I'm not saying the government doesn't know what it actually wants to do with Brexit, but Jacob Rees-Mogg says his top priority is changing the emergency exit signs inside the Dartford Tunnel. https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1540247376866295809/video/1
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
There wasn't any scope for a tactical vote surge in Wakefield because it was mathematically impossible for there to be one of any significance. That's because the LDs scored a puny 3.9% of the vote in 2019. In so far as there was any scope for Labour to hoover much of that up, it was negated because the Greens were new to the ballot in 2021, and from nothing pulled in the exact share (2.1%) that the LDs lost.
There were also lots of palatable alternatives for disillusioned Tories to use to make a statement if they didn't fancy a straight switch to Labour. A high profile Tory independent who had resigned over Partygate. A former Tory chairman of the constituency, now standing for the Yorkshire GOP. Reform UK and UKIP also new to the ballot in 2021.
+8.1% was fine for Labour in the circumstances. What last night showed is that Labour is able to pick up votes in the areas it needs to, even Red Wall areas that were heavily Brexit voting.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
There wasn't any scope for a tactical vote surge in Wakefield because it was mathematically impossible for there to be one of any significance. That's because the LDs scored a puny 3.9% of the vote in 2019. In so far as there was any scope for Labour to hoover much of that up, it was negated because the Greens were new to the ballot in 2021, and from nothing pulled in the exact share (2.1%) that the LDs lost.
There were also lots of palatable alternatives for disillusioned Tories to use to make a statement if they didn't fancy a straight switch to Labour. A high profile Tory independent who had resigned over Partygate. A former Tory chairman of the constituency, now standing for the Yorkshire GOP. Reform UK and UKIP also new to the ballot in 2021.
+8.1% was fine for Labour in the circumstances. What last night showed is that Labour is able to pick up votes in the areas it needs to, even Red Wall areas that were heavily Brexit voting.
BiB - this gives lie to the claim that there wasn't tactical voting in 2019. There was.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
You only have to be less toxic than your opponent and Labour is far less toxic than the Conservative Party as this result shows.
That's true at by elections.
A general election is a different kettle of fish.
What worries me about these results is that SKS might see it as a vindication of his strategy to have no policies and just win by default.
I'm not saying the government doesn't know what it actually wants to do with Brexit, but Jacob Rees-Mogg says his top priority is changing the emergency exit signs inside the Dartford Tunnel. https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1540247376866295809/video/1
What the fuck is he even talking about?
Isn't he upset that they are an even number of metres apart? I can't think what else it can be. Presumably he wants them to be 4.54 rods rather than 4.97 rods.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
There wasn't any scope for a tactical vote surge in Wakefield because it was mathematically impossible for there to be one of any significance. That's because the LDs scored a puny 3.9% of the vote in 2019. In so far as there was any scope for Labour to hoover much of that up, it was negated because the Greens were new to the ballot in 2021, and from nothing pulled in the exact share (2.1%) that the LDs lost.
There were also lots of palatable alternatives for disillusioned Tories to use to make a statement if they didn't fancy a straight switch to Labour. A high profile Tory independent who had resigned over Partygate. A former Tory chairman of the constituency, now standing for the Yorkshire GOP. Reform UK and UKIP also new to the ballot in 2021.
+8.1% was fine for Labour in the circumstances. What last night showed is that Labour is able to pick up votes in the areas it needs to, even Red Wall areas that were heavily Brexit voting.
Ive said it was a goodish result, so i agree. What it wasnt was evidence of tactical voting benefitting Labour. That may come. But its not been seen yet. LDs in the blue wall, yes all day
Being in Rwanda is not looking like an astute move by Johnson but of course it would have been 1000x worse had the tory MPs not prematurely ejaculated.
I am amazed that it is not simply taken as read that Boris triggered that premature ejaculation himself. Some people are reluctant to give him credit for anything.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I understand your frustration, but I don't really see why housing assets are so different from other assets. You could make the same argument about equities - if old people were banned from owning more than their "fair share" of those then their price would go down and young people could buy them more easily. Essentially your argument comes down to an argument against a fundamental tenet of a free capitalist society, that the state shouldn't interfere in the ownership of capital. It just so happens that in this particular case, you would be a beneficiary of this particular restriction! And in fact, stamp duty rules already favour owner occupiers, especially first time buyers. The reality is that some people will always want/need to rent. We rented for a while when we first came to London before we got on the housing ladder by buying an ex-LA flat on a slightly iffy estate, and I'm glad there was private rented accommodation available. By all means drive bad landlords out of the market and tilt things in favour of owner occupiers but the idea that all private renting is wrong seems rather extreme. I should declare an interest here as we are (hopefully) about to exchange on a BTL flat, which we will rent out to a refugee family at zero and possibly negative profit.
People can't live in shares, OLB. That's the difference.
Not everyone wants to buy. Who do they rent from? Also aren't you quite well off? Is there really no property in London or the SE that you could afford to buy? How much do you need property prices to fall before you could afford, say, a 2 bed ex LA property in SE London?
Being in Rwanda is not looking like an astute move by Johnson but of course it would have been 1000x worse had the tory MPs not prematurely ejaculated.
I am amazed that it is not simply taken as read that Boris triggered that premature ejaculation himself. Some people are reluctant to give him credit for anything.
I am not sure it will save him.
I think he might return from his trip to find the rules have changed.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
You only have to be less toxic than your opponent and Labour is far less toxic than the Conservative Party as this result shows.
That's true at by elections.
A general election is a different kettle of fish.
What worries me about these results is that SKS might see it as a vindication of his strategy to have no policies and just win by default.
There was negligible tactical voting in Wakefield as evidenced by less than half the Tory drop going Labour. The LDs were already a nothing party there. There was plenty in Tiverton.
Spot on psephology Woolie 👍🏻
And even in Devon it was not what made the difference. Tory to Libdem switching made difference in Devon. It’s a guess, but I think it means Partygate is now baked in to Tory results, like it seems baked in to MarqueeMark’s and other PB Tories opinion. Did cost of living also play too? Opponents would say what came up on doorsteps, but then they would spin wouldn’t they?
If anti Tory tactical voting is back, there’s a lot of places in GE it could make a key difference.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
I do not own a BTL.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
Being in Rwanda is not looking like an astute move by Johnson but of course it would have been 1000x worse had the tory MPs not prematurely ejaculated.
I am amazed that it is not simply taken as read that Boris triggered that premature ejaculation himself. Some people are reluctant to give him credit for anything.
I am not sure it will save him.
I think he might return from his trip to find the rules have changed.
Unless he is out before then...
It might not, but it was smart politics nonetheless.
TORY MPS: "No you can't have a second EU referendum, the result of the first one must stand. Don't you believe in democracy?"
TORY MPS: "No you can't have a second Scottish independence referendum, it was a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Stop playing politics with our country."
ALSO TORY MPS: "omg we gave a vote of confidence in Boris and he turns out to be a loser, we must change the rules so we can have another vote at once"
Yup! Trying to change the rules of the ‘22 committee at this point, really isn’t cricket.
The MPs had their chance and didn’t take it, now it’s up to the Cabinet and the “Men in Grey Suits” to initiate a change of leader.
TBH it’s probably only the Ukraine situation and the forthcoming recess keeping him in place - although there might well be more resignations coming in the next few days.
I'm not saying the government doesn't know what it actually wants to do with Brexit, but Jacob Rees-Mogg says his top priority is changing the emergency exit signs inside the Dartford Tunnel. https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1540247376866295809/video/1
What the fuck is he even talking about?
Isn't he upset that they are an even number of metres apart? I can't think what else it can be. Presumably he wants them to be 4.54 rods rather than 4.97 rods.
It is staggering that the Remainers won't all pull together for Brexit when there are glories like this on offer.
I'm not saying the government doesn't know what it actually wants to do with Brexit, but Jacob Rees-Mogg says his top priority is changing the emergency exit signs inside the Dartford Tunnel. https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1540247376866295809/video/1
What the fuck is he even talking about?
Not what he said. He said it was a 'compeletely trivial' example.
And ardent remainers wonder why they are seen as a clown caucus?
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I understand your frustration, but I don't really see why housing assets are so different from other assets. You could make the same argument about equities - if old people were banned from owning more than their "fair share" of those then their price would go down and young people could buy them more easily. Essentially your argument comes down to an argument against a fundamental tenet of a free capitalist society, that the state shouldn't interfere in the ownership of capital. It just so happens that in this particular case, you would be a beneficiary of this particular restriction! And in fact, stamp duty rules already favour owner occupiers, especially first time buyers. The reality is that some people will always want/need to rent. We rented for a while when we first came to London before we got on the housing ladder by buying an ex-LA flat on a slightly iffy estate, and I'm glad there was private rented accommodation available. By all means drive bad landlords out of the market and tilt things in favour of owner occupiers but the idea that all private renting is wrong seems rather extreme. I should declare an interest here as we are (hopefully) about to exchange on a BTL flat, which we will rent out to a refugee family at zero and possibly negative profit.
Housing and shares are completely different. Equities are not people's homes and you don't see young people forced to pay rent to equity owners.
When you say that you are going to get zero and 'possibly negative' profit on a BTL flat, do you mean you'll be donating any capital gains to charity? Or do you mean you'll be seeking to be cost-neutral on an annual basis because the rent on the flat will be covering any costs, but any capital gains will be banked?
Not making a short term profit on an annual basis doesn't mean you're not exploiting property to make a profit on a long-term if you're getting the capital gains and people are renting to cover your costs so you make relatively risk-free profits from the rent of others long term.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
Tories out for a generation? Maybe, just maybe, getting a little bit carried away?
I'm Scottish, as you know our generations are fairly short.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am not a pensioner and am very concerned about the future for the young. I don't think rude language helps, that's all. There are poor pensioners and rich young. You are one of the latter. I know quite a few poor pensioners in Millom who have not been stealing anything from anyone and have little in the way of assets. People like you should be taxed more to help people like them.
I have proposed both below the line and above it a number of proposals which would shift the balance away from the wealthy to those who work, especially the young.
We are I think broadly in agreement that too much policy has been aimed at only one group of favoured voters which is bad policy and bad for the economy and society. But I find it grimly amusing that it is you which has been a cheerleader for the Tory party and its policies which have largely been responsible for this for the last 12 years.
Rather than castigating me perhaps you might reflect on whether your support for that party has been in part responsible for the policies you now say you dislike.
One problem all Governments will have is that raising the standard state pension is essential so that pensioners can survive. What we also need to do is find a way that it can be done so that more pensioners receive enough via the state pension that they don't need to claim secondary schemes (because an awful lot of people don't do so until Age Concern appear and tell them what else they can get).
But the problem with raising the state pension is that various people will look upon it as a freebie for more obvious richer pensioners. So something really does need to be done to fix that - although I haven't got a clue what.
Personally I would Increase basic state pensions by £2000 or even £3000, remove some of the claimable (but often not claimed) benefits that poorer pensioners may get and implement NI on pensioner incomes. Combined I think that reduces admin costs and would ensure pensioners with a total income of less than say £25000 or so would be better off.
Another fact to rebut the Johnson lies about sitting governments and by-elections. When Tony Blair was PM Labour fought 28 by-elections against the Tories. Played 28 Won 28 Lost 0. Proper leader. Proper campaigns. Proper government. Just go you useless lying incompetent crook
Point of order.
Labour did fight 28 by-elections whilst Blair was PM; 16 of these were defences. They won 13 of the defences and picked up 1 from former Speaker.
So it was: played 28, won 14. They did, however, only lose three by-elections where they'd held the seat before the poll.
Johnson has had 11 by-elections, of which 7 were defences. He held 2 of them and picked up one (Hartlepool) from Labour.
Played 11, won 3. The Tories have, therefore, already lost five by-elections where they'd held the seat before the poll.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am not a pensioner and am very concerned about the future for the young. I don't think rude language helps, that's all. There are poor pensioners and rich young. You are one of the latter. I know quite a few poor pensioners in Millom who have not been stealing anything from anyone and have little in the way of assets. People like you should be taxed more to help people like them.
I have proposed both below the line and above it a number of proposals which would shift the balance away from the wealthy to those who work, especially the young.
We are I think broadly in agreement that too much policy has been aimed at only one group of favoured voters which is bad policy and bad for the economy and society. But I find it grimly amusing that it is you which has been a cheerleader for the Tory party and its policies which have largely been responsible for this for the last 12 years.
Rather than castigating me perhaps you might reflect on whether your support for that party has been in part responsible for the policies you now say you dislike.
Firstly, I already pay significant tax, at last count more than 45% of my gross income was spent on income and other taxes last year. The top 1% of earners in this country contribute ever more in tax, it was 27% two years ago. The idea that high earners don't contribute enough is frankly ridiculous. Let's start with NI on pension income, state pension clawback for higher rate pensioners before we start increasing the burden, yet again, on working people. Let's increase tax on unproductive and unearned income like dividends, rent and some forms of capital before attacking working people (either via income taxes or corporate taxes that will drag on pay growth). Lets bloody put a super-tax on cruises if we need to claw back money from wealthy old people.
What we also don't do us tax accumulated lifetime wealth during retirement and we should. We have trillions of non-primary housing assets locked up by older people who don't spend it and it isn't properly taxed. Even if we looked at how discretionary trusts are taxed that would be a start. If taxes go up on older wealthy people then that's taxes which don't have to go up on working age people, it also means older people will self fund their generation's health and care needs rather than putting the burden onto working age people.
Labour needs a radical approach on the generational wealth gap and to "speak truth to power" call out the older generation as selfish, make them look at themselves in the mirror and ask how they think their 11% pension rises will be funded, are they impoverishing their children and grandchildren in the process. Ask them if they are as selfish as everyone believes or are they willing to make the same sacrifices as everyone else is being asked? I think a bout of honesty for older people is necessary but Starmer isn't a strong enough leader to do it. Neither is Boris, of course.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
You only have to be less toxic than your opponent and Labour is far less toxic than the Conservative Party as this result shows.
That's true at by elections.
A general election is a different kettle of fish.
What worries me about these results is that SKS might see it as a vindication of his strategy to have no policies and just win by default.
SKS certainly ought to see a recovery of this scale in a Red Wall seat as vindication of his strategy to try and leave Brexit and all things EU on the back burner.
Yes there's a need for Labour to be developing policies for this point on, but I don't think a smorgasbord of detail is what needed. What's more important is to have a clear restatement of values and to crystallise those into a relatively small number of well-understood headline policies that put those values into practice.
I'm not saying the government doesn't know what it actually wants to do with Brexit, but Jacob Rees-Mogg says his top priority is changing the emergency exit signs inside the Dartford Tunnel. https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1540247376866295809/video/1
What the fuck is he even talking about?
Not what he said. He said it was a 'compeletely trivial' example.
And ardent remainers wonder why they are seen as a clown caucus?
Assiduous as ever. Props for the bravery of using ‘seen as a clown caucus’ in defence of JRM.
applause for David Herdson's doubling of voteshare
Big swing from the Tories to the Yorkshire Party!
If he had listened to me and based platform on security in our community (crime+) and to parliament to ensure not a penny of constituents tax is wasted, it would have been even better.
@wooliedyed re your analysis a week or two ago re the red wall gains by the Tories being a predictable progression rather than a phenomena of the 2019 election (2019 just being the tipping point) I note that, I think @Foxy, did something this morning on the potential swing back in the red wall seats based upon Wakefield that you might find interesting (again I think highlighting the lack of a specific phenomena for these seats). I didn't look at the detail of your research or @Foxy's but it sounds interesting.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am not a pensioner and am very concerned about the future for the young. I don't think rude language helps, that's all. There are poor pensioners and rich young. You are one of the latter. I know quite a few poor pensioners in Millom who have not been stealing anything from anyone and have little in the way of assets. People like you should be taxed more to help people like them.
I have proposed both below the line and above it a number of proposals which would shift the balance away from the wealthy to those who work, especially the young.
We are I think broadly in agreement that too much policy has been aimed at only one group of favoured voters which is bad policy and bad for the economy and society. But I find it grimly amusing that it is you which has been a cheerleader for the Tory party and its policies which have largely been responsible for this for the last 12 years.
Rather than castigating me perhaps you might reflect on whether your support for that party has been in part responsible for the policies you now say you dislike.
Firstly, I already pay significant tax, at last count more than 45% of my gross income was spent on income and other taxes last year. The top 1% of earners in this country contribute ever more in tax, it was 27% two years ago. The idea that high earners don't contribute enough is frankly ridiculous. Let's start with NI on pension income, state pension clawback for higher rate pensioners before we start increasing the burden, yet again, on working people. Let's increase tax on unproductive and unearned income like dividends, rent and some forms of capital before attacking working people (either via income taxes or corporate taxes that will drag on pay growth). Lets bloody put a super-tax on cruises if we need to claw back money from wealthy old people.
What we also don't do us tax accumulated lifetime wealth during retirement and we should. We have trillions of non-primary housing assets locked up by older people who don't spend it and it isn't properly taxed. Even if we looked at how discretionary trusts are taxed that would be a start. If taxes go up on older wealthy people then that's taxes which don't have to go up on working age people, it also means older people will self fund their generation's health and care needs rather than putting the burden onto working age people.
Labour needs a radical approach on the generational wealth gap and to "speak truth to power" call out the older generation as selfish, make them look at themselves in the mirror and ask how they think their 11% pension rises will be funded, are they impoverishing their children and grandchildren in the process. Ask them if they are as selfish as everyone believes or are they willing to make the same sacrifices as everyone else is being asked? I think a bout of honesty for older people is necessary but Starmer isn't a strong enough leader to do it. Neither is Boris, of course.
The young need to vote. That is the one true solution to your problem.
TORY MPS: "No you can't have a second EU referendum, the result of the first one must stand. Don't you believe in democracy?"
TORY MPS: "No you can't have a second Scottish independence referendum, it was a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Stop playing politics with our country."
ALSO TORY MPS: "omg we gave a vote of confidence in Boris and he turns out to be a loser, we must change the rules so we can have another vote at once"
Yup! Trying to change the rules of the ‘22 committee at this point, really isn’t cricket.
The MPs had their chance and didn’t take it, now it’s up to the Cabinet and the “Men in Grey Suits” to initiate a change of leader.
TBH it’s probably only the Ukraine situation and the forthcoming recess keeping him in place - although there might well be more resignations coming in the next few days.
No one else will resign. None of them have the guts.
I'm not saying the government doesn't know what it actually wants to do with Brexit, but Jacob Rees-Mogg says his top priority is changing the emergency exit signs inside the Dartford Tunnel. https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1540247376866295809/video/1
What the fuck is he even talking about?
Not what he said. He said it was a 'compeletely trivial' example.
And ardent remainers wonder why they are seen as a clown caucus?
Wait, what? Scott pasted fake news without checking it?
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
There wasn't any scope for a tactical vote surge in Wakefield because it was mathematically impossible for there to be one of any significance. That's because the LDs scored a puny 3.9% of the vote in 2019. In so far as there was any scope for Labour to hoover much of that up, it was negated because the Greens were new to the ballot in 2021, and from nothing pulled in the exact share (2.1%) that the LDs lost.
There were also lots of palatable alternatives for disillusioned Tories to use to make a statement if they didn't fancy a straight switch to Labour. A high profile Tory independent who had resigned over Partygate. A former Tory chairman of the constituency, now standing for the Yorkshire GOP. Reform UK and UKIP also new to the ballot in 2021.
+8.1% was fine for Labour in the circumstances. What last night showed is that Labour is able to pick up votes in the areas it needs to, even Red Wall areas that were heavily Brexit voting.
Ive said it was a goodish result, so i agree. What it wasnt was evidence of tactical voting benefitting Labour. That may come. But its not been seen yet. LDs in the blue wall, yes all day
I'm not saying the government doesn't know what it actually wants to do with Brexit, but Jacob Rees-Mogg says his top priority is changing the emergency exit signs inside the Dartford Tunnel. https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1540247376866295809/video/1
What the fuck is he even talking about?
Isn't he upset that they are an even number of metres apart? I can't think what else it can be. Presumably he wants them to be 4.54 rods rather than 4.97 rods.
It is staggering that the Remainers won't all pull together for Brexit when there are glories like this on offer.
OK I think I have cracked it. Because the measurement is in metres but our signs are in yards the number of yards is an odd number on the signs.
I must admit I have never noticed our signs were in yards anyway. Solution: Why not say 25 metres instead of 27 yards then?
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
LibDems should ask to talk about reform for local elections rather than shoot too high and fail yet again. Starmer can't concede PR for Westminster like that.
Or go for limited change - top ups like Holyrood etc which will increase their mps and probably give them balance of power often
The libdems don't want PR solely because they will get a balance of power, it's because it's fairer to all parties and gives parties representation based on how many voted for them
The pr used in Scottish local councils does that. In fact it can be argued that libdems have lost some influence on some councils due to PR.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
I do not own a BTL.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
I have been a renter. My parents rented all their life. In fact while my father was dying, the flat was sold to an appalling landlord who so neglected it that it became riddled with dry rot and damp so badly that it was declared unfit for human habitation under the 1952 Housing Act. Imagine a recently widowed woman and her children having to live in such conditions. It was one reason I got into law - to help my mother. It was one reason why I volunteered at the North Kensington Law Centre - to help those with similar housing problems. Those were the days when you could get Legal Aid (something which the Tory government has cut drastically).
I know what it is to have awful landlords. I have also seen the sort of crummy flats the young have to rent in London, one reason Daughter left. So I really don't need a well off City worker able to buy expensive flats and houses in Hampstead and North London lecturing me about Britain's broken rental market. Gove's recent proposed reforms seem sensible. A decent rental market is needed as exists in other European countries, which provides good quality housing and some level of security, as well as much more housebuilding for property to buy.
I don't have the answers. But I am a bit fed up of being picked on by @MaxPB who is almost certainly a lot better off than any of my three children and one of those who should certainly be paying more tax to help those worse off than him.
@wooliedyed re your analysis a week or two ago re the red wall gains by the Tories being a predictable progression rather than a phenomena of the 2019 election (2019 just being the tipping point) I note that, I think @Foxy, did something this morning on the potential swing back in the red wall seats based upon Wakefield that you might find interesting (again I think highlighting the lack of a specific phenomena for these seats). I didn't look at the detail of your research or @Foxy's but it sounds interesting.
I'll go try and find that, thanks! I've some thoughts on Wakefield and '2024?' But i'm going to crunch some data first. Tagline - good for Labour because of Tory drop, Lab vote % gain 'not enough'
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am not a pensioner and am very concerned about the future for the young. I don't think rude language helps, that's all. There are poor pensioners and rich young. You are one of the latter. I know quite a few poor pensioners in Millom who have not been stealing anything from anyone and have little in the way of assets. People like you should be taxed more to help people like them.
I have proposed both below the line and above it a number of proposals which would shift the balance away from the wealthy to those who work, especially the young.
We are I think broadly in agreement that too much policy has been aimed at only one group of favoured voters which is bad policy and bad for the economy and society. But I find it grimly amusing that it is you which has been a cheerleader for the Tory party and its policies which have largely been responsible for this for the last 12 years.
Rather than castigating me perhaps you might reflect on whether your support for that party has been in part responsible for the policies you now say you dislike.
Firstly, I already pay significant tax, at last count more than 45% of my gross income was spent on income and other taxes last year. The top 1% of earners in this country contribute ever more in tax, it was 27% two years ago. The idea that high earners don't contribute enough is frankly ridiculous. Let's start with NI on pension income, state pension clawback for higher rate pensioners before we start increasing the burden, yet again, on working people. Let's increase tax on unproductive and unearned income like dividends, rent and some forms of capital before attacking working people (either via income taxes or corporate taxes that will drag on pay growth). Lets bloody put a super-tax on cruises if we need to claw back money from wealthy old people.
What we also don't do us tax accumulated lifetime wealth during retirement and we should. We have trillions of non-primary housing assets locked up by older people who don't spend it and it isn't properly taxed. Even if we looked at how discretionary trusts are taxed that would be a start. If taxes go up on older wealthy people then that's taxes which don't have to go up on working age people, it also means older people will self fund their generation's health and care needs rather than putting the burden onto working age people.
Labour needs a radical approach on the generational wealth gap and to "speak truth to power" call out the older generation as selfish, make them look at themselves in the mirror and ask how they think their 11% pension rises will be funded, are they impoverishing their children and grandchildren in the process. Ask them if they are as selfish as everyone believes or are they willing to make the same sacrifices as everyone else is being asked? I think a bout of honesty for older people is necessary but Starmer isn't a strong enough leader to do it. Neither is Boris, of course.
Your problem there is that it's all stick with little carrot (and you need the carrot to ensure people vote). Remember Remain lost - not because it had the better case but because they couldn't think of any carrot that gave people a reason to vote for them.
Look at my approach below - big increase in state pensions but attached to a reduction in top-ups for poorer pensioners. Attach that to the NI changes and it's probably a vote winner as it only impacts richer pensioners while fixing problems elsewhere.
Likewise the wealth tax is combined with a change in council tax so that for poorer people the change isn't noticed.
By doing that Labour would end up with a set of policies that achieve both your and my aims without scaring a lot of voters away.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I understand your frustration, but I don't really see why housing assets are so different from other assets. You could make the same argument about equities - if old people were banned from owning more than their "fair share" of those then their price would go down and young people could buy them more easily. Essentially your argument comes down to an argument against a fundamental tenet of a free capitalist society, that the state shouldn't interfere in the ownership of capital. It just so happens that in this particular case, you would be a beneficiary of this particular restriction! And in fact, stamp duty rules already favour owner occupiers, especially first time buyers. The reality is that some people will always want/need to rent. We rented for a while when we first came to London before we got on the housing ladder by buying an ex-LA flat on a slightly iffy estate, and I'm glad there was private rented accommodation available. By all means drive bad landlords out of the market and tilt things in favour of owner occupiers but the idea that all private renting is wrong seems rather extreme. I should declare an interest here as we are (hopefully) about to exchange on a BTL flat, which we will rent out to a refugee family at zero and possibly negative profit.
People can't live in shares, OLB. That's the difference.
Not everyone wants to buy. Who do they rent from? Also aren't you quite well off? Is there really no property in London or the SE that you could afford to buy? How much do you need property prices to fall before you could afford, say, a 2 bed ex LA property in SE London?
It isn't about me, OLB, we've recentlyish bought a 4 bed in Fortis Green and we sold my old flat in Hampstead.
Maybe not everyone wants to buy but the market will inevitably find a new equilibrium point where fewer properties are in the hands of landlords and more in the hands of owner occupiers and with some smart non-transferable build to let tax breaks a new more risky investment can support the rental market and housebuilding.
TORY MPS: "No you can't have a second EU referendum, the result of the first one must stand. Don't you believe in democracy?"
TORY MPS: "No you can't have a second Scottish independence referendum, it was a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Stop playing politics with our country."
ALSO TORY MPS: "omg we gave a vote of confidence in Boris and he turns out to be a loser, we must change the rules so we can have another vote at once"
Yup! Trying to change the rules of the ‘22 committee at this point, really isn’t cricket.
The MPs had their chance and didn’t take it, now it’s up to the Cabinet and the “Men in Grey Suits” to initiate a change of leader.
TBH it’s probably only the Ukraine situation and the forthcoming recess keeping him in place - although there might well be more resignations coming in the next few days.
No one else will resign. None of them have the guts.
Rishi Washi needs to make a move. His torn, procrastinating Hamlet thing is all very well, but the Tory Party is going down in flames, taking the country with it as collateral damage. If he dithers much longer he'll find himself peeping out onto a wasteland, with nothing left to lead anyway.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I understand your frustration, but I don't really see why housing assets are so different from other assets. You could make the same argument about equities - if old people were banned from owning more than their "fair share" of those then their price would go down and young people could buy them more easily. Essentially your argument comes down to an argument against a fundamental tenet of a free capitalist society, that the state shouldn't interfere in the ownership of capital. It just so happens that in this particular case, you would be a beneficiary of this particular restriction! And in fact, stamp duty rules already favour owner occupiers, especially first time buyers. The reality is that some people will always want/need to rent. We rented for a while when we first came to London before we got on the housing ladder by buying an ex-LA flat on a slightly iffy estate, and I'm glad there was private rented accommodation available. By all means drive bad landlords out of the market and tilt things in favour of owner occupiers but the idea that all private renting is wrong seems rather extreme. I should declare an interest here as we are (hopefully) about to exchange on a BTL flat, which we will rent out to a refugee family at zero and possibly negative profit.
Housing and shares are completely different. Equities are not people's homes and you don't see young people forced to pay rent to equity owners.
When you say that you are going to get zero and 'possibly negative' profit on a BTL flat, do you mean you'll be donating any capital gains to charity? Or do you mean you'll be seeking to be cost-neutral on an annual basis because the rent on the flat will be covering any costs, but any capital gains will be banked?
Not making a short term profit on an annual basis doesn't mean you're not exploiting property to make a profit on a long-term if you're getting the capital gains and people are renting to cover your costs so you make relatively risk-free profits from the rent of others long term.
If Max has his way I will be seeing a capital loss not a gain. I just want something that holds its value in real terms when inflation is heading for 11%, to protect my savings that I have worked hard for and already been taxed on extensively. Getting criticised for this heinous act of profiteering and greed by two of the most ardent Thatcherites on here is... interesting.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
You only have to be less toxic than your opponent and Labour is far less toxic than the Conservative Party as this result shows.
That's true at by elections.
A general election is a different kettle of fish.
What worries me about these results is that SKS might see it as a vindication of his strategy to have no policies and just win by default.
SKS certainly ought to see a recovery of this scale in a Red Wall seat as vindication of his strategy to try and leave Brexit and all things EU on the back burner.
Yes there's a need for Labour to be developing policies for this point on, but I don't think a smorgasbord of detail is what needed. What's more important is to have a clear restatement of values and to crystallise those into a relatively small number of well-understood headline policies that put those values into practice.
There needs to be positivity for the future, more than anything else. Cameron had it, as did Blair - and yes, as did Johnson.
Labour still presents itself as a group of worthy metropolitan lawyers, backed up by angry social activists and trade unionists. They need to have someone being positive.
I'm not saying the government doesn't know what it actually wants to do with Brexit, but Jacob Rees-Mogg says his top priority is changing the emergency exit signs inside the Dartford Tunnel. https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1540247376866295809/video/1
What the fuck is he even talking about?
Not what he said. He said it was a 'compeletely trivial' example.
And ardent remainers wonder why they are seen as a clown caucus?
But why wouldn't you go with "here's a fundamentally important" example? unless you didn't have one?
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
I do not own a BTL.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
I have been a renter. My parents rented all their life. In fact while my father was dying, the flat was sold to an appalling landlord who so neglected it that it became riddled with dry rot and damp so badly that it was declared unfit for human habitation under the 1952 Housing Act. Imagine a recently widowed woman and her children having to live in such conditions. It was one reason I got into law - to help my mother. It was one reason why I volunteered at the North Kensington Law Centre - to help those with similar housing problems. Those were the days when you could get Legal Aid (something which the Tory government has cut drastically).
I know what it is to have awful landlords. I have also seen the sort of crummy flats the young have to rent in London, one reason Daughter left. So I really don't need a well off City worker able to buy expensive flats and houses in Hampstead and North London lecturing me about Britain's broken rental market. Gove's recent proposed reforms seem sensible. A decent rental market is needed as exists in other European countries, which provides good quality housing and some level of security, as well as much more housebuilding for property to buy.
I don't have the answers. But I am a bit fed up of being picked on by @MaxPB who is almost certainly a lot better off than any of my three children and one of those who should certainly be paying more tax to help those worse off than him.
At which point he decides to move to Switzerland after all, and HMRC gets nothing.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I understand your frustration, but I don't really see why housing assets are so different from other assets. You could make the same argument about equities - if old people were banned from owning more than their "fair share" of those then their price would go down and young people could buy them more easily. Essentially your argument comes down to an argument against a fundamental tenet of a free capitalist society, that the state shouldn't interfere in the ownership of capital. It just so happens that in this particular case, you would be a beneficiary of this particular restriction! And in fact, stamp duty rules already favour owner occupiers, especially first time buyers. The reality is that some people will always want/need to rent. We rented for a while when we first came to London before we got on the housing ladder by buying an ex-LA flat on a slightly iffy estate, and I'm glad there was private rented accommodation available. By all means drive bad landlords out of the market and tilt things in favour of owner occupiers but the idea that all private renting is wrong seems rather extreme. I should declare an interest here as we are (hopefully) about to exchange on a BTL flat, which we will rent out to a refugee family at zero and possibly negative profit.
Housing and shares are completely different. Equities are not people's homes and you don't see young people forced to pay rent to equity owners.
When you say that you are going to get zero and 'possibly negative' profit on a BTL flat, do you mean you'll be donating any capital gains to charity? Or do you mean you'll be seeking to be cost-neutral on an annual basis because the rent on the flat will be covering any costs, but any capital gains will be banked?
Not making a short term profit on an annual basis doesn't mean you're not exploiting property to make a profit on a long-term if you're getting the capital gains and people are renting to cover your costs so you make relatively risk-free profits from the rent of others long term.
If Max has his way I will be seeing a capital loss not a gain. I just want something that holds its value in real terms when inflation is heading for 11%, to protect my savings that I have worked hard for and already been taxed on extensively. Getting criticised for this heinous act of profiteering and greed by two of the most ardent Thatcherites on here is... interesting.
Because I think both of us recognise that having tens of millions of younger people with no stake in the UK economy is fundamentally a bad idea for the nation and for society. If it means regulating the free market for housing then we need to do that. Mrs Thatcher recognised that home ownership was the foundation of prosperity for working people, that the modern Tory party has forgotten this and allowed old people to price young people out of owning their own home is a huge and lamentable error.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I understand your frustration, but I don't really see why housing assets are so different from other assets. You could make the same argument about equities - if old people were banned from owning more than their "fair share" of those then their price would go down and young people could buy them more easily. Essentially your argument comes down to an argument against a fundamental tenet of a free capitalist society, that the state shouldn't interfere in the ownership of capital. It just so happens that in this particular case, you would be a beneficiary of this particular restriction! And in fact, stamp duty rules already favour owner occupiers, especially first time buyers. The reality is that some people will always want/need to rent. We rented for a while when we first came to London before we got on the housing ladder by buying an ex-LA flat on a slightly iffy estate, and I'm glad there was private rented accommodation available. By all means drive bad landlords out of the market and tilt things in favour of owner occupiers but the idea that all private renting is wrong seems rather extreme. I should declare an interest here as we are (hopefully) about to exchange on a BTL flat, which we will rent out to a refugee family at zero and possibly negative profit.
Housing and shares are completely different. Equities are not people's homes and you don't see young people forced to pay rent to equity owners.
When you say that you are going to get zero and 'possibly negative' profit on a BTL flat, do you mean you'll be donating any capital gains to charity? Or do you mean you'll be seeking to be cost-neutral on an annual basis because the rent on the flat will be covering any costs, but any capital gains will be banked?
Not making a short term profit on an annual basis doesn't mean you're not exploiting property to make a profit on a long-term if you're getting the capital gains and people are renting to cover your costs so you make relatively risk-free profits from the rent of others long term.
If Max has his way I will be seeing a capital loss not a gain. I just want something that holds its value in real terms when inflation is heading for 11%, to protect my savings that I have worked hard for and already been taxed on extensively. Getting criticised for this heinous act of profiteering and greed by two of the most ardent Thatcherites on here is... interesting.
Because I think both of us recognise that having tens of millions of younger people with no stake in the UK economy is fundamentally a bad idea for the nation and for society. If it means regulating the free market for housing then we need to do that. Mrs Thatcher recognised that home ownership was the foundation of prosperity for working people, that the modern Tory party has forgotten this and allowed old people to price young people out of owning their own home is a huge and lamentable error.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
I do not own a BTL.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
I have been a renter. My parents rented all their life. In fact while my father was dying, the flat was sold to an appalling landlord who so neglected it that it became riddled with dry rot and damp so badly that it was declared unfit for human habitation under the 1952 Housing Act. Imagine a recently widowed woman and her children having to live in such conditions. It was one reason I got into law - to help my mother. It was one reason why I volunteered at the North Kensington Law Centre - to help those with similar housing problems. Those were the days when you could get Legal Aid (something which the Tory government has cut drastically).
I know what it is to have awful landlords. I have also seen the sort of crummy flats the young have to rent in London, one reason Daughter left. So I really don't need a well off City worker able to buy expensive flats and houses in Hampstead and North London lecturing me about Britain's broken rental market. Gove's recent proposed reforms seem sensible. A decent rental market is needed as exists in other European countries, which provides good quality housing and some level of security, as well as much more housebuilding for property to buy.
I don't have the answers. But I am a bit fed up of being picked on by @MaxPB who is almost certainly a lot better off than any of my three children and one of those who should certainly be paying more tax to help those worse off than him.
Max definitely has a bee in his bonnet about landlords, I’m convinced he had a massive argument with one in a previous life. Making it impossible to be a landlord, would simply raise rents for those who can’t afford to buy, or don’t want to buy - rents that, in London, are already unaffordable for many.
The current government’s biggest failing has been on planning reform, the whole point of a majority is to push through the necessary but unpopular. Gove’s reforms on rentals are a good start though, he’s the one minister with a pile of well-thought-through ideas.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I understand your frustration, but I don't really see why housing assets are so different from other assets. You could make the same argument about equities - if old people were banned from owning more than their "fair share" of those then their price would go down and young people could buy them more easily. Essentially your argument comes down to an argument against a fundamental tenet of a free capitalist society, that the state shouldn't interfere in the ownership of capital. It just so happens that in this particular case, you would be a beneficiary of this particular restriction! And in fact, stamp duty rules already favour owner occupiers, especially first time buyers. The reality is that some people will always want/need to rent. We rented for a while when we first came to London before we got on the housing ladder by buying an ex-LA flat on a slightly iffy estate, and I'm glad there was private rented accommodation available. By all means drive bad landlords out of the market and tilt things in favour of owner occupiers but the idea that all private renting is wrong seems rather extreme. I should declare an interest here as we are (hopefully) about to exchange on a BTL flat, which we will rent out to a refugee family at zero and possibly negative profit.
Housing and shares are completely different. Equities are not people's homes and you don't see young people forced to pay rent to equity owners.
When you say that you are going to get zero and 'possibly negative' profit on a BTL flat, do you mean you'll be donating any capital gains to charity? Or do you mean you'll be seeking to be cost-neutral on an annual basis because the rent on the flat will be covering any costs, but any capital gains will be banked?
Not making a short term profit on an annual basis doesn't mean you're not exploiting property to make a profit on a long-term if you're getting the capital gains and people are renting to cover your costs so you make relatively risk-free profits from the rent of others long term.
If Max has his way I will be seeing a capital loss not a gain. I just want something that holds its value in real terms when inflation is heading for 11%, to protect my savings that I have worked hard for and already been taxed on extensively. Getting criticised for this heinous act of profiteering and greed by two of the most ardent Thatcherites on here is... interesting.
Because I think both of us recognise that having tens of millions of younger people with no stake in the UK economy is fundamentally a bad idea for the nation and for society. If it means regulating the free market for housing then we need to do that. Mrs Thatcher recognised that home ownership was the foundation of prosperity for working people, that the modern Tory party has forgotten this and allowed old people to price young people out of owning their own home is a huge and lamentable error.
and the step before home ownership is even more important. Just having somewhere to call your own with some security of tenancy and where you don't live in dread of the rent increasing 40% in 4 months time would be a great improvement on the current situation.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
Do we know anything about the Independent in Wakefield who got 7% (above David Herdson)?
TORY MPS: "No you can't have a second EU referendum, the result of the first one must stand. Don't you believe in democracy?"
TORY MPS: "No you can't have a second Scottish independence referendum, it was a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Stop playing politics with our country."
ALSO TORY MPS: "omg we gave a vote of confidence in Boris and he turns out to be a loser, we must change the rules so we can have another vote at once"
I'm not saying the government doesn't know what it actually wants to do with Brexit, but Jacob Rees-Mogg says his top priority is changing the emergency exit signs inside the Dartford Tunnel. https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1540247376866295809/video/1
"If equipment is safe and works, why does it need a regulation?"
The pertinent question is surely "in the absence of a regulation, would the equipment work and be safe?". Buildings in the country generally don't fall down. We have a system on building regs and inspectors. Do we conclude that because buildings work and are safe we don't need regulations? A friend is a building inspector; from his stories I suspect that, in the absence of regulations, not all builders could be relied upon to build safe, working buildings.
And even with building regulations, Grenfell happened! We need better regulation, not less of it.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
I do not own a BTL.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
I have been a renter. My parents rented all their life. In fact while my father was dying, the flat was sold to an appalling landlord who so neglected it that it became riddled with dry rot and damp so badly that it was declared unfit for human habitation under the 1952 Housing Act. Imagine a recently widowed woman and her children having to live in such conditions. It was one reason I got into law - to help my mother. It was one reason why I volunteered at the North Kensington Law Centre - to help those with similar housing problems. Those were the days when you could get Legal Aid (something which the Tory government has cut drastically).
I know what it is to have awful landlords. I have also seen the sort of crummy flats the young have to rent in London, one reason Daughter left. So I really don't need a well off City worker able to buy expensive flats and houses in Hampstead and North London lecturing me about Britain's broken rental market. Gove's recent proposed reforms seem sensible. A decent rental market is needed as exists in other European countries, which provides good quality housing and some level of security, as well as much more housebuilding for property to buy.
I don't have the answers. But I am a bit fed up of being picked on by @MaxPB who is almost certainly a lot better off than any of my three children and one of those who should certainly be paying more tax to help those worse off than him.
Max definitely has a bee in his bonnet about landlords, I’m convinced he had a massive argument with one in a previous life. Making it impossible to be a landlord, would simply raise rents for those who can’t afford to buy, or don’t want to buy - rents that, in London, are already unaffordable for many.
The current government’s biggest failing has been on planning reform, the whole point of a majority is to push through the necessary but unpopular. Gove’s reforms on rentals are a good start though, he’s the one minister with a pile of well-thought-through ideas.
I have zero problems with landlords - I have a big problem with BTL landlords as most of them are amateurville and anything for an extra buck.
We really do need an awful lot more build to rent property funded for and managed professional on behalf of pension funds.....
With suitable incentive / changes to the market so that private owner occupier residential property is kept as private (owner occupier) property with amateur landlords discouraged.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
I do not own a BTL.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
I have been a renter. My parents rented all their life. In fact while my father was dying, the flat was sold to an appalling landlord who so neglected it that it became riddled with dry rot and damp so badly that it was declared unfit for human habitation under the 1952 Housing Act. Imagine a recently widowed woman and her children having to live in such conditions. It was one reason I got into law - to help my mother. It was one reason why I volunteered at the North Kensington Law Centre - to help those with similar housing problems. Those were the days when you could get Legal Aid (something which the Tory government has cut drastically).
I know what it is to have awful landlords. I have also seen the sort of crummy flats the young have to rent in London, one reason Daughter left. So I really don't need a well off City worker able to buy expensive flats and houses in Hampstead and North London lecturing me about Britain's broken rental market. Gove's recent proposed reforms seem sensible. A decent rental market is needed as exists in other European countries, which provides good quality housing and some level of security, as well as much more housebuilding for property to buy.
I don't have the answers. But I am a bit fed up of being picked on by @MaxPB who is almost certainly a lot better off than any of my three children and one of those who should certainly be paying more tax to help those worse off than him.
Part of the reason I pick on you a but Cyclefree is because you give as good as you get and I do enjoy the discussion and you make me think about issues from a different perspective, don't take it personally.
The other part is that you are ultimately part of the establishment and most of your solutions protect that establishment.
I'd smash it all up if I had the opportunity. The civil service, the landlords, the rentier class, all of it.
Being in Rwanda is not looking like an astute move by Johnson but of course it would have been 1000x worse had the tory MPs not prematurely ejaculated.
I am amazed that it is not simply taken as read that Boris triggered that premature ejaculation himself. Some people are reluctant to give him credit for anything.
Could be. He does bring some skill and focus to bear when it comes to his personal prospects. He fiddled the leadership contest remember - used his surplus to make sure certain people were eliminated at certain times and that he got the no-hoper Hunt in the final.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I understand your frustration, but I don't really see why housing assets are so different from other assets. You could make the same argument about equities - if old people were banned from owning more than their "fair share" of those then their price would go down and young people could buy them more easily. Essentially your argument comes down to an argument against a fundamental tenet of a free capitalist society, that the state shouldn't interfere in the ownership of capital. It just so happens that in this particular case, you would be a beneficiary of this particular restriction! And in fact, stamp duty rules already favour owner occupiers, especially first time buyers. The reality is that some people will always want/need to rent. We rented for a while when we first came to London before we got on the housing ladder by buying an ex-LA flat on a slightly iffy estate, and I'm glad there was private rented accommodation available. By all means drive bad landlords out of the market and tilt things in favour of owner occupiers but the idea that all private renting is wrong seems rather extreme. I should declare an interest here as we are (hopefully) about to exchange on a BTL flat, which we will rent out to a refugee family at zero and possibly negative profit.
Housing and shares are completely different. Equities are not people's homes and you don't see young people forced to pay rent to equity owners.
When you say that you are going to get zero and 'possibly negative' profit on a BTL flat, do you mean you'll be donating any capital gains to charity? Or do you mean you'll be seeking to be cost-neutral on an annual basis because the rent on the flat will be covering any costs, but any capital gains will be banked?
Not making a short term profit on an annual basis doesn't mean you're not exploiting property to make a profit on a long-term if you're getting the capital gains and people are renting to cover your costs so you make relatively risk-free profits from the rent of others long term.
If Max has his way I will be seeing a capital loss not a gain. I just want something that holds its value in real terms when inflation is heading for 11%, to protect my savings that I have worked hard for and already been taxed on extensively. Getting criticised for this heinous act of profiteering and greed by two of the most ardent Thatcherites on here is... interesting.
Because I think both of us recognise that having tens of millions of younger people with no stake in the UK economy is fundamentally a bad idea for the nation and for society. If it means regulating the free market for housing then we need to do that. Mrs Thatcher recognised that home ownership was the foundation of prosperity for working people, that the modern Tory party has forgotten this and allowed old people to price young people out of owning their own home is a huge and lamentable error.
and the step before home ownership is even more important. Just having somewhere to call your own with some security of tenancy and where you don't live in dread of the rent increasing 40% in 4 months time would be a great improvement on the current situation.
I'm not saying the government doesn't know what it actually wants to do with Brexit, but Jacob Rees-Mogg says his top priority is changing the emergency exit signs inside the Dartford Tunnel. https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1540247376866295809/video/1
"If equipment is safe and works, why does it need a regulation?"
The pertinent question is surely "in the absence of a regulation, would the equipment work and be safe?". Buildings in the country generally don't fall down. We have a system on building regs and inspectors. Do we conclude that because buildings work and are safe we don't need regulations? A friend is a building inspector; from his stories I suspect that, in the absence of regulations, not all builders could be relied upon to build safe, working buildings.
And even with building regulations, Grenfell happened! We need better regulation, not less of it.
Just imagine what Jacob Rees-Mogg could do if there was no regulation in the financial market!
“At least 40 Russian soldiers have been injured after a Ukrainian goat set off a boobytrap they were laying around a hospital in Zaporizhzhia with its “chaotic movements”.
“The troops were setting up a tripwire when an escaped goat from a farm in the village of Kinski Rozdory triggered it.
“They had pinned grenades around the edge of a local hospital and placed the trap as a “circular defence”, Ukraine's Chief Intelligence Directorate said.”
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I understand your frustration, but I don't really see why housing assets are so different from other assets. You could make the same argument about equities - if old people were banned from owning more than their "fair share" of those then their price would go down and young people could buy them more easily. Essentially your argument comes down to an argument against a fundamental tenet of a free capitalist society, that the state shouldn't interfere in the ownership of capital. It just so happens that in this particular case, you would be a beneficiary of this particular restriction! And in fact, stamp duty rules already favour owner occupiers, especially first time buyers. The reality is that some people will always want/need to rent. We rented for a while when we first came to London before we got on the housing ladder by buying an ex-LA flat on a slightly iffy estate, and I'm glad there was private rented accommodation available. By all means drive bad landlords out of the market and tilt things in favour of owner occupiers but the idea that all private renting is wrong seems rather extreme. I should declare an interest here as we are (hopefully) about to exchange on a BTL flat, which we will rent out to a refugee family at zero and possibly negative profit.
Housing and shares are completely different. Equities are not people's homes and you don't see young people forced to pay rent to equity owners.
When you say that you are going to get zero and 'possibly negative' profit on a BTL flat, do you mean you'll be donating any capital gains to charity? Or do you mean you'll be seeking to be cost-neutral on an annual basis because the rent on the flat will be covering any costs, but any capital gains will be banked?
Not making a short term profit on an annual basis doesn't mean you're not exploiting property to make a profit on a long-term if you're getting the capital gains and people are renting to cover your costs so you make relatively risk-free profits from the rent of others long term.
If Max has his way I will be seeing a capital loss not a gain. I just want something that holds its value in real terms when inflation is heading for 11%, to protect my savings that I have worked hard for and already been taxed on extensively. Getting criticised for this heinous act of profiteering and greed by two of the most ardent Thatcherites on here is... interesting.
Because I think both of us recognise that having tens of millions of younger people with no stake in the UK economy is fundamentally a bad idea for the nation and for society. If it means regulating the free market for housing then we need to do that. Mrs Thatcher recognised that home ownership was the foundation of prosperity for working people, that the modern Tory party has forgotten this and allowed old people to price young people out of owning their own home is a huge and lamentable error.
and the step before home ownership is even more important. Just having somewhere to call your own with some security of tenancy and where you don't live in dread of the rent increasing 40% in 4 months time would be a great improvement on the current situation.
I think that is very rare indeed, or perhaps involves a recovery from a heavy COVID discount.
I looked up the official data the other day and the numbers around rent increases 2005-2021 are +35% for rent, and +42% for CPI.
What do you contribute to the country mate I take it you work in financial services so are likely vastly overpaid yourself given your abilities, Maybe you take too much out of the country Whilst the old are a problem a lot of our problems stem from the massive bailout of the banks in 2008
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
I do not own a BTL.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
I have been a renter. My parents rented all their life. In fact while my father was dying, the flat was sold to an appalling landlord who so neglected it that it became riddled with dry rot and damp so badly that it was declared unfit for human habitation under the 1952 Housing Act. Imagine a recently widowed woman and her children having to live in such conditions. It was one reason I got into law - to help my mother. It was one reason why I volunteered at the North Kensington Law Centre - to help those with similar housing problems. Those were the days when you could get Legal Aid (something which the Tory government has cut drastically).
I know what it is to have awful landlords. I have also seen the sort of crummy flats the young have to rent in London, one reason Daughter left. So I really don't need a well off City worker able to buy expensive flats and houses in Hampstead and North London lecturing me about Britain's broken rental market. Gove's recent proposed reforms seem sensible. A decent rental market is needed as exists in other European countries, which provides good quality housing and some level of security, as well as much more housebuilding for property to buy.
I don't have the answers. But I am a bit fed up of being picked on by @MaxPB who is almost certainly a lot better off than any of my three children and one of those who should certainly be paying more tax to help those worse off than him.
Part of the reason I pick on you a but Cyclefree is because you give as good as you get and I do enjoy the discussion and you make me think about issues from a different perspective, don't take it personally.
The other part is that you are ultimately part of the establishment and most of your solutions protect that establishment.
I'd smash it all up if I had the opportunity. The civil service, the landlords, the rentier class, all of it.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
Do we know anything about the Independent in Wakefield who got 7% (above David Herdson)?
Basically a Tory. Former tory councillor. Which detracts a bit from the winning margin
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
I do not own a BTL.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
I have been a renter. My parents rented all their life. In fact while my father was dying, the flat was sold to an appalling landlord who so neglected it that it became riddled with dry rot and damp so badly that it was declared unfit for human habitation under the 1952 Housing Act. Imagine a recently widowed woman and her children having to live in such conditions. It was one reason I got into law - to help my mother. It was one reason why I volunteered at the North Kensington Law Centre - to help those with similar housing problems. Those were the days when you could get Legal Aid (something which the Tory government has cut drastically).
I know what it is to have awful landlords. I have also seen the sort of crummy flats the young have to rent in London, one reason Daughter left. So I really don't need a well off City worker able to buy expensive flats and houses in Hampstead and North London lecturing me about Britain's broken rental market. Gove's recent proposed reforms seem sensible. A decent rental market is needed as exists in other European countries, which provides good quality housing and some level of security, as well as much more housebuilding for property to buy.
I don't have the answers. But I am a bit fed up of being picked on by @MaxPB who is almost certainly a lot better off than any of my three children and one of those who should certainly be paying more tax to help those worse off than him.
Part of the reason I pick on you a but Cyclefree is because you give as good as you get and I do enjoy the discussion and you make me think about issues from a different perspective, don't take it personally.
The other part is that you are ultimately part of the establishment and most of your solutions protect that establishment.
I'd smash it all up if I had the opportunity. The civil service, the landlords, the rentier class, all of it.
The trouble with smashing everything up is you clear a space for complete psychopaths to take total control of your country. You only have to look at the history of revolutions everywhere (regardless of political origin) to see the consequences of this outcome.
The 2008 bailout was a massive redistribution of wealth from ordinary working people to those working in financial services If we had been talking steelworks the market would have been left to rub its course
Far too many posts to read through this morning, but my quick take on the by-elections (probably already covered):
1. Starmer is not currently very popular at all with voters; particularly, I suspect with working class voters, who think he's a dud. In that context, Wakefield was a good result for Labour - certainly better than I feared. Starmer has time to up his game.
2. Both Wakefield and T&H provide, I think, evidence of significant weakening of Brexit as a determinant of voting. Both were strong leave seats. Yes, the anti-Tory vote was about Boris, but at the same time Boris is the embodiment of Brexit. I don't think the Tories can rely on Brexit any longer to win them the next GE.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
Do we know anything about the Independent in Wakefield who got 7% (above David Herdson)?
Basically a Tory. Former tory councillor. Which detracts a bit from the winning margin
Oh wow, so two former Tory councillors 3rd and 4th.
‘A nationalist MP admitted being too drunk in a Commons bar to remember how she behaved towards a party worker who accused her of sexual harassment…..’ “I’m pleased that my reputation has been restored”. What could be more snp?
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
You only have to be less toxic than your opponent and Labour is far less toxic than the Conservative Party as this result shows.
That's true at by elections.
A general election is a different kettle of fish.
What worries me about these results is that SKS might see it as a vindication of his strategy to have no policies and just win by default.
SKS certainly ought to see a recovery of this scale in a Red Wall seat as vindication of his strategy to try and leave Brexit and all things EU on the back burner.
Yes there's a need for Labour to be developing policies for this point on, but I don't think a smorgasbord of detail is what needed. What's more important is to have a clear restatement of values and to crystallise those into a relatively small number of well-understood headline policies that put those values into practice.
There needs to be positivity for the future, more than anything else. Cameron had it, as did Blair - and yes, as did Johnson.
Labour still presents itself as a group of worthy metropolitan lawyers, backed up by angry social activists and trade unionists. They need to have someone being positive.
I think whatever face Labour presents you'll manage to see that one.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
You only have to be less toxic than your opponent and Labour is far less toxic than the Conservative Party as this result shows.
That's true at by elections.
A general election is a different kettle of fish.
What worries me about these results is that SKS might see it as a vindication of his strategy to have no policies and just win by default.
SKS certainly ought to see a recovery of this scale in a Red Wall seat as vindication of his strategy to try and leave Brexit and all things EU on the back burner.
Yes there's a need for Labour to be developing policies for this point on, but I don't think a smorgasbord of detail is what needed. What's more important is to have a clear restatement of values and to crystallise those into a relatively small number of well-understood headline policies that put those values into practice.
There needs to be positivity for the future, more than anything else. Cameron had it, as did Blair - and yes, as did Johnson.
Labour still presents itself as a group of worthy metropolitan lawyers, backed up by angry social activists and trade unionists. They need to have someone being positive.
I think whatever face Labour presents you'll manage to see that one.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
Do we know anything about the Independent in Wakefield who got 7% (above David Herdson)?
Basically a Tory. Former tory councillor. Which detracts a bit from the winning margin
But only serves to emphasise OGH's point about FPTP.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
I do not own a BTL.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
I have been a renter. My parents rented all their life. In fact while my father was dying, the flat was sold to an appalling landlord who so neglected it that it became riddled with dry rot and damp so badly that it was declared unfit for human habitation under the 1952 Housing Act. Imagine a recently widowed woman and her children having to live in such conditions. It was one reason I got into law - to help my mother. It was one reason why I volunteered at the North Kensington Law Centre - to help those with similar housing problems. Those were the days when you could get Legal Aid (something which the Tory government has cut drastically).
I know what it is to have awful landlords. I have also seen the sort of crummy flats the young have to rent in London, one reason Daughter left. So I really don't need a well off City worker able to buy expensive flats and houses in Hampstead and North London lecturing me about Britain's broken rental market. Gove's recent proposed reforms seem sensible. A decent rental market is needed as exists in other European countries, which provides good quality housing and some level of security, as well as much more housebuilding for property to buy.
I don't have the answers. But I am a bit fed up of being picked on by @MaxPB who is almost certainly a lot better off than any of my three children and one of those who should certainly be paying more tax to help those worse off than him.
Part of the reason I pick on you a but Cyclefree is because you give as good as you get and I do enjoy the discussion and you make me think about issues from a different perspective, don't take it personally.
The other part is that you are ultimately part of the establishment and most of your solutions protect that establishment.
I'd smash it all up if I had the opportunity. The civil service, the landlords, the rentier class, all of it.
The trouble with smashing everything up is you clear a space for complete psychopaths to take total control of your country. You only have to look at the history of revolutions everywhere (regardless of political origin) to see the consequences of this outcome.
The establishment has already had it's chance and fucked up the country for the last 30 years with its policy of managed declinisnm.
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am not a pensioner and am very concerned about the future for the young. I don't think rude language helps, that's all. There are poor pensioners and rich young. You are one of the latter. I know quite a few poor pensioners in Millom who have not been stealing anything from anyone and have little in the way of assets. People like you should be taxed more to help people like them.
I have proposed both below the line and above it a number of proposals which would shift the balance away from the wealthy to those who work, especially the young.
We are I think broadly in agreement that too much policy has been aimed at only one group of favoured voters which is bad policy and bad for the economy and society. But I find it grimly amusing that it is you which has been a cheerleader for the Tory party and its policies which have largely been responsible for this for the last 12 years.
Rather than castigating me perhaps you might reflect on whether your support for that party has been in part responsible for the policies you now say you dislike.
Firstly, I already pay significant tax, at last count more than 45% of my gross income was spent on income and other taxes last year. The top 1% of earners in this country contribute ever more in tax, it was 27% two years ago. The idea that high earners don't contribute enough is frankly ridiculous. Let's start with NI on pension income, state pension clawback for higher rate pensioners before we start increasing the burden, yet again, on working people. Let's increase tax on unproductive and unearned income like dividends, rent and some forms of capital before attacking working people (either via income taxes or corporate taxes that will drag on pay growth). Lets bloody put a super-tax on cruises if we need to claw back money from wealthy old people.
What we also don't do us tax accumulated lifetime wealth during retirement and we should. We have trillions of non-primary housing assets locked up by older people who don't spend it and it isn't properly taxed. Even if we looked at how discretionary trusts are taxed that would be a start. If taxes go up on older wealthy people then that's taxes which don't have to go up on working age people, it also means older people will self fund their generation's health and care needs rather than putting the burden onto working age people.
Labour needs a radical approach on the generational wealth gap and to "speak truth to power" call out the older generation as selfish, make them look at themselves in the mirror and ask how they think their 11% pension rises will be funded, are they impoverishing their children and grandchildren in the process. Ask them if they are as selfish as everyone believes or are they willing to make the same sacrifices as everyone else is being asked? I think a bout of honesty for older people is necessary but Starmer isn't a strong enough leader to do it. Neither is Boris, of course.
Actually - the answer is a significant investment in urban densification within a limited radius of certain old village and town centres. And a larger densification programme in urban areas.
The vested interests are against it in the Conservative party - the property developers and large landowners.
But the Netherlands shows how it can be done in a sensitive Northern European way.
The key would be to ensure the apartments were big enough for families and well built enough (noise insulation etc, and light access).
Young people want to be near the action. Houses wouldn't lose value as they'd remain the blue riband aspiration. It would reverse the long term decline of town and village centres.
Will it be done? Almost certainly not.
The Tories would fear social democratic leanings among residential occupants.
Labour would struggle to pass an increase in housing without reviving council housing provision.
And the key to it is avoiding perceptions that they are sinks or schemes.
The US is not the model for us here - the Dutch have similar population densities to the southeast.
MaxPB I hear your anger about the establishment I think the problem is UK society has become completely ossified perhaps we have just been too stable for too long
If we simply aggregate the votes cast in the two seats last night, the Conservatives still came out on top with 24,500+ votes, followed by the LDs and Lab. The Conservatives were the only party not to loose a deposit, the LDs and Lab lost one deposit each, and every other party standing lost all their deposits.
Yet the Conservatives came out of it with zero seats, while the LDs and Lab got one each. What's clear is that the LDs and Lab are now potentially concentrating their votes very effectively, because voters are prepared to pile in behind either the LDs or Lab depending on which is judged capable of winning against the Conservatives. The Greens were squeezed in both seats compared to their national poll ratings.
In the light of that, it seems highly simplistic to continue to interpret national opinion polls based solely on the net Lab lead over the Conservatives, and to calculate seats gained based on uniform swing. That greatly understates the number of Conservative seats at risk. Just as important to me is the combined Lab/LD/Green vote, and how far that exceeds the Con vote.
So taking the two polls which showed Labour leads of 2% and 11% over virtually the same polling period, it's important to note also that the combined Lab/LD/Green vote exceeded the Con vote by 20% and 26% respectively.
What do you contribute to the country mate I take it you work in financial services so are likely vastly overpaid yourself given your abilities, Maybe you take too much out of the country Whilst the old are a problem a lot of our problems stem from the massive bailout of the banks in 2008
The exchequer is minting it from Max's salary through NI (Both of them) and income tax. A bigger question though is where do investment bank profits arise from. Do they truly generate wealth for the country, or is it an extraction that would otherwise have been earnt by other businesses. Despite our fs sector, our gdp per cap is absolubtely moribund compared to elsewhere (Particularly the USA if you look over the last decade or so). Why is that ?
I predicted the Tories would lose both seats but Boris would stay. Sadly - for the Conservative Party - this appears to be accurate on all counts
Boris is clearly steering his Party to a catastrophic defeat. They need to oust him now
Recall the Golden Bough. The sacrifice of the king propitiates the angry gods, and thus the tribe is saved. It is time to propitiate; because the gods - AKA the voters - are VERY angry
And if, in the process, the Tory core has to put up with some social liberalism that it finds distasteful, then tough. If it should come to pass, a heavy Conservative defeat at the next election that allows this to happen will be as much a monument to their greed as it will be to Johnson's self-absorption and venality.
Wokeness is not “social liberalism”, it is much more sinister than that
I entirely agree with you on the predatory pensioners. We need a government for the young
Unfortunately I don’t think Starmer’s Labour is it. They are as clueless - policy wise - as the Tories.
But then, looking at the headlines in today’s FT, with emergencies across the world from humble Sri Lanka to mighty America, with the EU warning of “terrible splits” in the bloc as Russia shuts off the gas, I wonder if any politician anywhere has even a vague idea how to handle what’s coming our way
Brace
I really hate the way particular groups are described in offensive ways - "feckless young", "predatory pensioners" etc. This sort of tribal culture war language will do nothing to repair society.
The current Tory party is exhausted and out of good ideas. Boris is a disgrace to his office and his government is degrading our democracy. His MPs should grow a spine, throw him out and start the process of rebuilding a Tory party that does not shame Britain. I doubt they will. But it is what they ought to do.if they don't the Tories will be out of power for a long time which will lead to the same problems with Labour. Parties that stay in power for too long become a menace.
We need policies for the hard-working of all ages, the young and those who are poor and just about managing. We need proper housebuilding, to do something about the grotesque interest rates on student loans and the absurd obstacles we have put in the way of those who try to export. We need proper investment in infrastructure in all parts of the country and we need to repair relations with our nearest neighbours.
We do not need more constitutional jiggery-pokery.
What we need above all is a government which explains clearly that times are going to be hard for the next few years as we deal with the consequences of Brexit, Covid and world instabilities so that all of us will have to tighten our belts but that this will need to be done fairly. No-one will be immune but we will try our damndest to make sure that those with the greatest wealth pay their fair share. For a start, NI on everyone who works, no matter what their age , rises in pensions should be no higher than what is offered to other public sector workers and council tax bands above the current highest levels to capture the increase in house values in recent years. I'd hugely increase the amount non-doms have to pay for their status as well and limit the amount rich people can give to charities and claim back from their tax as well.
Others will have other policies but they need to be presented as part of a narrative which explains that the next few years will be tough and that no-one will be exempt. Labour and the Lib Dems are still proposing to do something for the WASPI women, for instance - who have no legal case and are about as undeserving a group as you could find. This idea that you can throw sweeties at your favoured groups needs to be quashed.
We have to think hard about how we are going to earn our living and start doing it. For all of Labour's success so far I am not at all sure that there is much of a narrative from them on this. And if they don't develop one - with the policies to match and the steel to resist all the many claims made on them - they will end up being buffeted by events when in power.
The problem with this is that the pensioners are leeching from younger generations through rent and imposing huge pension rises on working age people, either via the state pension or RPI increases on final salary schemes that are paid for by current employees of companies. A tax on higher earning pensioners and clawbacks of the state pension would allow for taxes to be cut for working age people but Labour are simply too weak to pursue this policy.
Younger generations pointing out, fairly, that pensioners are predatory and thieving from younger generations to fund their retirements. Making it prohibitively expensive to own additional properties is the best way to solve this as it frees up millions of houses for purchase by young people who are currently priced out of the market by landlords and second home owners.
You want everyone to "get along" but while older generations are monopolising wealth and prosperity I see no reason for young people to be part of this grand bargain of "getting along" for the sake of it. It's up to older people to realise their selfishness is the cause of friction between the generations, they are leeching from their children and grandchildren yet want all of us to play nice because their parents made sacrifices while they made none.
I am an 'older person' who might well fall into your category of 'predatory and thieving' pensioner: In receipt of my FS pension (that I signed up to 40 years ago and stuck with throughout my working life), I got on the property ladder in my early 20s and am now living a comfortable retirement in my nice rent-free house with my good pension.
But here's the thing: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO?
Unlike you I suspect, I have never voted for he Tories with their triple-lock nonsense and failure to extend NI to all income. Their failure to address the accumulation and protection of wealth through inheritance.
I can surely only continue to use my vote to bring about change.
So think about that before you get arsey and lump every one over 60 into your 'predatory thieving' category!
Do you own a BTL property if not the only impact for you would be - whatever approach is adopted to tax pensioners earning enough to be high rate tax (40%) - that assumes your total pension income is over £50,000 a year (which I doubt it is) and possibly the impact of switching from council tax to a tax based on the actual current value of your house.
I do not own a BTL.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
OGH is right on this. The next election will see massive anit Tory tactical voting which will benefit Labour in the Red Wall and the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall. A pincer movement that will lock the Tories out of power, maybe for a generation. The Lib Dems should demand electoral reform as a condition of supporting a minority Labour government, and then people can vote for their first choice again, confident it won't result in their last choice getting elected.
OGH is wrong about Wakefield. There was no tactical vote surge there. Tories lost 17%, Labour gained 8%. Blue wall, yes, big problems. Red wall, much less so. Labour are still toxic
Do we know anything about the Independent in Wakefield who got 7% (above David Herdson)?
Basically a Tory. Former tory councillor. Which detracts a bit from the winning margin
Oh wow, so two former Tory councillors 3rd and 4th.
Yes. Labour didn't quite get back to 2017 levels on a low turnout against an outgoing party who foisted a child sexual assaulter on the city. The Tory collapse in vote flattered them somewhat and id expect this to be a Labour held marginal (less than 5%) at a GE. On this sort of result, against this specific backdrop id say labour will struggle to retake the larger majoritues in the red wall on current boundaries like Bishop Auckland and Rother Valley
Comments
https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/1540276071404371968
https://twitter.com/TimRoss_1/status/1540217944596176896
There were also lots of palatable alternatives for disillusioned Tories to use to make a statement if they didn't fancy a straight switch to Labour. A high profile Tory independent who had resigned over Partygate. A former Tory chairman of the constituency, now standing for the Yorkshire GOP. Reform UK and UKIP also new to the ballot in 2021.
+8.1% was fine for Labour in the circumstances. What last night showed is that Labour is able to pick up votes in the areas it needs to, even Red Wall areas that were heavily Brexit voting.
A general election is a different kettle of fish.
What worries me about these results is that SKS might see it as a vindication of his strategy to have no policies and just win by default.
LDs in the blue wall, yes all day
Also aren't you quite well off? Is there really no property in London or the SE that you could afford to buy? How much do you need property prices to fall before you could afford, say, a 2 bed ex LA property in SE London?
I think he might return from his trip to find the rules have changed.
Unless he is out before then...
This is where the Moggster should be focusing his efforts.
And even in Devon it was not what made the difference. Tory to Libdem switching made difference in Devon. It’s a guess, but I think it means Partygate is now baked in to Tory results, like it seems baked in to MarqueeMark’s and other PB Tories opinion.
Did cost of living also play too? Opponents would say what came up on doorsteps, but then they would spin wouldn’t they?
If anti Tory tactical voting is back, there’s a lot of places in GE it could make a key difference.
Rolling out NI to all income would reduce my net income. But it's a fair thing to do, so I support it.
Similarly reform of CT or replacement by a wealth or property tax.
I support those things but @MaxPB has me a "predatory and thieving" pensioner - while he no doubt voted for this predatory and thieving government.
The MPs had their chance and didn’t take it, now it’s up to the Cabinet and the “Men in Grey Suits” to initiate a change of leader.
TBH it’s probably only the Ukraine situation and the forthcoming recess keeping him in place - although there might well be more resignations coming in the next few days.
And ardent remainers wonder why they are seen as a clown caucus?
When you say that you are going to get zero and 'possibly negative' profit on a BTL flat, do you mean you'll be donating any capital gains to charity? Or do you mean you'll be seeking to be cost-neutral on an annual basis because the rent on the flat will be covering any costs, but any capital gains will be banked?
Not making a short term profit on an annual basis doesn't mean you're not exploiting property to make a profit on a long-term if you're getting the capital gains and people are renting to cover your costs so you make relatively risk-free profits from the rent of others long term.
It was there to be gamed to your own advantage why not
But the problem with raising the state pension is that various people will look upon it as a freebie for more obvious richer pensioners. So something really does need to be done to fix that - although I haven't got a clue what.
Personally I would Increase basic state pensions by £2000 or even £3000, remove some of the claimable (but often not claimed) benefits that poorer pensioners may get and implement NI on pensioner incomes. Combined I think that reduces admin costs and would ensure pensioners with a total income of less than say £25000 or so would be better off.
Labour did fight 28 by-elections whilst Blair was PM; 16 of these were defences. They won 13 of the defences and picked up 1 from former Speaker.
So it was: played 28, won 14.
They did, however, only lose three by-elections where they'd held the seat before the poll.
Johnson has had 11 by-elections, of which 7 were defences. He held 2 of them and picked up one (Hartlepool) from Labour.
Played 11, won 3.
The Tories have, therefore, already lost five by-elections where they'd held the seat before the poll.
Polling guru tells @MattChorley the swing against him when he stood as Tory in Christchurch in 1993 was more >35%.
‘Tiverton was a mere 29.9% last night’ he scoffs.
https://twitter.com/LOS_Fisher/status/1540279614874046465
What we also don't do us tax accumulated lifetime wealth during retirement and we should. We have trillions of non-primary housing assets locked up by older people who don't spend it and it isn't properly taxed. Even if we looked at how discretionary trusts are taxed that would be a start. If taxes go up on older wealthy people then that's taxes which don't have to go up on working age people, it also means older people will self fund their generation's health and care needs rather than putting the burden onto working age people.
Labour needs a radical approach on the generational wealth gap and to "speak truth to power" call out the older generation as selfish, make them look at themselves in the mirror and ask how they think their 11% pension rises will be funded, are they impoverishing their children and grandchildren in the process. Ask them if they are as selfish as everyone believes or are they willing to make the same sacrifices as everyone else is being asked? I think a bout of honesty for older people is necessary but Starmer isn't a strong enough leader to do it. Neither is Boris, of course.
Yes there's a need for Labour to be developing policies for this point on, but I don't think a smorgasbord of detail is what needed. What's more important is to have a clear restatement of values and to crystallise those into a relatively small number of well-understood headline policies that put those values into practice.
Props for the bravery of using ‘seen as a clown caucus’ in defence of JRM.
Surely not!
I must admit I have never noticed our signs were in yards anyway. Solution: Why not say 25 metres instead of 27 yards then?
Have I just given JRM a heart attack?
The pr used in Scottish local councils does that. In fact it can be argued that libdems have lost some influence on some councils due to PR.
I know what it is to have awful landlords. I have also seen the sort of crummy flats the young have to rent in London, one reason Daughter left. So I really don't need a well off City worker able to buy expensive flats and houses in Hampstead and North London lecturing me about Britain's broken rental market. Gove's recent proposed reforms seem sensible. A decent rental market is needed as exists in other European countries, which provides good quality housing and some level of security, as well as much more housebuilding for property to buy.
I don't have the answers. But I am a bit fed up of being picked on by @MaxPB who is almost certainly a lot better off than any of my three children and one of those who should certainly be paying more tax to help those worse off than him.
I've some thoughts on Wakefield and '2024?' But i'm going to crunch some data first.
Tagline - good for Labour because of Tory drop, Lab vote % gain 'not enough'
Look at my approach below - big increase in state pensions but attached to a reduction in top-ups for poorer pensioners. Attach that to the NI changes and it's probably a vote winner as it only impacts richer pensioners while fixing problems elsewhere.
Likewise the wealth tax is combined with a change in council tax so that for poorer people the change isn't noticed.
By doing that Labour would end up with a set of policies that achieve both your and my aims without scaring a lot of voters away.
Maybe not everyone wants to buy but the market will inevitably find a new equilibrium point where fewer properties are in the hands of landlords and more in the hands of owner occupiers and with some smart non-transferable build to let tax breaks a new more risky investment can support the rental market and housebuilding.
Labour still presents itself as a group of worthy metropolitan lawyers, backed up by angry social activists and trade unionists. They need to have someone being positive.
The country is shafted.
There are no credible solutions.
The current government’s biggest failing has been on planning reform, the whole point of a majority is to push through the necessary but unpopular. Gove’s reforms on rentals are a good start though, he’s the one minister with a pile of well-thought-through ideas.
An obvious source of income is the incredible sums earned by internet giants
Tax them on turnover in the UK. No ifs no buts. Are they really going to leave the world’s 6th biggest economy?
We really do need an awful lot more build to rent property funded for and managed professional on behalf of pension funds.....
With suitable incentive / changes to the market so that private owner occupier residential property is kept as private (owner occupier) property with amateur landlords discouraged.
The other part is that you are ultimately part of the establishment and most of your solutions protect that establishment.
I'd smash it all up if I had the opportunity. The civil service, the landlords, the rentier class, all of it.
Security of home. Always.
“At least 40 Russian soldiers have been injured after a Ukrainian goat set off a boobytrap they were laying around a hospital in Zaporizhzhia with its “chaotic movements”.
“The troops were setting up a tripwire when an escaped goat from a farm in the village of Kinski Rozdory triggered it.
“They had pinned grenades around the edge of a local hospital and placed the trap as a “circular defence”, Ukraine's Chief Intelligence Directorate said.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/06/24/goat-kyiv-triggers-russian-boobytrap-injures-40-soldiers/
I looked up the official data the other day and the numbers around rent increases 2005-2021 are +35% for rent, and +42% for CPI.
Needs work
Puzzled birds on ice
Wintry Britain is shafted
Now? Anal bleeding
What do you contribute to the country mate I take it you work in financial services so are likely vastly overpaid yourself given your abilities, Maybe you take too much out of the country Whilst the old are a problem a lot of our problems stem from the massive bailout of the banks in 2008
I’m off to dance like a frog, eat herring and drink akvavit. I may pop on my kilt.
1. Starmer is not currently very popular at all with voters; particularly, I suspect with working class voters, who think he's a dud. In that context, Wakefield was a good result for Labour - certainly better than I feared. Starmer has time to up his game.
2. Both Wakefield and T&H provide, I think, evidence of significant weakening of Brexit as a determinant of voting. Both were strong leave seats. Yes, the anti-Tory vote was about Boris, but at the same time Boris is the embodiment of Brexit. I don't think the Tories can rely on Brexit any longer to win them the next GE.
“I’m pleased that my reputation has been restored”.
What could be more snp?
https://twitter.com/mccartneyles/status/1540280146430754816?
What’s their vision, their dream?
The vested interests are against it in the Conservative party - the property developers and large landowners.
But the Netherlands shows how it can be done in a sensitive Northern European way.
The key would be to ensure the apartments were big enough for families and well built enough (noise insulation etc, and light access).
Young people want to be near the action.
Houses wouldn't lose value as they'd remain the blue riband aspiration.
It would reverse the long term decline of town and village centres.
Will it be done? Almost certainly not.
The Tories would fear social democratic leanings among residential occupants.
Labour would struggle to pass an increase in housing without reviving council housing provision.
And the key to it is avoiding perceptions that they are sinks or schemes.
The US is not the model for us here - the Dutch have similar population densities to the southeast.
Yet the Conservatives came out of it with zero seats, while the LDs and Lab got one each. What's clear is that the LDs and Lab are now potentially concentrating their votes very effectively, because voters are prepared to pile in behind either the LDs or Lab depending on which is judged capable of winning against the Conservatives. The Greens were squeezed in both seats compared to their national poll ratings.
In the light of that, it seems highly simplistic to continue to interpret national opinion polls based solely on the net Lab lead over the Conservatives, and to calculate seats gained based on uniform swing. That greatly understates the number of Conservative seats at risk. Just as important to me is the combined Lab/LD/Green vote, and how far that exceeds the Con vote.
So taking the two polls which showed Labour leads of 2% and 11% over virtually the same polling period, it's important to note also that the combined Lab/LD/Green vote exceeded the Con vote by 20% and 26% respectively.
Despite our fs sector, our gdp per cap is absolubtely moribund compared to elsewhere (Particularly the USA if you look over the last decade or so). Why is that ?
On this sort of result, against this specific backdrop id say labour will struggle to retake the larger majoritues in the red wall on current boundaries like Bishop Auckland and Rother Valley