Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Labouring the economy – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,159
edited November 21 in General
Labouring the economy – politicalbetting.com

NEW from @IpsosUK 41% say they are worse off since Labour took office. 15% say better off.More https://t.co/JHjjhJiSnP pic.twitter.com/5UbOR0aA23

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,174
    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,603
    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Promoting her would be a Balls up.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,486
    edited November 21
    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Whilst he would indeed be better than any of the other options in the Labour Party, Tommy Cooper is long dead Pulpstar, sorry.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,814
    edited November 21
    GTS Rail announced as new operator of Elizabeth Line (from May):

    https://railuk.com/company-news/gts-rail-operations-limited-announced-as-new-operator-for-the-elizabeth-line/

    Transport for London (TfL) has announced its intention to award the new Elizabeth line operator contract to GTS Rail Operations Limited, a joint venture between Go Ahead Group, Tokyo Metro and Sumitomo Corporation. The contract will cover seven years with an option to extend for up to two additional years.

    GTS Rail Operations Limited will take over from the existing operator, MTR Corporation (Crossrail) Limited, in May 2025.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,174

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    She was his second choice, lest we forget his first Shadow Chancellor was Anneliese Dodds.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    She was his second choice, lest we forget his first Shadow Chancellor was Anneliese Dodds.
    Ah yes, trhe spoon dolly in human form...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,603
    Good clip of John Prescott on Top Gear:

    https://x.com/maxtempers/status/1859530659942817828
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    Who are the 15% better off? The Cabinet didn't require THAT many new clothes....
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,098

    boulay said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Whilst he would indeed be better than any of the other options in the Labour Party, Tommy Cooper is long dead Pulpstar, sorry.
    - How are you going to grow the economy?
    - Just like that!
    Fez up, you're clueless.
  • Who are the 15% better off? The Cabinet didn't require THAT many new clothes....

    Undertakers, that cut to the winter fuel allowance is going to help them.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    edited November 21
    Labour have only been in power for 140 days but there’s a palpable sense of disappointment - not just on here but in organs like the FT which reflect, if not shape, global business opinion.

    Reeves gave a great Mais Lecture at the beginning of this year, and there’s no shortage of what I might New Model Growthers floating around the Labour tent. As I’ve posted before, what is missing is an overall sense of strategy - a reason to believe.

    Something has gone very wrong.
    I’m not sure Starmer has the imagination to course-correct.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,174
    edited November 21

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,603

    Labour have only been in power for 140 days but there’s a palpable sense of disappointment - not just on here but in organs like the FT which reflect, if not shape, global business opinion.

    Reeves gave a great Mais Lecture at the beginning of this year, and there’s no shortage of what I might New Model Growthers floating around the Labour tent. As I’ve posted before, what is missing is an overall sense of strategy - a reason to believe.

    Something has gone very wrong.
    I’m not sure Starmer has the imagination to course-correct.

    We await the second coming of Maggie. Starmer cannot hold.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    There was the odd Wes Streeting vibe in Opposition, iirc. David Lammy if the PB Tories are right about Donald Trump's objections to our Foreign Secretary.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555

    Who are the 15% better off? The Cabinet didn't require THAT many new clothes....

    Undertakers, that cut to the winter fuel allowance is going to help them.
    And in their wake, the probate lawyers...

    Always the bloody lawyers.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,549
    "Bluesky chief doesn't know age limit for platform

    While speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live's Breakfast programme, Jay Graber wrongly said you needed to be 18 to use Bluesky, when the actual age limit is 13."

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c238y83l48jo
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,128
    edited November 21
    SLAPP debate.

    Joe Powell MP talked (I'm catching) about how Mohammed Al-Fayed used legal threats to silence investigations into his behaviour.

    To date we have around 200 women making complaints about Al-Fayed abusing them.

    An account from Henry Porter about how Al-Fayed went for him, when he was reporting about him from the 1990s onward.

    It was Al-Fayed who gave £20k to Tim Smith, former MP for here in Ashfield, to ask Parliamentary Questions.

    He was like a London-based Trump.

    https://www.theguardian.com/global/2024/sep/22/remorseless-ruthless-racist-my-battle-to-expose-mohamed-al-fayed
  • Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,814
    edited November 21

    Who are the 15% better off? The Cabinet didn't require THAT many new clothes....

    Undertakers, that cut to the winter fuel allowance is going to help them.
    And in their wake, the probate lawyers...

    Always the bloody lawyers.
    Bit unfair. One can do without the lawyers to a considerable extent, such that most of the money is actually spent on the undertakers but also the celebrant for the funeral, the hotel for the f. baked meats, the house and contents valuers, the estate agents, the house clearance/skip, and the odd specialist such as the videographer for the house sale. Not easy to do without those ...
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,286
    I hope Labour have learning and growth in them and are grafters who can find their way in government much as they did (in a different manner) in opposition. The up front pain doesn't help when there is a sense that Labour are not there yet as a government.

    13 months in to Starmer's leadership came the Hartlepool by-election and only after that did Labour find its feet as an opposition. They need to find a way to pull that trick again.

    I remain more hopeful of learning from a Starmer government than was managed by the Tories between 10-24.

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,354

    Labour have only been in power for 140 days but there’s a palpable sense of disappointment - not just on here but in organs like the FT which reflect, if not shape, global business opinion.

    Reeves gave a great Mais Lecture at the beginning of this year, and there’s no shortage of what I might New Model Growthers floating around the Labour tent. As I’ve posted before, what is missing is an overall sense of strategy - a reason to believe.

    Something has gone very wrong.
    I’m not sure Starmer has the imagination to course-correct.

    Do you remember? People used to describe Starmer as a strategic political genius!

    It's more and more obvious that he was simply in the right place at the right time and a landslide majority fell into his lap without him having to do anything to win it. And now he does not have a bleeding clue what to do with it.

    The next election is likely to set new records in terms of the number of government seats lost.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,174

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    There was the odd Wes Streeting vibe in Opposition, iirc. David Lammy if the PB Tories are right about Donald Trump's objections to our Foreign Secretary.
    I think Streeting could do well.

    Recently with the NHS I booked an (in person) appointment of my choosing with the GP after going through the online Smart Triage service (After getting cut off after 3/4 of an hour waiting from caller 24 in the phone queue) https://www.larwoodhealthpartnership.co.uk/about/smart-triage/

    Blood test instantly booked in with hospital and results (All clear) back before the end of the day via app.

    The smart triage really worked well and I have no idea if other practices use it but it strikes me as a small web project that could be rolled out GP practice by GP practice instead of a gargantuan IT overhaul for the entirety of the NHS (It also frees up the receptionists more). The blood testing has worked well for a long time here, encouraging everyone to get the NHS app saves doctors time calling (Or patients worrying as doctors don't call with nothing doing results).

  • GTS Rail announced as new operator of Elizabeth Line (from May):

    https://railuk.com/company-news/gts-rail-operations-limited-announced-as-new-operator-for-the-elizabeth-line/

    Transport for London (TfL) has announced its intention to award the new Elizabeth line operator contract to GTS Rail Operations Limited, a joint venture between Go Ahead Group, Tokyo Metro and Sumitomo Corporation. The contract will cover seven years with an option to extend for up to two additional years.

    GTS Rail Operations Limited will take over from the existing operator, MTR Corporation (Crossrail) Limited, in May 2025.

    Because we need Japanese companies to run London infrastructure! Though iirc MTR is not wholly British either, and that is without European trains and French buses.

    One of the many reasons Britain is skint is because the Chancellor spends all day writing subsidy cheques to foreign companies.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,580
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    He's not going to fire Reeves!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,344
    MattW said:

    SLAPP debate.

    Joe Powell MP talked (I'm catching) about how Mohammed Al-Fayed used legal threats to silence investigations into his behaviour.

    To date we have around 200 women making complaints about Al-Fayed abusing them.

    An account from Henry Porter about how Al-Fayed went for him, when he was reporting about him from the 1990s onward.

    It was Al-Fayed who gave £20k to Tim Smith, former MP for here in Ashfield, to ask Parliamentary Questions.

    He was like a London-based Trump.

    https://www.theguardian.com/global/2024/sep/22/remorseless-ruthless-racist-my-battle-to-expose-mohamed-al-fayed

    What a gross and dangerous pig Fayed was.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,664
    edited November 21
    Carnyx said:

    Who are the 15% better off? The Cabinet didn't require THAT many new clothes....

    Undertakers, that cut to the winter fuel allowance is going to help them.
    And in their wake, the probate lawyers...

    Always the bloody lawyers.
    Bit unfair. One can do without the lawyers to a considerable extent, such that most of the money is actually spent on the undertakers but also the celebrant for the funeral, the hotel for the f. baked meats, the house and contents valuers, the estate agents, the house clearance/skip, and the odd specialist such as the videographer for the house sale. Not easy to do without those ...
    I went to a funeral this morning.

    The deceased had no relatives and the death was in unusual circumstances so the council had to arrange a burial.
    The celebrant was only there to say a few words at the graveside [much prefer this if I'm honest].
    The deceased accidentally burnt their own house down a few months earlier so the house clearance will be easy.
    The videographer won't be required.

    Unfortunately, nobody knows where the will is.

    As far as anyone knows, it was all to go to charity, but the state doesn't have much incentive to look hard.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,174
    Barnesian said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    He's not going to fire Reeves!
    I'm riffing off the thread header :o
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,220

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,354
    Pro_Rata said:

    I hope Labour have learning and growth in them and are grafters who can find their way in government much as they did (in a different manner) in opposition. The up front pain doesn't help when there is a sense that Labour are not there yet as a government.

    13 months in to Starmer's leadership came the Hartlepool by-election and only after that did Labour find its feet as an opposition. They need to find a way to pull that trick again.

    I remain more hopeful of learning from a Starmer government than was managed by the Tories between 10-24.

    The Hartlepool by-election was on May 6th 2021.

    Boris Johnson's leadership began to implode in October 2021, when Owen Paterson was found to be in breach of Parliamentary Standards, and Johnson decided to interfere with the standards process to save his mate. And it was all rapidly downhill from there. A year later and the die was cast, with very little involvement from the opposition.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,664
    edited November 21

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    Its a pretty weak link, though, isn't it?

    If you don't qualify and you don't have alternative income you have to use up yet more admin time in applying for some sort of credit instead.
  • Barnesian said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    He's not going to fire Reeves!
    She’s polling worse than Starmer!

    https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/11/19/a-promising-start-for-kemi-badenoch/
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,407

    Labour have only been in power for 140 days but there’s a palpable sense of disappointment - not just on here but in organs like the FT which reflect, if not shape, global business opinion.

    Reeves gave a great Mais Lecture at the beginning of this year, and there’s no shortage of what I might New Model Growthers floating around the Labour tent. As I’ve posted before, what is missing is an overall sense of strategy - a reason to believe.

    Something has gone very wrong.
    I’m not sure Starmer has the imagination to course-correct.

    We await the second coming of Maggie. Starmer cannot hold.
    This is a 1974-1979 Labour government.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,220

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    Paying income tax becomes the qualification.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,700

    Barnesian said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    He's not going to fire Reeves!
    She’s polling worse than Starmer!

    https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/11/19/a-promising-start-for-kemi-badenoch/
    She wont be CoE by next GE is my prediction. Possibly gone as soon as next May's reshuffle.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,721

    Barnesian said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    He's not going to fire Reeves!
    She’s polling worse than Starmer!

    https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/11/19/a-promising-start-for-kemi-badenoch/
    She wont be CoE by next GE is my prediction. Possibly gone as soon as next May's reshuffle.
    Chancellor getting sacked after a poorly received first budget? Sounds a bit Kwasi!
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,574

    Barnesian said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    He's not going to fire Reeves!
    She’s polling worse than Starmer!

    https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/11/19/a-promising-start-for-kemi-badenoch/
    She wont be CoE by next GE is my prediction. Possibly gone as soon as next May's reshuffle.
    That would smack of a "relaunch". No government with this majority should need a relaunch. And, I don't think they want that narrative - seems desperate. So, I think she stays.

    Unless, of course, more and sufficient allegations come to light.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,620
    edited November 21

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    Paying income tax becomes the qualification.
    That would be bad news for humble and working class people who receive income via dividends etc.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,174

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    You don't need to pay any NI to qualify for the state pension in a year.

    You simply amend the "deemed paid" flag to people's record.

    e.g.

    1997 to 1998 Full year View details
    You have contributions from

    National Insurance credits: 53 weeks

    These may have been added to your record if you were ill/disabled, unemployed, caring for someone full-time or on jury service.

  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    edited November 21

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    Paying income tax becomes the qualification.
    Make the state pension and unemployment/disability benefit the same thing. Entitlement comes from inability to work, not age, and entitlement through “paying in” goes away. Phase in from one year after I am due to claim my various pensions.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,789
    Poor figures for Labour and it's only going to get worse. The Tories will be in the lead on the economy by the middle of next year and it's because the outgoing government handed over 1.2% growth in H1 and Labour has trashed it in record time while putting up taxes by an unnecessary amount.

    Everyone is going to feel worse off and Labour will take the blame for it as desperate as they are to try and push it on the previous government, businesses or anyone except themselves.

    These next few years are going to be painful for everyone and I think the Tories need policies that will cut spending and cut public sector employment by a substantial number. We will continue down the road to Argentina if the Tories do nothing, a tax and spend death spiral.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,220

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    Paying income tax becomes the qualification.
    That would be bad news for humble and working class people who receive income via dividends etc.
    Don’t you mean scumbag rich tax avoiders? Probably farmers as well.

    Seriously, same as NI. Pay a token amount to qualify.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,174

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    Paying income tax becomes the qualification.
    That would be bad news for humble and working class people who receive income via dividends etc.
    Don’t you mean scumbag rich tax avoiders? Probably farmers as well.

    Seriously, same as NI. Pay a token amount to qualify.
    I've got 3 years missing, 2 years "deemed paid", 1 year with a whole £10.90 but counting as a full year to my record. It's also why people should register as unemployed even if they are entitled to £0.00 whilst being unemployed as a result of savings/equity.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,375
    edited November 21
    Well, I don't quite share the gloom and doom felt by most others on here on Labour's prospects, despite the admittedly shaky start. It's very early days, and those hoping for an economic renaissance after 5 months or so are not being realistic - let's see where we are in, say, 2027.

    Other than the economy, two other key metrics on which the government will be judged are NHS performance and legal/illegal immigration. On both these, I reckon early indicators are more promising. I think NHS waiting lists will fall quite quickly over the next two years. Legal migration will decline (I know, mainly because of actions taken by the previous government), and I judge some progress will be made on reducing small boat crossings: already, deportations of illegal migrants are up a fair bit, and combined with other stuff being done this will have a deterrent effect.

    All to play for, I reckon, despite most people talking Britain down currently. There's still plenty of time for Starmer et al to under-promise and over-deliver. He's quite happy to eschew early popularity to pave the way for future dividends - nobody could accuse the government of taking easy decisions to court opinion poll popularity in its early days.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061

    Labour have only been in power for 140 days but there’s a palpable sense of disappointment - not just on here but in organs like the FT which reflect, if not shape, global business opinion.

    Reeves gave a great Mais Lecture at the beginning of this year, and there’s no shortage of what I might New Model Growthers floating around the Labour tent. As I’ve posted before, what is missing is an overall sense of strategy - a reason to believe.

    Something has gone very wrong.
    I’m not sure Starmer has the imagination to course-correct.

    We await the second coming of Maggie. Starmer cannot hold.
    She out in place some of the problems we're grappling with now.
    "Another Maggie" is not the answer.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    MaxPB said:

    Poor figures for Labour and it's only going to get worse. The Tories will be in the lead on the economy by the middle of next year and it's because the outgoing government handed over 1.2% growth in H1 and Labour has trashed it in record time while putting up taxes by an unnecessary amount.

    Everyone is going to feel worse off and Labour will take the blame for it as desperate as they are to try and push it on the previous government, businesses or anyone except themselves.

    These next few years are going to be painful for everyone and I think the Tories need policies that will cut spending and cut public sector employment by a substantial number. We will continue down the road to Argentina if the Tories do nothing, a tax and spend death spiral.

    Healthcare and welfare is the ballgame. It’s easier for a Labour government to reform then so I was rather hoping they would. They won’t, will they?

    My instinct is that we need to radically rethink primary care, and obviously we need a proper answer on social care.
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,292
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    Perhaps he could ennoble Ed Balls and bring him in? Though I can't see wanting to give up his lucrative media career now.
    Pat McFadden and Douglas Alexander are other out there possibilities.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,603
    Nigelb said:

    Labour have only been in power for 140 days but there’s a palpable sense of disappointment - not just on here but in organs like the FT which reflect, if not shape, global business opinion.

    Reeves gave a great Mais Lecture at the beginning of this year, and there’s no shortage of what I might New Model Growthers floating around the Labour tent. As I’ve posted before, what is missing is an overall sense of strategy - a reason to believe.

    Something has gone very wrong.
    I’m not sure Starmer has the imagination to course-correct.

    We await the second coming of Maggie. Starmer cannot hold.
    She out in place some of the problems we're grappling with now.
    "Another Maggie" is not the answer.
    "Another Maggie" in the sense of someone with the conviction and determination required to break the status quo, rather than someone who will bring in a caricature of her policies.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    Perhaps he could ennoble Ed Balls and bring him in? Though I can't see wanting to give up his lucrative media career now.
    Pat McFadden and Douglas Alexander are other out there possibilities.
    In one of those ironies, the Second Lord of the Treasury needs to be an MP and not in the Lords.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061

    Nigelb said:

    Labour have only been in power for 140 days but there’s a palpable sense of disappointment - not just on here but in organs like the FT which reflect, if not shape, global business opinion.

    Reeves gave a great Mais Lecture at the beginning of this year, and there’s no shortage of what I might New Model Growthers floating around the Labour tent. As I’ve posted before, what is missing is an overall sense of strategy - a reason to believe.

    Something has gone very wrong.
    I’m not sure Starmer has the imagination to course-correct.

    We await the second coming of Maggie. Starmer cannot hold.
    She out in place some of the problems we're grappling with now.
    "Another Maggie" is not the answer.
    "Another Maggie" in the sense of someone with the conviction and determination required to break the status quo, rather than someone who will bring in a caricature of her policies.
    Caricature is a nice spin.

    One of the many reasons Britain is skint is because the Chancellor spends all day writing subsidy cheques to foreign companies.
    Direct result of actual Thatcherism.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,044

    Barnesian said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    He's not going to fire Reeves!
    She’s polling worse than Starmer!

    https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/11/19/a-promising-start-for-kemi-badenoch/
    She wont be CoE by next GE is my prediction. Possibly gone as soon as next May's reshuffle.
    You think she'll leave the CoE in protest over Welby? Maybe...
  • Well, I don't quite share the gloom and doom felt by most others on here on Labour's prospects, despite the admittedly shaky start. It's very early days, and those hoping for an economic renaissance after 5 months or so are not being realistic - let's see where we are in, say, 2027.

    Other than the economy, two other key metrics on which the government will be judged are NHS performance and legal/illegal immigration. On both these, I reckon early indicators are more promising. I think NHS waiting lists will fall quite quickly over the next two years. Legal migration will decline (I know, mainly because of actions taken by the previous government), and I judge some progress will be made on reducing small boat crossings: already, deportations of illegal migrants are up a fair bit, and combined with other stuff being done this will have a deterrent effect.

    All to play for, I reckon, despite most people talking Britain down currently. There's still plenty of time for Starmer et al to under-promise and over-deliver. He's quite happy to eschew early popularity to pave the way for future dividends - nobody could accuse the government of taking easy decisions to court opinion poll popularity in its early days.

    That’s called doing a Maggie (and Dave pbuh).

    Perhaps Starmer is the new Maggie?
  • Well, I don't quite share the gloom and doom felt by most others on here on Labour's prospects, despite the admittedly shaky start. It's very early days, and those hoping for an economic renaissance after 5 months or so are not being realistic - let's see where we are in, say, 2027.

    Other than the economy, two other key metrics on which the government will be judged are NHS performance and legal/illegal immigration. On both these, I reckon early indicators are more promising. I think NHS waiting lists will fall quite quickly over the next two years. Legal migration will decline (I know, mainly because of actions taken by the previous government), and I judge some progress will be made on reducing small boat crossings: already, deportations of illegal migrants are up a fair bit, and combined with other stuff being done this will have a deterrent effect.

    All to play for, I reckon, despite most people talking Britain down currently. There's still plenty of time for Starmer et al to under-promise and over-deliver. He's quite happy to eschew early popularity to pave the way for future dividends - nobody could accuse the government of taking easy decisions to court opinion poll popularity in its early days.

    On your last paragraph the biggest culprits for talking Britain down were Starmer and Reeves who actually caused the loss of confidence by business
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,603
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Labour have only been in power for 140 days but there’s a palpable sense of disappointment - not just on here but in organs like the FT which reflect, if not shape, global business opinion.

    Reeves gave a great Mais Lecture at the beginning of this year, and there’s no shortage of what I might New Model Growthers floating around the Labour tent. As I’ve posted before, what is missing is an overall sense of strategy - a reason to believe.

    Something has gone very wrong.
    I’m not sure Starmer has the imagination to course-correct.

    We await the second coming of Maggie. Starmer cannot hold.
    She out in place some of the problems we're grappling with now.
    "Another Maggie" is not the answer.
    "Another Maggie" in the sense of someone with the conviction and determination required to break the status quo, rather than someone who will bring in a caricature of her policies.
    Caricature is a nice spin.

    One of the many reasons Britain is skint is because the Chancellor spends all day writing subsidy cheques to foreign companies.
    Direct result of actual Thatcherism.
    Many of the negative things attributed to Thatcherism were actually caused by embracing the single market.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,375

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Who could Starmer go for as new chancellor ?

    Cooper looks the only serious alternative to my eyes tbh.

    Darren Jones would be my pick.
    Too tied in with Reeves I reckon, was hopeless last time I heard him on the morning round.

    Starmer would cop a massive loss of authority from firing Reeves tho.
    Perhaps he could ennoble Ed Balls and bring him in? Though I can't see wanting to give up his lucrative media career now.
    Pat McFadden and Douglas Alexander are other out there possibilities.
    I'm a big fan of Pat McFadden. He has a lovely voice, and his calmness under pressure is terribly reassuring. He's also pretty smart.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,789
    biggles said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor figures for Labour and it's only going to get worse. The Tories will be in the lead on the economy by the middle of next year and it's because the outgoing government handed over 1.2% growth in H1 and Labour has trashed it in record time while putting up taxes by an unnecessary amount.

    Everyone is going to feel worse off and Labour will take the blame for it as desperate as they are to try and push it on the previous government, businesses or anyone except themselves.

    These next few years are going to be painful for everyone and I think the Tories need policies that will cut spending and cut public sector employment by a substantial number. We will continue down the road to Argentina if the Tories do nothing, a tax and spend death spiral.

    Healthcare and welfare is the ballgame. It’s easier for a Labour government to reform then so I was rather hoping they would. They won’t, will they?

    My instinct is that we need to radically rethink primary care, and obviously we need a proper answer on social care.
    Social care needs a mandatory insurance provision that averages around £300 per person per year over 50. Not anything that will break the bank and subsidies available for people on low or fixed incomes. That would generate around £6bn per year which would fully fund social care at a stroke for everyone and it gets older people paying for their own care for just £10-12k lifetime insurance costs. Sure not everyone is going to need to use it but once people have it they'll wonder how we ever lived without the concept because the insurance will just handle all costs from day one without the hassle of having so sell property and with the risk so widely distributed over ~20m people there's no need for huge risk premiums as there would be now for the few people who would voluntarily purchase insurance of this kind.

    As for healthcare shoveling money at the problem isn't the answer. It's all going to get pissed up the wall and the NHS management will be back asking for another £20bn in two years. It is a money pit and junking the whole system seems like the only way out right now.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    Paying income tax becomes the qualification.
    Fine.
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    Paying income tax becomes the qualification.
    That would be bad news for humble and working class people who receive income via dividends etc.
    Don’t you mean scumbag rich tax avoiders? Probably farmers as well.

    Seriously, same as NI. Pay a token amount to qualify.
    I've got 3 years missing, 2 years "deemed paid", 1 year with a whole £10.90 but counting as a full year to my record. It's also why people should register as unemployed even if they are entitled to £0.00 whilst being unemployed as a result of savings/equity.
    Yes, I should probably re-check my own record on that point.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,897
    So she's better than the last two years of the Tories and she's only been there for 6 months.......

    Where's the scoop?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,174

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    Paying income tax becomes the qualification.
    Fine.
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour have been truely bad for business. Every business owner I've spoken to (and there's been a few) have said that labour have done nothing for business and nothing for growth.

    I know it would have been even less popular, but would employee NI (Or better yet income tax) have been better (in the round) to whack the tax onto as the impact would have been (On it's own) deflationary (Less money in the economy) rather than inflationary (Businesses need to put prices up due to increased costs) ?

    I get the feeling employer NI aside from the electoral benefit of not giving people a direct pay cut is actually the worst way economically to raise more tax...
    Not sure how much it would have raised but I would have preferred to see NI extended to all work - particularly those over retirement age who can still work without paying NI - and some way found to add it to unearned income as well.
    Fold NI into Income tax. This will save a fortune in administration as well.
    This all depends on breaking the link between NI and qualification for the state pension.
    Paying income tax becomes the qualification.
    That would be bad news for humble and working class people who receive income via dividends etc.
    Don’t you mean scumbag rich tax avoiders? Probably farmers as well.

    Seriously, same as NI. Pay a token amount to qualify.
    I've got 3 years missing, 2 years "deemed paid", 1 year with a whole £10.90 but counting as a full year to my record. It's also why people should register as unemployed even if they are entitled to £0.00 whilst being unemployed as a result of savings/equity.
    Yes, I should probably re-check my own record on that point.
    https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/check-your-state-pension/account/nirecord
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,375

    Well, I don't quite share the gloom and doom felt by most others on here on Labour's prospects, despite the admittedly shaky start. It's very early days, and those hoping for an economic renaissance after 5 months or so are not being realistic - let's see where we are in, say, 2027.

    Other than the economy, two other key metrics on which the government will be judged are NHS performance and legal/illegal immigration. On both these, I reckon early indicators are more promising. I think NHS waiting lists will fall quite quickly over the next two years. Legal migration will decline (I know, mainly because of actions taken by the previous government), and I judge some progress will be made on reducing small boat crossings: already, deportations of illegal migrants are up a fair bit, and combined with other stuff being done this will have a deterrent effect.

    All to play for, I reckon, despite most people talking Britain down currently. There's still plenty of time for Starmer et al to under-promise and over-deliver. He's quite happy to eschew early popularity to pave the way for future dividends - nobody could accuse the government of taking easy decisions to court opinion poll popularity in its early days.

    That’s called doing a Maggie (and Dave pbuh).

    Perhaps Starmer is the new Maggie?
    In the sense that he sticks to his guns and is not swayed by the fluff of popular opinion or what the papers say, yes. Farmers are to Starmer what miners were to Thatcher, for example.
    Politically, no - thank god.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,308
    biggles said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor figures for Labour and it's only going to get worse. The Tories will be in the lead on the economy by the middle of next year and it's because the outgoing government handed over 1.2% growth in H1 and Labour has trashed it in record time while putting up taxes by an unnecessary amount.

    Everyone is going to feel worse off and Labour will take the blame for it as desperate as they are to try and push it on the previous government, businesses or anyone except themselves.

    These next few years are going to be painful for everyone and I think the Tories need policies that will cut spending and cut public sector employment by a substantial number. We will continue down the road to Argentina if the Tories do nothing, a tax and spend death spiral.

    Healthcare and welfare is the ballgame. It’s easier for a Labour government to reform then so I was rather hoping they would. They won’t, will they?

    My instinct is that we need to radically rethink primary care, and obviously we need a proper answer on social care.
    Labour touches the forelock to the BMA, as does the BBC, which is why the NHS will continue to be an institution that puts its employees, and in particular its exaggerated hierarchy, well above the needs of patients.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Labour have only been in power for 140 days but there’s a palpable sense of disappointment - not just on here but in organs like the FT which reflect, if not shape, global business opinion.

    Reeves gave a great Mais Lecture at the beginning of this year, and there’s no shortage of what I might New Model Growthers floating around the Labour tent. As I’ve posted before, what is missing is an overall sense of strategy - a reason to believe.

    Something has gone very wrong.
    I’m not sure Starmer has the imagination to course-correct.

    We await the second coming of Maggie. Starmer cannot hold.
    She out in place some of the problems we're grappling with now.
    "Another Maggie" is not the answer.
    "Another Maggie" in the sense of someone with the conviction and determination required to break the status quo, rather than someone who will bring in a caricature of her policies.
    Caricature is a nice spin.

    One of the many reasons Britain is skint is because the Chancellor spends all day writing subsidy cheques to foreign companies.
    Direct result of actual Thatcherism.
    Many of the negative things attributed to Thatcherism were actually caused by embracing the single market.
    That was not.
    The sale of Thames Water, for example, to an Australian firm of blaggers, who extracted billions, had little to do with the EU.

    And the Single Market, of course, was a project enthusiastically backed by Mrs T.
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,292

    Well, I don't quite share the gloom and doom felt by most others on here on Labour's prospects, despite the admittedly shaky start. It's very early days, and those hoping for an economic renaissance after 5 months or so are not being realistic - let's see where we are in, say, 2027.

    Other than the economy, two other key metrics on which the government will be judged are NHS performance and legal/illegal immigration. On both these, I reckon early indicators are more promising. I think NHS waiting lists will fall quite quickly over the next two years. Legal migration will decline (I know, mainly because of actions taken by the previous government), and I judge some progress will be made on reducing small boat crossings: already, deportations of illegal migrants are up a fair bit, and combined with other stuff being done this will have a deterrent effect.

    All to play for, I reckon, despite most people talking Britain down currently. There's still plenty of time for Starmer et al to under-promise and over-deliver. He's quite happy to eschew early popularity to pave the way for future dividends - nobody could accuse the government of taking easy decisions to court opinion poll popularity in its early days.

    I think in terms of the economy it should be bore in mind.
    -The OBR does think the October budget will lead to increased growth... albeit in the 2030s after the next GE.
    -The OBR might well be underestimating growth: https://www.ippr.org/articles/second-round-effects
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    MaxPB said:

    biggles said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor figures for Labour and it's only going to get worse. The Tories will be in the lead on the economy by the middle of next year and it's because the outgoing government handed over 1.2% growth in H1 and Labour has trashed it in record time while putting up taxes by an unnecessary amount.

    Everyone is going to feel worse off and Labour will take the blame for it as desperate as they are to try and push it on the previous government, businesses or anyone except themselves.

    These next few years are going to be painful for everyone and I think the Tories need policies that will cut spending and cut public sector employment by a substantial number. We will continue down the road to Argentina if the Tories do nothing, a tax and spend death spiral.

    Healthcare and welfare is the ballgame. It’s easier for a Labour government to reform then so I was rather hoping they would. They won’t, will they?

    My instinct is that we need to radically rethink primary care, and obviously we need a proper answer on social care.
    Social care needs a mandatory insurance provision that averages around £300 per person per year over 50. Not anything that will break the bank and subsidies available for people on low or fixed incomes. That would generate around £6bn per year which would fully fund social care at a stroke for everyone and it gets older people paying for their own care for just £10-12k lifetime insurance costs. Sure not everyone is going to need to use it but once people have it they'll wonder how we ever lived without the concept because the insurance will just handle all costs from day one without the hassle of having so sell property and with the risk so widely distributed over ~20m people there's no need for huge risk premiums as there would be now for the few people who would voluntarily purchase insurance of this kind.

    As for healthcare shoveling money at the problem isn't the answer. It's all going to get pissed up the wall and the NHS management will be back asking for another £20bn in two years. It is a money pit and junking the whole system seems like the only way out right now.
    I agree on social care. I mostly agree on healthcare but you do have to take the public with you. I think we start with hypothecating healthcare taxes. That gives you space to change the relationship people have with the NHS from “the benign, free, NHS God will save me when I need it so long as I make the appropriate sacrifice” to “I pay for a service here”.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,375
    MaxPB said:

    biggles said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor figures for Labour and it's only going to get worse. The Tories will be in the lead on the economy by the middle of next year and it's because the outgoing government handed over 1.2% growth in H1 and Labour has trashed it in record time while putting up taxes by an unnecessary amount.

    Everyone is going to feel worse off and Labour will take the blame for it as desperate as they are to try and push it on the previous government, businesses or anyone except themselves.

    These next few years are going to be painful for everyone and I think the Tories need policies that will cut spending and cut public sector employment by a substantial number. We will continue down the road to Argentina if the Tories do nothing, a tax and spend death spiral.

    Healthcare and welfare is the ballgame. It’s easier for a Labour government to reform then so I was rather hoping they would. They won’t, will they?

    My instinct is that we need to radically rethink primary care, and obviously we need a proper answer on social care.
    Social care needs a mandatory insurance provision that averages around £300 per person per year over 50. Not anything that will break the bank and subsidies available for people on low or fixed incomes. That would generate around £6bn per year which would fully fund social care at a stroke for everyone and it gets older people paying for their own care for just £10-12k lifetime insurance costs. Sure not everyone is going to need to use it but once people have it they'll wonder how we ever lived without the concept because the insurance will just handle all costs from day one without the hassle of having so sell property and with the risk so widely distributed over ~20m people there's no need for huge risk premiums as there would be now for the few people who would voluntarily purchase insurance of this kind.

    As for healthcare shoveling money at the problem isn't the answer. It's all going to get pissed up the wall and the NHS management will be back asking for another £20bn in two years. It is a money pit and junking the whole system seems like the only way out right now.
    Gosh. I agree with your first paragraph.
    I wish you'd done two posts, so that I could 'like' the first paragraph and 'dislike' the second.
  • The universal nature of the NHS will need to come under scrutiny not least when it is consuming so much of the nations income

    I know it is a religion, but the time must come where insurance plays a part and free to all, no matter how wealthy, is changed so the broadest shoulders pay their fair share
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,239
    Fucksake. 4pm. Getting dark already
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,308
    Roger said:

    So she's better than the last two years of the Tories and she's only been there for 6 months.......

    Where's the scoop?

    She has full on lied on her CV. In any other walk of life that would be gross misconduct that would lead to dismissal.

    Johnson was quite correctly ousted for lying. Reeves should resign, and if the liar does not, she should be sacked or Starmer is no better than Johnson.
  • Roger said:

    So she's better than the last two years of the Tories and she's only been there for 6 months.......

    Where's the scoop?

    Actually Sunak and Hunt stabilised the economy after Truss's six weeks disaster and achieved the highest growth in the G7

    Starmer and Reeves trash talked the economy for misconceived political gain, and then produced a catastrophic budget that unravels day by day and is now hurting the future prospects of growth
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,375
    edited November 21
    Leon said:

    Fucksake. 4pm. Getting dark already

    Wasn't it 'dark already' yesterday? Today it's 'getting dark already'. You think we've turned the corner?
  • Leon said:

    Fucksake. 4pm. Getting dark already

    Only just. It is light enough that you could easily read an SK Tremayne novel in a London park, aside from the cold.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,220

    Well, I don't quite share the gloom and doom felt by most others on here on Labour's prospects, despite the admittedly shaky start. It's very early days, and those hoping for an economic renaissance after 5 months or so are not being realistic - let's see where we are in, say, 2027.

    Other than the economy, two other key metrics on which the government will be judged are NHS performance and legal/illegal immigration. On both these, I reckon early indicators are more promising. I think NHS waiting lists will fall quite quickly over the next two years. Legal migration will decline (I know, mainly because of actions taken by the previous government), and I judge some progress will be made on reducing small boat crossings: already, deportations of illegal migrants are up a fair bit, and combined with other stuff being done this will have a deterrent effect.

    All to play for, I reckon, despite most people talking Britain down currently. There's still plenty of time for Starmer et al to under-promise and over-deliver. He's quite happy to eschew early popularity to pave the way for future dividends - nobody could accuse the government of taking easy decisions to court opinion poll popularity in its early days.

    On your last paragraph the biggest culprits for talking Britain down were Starmer and Reeves who actually caused the loss of confidence by business
    A budget that increases costs on business won’t spontaneously create growth? Shock! Horror!
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,773
    Leon said:

    Fucksake. 4pm. Getting dark already

    Go west, young man. Still bright here west of the Pennines.

    Of course, the sun comes up later here too. But presumably that doesn't trouble a flint knapper.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,239
    edited November 21
    Has anyone else got an Apple 16 pro Max but NOT Apple Intelligence?

    I've done all the necessary things, switched to US English, got a US voice for Siri, which should apparently block any problems, but still no Apple Intelligence

    Yes, I have heard that Apple Intelligence is about as intelligent as a pigeon recently squashed under a 29 Bus but still, it would be nice to have the option. Otherwise my shiny new phone is barely distinguishable from my Apple 13, which was about 8 iterations go. Smartphones have stopped improving
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,220
    Leon said:

    Fucksake. 4pm. Getting dark already

    I blame The Trans Gay Woke Illegal Immigrant Alien AIs
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061
    Leon said:

    Has anyone else got an Apple 16 pro Max but NOT Apple Intelligence?

    I've done all the necessary things, switched to US English, got a US voice for Siri, which should apparently block any problems, but still no Apple Intelligence

    Yes, I have heard that Apple Intelligence is about as intelligent as a pigeon recently squashed under a 29 Bus but still, it would be nice to have the option. Otherwise my shiny new phone is barely distinguishable from my Apple 13, which was about 8 iterations go. Smartphones have stopped improving

    So you're saying you do have Apple intelligence?
  • Roger said:

    So she's better than the last two years of the Tories and she's only been there for 6 months.......

    Where's the scoop?

    She has full on lied on her CV. In any other walk of life that would be gross misconduct that would lead to dismissal.

    Johnson was quite correctly ousted for lying. Reeves should resign, and if the liar does not, she should be sacked or Starmer is no better than Johnson.
    First, has she lied or did she merely stretch the actualité?

    Second, what has her CV to do with her election to parliament or appointment as Chancellor?

    It is not as if anyone called for Tony Blair to resign over his claimed favourite meal changing with latitude, or David Cameron over his support for West Villa United (although there was a bit of a fuss over Blair and Jackie Milburn).
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,239

    Leon said:

    Fucksake. 4pm. Getting dark already

    Wasn't it 'dark already' yesterday? Today it's 'getting dark already'. You think we've turned the corner?
    It's actually a beautiful crisp dry cold clear day, slant winter sunshine in the trees of Regent's Park, all glamorous black against bluey-gold. If the British winter was like this for 3 months I could cope much better. But of course it ain't
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,308
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Has anyone else got an Apple 16 pro Max but NOT Apple Intelligence?

    I've done all the necessary things, switched to US English, got a US voice for Siri, which should apparently block any problems, but still no Apple Intelligence

    Yes, I have heard that Apple Intelligence is about as intelligent as a pigeon recently squashed under a 29 Bus but still, it would be nice to have the option. Otherwise my shiny new phone is barely distinguishable from my Apple 13, which was about 8 iterations go. Smartphones have stopped improving

    So you're saying you do have Apple intelligence?
    Are you suggesting that @Leon has the intellectual ability of an edible fruit?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,773

    The universal nature of the NHS will need to come under scrutiny not least when it is consuming so much of the nations income

    I know it is a religion, but the time must come where insurance plays a part and free to all, no matter how wealthy, is changed so the broadest shoulders pay their fair share

    Arguably those with the broadest shoulders already do pay their share. The rich pay far more in tax than the poor, to a larger extent than most western countries.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061
    Maybe Watchkeeper isn't quite as rubbish after all...
    (It is rubbish.)

    How not to build a drone
    How the EU spent 16 years and €8 billion on a drone that may never fly
    https://press.airstreet.com/p/how-not-to-build-a-drone

    They should just have bought one of the new Turkish designs and fitted their own avionics.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Has anyone else got an Apple 16 pro Max but NOT Apple Intelligence?

    I've done all the necessary things, switched to US English, got a US voice for Siri, which should apparently block any problems, but still no Apple Intelligence

    Yes, I have heard that Apple Intelligence is about as intelligent as a pigeon recently squashed under a 29 Bus but still, it would be nice to have the option. Otherwise my shiny new phone is barely distinguishable from my Apple 13, which was about 8 iterations go. Smartphones have stopped improving

    So you're saying you do have Apple intelligence?
    Are you suggesting that @Leon has the intellectual ability of an edible fruit?
    In his own words - "still no Apple intelligence".
    (I deleted a capital letter, as he habitually overuses them.)
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,664
    edited November 21
    Nigelb said:

    Maybe Watchkeeper isn't quite as rubbish after all...
    (It is rubbish.)

    How not to build a drone
    How the EU spent 16 years and €8 billion on a drone that may never fly
    https://press.airstreet.com/p/how-not-to-build-a-drone

    They should just have bought one of the new Turkish designs and fitted their own avionics.

    What happened to Taranis? That at least looked the part. But it first flew over a decade ago I think? Not much noise since.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    Fucksake. 4pm. Getting dark already

    It only gets worse by a whole 12 minutes in the evening from this point.
    Although December 20th/21st is the solstice, earliest sunset is actually December 14th.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,308

    Roger said:

    So she's better than the last two years of the Tories and she's only been there for 6 months.......

    Where's the scoop?

    She has full on lied on her CV. In any other walk of life that would be gross misconduct that would lead to dismissal.

    Johnson was quite correctly ousted for lying. Reeves should resign, and if the liar does not, she should be sacked or Starmer is no better than Johnson.
    First, has she lied or did she merely stretch the actualité?

    Second, what has her CV to do with her election to parliament or appointment as Chancellor?

    It is not as if anyone called for Tony Blair to resign over his claimed favourite meal changing with latitude, or David Cameron over his support for West Villa United (although there was a bit of a fuss over Blair and Jackie Milburn).
    The two latter examples are absurd comparisons that are not relevant.

    She lied on her CV and her LinkedIn profile, both in the duration of her role and the job title and type of organisation, with a clear intent to deceive . It was not a mistake, an exaggeration, or stretching of the truth, it was a full on lie that would be enough, as I say, to cause someone to be fired in any other walk of life.

    Perhaps to some Labour supporters lying is only a bad thing when it is done by Tories?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,643
    edited November 21
    MaxPB said:

    biggles said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor figures for Labour and it's only going to get worse. The Tories will be in the lead on the economy by the middle of next year and it's because the outgoing government handed over 1.2% growth in H1 and Labour has trashed it in record time while putting up taxes by an unnecessary amount.

    Everyone is going to feel worse off and Labour will take the blame for it as desperate as they are to try and push it on the previous government, businesses or anyone except themselves.

    These next few years are going to be painful for everyone and I think the Tories need policies that will cut spending and cut public sector employment by a substantial number. We will continue down the road to Argentina if the Tories do nothing, a tax and spend death spiral.

    Healthcare and welfare is the ballgame. It’s easier for a Labour government to reform then so I was rather hoping they would. They won’t, will they?

    My instinct is that we need to radically rethink primary care, and obviously we need a proper answer on social care.
    Social care needs a mandatory insurance provision that averages around £300 per person per year over 50. Not anything that will break the bank and subsidies available for people on low or fixed incomes. That would generate around £6bn per year which would fully fund social care at a stroke for everyone and it gets older people paying for their own care for just £10-12k lifetime insurance costs. Sure not everyone is going to need to use it but once people have it they'll wonder how we ever lived without the concept because the insurance will just handle all costs from day one without the hassle of having so sell property and with the risk so widely distributed over ~20m people there's no need for huge risk premiums as there would be now for the few people who would voluntarily purchase insurance of this kind.

    As for healthcare shoveling money at the problem isn't the answer. It's all going to get pissed up the wall and the NHS management will be back asking for another £20bn in two years. It is a money pit and junking the whole system seems like the only way out right now.
    I agree with 90% of this. There will be many people idealogically opposed to insurance, but the alternative is taxing working age people for the universal provision of care of (often rich) older people, which is a step this country cannot sustain. Even mandatory flat insurance will be regressive because it will serve to protect large inheritances, but that's a different issue imo.

    Where I disagree is the shovelling of money. I think 11% of GDP on healthcare is fine (17% in the US); I'd boost it to 13% as long as all of the extra money goes on Public Health (perhaps a bit on primary). We have to freeze secondary care in real terms before it's eats all of our tax revenue.

    I think the NHS is capable of doing that, as it did in the past.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,789

    MaxPB said:

    biggles said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor figures for Labour and it's only going to get worse. The Tories will be in the lead on the economy by the middle of next year and it's because the outgoing government handed over 1.2% growth in H1 and Labour has trashed it in record time while putting up taxes by an unnecessary amount.

    Everyone is going to feel worse off and Labour will take the blame for it as desperate as they are to try and push it on the previous government, businesses or anyone except themselves.

    These next few years are going to be painful for everyone and I think the Tories need policies that will cut spending and cut public sector employment by a substantial number. We will continue down the road to Argentina if the Tories do nothing, a tax and spend death spiral.

    Healthcare and welfare is the ballgame. It’s easier for a Labour government to reform then so I was rather hoping they would. They won’t, will they?

    My instinct is that we need to radically rethink primary care, and obviously we need a proper answer on social care.
    Social care needs a mandatory insurance provision that averages around £300 per person per year over 50. Not anything that will break the bank and subsidies available for people on low or fixed incomes. That would generate around £6bn per year which would fully fund social care at a stroke for everyone and it gets older people paying for their own care for just £10-12k lifetime insurance costs. Sure not everyone is going to need to use it but once people have it they'll wonder how we ever lived without the concept because the insurance will just handle all costs from day one without the hassle of having so sell property and with the risk so widely distributed over ~20m people there's no need for huge risk premiums as there would be now for the few people who would voluntarily purchase insurance of this kind.

    As for healthcare shoveling money at the problem isn't the answer. It's all going to get pissed up the wall and the NHS management will be back asking for another £20bn in two years. It is a money pit and junking the whole system seems like the only way out right now.
    Gosh. I agree with your first paragraph.
    I wish you'd done two posts, so that I could 'like' the first paragraph and 'dislike' the second.
    I'm open to ideas on how to fix the NHS but there seems to be nothing forthcoming from Labour (or the Tories for that matter) though I instinctively preferred the Tory method which will give us substantially the same outcomes but for £20bn less spent.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,375
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Fucksake. 4pm. Getting dark already

    Wasn't it 'dark already' yesterday? Today it's 'getting dark already'. You think we've turned the corner?
    It's actually a beautiful crisp dry cold clear day, slant winter sunshine in the trees of Regent's Park, all glamorous black against bluey-gold. If the British winter was like this for 3 months I could cope much better. But of course it ain't
    Back in the 1980s, I lived near Primrose Hill and used to wander up to the top at sunset to watch the skies change on days such as you describe. Beautiful.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,773

    Labour have only been in power for 140 days but there’s a palpable sense of disappointment - not just on here but in organs like the FT which reflect, if not shape, global business opinion.

    Reeves gave a great Mais Lecture at the beginning of this year, and there’s no shortage of what I might New Model Growthers floating around the Labour tent. As I’ve posted before, what is missing is an overall sense of strategy - a reason to believe.

    Something has gone very wrong.
    I’m not sure Starmer has the imagination to course-correct.

    Nothing's gone wrong. Labour increase tax and spend it on their clients - i.e. the public sector unions and the state-adjacent sector. 'Pro-growth' was only ever so much guff and wishful thinking. What's happening is happening by design. This is what Labour do.
    {and yes, the last lot also focused spend on their clients in the 65+ demographic. I'm not playing angels and devils.}
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    Nigelb said:

    Maybe Watchkeeper isn't quite as rubbish after all...
    (It is rubbish.)

    How not to build a drone
    How the EU spent 16 years and €8 billion on a drone that may never fly
    https://press.airstreet.com/p/how-not-to-build-a-drone

    They should just have bought one of the new Turkish designs and fitted their own avionics.

    I’m still waiting for someone to make the Israeli connection on watch keeper. Then I should be able to tick off the whole bingo card.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,375

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Fucksake. 4pm. Getting dark already

    Wasn't it 'dark already' yesterday? Today it's 'getting dark already'. You think we've turned the corner?
    It's actually a beautiful crisp dry cold clear day, slant winter sunshine in the trees of Regent's Park, all glamorous black against bluey-gold. If the British winter was like this for 3 months I could cope much better. But of course it ain't
    Back in the 1980s, I lived near Primrose Hill and used to wander up to the top at sunset to watch the skies change on days such as you describe. Beautiful.
    Edit: you'd like the fact that I rented a flat owned by a Glaswegian who ended up in prison for importing porn videos from Denmark in Danish bacon trucks. He kept the porn in a locked cupboard in the flat.
Sign In or Register to comment.