Best Of

My dislike of Reeves was kindled when I heard her pre-election chit-chat with Bad Al and Rory Stewart.

In a generally soft-ball interview, Stewart innocently asked whether her tax plans would be sufficient, and Reeves jumped down his throat and started ranting about Tory effrontery.

She’s obviously quite a bitter individual, and as we’ve now discovered, destructively useless as well.

She's bitter that she never held a real job in the city and I think she not so secretly hates the economic engine of the UK because it chewed her up and spat her out early in her career and shunted her into a customer service role for a retail bank.

The rumour is that the top rate or tax will go up to 49% (47% IT and 2% NI) or a 64% marginal rate in the £100-125k income band. Any of the last few Labour supporters want to tell me that either of these rates aren't work disincentives?

This country is a joke and the Laboir party are having a laugh at our expense.

I think there is a bigger problem lower down in the payscale.

From my anecdotal experience the people dropping to 4 day weeks are typically people on £50k - £80k who are paired up, have a mortgage, and/or have kids, so the leisure/work balance has hit the top rate of tax at 48% here in Scotland and the decision is obvious. Those on £100k in my line of work tend to be highly driven and for them, frankly, the cash is only a small part of why they work so hard - it's more about prestige/power. I think this is why the £100k band effect is difficult to discern in the data.

Essentially the Treasury is taking advantage of the hustle of people working for their first flat or are highly driven, and the inversion point on the laffer curve is actually very high for these individuals - possibly even as high as 70%. If I were Reeves, I'd be much more concerned about how to keep parents and people with mortgages working 35+ hours, where the point could be as low as 30%.

We are now in a situation where 25 % of teachers are choosing to work part time. This has been a problem with doctors for a while but the problem is now spinning down the public sector ranks. Those earning around £50k look at what the government is proposing to take of any increase and choosing more leisure time instead.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/07/one-in-four-teachers-now-part-time/?msockid=286f17fc1c606c5a0eb002b31dff6dac

I agree that the really high earners tend not to be motivated by money as much as by status or ambition but an ever increasing share of our work force are looking at the numbers and saying sod this.

Ambition doesn’t pay the bills.

To echo Casino’s point I have been a Supply Chain departmental Manager three times in my career. The first time I was ambitious. The last two I ended up with all this extra work and hassle and being expected to be on call pretty much 24-7 for what, a few meaningless perks I got taxed on, like BUPA, and losing a large chunk of the extra cash.

Fuck that. I’d rather have the time and less hassle and a job paying just under the threshold. So I took a step back and refused any other opportunities that I was asked to consider.

My dislike of Reeves was kindled when I heard her pre-election chit-chat with Bad Al and Rory Stewart.

In a generally soft-ball interview, Stewart innocently asked whether her tax plans would be sufficient, and Reeves jumped down his throat and started ranting about Tory effrontery.

She’s obviously quite a bitter individual, and as we’ve now discovered, destructively useless as well.

She's bitter that she never held a real job in the city and I think she not so secretly hates the economic engine of the UK because it chewed her up and spat her out early in her career and shunted her into a customer service role for a retail bank.

The rumour is that the top rate or tax will go up to 49% (47% IT and 2% NI) or a 64% marginal rate in the £100-125k income band. Any of the last few Labour supporters want to tell me that either of these rates aren't work disincentives?

This country is a joke and the Laboir party are having a laugh at our expense.

I think there is a bigger problem lower down in the payscale.

From my anecdotal experience the people dropping to 4 day weeks are typically people on £50k - £80k who are paired up, have a mortgage, and/or have kids, so the leisure/work balance has hit the top rate of tax at 48% here in Scotland and the decision is obvious. Those on £100k in my line of work tend to be highly driven and for them, frankly, the cash is only a small part of why they work so hard - it's more about prestige/power. I think this is why the £100k band effect is difficult to discern in the data.

Essentially the Treasury is taking advantage of the hustle of people working for their first flat or are highly driven, and the inversion point on the laffer curve is actually very high for these individuals - possibly even as high as 70%. If I were Reeves, I'd be much more concerned about how to keep parents and people with mortgages working 35+ hours, where the point could be as low as 30%.

We are now in a situation where 25 % of teachers are choosing to work part time. This has been a problem with doctors for a while but the problem is now spinning down the public sector ranks. Those earning around £50k look at what the government is proposing to take of any increase and choosing more leisure time instead.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/07/one-in-four-teachers-now-part-time/?msockid=286f17fc1c606c5a0eb002b31dff6dac

I agree that the really high earners tend not to be motivated by money as much as by status or ambition but an ever increasing share of our work force are looking at the numbers and saying sod this.

My dislike of Reeves was kindled when I heard her pre-election chit-chat with Bad Al and Rory Stewart.

In a generally soft-ball interview, Stewart innocently asked whether her tax plans would be sufficient, and Reeves jumped down his throat and started ranting about Tory effrontery.

She’s obviously quite a bitter individual, and as we’ve now discovered, destructively useless as well.

She's bitter that she never held a real job in the city and I think she not so secretly hates the economic engine of the UK because it chewed her up and spat her out early in her career and shunted her into a customer service role for a retail bank.

The rumour is that the top rate or tax will go up to 49% (47% IT and 2% NI) or a 64% marginal rate in the £100-125k income band. Any of the last few Labour supporters want to tell me that either of these rates aren't work disincentives?

This country is a joke and the Laboir party are having a laugh at our expense.

I think there is a bigger problem lower down in the payscale.

From my anecdotal experience the people dropping to 4 day weeks are typically people on £50k - £80k who are paired up, have a mortgage, and/or have kids, so the leisure/work balance has hit the top rate of tax at 45% here in Scotland and the decision is obvious. Those on £100k in my line of work tend to be highly driven and for them, frankly, the cash is only a small part of why they work so hard - it's more about prestige/power. I think this is why the £100k band effect is difficult to discern in the data.

Essentially the Treasury is taking advantage of the hustle of people working for their first flat or are highly driven, and the inversion point on the laffer curve is actually very high for these individuals - possibly even as high as 70%. If I were Reeves, I'd be much more concerned about how to keep parents and people with mortgages working 35+ hours, where the point could be as low as 30%.

I missed an important point - there are many, many more people earning in and around £50k than £100k. So while I think sorting the silly cliff edge out is important, this incessant focus on the highest earners is unwarranted imo - there is more potential to generate more output lower down the pay distribution.

There’s also a significant cliff edge for many at £50k with the child benefit withdrawal. A number that hasn’t risen with inflation.

Being a single parent on £50-60k is really poor position now. Earning too much money for tax credits, cliff edge and liable for everything a couple would be, while into the 40% tax IC rate, energy costs, council tax, etc etc etc. it isn't a large income now.

The Mad King is decompensating live on social media

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3m57bbcxvwk2c

Do you mean

- decomposing
- composting
- ?

Decompensating: the final functional collapse of a declining bodily system that has previous been kept running by compensatory actions or medications.

E.g. You can compensate for the effects of aging by injecting your President with stimulant drugs for a while, but eventually their cognitive decline will be too advanced for those treatments to have any positive effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decompensation

To conflate other posts, before long Trump will be pinning medals with shaking hands on boy soldiers in the Rose Garden.

Edit: still one of the most remarkable pieces of footage from WWII.

https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn1004475#:~:text=Excerpt from the last Wochenschau,the boys wearing their medals.

I suspect most of them died before Hitler did.

I was in Chester Cathedral today (and saw the Lego model). There is a narrative there of Jack Cornwell who was killed in the battle of Jutland aboard the HMS Cheshire. He stood by his gun with pieces of shrapnel in his chest trying to set it up to fire at the German fleet. He died of his wounds and was posthumously awarded the VC. He was 16. He was one of 5 "boys" killed on that ship on that day.

Today, of all days, it brought the horror and tragedy of war home to me like nothing else. I am becoming an old softy but by the time I had finished I had tears in my eyes.