see the benefit from economic growth. I suspect benefits from growth would be directed to the already massively wealthy using excuses like "we need to encourage investment", basically the script they'd be given from the professional lobbyists.
Whilst Starmer's judgement would still be as bad, had Ms Reeves not sabotaged growth of the economy I wonder if Labour would have a better story to tell, public opinion not threatening negative numbers, etc. and thus Starmer's poor judgement would not have the prominence it now has.
That said, I'm not convinced that under Starmer/Reeves that the population would see the benefit from economic growth. I suspect benefits from growth would be directed to the already massively wealthy using excuses like "we need to encourage investment", basically the script they'd be given from the professional lobbyists.
briantrumpet
Timewaster
Out of interest, what are Reeves's failings as Chancellor that you mention? What would you have done differently?
Psamathe
Legendary Member
Things like increasing taxes on companies (eg employer NI increases) at a time when looking for companies to invest to improve productivity and create growth. With high inflation many companies have reduced their margins so increased costs have a significant impact ...
Many other examples eg the way they are targeting property development (ie doing the developer's bidding, eg blaming aspects that even Gov. says are not hindrances/blockages) rather than actually addressing the real issues)
briantrumpet
Timewaster
So if not these taxes, would you have raised others, or let the deficit increase, (probably) along with borrowing costs, if Reeves's fiscal regime was deemed too lax?
Psamathe
Legendary Member
There were many alternatives that would not have suppressed growth in the same way. Some eg windfall taxes on banks (banks made massive profits from secure loans to government as base rate increased; most European countries addressed this where UK Gov. hasn't and thus pays more on debt interest and fails to tax bank windfall profits). Note that Reeves is very happy with the concept of "windfall tax" as she's just announced a windfall tax on low carbon energy generation (whilst we continue with hydrocarbon subsidies).
briantrumpet
Timewaster
The thing is, and it's what's rotten about politics now, is that the only real choices are least-worst ones. There are no *good* choices that don't have downsides. So if someone says "they shouldn't have raised that tax", I'm going to ask what they should have done instead.
My trouble with the Greens is that their type of populism is that even if it's well-meaning (or art least, not malign), most things are presented simplistically without thinking through the "What could possibly go wrong?" (e.g. like being nice to Putin, or not wanting large solar farms or onshore wind farms); conversely, Right Wing populism is positively malign, but the simplistic solutions (blame immigrants, drill for oil, etc) would also be disastrous (albeit, intentionally so).
My trouble with the Greens is that their type of populism is that even if it's well-meaning (or art least, not malign), most things are presented simplistically without thinking through the "What could possibly go wrong?" (e.g. like being nice to Putin, or not wanting large solar farms or onshore wind farms); conversely, Right Wing populism is positively malign, but the simplistic solutions (blame immigrants, drill for oil, etc) would also be disastrous (albeit, intentionally so).
briantrumpet
Timewaster
And if that was so easy (maybe it was, but I'm no expert), can you think why she wouldn't have done it?
Psamathe
Legendary Member
Lobbyists.
But that was just one example of many missed alternatives (eg equalise CGT and income tax rates ...)
I have to correct you on that, the solution sucks either way for normal people not for the rich, although the always cry the hardest about how hard they would be hit etc.
Dorset Boy
Well-Known Member
Brian, Reeves killed any chance of growth by increasing employee NI at the same time as significantly reducing the point at which it starts being paid. It was really stupid, and the under 25s are paying the highest price for that stupidity.
All because they were too stupid / scared to increase income tax.
We have discussed Reeves's failings, including all those leaks re the bus=dget and u-turns plenty of times over the last 6-8 months.
All because they were too stupid / scared to increase income tax.
We have discussed Reeves's failings, including all those leaks re the bus=dget and u-turns plenty of times over the last 6-8 months.
