This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
A cogent, well-constructed Header as usual from Gareth, although slightly despoiled by the inclusion of the (having a) Laffer Curve. But we argued that point on here very recently so all good. Going forward I'd like to propose renaming it the Tax Trade Off Principle - TTOP. It says the following:
"In a free society there comes a point where increasing tax rates reduces tax revenue. It will be different for each tax and will vary with time and circumstances. And nobody knows where it is."
All on board?
No. Lots of people "know" where it is. It is just that they disagree on the answer. Most if not quite all will be wrong.
🙂 yes.
For me - right now - it's 65%.
I think we can be pretty sure of the reverse Laffer effect, then, where individual tax rates are applied on the basis of each taxpayer's personal declared estimate of the Laffer maximum.
For me, it is 50%. When we get beyond the point when the State is making as much as me out of my extra work to where it is getting more I think that causes changes in behaviour which are adverse. So, we see, for example, doctors cutting the number of days, they work, we have seen salary sacrifice policies which the Chancellor now wants to attack, people reluctant to accept promotions to more demanding posts etc. All of these result in the tax take and indeed the economic activity being less than optimal. Of course in the kill zone of £100-120K I am already paying comfortably more than that.
The 40% income tax rate was too much for me. What with NI as well that's close enough to the magic 50% mark.
I refused to pay it and dumped what I could in a pension and cut hours.
Because I dumped money in a pension I now have easily enough to "retire" mid 50s. So I did.
Whilst I might have done that anyway, the tax rate was just encouragement.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
'Ahead of International Men’s Day @Moreincommon_ has new research into a cohort of disillusioned men who have lost faith in the social contract & the idea that hard work will support a good life, don’t think politics respect them & who are turning away from mainstream politics.The research suggests at around one in eight men are deeply disillusioned using this index, they are most likely to be middle aged, and less likely to live in London or to have gone to university..his group of often describe themselves as struggling financially, which also feeds a zero-sum view among some that others are getting ahead as they struggle. Disillusioned men are more likely than average to think progress for women has come at the expense of men..They overwhelmingly blame politicians for the problems that the country is facing, but also migration and the wealthy and big business. They are far more likely than average to say multiculturalism threatens rather than benefits society..Their frustration at the mainstream to deliver the things which will allow them to lead a good life is driving them away from traditional parties. Half of disillusioned men would now vote for Reform UK - and in a sign their distrust isn’t necessarily irreversible a similar number say a Reform win would make them hopeful.'
So looking for just about any scapegoat for their predicament. And another illusory magical solution to it.
The real lesson of such survey results is that governments have to offer hope - and at the very least partially deliver on it.
Otherwise the dice gets rolled on the next implausible idea offering the biggest payoff, however unlikely (see also Brexit).
The last, and this government failed, and are failing on both scores.
Is any of this new? There have always been people (often men) whose life has not lived up to their hopes and are looking for someone to blame. Not saying it's not bad luck for them of course or writing them off. What seems to be new is that we seem to have politicians more ready to pander to people's resentments ather than trying to make things work for this group and more importantly for everyone else.
Politicians being ready to pander to anything in exchange for votes is as old as voting as well. What has changed is social media, and the effectiveness of this strategy. Social media needs to be sin taxed. (Even though it often has poor syntax).
Good thread header. This is the real issue facing this government and it is one that the last government largely dodged. I would add that the increasing cost of our debt burden is another very serious challenge going forward. According to the OBR, " in 2025-26 we expect debt interest spending to total £111.2 billion. That would represent 8.3 per cent of total public spending and is equivalent to over 3.7 per cent of national income."
A lot of our current debt was borrowed at ridiculously low interest rates after the GFC. So a 10 year gilt from 2015, for example, might have had a coupon of 0.2%. When that became repayable this year we obviously did not have the money to repay it so the debt will have been rolled over but at a cost of around 4.5%. A lot of people on here criticised Osborne for not borrowing more to invest and claimed this was shortsighted. This shows how wrong they were. That 8.3% is heading in only 1 direction.
So, we urgently need to cut spending. Much easier said than done of course, especially given the pressures mentioned by Gareth and by me. We need to reduce regulatory costs, we need to reduce the head count in the public sector substantially, we need to stop wasting money on never ending inquiries which tell us the same things again and again (and which, as @Cyclefree points out, we normally ignore). Its a huge challenge for any government and politically it is a particular challenge for Labour. But it needs to be done.
I am all for a balanced budget, but be realistic on public headcount. After 15 years of austerity how much fat is there to cut in our criminal justice system for example? The way to cut costs there is to restrict what is permitted, for example greatly restricting the right to appeal.
Similarly in my line of work (my Trust is reducing headcount this year by 7% already). What treatments on the NHS do we stop?
On your latter point, IVF.
Given our low birthrate certainly not
IVF makes a negligible contribution to overall birthrate.
If people want to use IVF, fair enough, but not funded by the taxpayer.
You really are a misanthrope.
Poor people as well as rich people struggle to conceive children.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
- Remove winter fuel allowance & other add on benefits. - Child benefit for first child only - End the triple lock - Cut back the number of diversity officers - there are at least 500 in central government according to a recent FoI request and the number has increased since Labour came into power - Prescription charges: reduce the number of exemptions and increase payments - Foreign aid: what actually is it being spent on and which countries - More charges for council services above the bare minimum - Stop or drastically reduce funding of lobby groups - No money in current budget for AD - where is the money for that to come from? If people want it they should pay for it themselves. - Social care - people with savings need to use those first. The rainy day has arrived so that is what the savings are for.
On the tax side - - raise income tax and extend NI ultimately combining the two - add council tax bands at the top end rather than faff around with extra taxes - Extend VAT - we have more exemptions than many other countries - Get rid of cliff edges - Reduce pension tax relief to the basic rate - Freeze thresholds
Once there is a path to a reduced deficit and growth then can think of reducing tax. But I would make the priority proper investment in infrastructure and high quality competent permanent staff rather than endless locums and consultants.
Some sensible measures but given our fertility rate is now just 1.45 we need to increase child benefit for the first two children if anything. I would means test not end triple lock and savings already have to be used to pay for social care except the home for at home care which after the dementia tax disaster won't change.
On tax it is likely Reeves will increase higher council tax bands and freeze thresholds and reduce pension relief anyway. I would ringfence national insurance for JSA, the state pension and some social care not merge it with income tax
Means testing benefits just creates unfair cliff edges all over the place. It is much simpler and less costly to administer to have universal benefits and recover the extra money spent by higher income tax rates for those paying more than the basic rate of income tax.
No as that costs economic growth with that higher income tax
Yet you have no issue with the 55% taper on UC?
You lose far less of your benefits for every extra day worked than you did before UC when Brown was Chancellor and PM
'Ahead of International Men’s Day @Moreincommon_ has new research into a cohort of disillusioned men who have lost faith in the social contract & the idea that hard work will support a good life, don’t think politics respect them & who are turning away from mainstream politics.The research suggests at around one in eight men are deeply disillusioned using this index, they are most likely to be middle aged, and less likely to live in London or to have gone to university..his group of often describe themselves as struggling financially, which also feeds a zero-sum view among some that others are getting ahead as they struggle. Disillusioned men are more likely than average to think progress for women has come at the expense of men..They overwhelmingly blame politicians for the problems that the country is facing, but also migration and the wealthy and big business. They are far more likely than average to say multiculturalism threatens rather than benefits society..Their frustration at the mainstream to deliver the things which will allow them to lead a good life is driving them away from traditional parties. Half of disillusioned men would now vote for Reform UK - and in a sign their distrust isn’t necessarily irreversible a similar number say a Reform win would make them hopeful.'
So looking for just about any scapegoat for their predicament. And another illusory magical solution to it.
The real lesson of such survey results is that governments have to offer hope - and at the very least partially deliver on it.
Otherwise the dice gets rolled on the next implausible idea offering the biggest payoff, however unlikely (see also Brexit).
The last, and this government failed, and are failing on both scores.
Is any of this new? There have always been people (often men) whose life has not lived up to their hopes and are looking for someone to blame. Not saying it's not bad luck for them of course or writing them off. What seems to be new is that we seem to have politicians more ready to pander to people's resentments ather than trying to make things work for this group and more importantly for everyone else.
No, of course it's not. It's just that over the last two decades, the numbers of the disillusioned, and the political salience of such appeals to them, have grown to dominate our politics.
For anyone suggesting cuts - please point out where they can come from
Seriously the only way to cut things would be to stop doing X, so tell me what things you don't want the public sector to do..
Planning.
Replace with a cleaner zonal system and for land zoned for development let people build what they want on their own land, so long as it is to code, without begging for permission first. Like works very well in Japan.
We would have massive economic growth as people stop obstructing developments and we could axe people working in those departments.
That's just one suggestion. Others could make others.
Clive Lewis affirms he would give up his seat for Andy Burnham
Really
That’s funny. Do Labour reckon they have a single safe seat in a by-election right now, if they try and pull a stunt like this?
Burnham would be up against a “man in a white suit”, in a two-horse race.
Norwich South was won by Lewis with 47% with the Greens second last year, zero chance of Reform or the Tories winning it. The Greens would have a shot but Burnham would pitch himself as left of Starmer with Lewis' endorsement but that may make it more difficult for him to win centrist swing voters if he won the seat and became leader
Note neither Ukraine, nor Europe are part of these negotiations.
Scoop: U.S. secretly drafting new plan to end Ukraine war https://www.axios.com/2025/11/19/ukraine-peace-plan-trump-russia-witkoff The Trump administration has been secretly working in consultation with Russia to draft a new plan to end the war in Ukraine, U.S. and Russian officials tell Axios...
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
I'd suggest those on the left focus on the policies Labour are advancing on immigration rather than how they are portrayed in the press. There is a big difference.
i.e - Jewellery confiscated!!! Nazi Labour!!! vs no personal jewellery won't be confiscated but nor is it acceptable to hide wealth by buying countless gold rings and expect others to pay for your keep when you are perfectly capable of doing so yourself.
"Russian spy ship on edge of UK waters uses lasers at RAF pilots, Healey says"
During the 80s, Iranian armed speedboats were doing all kinds of stuff in the Straits of Hormuz. Even trying to sink tankers. One got run over by a tanker..
Anyway, they liked shit talking US warships on the radio - “we will sink you blah blah”. So the story goes, a US Captain got bored with their shit and turned his radar to full power.
The speedboat was dead in the water, not electronics (no engine, radar or radio).
Just left them there…
{narrator: x Megawatts of microwaves at point blank range have consequences}
- Remove winter fuel allowance & other add on benefits. - Child benefit for first child only - End the triple lock - Cut back the number of diversity officers - there are at least 500 in central government according to a recent FoI request and the number has increased since Labour came into power - Prescription charges: reduce the number of exemptions and increase payments - Foreign aid: what actually is it being spent on and which countries - More charges for council services above the bare minimum - Stop or drastically reduce funding of lobby groups - No money in current budget for AD - where is the money for that to come from? If people want it they should pay for it themselves. - Social care - people with savings need to use those first. The rainy day has arrived so that is what the savings are for.
On the tax side - - raise income tax and extend NI ultimately combining the two - add council tax bands at the top end rather than faff around with extra taxes - Extend VAT - we have more exemptions than many other countries - Get rid of cliff edges - Reduce pension tax relief to the basic rate - Freeze thresholds
Once there is a path to a reduced deficit and growth then can think of reducing tax. But I would make the priority proper investment in infrastructure and high quality competent permanent staff rather than endless locums and consultants.
Some sensible measures but given our fertility rate is now just 1.45 we need to increase child benefit for the first two children if anything. I would means test not end triple lock and savings already have to be used to pay for social care except the home for at home care which after the dementia tax disaster won't change.
On tax it is likely Reeves will increase higher council tax bands and freeze thresholds and reduce pension relief anyway. I would ringfence national insurance for JSA, the state pension and some social care not merge it with income tax
In Scotland the home is sold to pay for the care home, so long as it isn't someone else's main home too. It works because council care homes are worse than hell and you wouldn't condemn a loved one to stay in one unless necessary. My feeling about Dementia Tax is, it was a badly managed election campaign that even made Corbyn look acceptable. It is also inevitable. My feeling about Social Care is selling the home isn't enough to stop the whole system crumbling into the sea but maybe it props things up a little.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
Larry Summers steps down from Open AI over Epstein ties.
Wow, too evil to be involved with AI, that is a high hurdle to clear.
He’s certainly fell from whatever grace he had in the last few days. I don’t think people will be rushing to get his thoughts on the economy and bang it on YouTube anymore.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
Clive Lewis affirms he would give up his seat for Andy Burnham
Really
That’s funny. Do Labour reckon they have a single safe seat in a by-election right now, if they try and pull a stunt like this?
Burnham would be up against a “man in a white suit”, in a two-horse race.
Norwich South was won by Lewis with 47% with the Greens second last year, zero chance of Reform or the Tories winning it. The Greens would have a shot but Burnham would pitch himself as left of Starmer with Lewis' endorsement but that may make it more difficult for him to win centrist swing voters if he won the seat and became leader
Centrists would prefer Burnham to Starmer. Their politics are not significantly different enough to matter to anyone bar Labour aficionados. Burnham is a far better communicator and offers a clean slate. Starmer not done much at all with his majority in the first year and a half.
An R4 WATO classic today. A totally sympathetic and unchallenging interview by Lady Brooke aka Sarah Montague with a nice lady about life's sufferings. The nice lady is in a household of two working people with two children and a household income of £67,000. She added that their mortgage was currently fixed from the time of low interest. Apparently their food bill is £100 a week, and has risen from some rather lower figure, (as has mine) and they can't make it the end of the month without using a credit card.
This is broadly the class to which I and my family belong. I contemplate the world and I think I am in the luckiest 5%. Probably 1%. I can think of little more shameful than appearing on the media complaining about it.
"Russian spy ship on edge of UK waters uses lasers at RAF pilots, Healey says"
During the 80s, Iranian armed speedboats were doing all kinds of stuff in the Straits of Hormuz. Even trying to sink tankers. One got run over by a tanker..
Anyway, they liked shit talking US warships on the radio - “we will sink you blah blah”. So the story goes, a US Captain got bored with their shit and turned his radar to full power.
The speedboat was dead in the water, not electronics (no engine, radar or radio).
Just left them there…
{narrator: x Megawatts of microwaves at point blank range have consequences}
It got no international coverage, but the Iranians kidnapped a ship in the Straight of Hormuz a couple of days ago.
An oil tanker heading from UAE to Singapore.
There will be the usual shakedown, followed by an enhanced international presence in the Straight.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You’ve missed the zeitgeist shift. These days, demur ever so slightly on the consensus that immigration is the single most important issue facing the country and the solution is to copy-paste Farage’s policy platform, you get slapped down. Loudly and repeatedly. With lots of name calling.
An R4 WATO classic today. A totally sympathetic and unchallenging interview by Lady Brooke aka Sarah Montague with a nice lady about life's sufferings. The nice lady is in a household of two working people with two children and a household income of £67,000. She added that their mortgage was currently fixed from the time of low interest. Apparently their food bill is £100 a week, and has risen from some rather lower figure, (as has mine) and they can't make it the end of the month without using a credit card.
This is broadly the class to which I and my family belong. I contemplate the world and I think I am in the luckiest 5%. Probably 1%. I can think of little more shameful than appearing on the media complaining about it.
Appearing on the media to advocate pineapple on pizza?
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
What arseholes, eh? No wonder they can't get beyond 11%...
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You’ve missed the zeitgeist shift. These days, demur ever so slightly on the consensus that immigration is the single most important issue facing the country and the solution is to copy-paste Farage’s policy platform, you get slapped down. Loudly and repeatedly. With lots of name calling.
That's an interesting thread header which makes some excellent points.
I have to laugh, though, at dropping in the Laffer curve as if it is undeniable gospel and has anything useful to say. Where's the data behind that (or any) Laffer curve?
I remain of the opinion that we should raise taxes on people like me who are fortunate enough to be in the top quartile of income and/or wealth. We should also ensure ALL income if taxed under the same tax regime (e.g roll NI into income tax). We should have a UK FATCA for expats, and a surcharge property tax on UK real estate owned by non-UK citizens and companies.
That said, I would cut spending in some areas too: * PIP and other disability benefits - tighten the criteria and treat as taxable income. * State Pension - end the triple-lock. * Attendance allowance - means test.
I can't remember if I first saw this on here, but this is quite a good representation of the Laffer Curve. It certainly triggers lefties, but if you're in complete denial if you don't think it exists in some form:
A better graph would be tax base (y) against tax rate (x), which would emphasis the elementary logic behind the curve
Yes, please post that graph, I'd love to see it (and the underlying data that supports it).
Your facile comment is actually asking for a major research exercise which could only realistically be performed by HMRC which holds the key confidential tax data together with an outfit like the OBR which has access to a credible model of the economy with all relevant feedbacks incorporated
@Benpointer Here are some examples of the type of curves I alluded to. Trabandt and Uhlig, "The Laffer curve revisited", Journal of Monetary Economics, 2011 This paper also shows a number of actual Laffer curves for various taxes and various countries with tables and elasticity estimates. https://home.uchicago.edu/~huhlig/papers/uhlig.trabandt.jme.2011.pdf
That's a fascinating graph if it shows what I think it shows. It appears to show that taxing returns to capital at any rate provides a negligible uplift in the total tax take, as the increased capital tax take is offset almost 1:1 with a reduced labour tax take (I think the peak is at about 50% rate rate, but this only produces in increase in total tax take of about 3% of GDP).
I'm not sure how much of a growth feedback loop is already built into this model, but given the labour tax take is probably a reasonable proxy for economic growth, and strong economic growth will increase the tax raised in absolute terms (rather than as a percentage of GDP - important when a lot of government spending is on debt interest), and also considering that the labour tax take is probably inversely linked to the level of spending required on in work benefits, it seems like the we should probably not be taxing returns to capital.
How we get to a steady state like that without the gov running out of money first is an exercise I'll leave to the reader!
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You’ve missed the zeitgeist shift. These days, demur ever so slightly on the consensus that immigration is the single most important issue facing the country and the solution is to copy-paste Farage’s policy platform, you get slapped down. Loudly and repeatedly. With lots of name calling.
An R4 WATO classic today. A totally sympathetic and unchallenging interview by Lady Brooke aka Sarah Montague with a nice lady about life's sufferings. The nice lady is in a household of two working people with two children and a household income of £67,000. She added that their mortgage was currently fixed from the time of low interest. Apparently their food bill is £100 a week, and has risen from some rather lower figure, (as has mine) and they can't make it the end of the month without using a credit card.
This is broadly the class to which I and my family belong. I contemplate the world and I think I am in the luckiest 5%. Probably 1%. I can think of little more shameful than appearing on the media complaining about it.
The frustration may be a wage compression thing. £67000 is about 150% of minimum wage for two people (if both full time). When the minimum wage was introduced in 1998 the equivalent of £67000 then would have been more like 200% of minimum wage. This affects how lucky one feels.
(I wouldn't whore myself out in the media either, of course.)
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You’ve missed the zeitgeist shift. These days, demur ever so slightly on the consensus that immigration is the single most important issue facing the country and the solution is to copy-paste Farage’s policy platform, you get slapped down. Loudly and repeatedly. With lots of name calling.
Possible the old attitude led to the new one.
#FRITLF prize for today. Take a bow.
Need to know what hashtags the kids are using these days to take that bow, Tim.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
Its pretty much the direct opposite. Suggest even timidly that there are economic and other benefits to immigration and you get shouted down, even on here. That is what is stopping any nuanced debate.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
Well that’s not the Lib Dem policy position on migration, or planning, but let’s not let facts get in the way. Let’s instead focus on really “nuanced” ideas like stopping government funding for IVF treatment and abortion.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
Its pretty much the direct opposite. Suggest even timidly that there are economic and other benefits to immigration and you get shouted down, even on here. That is what is stopping any nuanced debate.
There’s massive economic benefits to immigration.
It just needs to be managed properly, without feeding a pyramid scheme, and the existing British population needs to be convinced of the benefits of it.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You’ve missed the zeitgeist shift. These days, demur ever so slightly on the consensus that immigration is the single most important issue facing the country and the solution is to copy-paste Farage’s policy platform, you get slapped down. Loudly and repeatedly. With lots of name calling.
Possible the old attitude led to the new one.
#FRITLF prize for today. Take a bow.
Need to know what hashtags the kids are using these days to take that bow, Tim.
“Far right is the left’s fault”. Pretty much the entire moral argument of liberal US MAGA apologists, and finding its way across the Atlantic it seems.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
An R4 WATO classic today. A totally sympathetic and unchallenging interview by Lady Brooke aka Sarah Montague with a nice lady about life's sufferings. The nice lady is in a household of two working people with two children and a household income of £67,000. She added that their mortgage was currently fixed from the time of low interest. Apparently their food bill is £100 a week, and has risen from some rather lower figure, (as has mine) and they can't make it the end of the month without using a credit card.
This is broadly the class to which I and my family belong. I contemplate the world and I think I am in the luckiest 5%. Probably 1%. I can think of little more shameful than appearing on the media complaining about it.
I had to turn it off. The inflation rate is declining (yes, yes, nominally so prices are still going through the roof) a story Sarah would have sold as a great Government victory eighteen months ago, yet today it was couched in terms of food inflation. A fair story, but still told with a bucket load of partisanship.
Her interview with George Robertson was also telling. Robertson basically admitted as a nation when Russia comes a calling we are f*****. Sarah was on a roll and kept going on about the "glacially slow" progress being made by this Government in terms of preparedness for the Russian invasion. Conveniently she sets her starting point over defence neglect at 5th July 2024, so her Government of choice get to play their get out of jail free card.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
Its pretty much the direct opposite. Suggest even timidly that there are economic and other benefits to immigration and you get shouted down, even on here. That is what is stopping any nuanced debate.
Yes, that must be it. 🙄
There is nothing wrong with bringing in migrants that will contribute. There is everything wrong with bringing in cheap low wage migrants to work in care homes, or wherever, for minimum wage with mutiple economically inactive dependents who will never be net contributors but it’s ‘racist’ to say this !
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
Its pretty much the direct opposite. Suggest even timidly that there are economic and other benefits to immigration and you get shouted down, even on here. That is what is stopping any nuanced debate.
There’s massive economic benefits to immigration.
It just needs to be managed properly, without feeding a pyramid scheme, and the existing British population needs to be convinced of the benefits of it.
And being convinced is not the preferred option of the left by telling anyone raising it they are ‘racist’
Skilled inward migration is not only desirable, I’d say it was essential. Plug gaps we don’t have.
An R4 WATO classic today. A totally sympathetic and unchallenging interview by Lady Brooke aka Sarah Montague with a nice lady about life's sufferings. The nice lady is in a household of two working people with two children and a household income of £67,000. She added that their mortgage was currently fixed from the time of low interest. Apparently their food bill is £100 a week, and has risen from some rather lower figure, (as has mine) and they can't make it the end of the month without using a credit card.
This is broadly the class to which I and my family belong. I contemplate the world and I think I am in the luckiest 5%. Probably 1%. I can think of little more shameful than appearing on the media complaining about it.
The frustration may be a wage compression thing. £67000 is about 150% of minimum wage for two people (if both full time). When the minimum wage was introduced in 1998 the equivalent of £67000 then would have been more like 200% of minimum wage. This affects how lucky one feels.
(I wouldn't whore myself out in the media either, of course.)
Compression on the downside and the opposite on the upside. Far more people earning £200k+ than there were in 1998 equivalent adjusted incomes.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I spent most of my career in that industry, from 82 - 14, that’s staggering. Speed to market is amazing.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
It’s a bit like
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
It's not even like that, though. SpaceX surprised a lot of people.
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades. But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
Larry Summers steps down from Open AI over Epstein ties.
Wow, too evil to be involved with AI, that is a high hurdle to clear.
He’s certainly fell from whatever grace he had in the last few days. I don’t think people will be rushing to get his thoughts on the economy and bang it on YouTube anymore.
Larry Summers has always been a first rate authority on economics although his skill has tended to lie in synthesizing and communicating ideas rather than in original thought. His greatest skill is in advocating for a view with utter conviction even if he held a different view until fairly recently. He operated at the very top of the economics and policy world with access to absolutely everyone. I recall once meeting with an eminent person in the economic policy world and as I left Summers was arriving for the next meeting. Having said all that, he never seemed a very nice guy (from a distance, I've never met him other than this fleeting interaction). Extremely full of himself. And the sexist stuff is well known. Another example of how extremely smart people can behave extremely stupidly.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
I'd suggest those on the left focus on the policies Labour are advancing on immigration rather than how they are portrayed in the press. There is a big difference.
i.e - Jewellery confiscated!!! Nazi Labour!!! vs no personal jewellery won't be confiscated but nor is it acceptable to hide wealth by buying countless gold rings and expect others to pay for your keep when you are perfectly capable of doing so yourself.
I am in the centre, but if I meet anyone on the left, I will pass on this advice.
Note neither Ukraine, nor Europe are part of these negotiations.
Scoop: U.S. secretly drafting new plan to end Ukraine war https://www.axios.com/2025/11/19/ukraine-peace-plan-trump-russia-witkoff The Trump administration has been secretly working in consultation with Russia to draft a new plan to end the war in Ukraine, U.S. and Russian officials tell Axios...
Phillips P O'Brien has just put out a rather pessimistic substack suggesting that the Europeans will be told the US will pull out of NATO if they don't agree to the peace plan, whatever it is. We are about to see the maximum leverage available to the US President applied to Ukraine and Europe - when we've all been hoping it might be applied to Russia.
Europe had nearly four years to get its act together, and we're now going to suffer the consequences of failing to do so.
I guess there's still theoretically a possibility that Putin has folded - reportedly the latest budget statistics from Russia are very ugly - but I don't have high hopes.
That's an interesting thread header which makes some excellent points.
I have to laugh, though, at dropping in the Laffer curve as if it is undeniable gospel and has anything useful to say. Where's the data behind that (or any) Laffer curve?
I remain of the opinion that we should raise taxes on people like me who are fortunate enough to be in the top quartile of income and/or wealth. We should also ensure ALL income if taxed under the same tax regime (e.g roll NI into income tax). We should have a UK FATCA for expats, and a surcharge property tax on UK real estate owned by non-UK citizens and companies.
That said, I would cut spending in some areas too: * PIP and other disability benefits - tighten the criteria and treat as taxable income. * State Pension - end the triple-lock. * Attendance allowance - means test.
I can't remember if I first saw this on here, but this is quite a good representation of the Laffer Curve. It certainly triggers lefties, but if you're in complete denial if you don't think it exists in some form:
A better graph would be tax base (y) against tax rate (x), which would emphasis the elementary logic behind the curve
Yes, please post that graph, I'd love to see it (and the underlying data that supports it).
Your facile comment is actually asking for a major research exercise which could only realistically be performed by HMRC which holds the key confidential tax data together with an outfit like the OBR which has access to a credible model of the economy with all relevant feedbacks incorporated
@Benpointer Here are some examples of the type of curves I alluded to. Trabandt and Uhlig, "The Laffer curve revisited", Journal of Monetary Economics, 2011 This paper also shows a number of actual Laffer curves for various taxes and various countries with tables and elasticity estimates. https://home.uchicago.edu/~huhlig/papers/uhlig.trabandt.jme.2011.pdf
Well they are lovely curves to be sure, but they are based on a economic model - which is all you can do because we cannot run a real economic cycle repeatedly to with different tax rates to see the actual effect.
8. Conclusion Laffer curves for labor and capital income taxation have been characterized quantitatively for the US, the EU-14 and individual European countries by comparing the balanced growth paths of a neoclassical growth model featuring ‘‘constant Frisch elasticity’’ (CFE) preferences.
The point is, in placing your trust in any particular Laffer curve you are placing your trust 100% whatever models underpin it. It's not evidence-based science, nor should it be taken as fact.
In any event, amusingly given the number of people who quote the Laffer curve as a reason taxes should be reduced, the paper indicates consistently, based on the model it uses, that higher tax rates would yield more revenue see for example figures 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 in that paper. E.g.
Raise taxes on the wealthier, improve public services, obliterate the deficit, pay down government debt, reduce debt interest payments. That is what we should be doing.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
Its pretty much the direct opposite. Suggest even timidly that there are economic and other benefits to immigration and you get shouted down, even on here. That is what is stopping any nuanced debate.
There’s massive economic benefits to immigration.
It just needs to be managed properly, without feeding a pyramid scheme, and the existing British population needs to be convinced of the benefits of it.
And being convinced is not the preferred option of the left by telling anyone raising it they are ‘racist’
Skilled inward migration is not only desirable, I’d say it was essential. Plug gaps we don’t have.
I live somewhere that does this right.
The locals are all very happy with the situation, even when they’re only 15% of the population.
An R4 WATO classic today. A totally sympathetic and unchallenging interview by Lady Brooke aka Sarah Montague with a nice lady about life's sufferings. The nice lady is in a household of two working people with two children and a household income of £67,000. She added that their mortgage was currently fixed from the time of low interest. Apparently their food bill is £100 a week, and has risen from some rather lower figure, (as has mine) and they can't make it the end of the month without using a credit card.
This is broadly the class to which I and my family belong. I contemplate the world and I think I am in the luckiest 5%. Probably 1%. I can think of little more shameful than appearing on the media complaining about it.
Really depends what that £67k is. Two salaries of £33k? A single of £67k? Net income after tax and benefits?
With two dependent children it's not impossible they are on a low (equivalised) income. OTOH, their after housing costs income is probably pretty good.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
Its pretty much the direct opposite. Suggest even timidly that there are economic and other benefits to immigration and you get shouted down, even on here. That is what is stopping any nuanced debate.
There’s massive economic benefits to immigration.
It just needs to be managed properly, without feeding a pyramid scheme, and the existing British population needs to be convinced of the benefits of it.
And being convinced is not the preferred option of the left by telling anyone raising it they are ‘racist’
Skilled inward migration is not only desirable, I’d say it was essential. Plug gaps we don’t have.
I live somewhere that does this right.
The locals are all very happy with the situation, even when they’re only 15% of the population.
Of course they do. They get to treat South Asian domestic staff like slaves with zero repercussions.
An R4 WATO classic today. A totally sympathetic and unchallenging interview by Lady Brooke aka Sarah Montague with a nice lady about life's sufferings. The nice lady is in a household of two working people with two children and a household income of £67,000. She added that their mortgage was currently fixed from the time of low interest. Apparently their food bill is £100 a week, and has risen from some rather lower figure, (as has mine) and they can't make it the end of the month without using a credit card.
This is broadly the class to which I and my family belong. I contemplate the world and I think I am in the luckiest 5%. Probably 1%. I can think of little more shameful than appearing on the media complaining about it.
The frustration may be a wage compression thing. £67000 is about 150% of minimum wage for two people (if both full time). When the minimum wage was introduced in 1998 the equivalent of £67000 then would have been more like 200% of minimum wage. This affects how lucky one feels.
(I wouldn't whore myself out in the media either, of course.)
Fair point. But even if one thinks that the lowest paid should be paid a bit less, and that I should be paid a bit more like you I wouldn't go out on radio to say so. And I would expect a tiny bit of pushback from the interviewer about how she feels her local bin men, street cleaners, hospital porters and so on are getting on in comparison.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
Sandpit, you are an immigrant, living in a country that is 88% immigrants. Why are you complaining about immigration?
An R4 WATO classic today. A totally sympathetic and unchallenging interview by Lady Brooke aka Sarah Montague with a nice lady about life's sufferings. The nice lady is in a household of two working people with two children and a household income of £67,000. She added that their mortgage was currently fixed from the time of low interest. Apparently their food bill is £100 a week, and has risen from some rather lower figure, (as has mine) and they can't make it the end of the month without using a credit card.
This is broadly the class to which I and my family belong. I contemplate the world and I think I am in the luckiest 5%. Probably 1%. I can think of little more shameful than appearing on the media complaining about it.
Really depends what that £67k is. Two salaries of £33k? A single of £67k? Net income after tax and benefits?
With two dependent children it's not impossible they are on a low (equivalised) income. OTOH, their after housing costs income is probably pretty good.
The interview indicated bloke full time, she part time. No information (as usual) IIRC about net/gross/benefits/student loan.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I spent most of my career in that industry, from 82 - 14, that’s staggering. Speed to market is amazing.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
It’s a bit like
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
It's not even like that, though. SpaceX surprised a lot of people.
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades. But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
It is like that, I think.
The biggest barrier to innovation is often “we don’t do it like that” - the accreted socio-economic structures of the existing organisation.
After WWII the Koreans built a modern ship building industry. Which didn’t have all the old “proper way” of doing things. The ideas they used - modular construction etc - were invented in the West, but never became widespread because “that’s not proper ship building”. Kaiser used early forms of that for the Victory Ships, but post war, US yards rapidly went back to the “proper way”. In the U.K., Beardmores did modular construction - but went out of business in the 1920s….
In the European car industry, changing to EVs was nicked by the huge investment in engines and gearboxes. Whole divisions would become obsolete. *Board members* power bases would be destroyed. So they delayed. And delayed.
Clive Lewis affirms he would give up his seat for Andy Burnham
Really
Has he asked his constituents if they mind?
That comes after he steps down. Inevitably.
In a by election that would be an easy Green gain.
Then so be it. That's how democracy works.
I see a flaw in Burnham's cunning plan. He remains Mayor of Greater Manchester and Labour have one fewer MP.
How do people see him as the answer ?
He’s shit. He came away from the Labour conference weakened.
I'm not sure no one other than Clive Lewis really does*. I was merely pointing out to boulay that a by election would be "asking his constituents".
*I believe we have in any event already tested the idea of making a popular mayor leader of the country, with less than outstanding results. (As has the US.)
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
Sandpit, you are an immigrant, living in a country that is 88% immigrants. Why are you complaining about immigration?
I’m not complaining about immigration, I’m giving an example of a country where immigration is supported by the citizen population.
Most Western countries right now see immigration as a problem, not as an opportunity as we do in the sandpit.
Clive Lewis affirms he would give up his seat for Andy Burnham
Really
Has he asked his constituents if they mind?
That comes after he steps down. Inevitably.
In a by election that would be an easy Green gain.
Then so be it. That's how democracy works.
I see a flaw in Burnham's cunning plan. He remains Mayor of Greater Manchester and Labour have one fewer MP.
How do people see him as the answer ?
He’s shit. He came away from the Labour conference weakened.
If Labour want the next election to be an interesting contest between Reform, Greens and LDs, with Labour v Tory as the undercard all they need to do is carry on as they are.
Clive Lewis affirms he would give up his seat for Andy Burnham
Really
Has he asked his constituents if they mind?
That comes after he steps down. Inevitably.
In a by election that would be an easy Green gain.
Then so be it. That's how democracy works.
I see a flaw in Burnham's cunning plan. He remains Mayor of Greater Manchester and Labour have one fewer MP.
How do people see him as the answer ?
He’s shit. He came away from the Labour conference weakened.
He has sold something of a bullshine Johnsonian tale that before Burnham Manchester could be twinned with Gaza and post Burnham it is like Berlin in 1938.
Note neither Ukraine, nor Europe are part of these negotiations.
Scoop: U.S. secretly drafting new plan to end Ukraine war https://www.axios.com/2025/11/19/ukraine-peace-plan-trump-russia-witkoff The Trump administration has been secretly working in consultation with Russia to draft a new plan to end the war in Ukraine, U.S. and Russian officials tell Axios...
Phillips P O'Brien has just put out a rather pessimistic substack suggesting that the Europeans will be told the US will pull out of NATO if they don't agree to the peace plan, whatever it is. We are about to see the maximum leverage available to the US President applied to Ukraine and Europe - when we've all been hoping it might be applied to Russia.
Europe had nearly four years to get its act together, and we're now going to suffer the consequences of failing to do so.
I guess there's still theoretically a possibility that Putin has folded - reportedly the latest budget statistics from Russia are very ugly - but I don't have high hopes.
There's also the theoretical possibility of calling Trump's bluff, which if the terms are as bad as I expect they will be, we should do. The idea of our future security being negotiated between a mass murdering autocrat, and a semi-senile grifter, with us excluded, is not an appealing one.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I spent most of my career in that industry, from 82 - 14, that’s staggering. Speed to market is amazing.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
It’s a bit like
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
It's not even like that, though. SpaceX surprised a lot of people.
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades. But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
It is like that, I think.
The biggest barrier to innovation is often “we don’t do it like that” - the accreted socio-economic structures of the existing organisation.
After WWII the Koreans built a modern ship building industry. Which didn’t have all the old “proper way” of doing things. The ideas they used - modular construction etc - were invented in the West, but never became widespread because “that’s not proper ship building”. Kaiser used early forms of that for the Victory Ships, but post war, US yards rapidly went back to the “proper way”. In the U.K., Beardmores did modular construction - but went out of business in the 1920s….
In the European car industry, changing to EVs was nicked by the huge investment in engines and gearboxes. Whole divisions would become obsolete. *Board members* power bases would be destroyed. So they delayed. And delayed.
Shipbuilding was partly the prior investment in tech, sites and skills. KAiser et al had new sites, new staff with rather few preexisting skills, a free hand more or less to select tech (and even then he very nearly came unstuck, so to speak, with the weld fracture issue on the Liberties and Victories). Beardmores were on a clean site but came unstuck in the sudden crash after an early vistory in 1918.
Cars, perhaps more like changing from sail to steam (but still steel) cargo ships.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I spent most of my career in that industry, from 82 - 14, that’s staggering. Speed to market is amazing.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
It’s a bit like
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
It's not even like that, though. SpaceX surprised a lot of people.
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades. But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
It is like that, I think.
The biggest barrier to innovation is often “we don’t do it like that” - the accreted socio-economic structures of the existing organisation.
After WWII the Koreans built a modern ship building industry. Which didn’t have all the old “proper way” of doing things. The ideas they used - modular construction etc - were invented in the West, but never became widespread because “that’s not proper ship building”. Kaiser used early forms of that for the Victory Ships, but post war, US yards rapidly went back to the “proper way”. In the U.K., Beardmores did modular construction - but went out of business in the 1920s….
In the European car industry, changing to EVs was nicked by the huge investment in engines and gearboxes. Whole divisions would become obsolete. *Board members* power bases would be destroyed. So they delayed. And delayed.
The question then is where are the new companies in Europe that could have done things differently? Why aren't we getting people starting new companies, or why can't they find investment, failing to scale, etc?
For example, I wouldn't necessarily expect BAe to be best-placed to develop drones for the British military, so we'd want to see British startups that were developing the new technology with new ideas. Is that happening? If not, why not?
Capitalism relies on new companies to outcompete existing companies. You can't expect existing companies to compete against themselves.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
Sandpit, you are an immigrant, living in a country that is 88% immigrants. Why are you complaining about immigration?
"It's the old irregular verb, Minister. I am a filthy immigrant, you are an expat, he is a citizen of the world" "Fuck off, Bernard"
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
Its pretty much the direct opposite. Suggest even timidly that there are economic and other benefits to immigration and you get shouted down, even on here. That is what is stopping any nuanced debate.
There’s massive economic benefits to immigration.
It just needs to be managed properly, without feeding a pyramid scheme, and the existing British population needs to be convinced of the benefits of it.
And being convinced is not the preferred option of the left by telling anyone raising it they are ‘racist’
Skilled inward migration is not only desirable, I’d say it was essential. Plug gaps we don’t have.
Yet Reform want lower immigration; they want net zero immigration. That could only happen by substantially cutting skilled inward migration.
This is why I say nuance is missing. Most UK immigration is skilled, but Reform and fellow travellers still seek to cast all immigrants as, at best, scroungers, or worse.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
Sandpit, you are an immigrant, living in a country that is 88% immigrants. Why are you complaining about immigration?
I believe he lives in a country where half of the immigrants are wealthy high income ex pats tax exiles who like the sunshine and lack of income tax. The other half are basically near slaves for the former
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
Sandpit, you are an immigrant, living in a country that is 88% immigrants. Why are you complaining about immigration?
I believe he lives in a country where half of the immigrants are wealthy high income ex pats tax exiles who like the sunshine and lack of income tax. The other half are basically near slaves for the former
You’re half right.
Employment terms and conditions now very different in the UAE, when compared to Saudi or Qatar.
That's an interesting thread header which makes some excellent points.
I have to laugh, though, at dropping in the Laffer curve as if it is undeniable gospel and has anything useful to say. Where's the data behind that (or any) Laffer curve?
I remain of the opinion that we should raise taxes on people like me who are fortunate enough to be in the top quartile of income and/or wealth. We should also ensure ALL income if taxed under the same tax regime (e.g roll NI into income tax). We should have a UK FATCA for expats, and a surcharge property tax on UK real estate owned by non-UK citizens and companies.
That said, I would cut spending in some areas too: * PIP and other disability benefits - tighten the criteria and treat as taxable income. * State Pension - end the triple-lock. * Attendance allowance - means test.
I can't remember if I first saw this on here, but this is quite a good representation of the Laffer Curve. It certainly triggers lefties, but if you're in complete denial if you don't think it exists in some form:
A better graph would be tax base (y) against tax rate (x), which would emphasis the elementary logic behind the curve
Yes, please post that graph, I'd love to see it (and the underlying data that supports it).
Your facile comment is actually asking for a major research exercise which could only realistically be performed by HMRC which holds the key confidential tax data together with an outfit like the OBR which has access to a credible model of the economy with all relevant feedbacks incorporated
@Benpointer Here are some examples of the type of curves I alluded to. Trabandt and Uhlig, "The Laffer curve revisited", Journal of Monetary Economics, 2011 This paper also shows a number of actual Laffer curves for various taxes and various countries with tables and elasticity estimates. https://home.uchicago.edu/~huhlig/papers/uhlig.trabandt.jme.2011.pdf
Well they are lovely curves to be sure, but they are based on a economic model - which is all you can do because we cannot run a real economic cycle repeatedly to with different tax rates to see the actual effect.
8. Conclusion Laffer curves for labor and capital income taxation have been characterized quantitatively for the US, the EU-14 and individual European countries by comparing the balanced growth paths of a neoclassical growth model featuring ‘‘constant Frisch elasticity’’ (CFE) preferences.
The point is, in placing your trust in any particular Laffer curve you are placing your trust 100% whatever models underpin it. It's not evidence-based science, nor should it be taken as fact.
In any event, amusingly given the number of people who quote the Laffer curve as a reason taxes should be reduced, the paper indicates consistently, based on the model it uses, that higher tax rates would yield more revenue see for example figures 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 in that paper. E.g.
Raise taxes on the wealthier, improve public services, obliterate the deficit, pay down government debt, reduce debt interest payments. That is what we should be doing.
If there are no arguments about the meaning of a Laffer curve, is it even a politics site?
- Remove winter fuel allowance & other add on benefits. - Child benefit for first child only - End the triple lock - Cut back the number of diversity officers - there are at least 500 in central government according to a recent FoI request and the number has increased since Labour came into power - Prescription charges: reduce the number of exemptions and increase payments - Foreign aid: what actually is it being spent on and which countries - More charges for council services above the bare minimum - Stop or drastically reduce funding of lobby groups - No money in current budget for AD - where is the money for that to come from? If people want it they should pay for it themselves. - Social care - people with savings need to use those first. The rainy day has arrived so that is what the savings are for.
On the tax side - - raise income tax and extend NI ultimately combining the two - add council tax bands at the top end rather than faff around with extra taxes - Extend VAT - we have more exemptions than many other countries - Get rid of cliff edges - Reduce pension tax relief to the basic rate - Freeze thresholds
Once there is a path to a reduced deficit and growth then can think of reducing tax. But I would make the priority proper investment in infrastructure and high quality competent permanent staff rather than endless locums and consultants.
Some sensible measures but given our fertility rate is now just 1.45 we need to increase child benefit for the first two children if anything. I would means test not end triple lock and savings already have to be used to pay for social care except the home for at home care which after the dementia tax disaster won't change.
On tax it is likely Reeves will increase higher council tax bands and freeze thresholds and reduce pension relief anyway. I would ringfence national insurance for JSA, the state pension and some social care not merge it with income tax
In Scotland the home is sold to pay for the care home, so long as it isn't someone else's main home too. It works because council care homes are worse than hell and you wouldn't condemn a loved one to stay in one unless necessary. My feeling about Dementia Tax is, it was a badly managed election campaign that even made Corbyn look acceptable. It is also inevitable. My feeling about Social Care is selling the home isn't enough to stop the whole system crumbling into the sea but maybe it props things up a little.
Homes in Scotland are worth far less than homes in the South of England though and no it isn't inevitable as after the 2017 GE no party would risk losing their majority by proposing a similar dementia tax policy. Even the SNP have said they want to scrap social care charges for non residential care anyway
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I spent most of my career in that industry, from 82 - 14, that’s staggering. Speed to market is amazing.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
It’s a bit like
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
It's not even like that, though. SpaceX surprised a lot of people.
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades. But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
It is like that, I think.
The biggest barrier to innovation is often “we don’t do it like that” - the accreted socio-economic structures of the existing organisation.
After WWII the Koreans built a modern ship building industry. Which didn’t have all the old “proper way” of doing things. The ideas they used - modular construction etc - were invented in the West, but never became widespread because “that’s not proper ship building”. Kaiser used early forms of that for the Victory Ships, but post war, US yards rapidly went back to the “proper way”. In the U.K., Beardmores did modular construction - but went out of business in the 1920s….
In the European car industry, changing to EVs was nicked by the huge investment in engines and gearboxes. Whole divisions would become obsolete. *Board members* power bases would be destroyed. So they delayed. And delayed.
I disagree (though you are right about the Innovators Dilemma style conservatism). The only way a car industry making (then) record profits was going to cannibalise its own business, was if it was forced to do so. If government had mandated, and assisted with steady investment over the last decade and a half, we might be somewhere close to where China is now.
As it is, European industry is now forced to make the transition just for its own survival, and had ceded any kind of leadership for the next decade in all likelihood.
That, and Brexit, have left us in what is probably a worse position still.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
Sandpit, you are an immigrant, living in a country that is 88% immigrants. Why are you complaining about immigration?
I’m not complaining about immigration, I’m giving an example of a country where immigration is supported by the citizen population.
Most Western countries right now see immigration as a problem, not as an opportunity as we do in the sandpit.
So, faced with people seeing their communities changing, what do you think should happen? Reform/MAGA style policies, rounding up brown people on the street? Or should some politician actually make a positive case for (some) immigration?
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
Its pretty much the direct opposite. Suggest even timidly that there are economic and other benefits to immigration and you get shouted down, even on here. That is what is stopping any nuanced debate.
There’s massive economic benefits to immigration.
It just needs to be managed properly, without feeding a pyramid scheme, and the existing British population needs to be convinced of the benefits of it.
And being convinced is not the preferred option of the left by telling anyone raising it they are ‘racist’
Skilled inward migration is not only desirable, I’d say it was essential. Plug gaps we don’t have.
Yet Reform want lower immigration; they want net zero immigration. That could only happen by substantially cutting skilled inward migration.
This is why I say nuance is missing. Most UK immigration is skilled, but Reform and fellow travellers still seek to cast all immigrants as, at best, scroungers, or worse.
They also conflate immigration in total, which has been historically high in recent years, with asylum and irregular arrivals which have also been historically high but are a fraction of the total. Not just Reform, pretty much everyone including the current Home Secretary. Reducing immigration <> stopping the boats.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I spent most of my career in that industry, from 82 - 14, that’s staggering. Speed to market is amazing.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
It’s a bit like
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
It's not even like that, though. SpaceX surprised a lot of people.
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades. But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
It is like that, I think.
The biggest barrier to innovation is often “we don’t do it like that” - the accreted socio-economic structures of the existing organisation.
After WWII the Koreans built a modern ship building industry. Which didn’t have all the old “proper way” of doing things. The ideas they used - modular construction etc - were invented in the West, but never became widespread because “that’s not proper ship building”. Kaiser used early forms of that for the Victory Ships, but post war, US yards rapidly went back to the “proper way”. In the U.K., Beardmores did modular construction - but went out of business in the 1920s….
In the European car industry, changing to EVs was nicked by the huge investment in engines and gearboxes. Whole divisions would become obsolete. *Board members* power bases would be destroyed. So they delayed. And delayed.
The question then is where are the new companies in Europe that could have done things differently? Why aren't we getting people starting new companies, or why can't they find investment, failing to scale, etc?
For example, I wouldn't necessarily expect BAe to be best-placed to develop drones for the British military, so we'd want to see British startups that were developing the new technology with new ideas. Is that happening? If not, why not?
Capitalism relies on new companies to outcompete existing companies. You can't expect existing companies to compete against themselves.
And European governments spend enormous amounts of time and effort supporting the existing players and making sure they don’t get challenged.
Similar very often in the US - see the endless propping up of legacy auto.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I spent most of my career in that industry, from 82 - 14, that’s staggering. Speed to market is amazing.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
It’s a bit like
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
It's not even like that, though. SpaceX surprised a lot of people.
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades. But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
It is like that, I think.
The biggest barrier to innovation is often “we don’t do it like that” - the accreted socio-economic structures of the existing organisation.
After WWII the Koreans built a modern ship building industry. Which didn’t have all the old “proper way” of doing things. The ideas they used - modular construction etc - were invented in the West, but never became widespread because “that’s not proper ship building”. Kaiser used early forms of that for the Victory Ships, but post war, US yards rapidly went back to the “proper way”. In the U.K., Beardmores did modular construction - but went out of business in the 1920s….
In the European car industry, changing to EVs was nicked by the huge investment in engines and gearboxes. Whole divisions would become obsolete. *Board members* power bases would be destroyed. So they delayed. And delayed.
The question then is where are the new companies in Europe that could have done things differently? Why aren't we getting people starting new companies, or why can't they find investment, failing to scale, etc?
For example, I wouldn't necessarily expect BAe to be best-placed to develop drones for the British military, so we'd want to see British startups that were developing the new technology with new ideas. Is that happening? If not, why not?
Capitalism relies on new companies to outcompete existing companies. You can't expect existing companies to compete against themselves.
Invest in Ukranian companies, for some clearly unknown reason they’re developing drone tech faster than anyone else right now.
Future wars will be fought with $500 drones, not $5m drones.
Clive Lewis affirms he would give up his seat for Andy Burnham
Really
Has he asked his constituents if they mind?
That comes after he steps down. Inevitably.
In a by election that would be an easy Green gain.
Not sure about that, Burnham has a +22% rating with Green voters, Starmer is on -52% with Greens by contrast. Labour, LD and Green voters all give Burnham a net positive rating, only Tories and Reform voters give him a net negative rating but still not as bad a negative rating as they give Sir Keir https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/Internal_Favourability_250929_w.pdf
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I spent most of my career in that industry, from 82 - 14, that’s staggering. Speed to market is amazing.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
It’s a bit like
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
It's not even like that, though. SpaceX surprised a lot of people.
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades. But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
It is like that, I think.
The biggest barrier to innovation is often “we don’t do it like that” - the accreted socio-economic structures of the existing organisation.
After WWII the Koreans built a modern ship building industry. Which didn’t have all the old “proper way” of doing things. The ideas they used - modular construction etc - were invented in the West, but never became widespread because “that’s not proper ship building”. Kaiser used early forms of that for the Victory Ships, but post war, US yards rapidly went back to the “proper way”. In the U.K., Beardmores did modular construction - but went out of business in the 1920s….
In the European car industry, changing to EVs was nicked by the huge investment in engines and gearboxes. Whole divisions would become obsolete. *Board members* power bases would be destroyed. So they delayed. And delayed.
The question then is where are the new companies in Europe that could have done things differently? Why aren't we getting people starting new companies, or why can't they find investment, failing to scale, etc?
For example, I wouldn't necessarily expect BAe to be best-placed to develop drones for the British military, so we'd want to see British startups that were developing the new technology with new ideas. Is that happening? If not, why not?
Capitalism relies on new companies to outcompete existing companies. You can't expect existing companies to compete against themselves.
Invest in Ukranian companies, for some clearly unknown reason they’re developing drone tech faster than anyone else right now.
Future wars will be fought with $500 drones, not $5m drones.
Well, that depends. If the $5m drone can wade through $500 drones as easily as a Conquistador through Aztec warriors then it will come out on top. I don't pretend to be able to predict the future, but I do know that we're more likely to find the best answer if we have more people looking for it, and given a fair chance of succeeding.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I spent most of my career in that industry, from 82 - 14, that’s staggering. Speed to market is amazing.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
It’s a bit like
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
It's not even like that, though. SpaceX surprised a lot of people.
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades. But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
It is like that, I think.
The biggest barrier to innovation is often “we don’t do it like that” - the accreted socio-economic structures of the existing organisation.
After WWII the Koreans built a modern ship building industry. Which didn’t have all the old “proper way” of doing things. The ideas they used - modular construction etc - were invented in the West, but never became widespread because “that’s not proper ship building”. Kaiser used early forms of that for the Victory Ships, but post war, US yards rapidly went back to the “proper way”. In the U.K., Beardmores did modular construction - but went out of business in the 1920s….
In the European car industry, changing to EVs was nicked by the huge investment in engines and gearboxes. Whole divisions would become obsolete. *Board members* power bases would be destroyed. So they delayed. And delayed.
The question then is where are the new companies in Europe that could have done things differently? Why aren't we getting people starting new companies, or why can't they find investment, failing to scale, etc?
For example, I wouldn't necessarily expect BAe to be best-placed to develop drones for the British military, so we'd want to see British startups that were developing the new technology with new ideas. Is that happening? If not, why not?
Capitalism relies on new companies to outcompete existing companies. You can't expect existing companies to compete against themselves.
Invest in Ukranian companies, for some clearly unknown reason they’re developing drone tech faster than anyone else right now.
Future wars will be fought with $500 drones, not $5m drones.
I do wonder if Swiss reservists will find themselves required to keep a couple of drones next to their service weapon. And to train on both.
This is probably one of the most interesting and revealing industrial stories of the year.
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
I spent most of my career in that industry, from 82 - 14, that’s staggering. Speed to market is amazing.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
It’s a bit like
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
It's not even like that, though. SpaceX surprised a lot of people.
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades. But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
It is like that, I think.
The biggest barrier to innovation is often “we don’t do it like that” - the accreted socio-economic structures of the existing organisation.
After WWII the Koreans built a modern ship building industry. Which didn’t have all the old “proper way” of doing things. The ideas they used - modular construction etc - were invented in the West, but never became widespread because “that’s not proper ship building”. Kaiser used early forms of that for the Victory Ships, but post war, US yards rapidly went back to the “proper way”. In the U.K., Beardmores did modular construction - but went out of business in the 1920s….
In the European car industry, changing to EVs was nicked by the huge investment in engines and gearboxes. Whole divisions would become obsolete. *Board members* power bases would be destroyed. So they delayed. And delayed.
I disagree (though you are right about the Innovators Dilemma style conservatism). The only way a car industry making (then) record profits was going to cannibalise its own business, was if it was forced to do so. If government had mandated, and assisted with steady investment over the last decade and a half, we might be somewhere close to where China is now.
As it is, European industry is now forced to make the transition just for its own survival, and had ceded any kind of leadership for the next decade in all likelihood.
That, and Brexit, have left us in what is probably a worse position still.
They knew change was coming.
They were told.
It was legislated.
They could have invested some of those record profits.
But no - culturally they had to wait. For a handout. For someone else to do something. For the horse to learn to sing….
Half the reason that Merkel fit the Tesla factory was to shout WAKE! UP! at the German car industry.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
You missed a bit.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
Sandpit, you are an immigrant, living in a country that is 88% immigrants. Why are you complaining about immigration?
I’m not complaining about immigration, I’m giving an example of a country where immigration is supported by the citizen population.
Most Western countries right now see immigration as a problem, not as an opportunity as we do in the sandpit.
So, faced with people seeing their communities changing, what do you think should happen? Reform/MAGA style policies, rounding up brown people on the street? Or should some politician actually make a positive case for (some) immigration?
The key point is that *every* *individual* *immigrant* needs to be a net contributor to the host country.
That contribution doesn’t always have to be financial, for example hiring a bunch of care workers on minimum wage, but public support starts to break down when a care worker is allowed to sponsor six adult relatives, none of whom work but all of whom end up on a path to citizenship, which simply adds to the Ponzi Scheme of future pension liabilities.
The key in the sandpit is that the guest workers are guest workers, including me. We’ll never be citizens, and will be “asked” to leave if they commit crimes or become unable to support themselves.
Clive Lewis affirms he would give up his seat for Andy Burnham
Really
Has he asked his constituents if they mind?
That comes after he steps down. Inevitably.
In a by election that would be an easy Green gain.
Then so be it. That's how democracy works.
I see a flaw in Burnham's cunning plan. He remains Mayor of Greater Manchester and Labour have one fewer MP.
How do people see him as the answer ?
He’s shit. He came away from the Labour conference weakened.
I'm not sure no one other than Clive Lewis really does*. I was merely pointing out to boulay that a by election would be "asking his constituents".
*I believe we have in any event already tested the idea of making a popular mayor leader of the country, with less than outstanding results. (As has the US.)
There was certainly a build up about him prior to the labour conference about him.
He’s a bottle job.
Had his chance and flunked it. Bottled it since then.
I'm not really sure anyone in the UK is advocating the Scandi model. Maybe Greens. We'd need much more trust in government to hand over sufficient money!
Interestingly the Scandi countries do not have much government debt, by some distance the lowest in Europe. They have always believed in paying for their welfare systems from tax not debt. Germany comes close too.
A cynic may notice that it hasn't generated a great deal of growth, even if not a debt crisis.
Switzerland meanwhile has lower taxes than the UK and Scandi nations, lower spending and still well run public services and no debt
The Swiss do also have compulsory private health insurance, so kinda like a tax but not called a tax, which somewhat flatters their tax picture. But, sure, there’s plenty we can learn from Switzerland. Which features would you copy? Close integration into the EU, a focus on high tech industries, or a much higher proportion of immigrants?
Switzerland not in the EU or even the EEA or a customs union though, only EFTA.
Switzerland also bans the face covering burka so is not that liberal on immigration issues
Switzeraland has the closest relationship to the EU of any country not in the EEA, and a much closer relationship than us.
I think over a quarter of the Swiss population are immigrants, much higher than in the UK.
Not a good argument. Family member worked in Switzerland for 30 years. When he couldn't work anymore and had run out of benefits, he was 'encouraged' to leave. Unfortunately this was before he could access his Swiss pension. The Swiss (Cantons) don't take any prisoners.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
I’d love to see a more nuanced discussion around immigration, but it’s pretty clear that neither Reform or Labour are going to deliver that. Reform want people to think that all immigrants are scroungers and most of them are illegal. Labour seem to be along for the ride rather than pushing back on that.
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist’
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
Its pretty much the direct opposite. Suggest even timidly that there are economic and other benefits to immigration and you get shouted down, even on here. That is what is stopping any nuanced debate.
There’s massive economic benefits to immigration.
It just needs to be managed properly, without feeding a pyramid scheme, and the existing British population needs to be convinced of the benefits of it.
And being convinced is not the preferred option of the left by telling anyone raising it they are ‘racist’
Skilled inward migration is not only desirable, I’d say it was essential. Plug gaps we don’t have.
Yet Reform want lower immigration; they want net zero immigration. That could only happen by substantially cutting skilled inward migration.
This is why I say nuance is missing. Most UK immigration is skilled, but Reform and fellow travellers still seek to cast all immigrants as, at best, scroungers, or worse.
I agree, though the lack of nuance is not one sided - many on the left seek to portray any opposition to immigration as racist.
But your main point: I think there's probably a strong consensus in favour of 80% of the immigration we see - the families from Hong Kong who are keen to integrate, the nice Indian doctor who helps out at the cricket club, the Ukrainians who work in the construction industry, the American engineers who find life in the UK rather more agreeable than in their home country, the Australian student. All of these people contribute, none expect special treatment or the rules to be changed for them. That doesn't however mean it is not important to deal with the other sirt of immigrant who turn up ininvited and cause problems.
So with inflation a whopping 0.4% below the Bank of England base rate there is already talk of lowering interest rates. Has it not occurred to people that inflation is usually below the official bank rate? What we see it that inflation is persistently higher than elsewhere. Cutting rates at such a moment feels like a gift for speculators. Feeding the AI bubble?
Comments
This car 👇, the 2026 version of France's Renault Twingo, is the first Western car engineered in China and made in Europe - a complete reversal of what used to be.
The challenge that Renault wanted to tackle is how to compete with Chinese EVs, which are best-in-class in affordability and speed-to-market.
Specifically, they wanted to develop an EV car from scratch in less than 2 years (when it normally takes 4 years to develop a new car for European auto makers) and be able to sell the car profitably for less than €20,000 while building it in Europe. Which is all insanely ambitious if you know about the European auto industry...
To do so, Renault opened a Shanghai R&D center (which they called "ACDC" in reference to both the band and the electrical current) where 160 engineers - 150 Chinese and 10 French (https://usinenouvelle.com/article/c-est-ici-que-tout-se-passe-ce-que-renault-a-appris-et-copie-en-chine.N2239820) - essentially tried to make Chinese development method work for Renault, in the heart of China's EV ecosystem to understand what was possible.
As the lead engineer on the project, Jérémie Coiffier, put it (https://frandroid.com/marques/renault/2859237_on-a-encore-un-coup-davance-pourquoi-la-renault-twingo-electrique-est-en-partie-chinoise): "We humbly came to learn to go fast. And learning to go fast isn't simply learning to do the same thing faster. It's doing things differently. It's a transformation."
And it worked: they had a first prototype in an insanely fast 4 weeks (https://journalauto.com/constructeurs/renault-acdc-fend-la-muraille-en-chine/)!!! The entire development process took just 21 months.
The end product is priced under €20,000 - after subsidies, around €15,000 - making it one of Europe's cheapest EVs and competitive against Chinese EVs.
46% of the car is made of Chinese parts..
https://x.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1990958738476569006
I won't even start on where the UK is.
England fans cheering on Scotland and hoping they win and get to the World Cup
Scotland fans would support anyone who played against England.
I refused to pay it and dumped what I could in a pension and cut hours.
Because I dumped money in a pension I now have easily enough to "retire" mid 50s. So I did.
Whilst I might have done that anyway, the tax rate was just encouragement.
You have to make the difference between refugee immigrants, visa immigrants, EU work immigrants and unlawful immigrants. A catchall immigrant doesn't shed any light on discussions unless qualified. Work and Visa immigrants would be net contributors.
No idea why the arseholes decided to bomb random apartment blocks there last night, but they did.
I fully expect Europe to respond with punitive protective tariffs.
Someone here, Francis Urquhart IIRC, posted some YouTube’s on Chinese auto makers. Advanced isn’t the word. It’s staggering how advanced they are.
https://bsky.app/profile/dennycarter.bsky.social/post/3m5ycrdluo223
Every apartment block targeted leaves an untargeted drone factory.
Not only an arsehole thing to do, but also stupid. Standard Russian ops...
Trump and Putin have put together proposals to end the Ukraine War with major concessions made to Russia.
https://www.axios.com/2025/11/19/ukraine-peace-plan-trump-russia-witkoff
It's just that over the last two decades, the numbers of the disillusioned, and the political salience of such appeals to them, have grown to dominate our politics.
Replace with a cleaner zonal system and for land zoned for development let people build what they want on their own land, so long as it is to code, without begging for permission first. Like works very well in Japan.
We would have massive economic growth as people stop obstructing developments and we could axe people working in those departments.
That's just one suggestion. Others could make others.
Scoop: U.S. secretly drafting new plan to end Ukraine war
https://www.axios.com/2025/11/19/ukraine-peace-plan-trump-russia-witkoff
The Trump administration has been secretly working in consultation with Russia to draft a new plan to end the war in Ukraine, U.S. and Russian officials tell Axios...
i.e - Jewellery confiscated!!! Nazi Labour!!! vs no personal jewellery won't be confiscated but nor is it acceptable to hide wealth by buying countless gold rings and expect others to pay for your keep when you are perfectly capable of doing so yourself.
Anyway, they liked shit talking US warships on the radio - “we will sink you blah blah”. So the story goes, a US Captain got bored with their shit and turned his radar to full power.
The speedboat was dead in the water, not electronics (no engine, radar or radio).
Just left them there…
{narrator: x Megawatts of microwaves at point blank range have consequences}
The reason we cannot have a nuanced debate is exactly that.
People see their communities changing and people coming in in rather large number. Raise concerns and get slapped down.
The list of “but that’s not how we do it” is always long.
This is broadly the class to which I and my family belong. I contemplate the world and I think I am in the luckiest 5%. Probably 1%. I can think of little more shameful than appearing on the media complaining about it.
An oil tanker heading from UAE to Singapore.
There will be the usual shakedown, followed by an enhanced international presence in the Straight.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTNPFuBXlj8
The Lib Dem’s idea of a nuanced debate around migration is ‘we like it, let’s have loads more, and if you complain you’re a racist, and if you want more houses built then you’re destroying the countryside, and if you can’t afford a house then work harder’
I'm not sure how much of a growth feedback loop is already built into this model, but given the labour tax take is probably a reasonable proxy for economic growth, and strong economic growth will increase the tax raised in absolute terms (rather than as a percentage of GDP - important when a lot of government spending is on debt interest), and also considering that the labour tax take is probably inversely linked to the level of spending required on in work benefits, it seems like the we should probably not be taxing returns to capital.
How we get to a steady state like that without the gov running out of money first is an exercise I'll leave to the reader!
(I wouldn't whore myself out in the media either, of course.)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/19/beano-mocks-trump-starmer-and-filthy-british-rivers/ (£££)
It just needs to be managed properly, without feeding a pyramid scheme, and the existing British population needs to be convinced of the benefits of it.
We were arguing it couldn’t be done.
While we debated it Britax Vega (again IIRC) went ahead and did it.
Her interview with George Robertson was also telling. Robertson basically admitted as a nation when Russia comes a calling we are f*****. Sarah was on a roll and kept going on about the "glacially slow" progress being made by this Government in terms of preparedness for the Russian invasion. Conveniently she sets her starting point over defence neglect at 5th July 2024, so her Government of choice get to play their get out of jail free card.
That's how democracy works.
There is nothing wrong with bringing in migrants that will contribute. There is everything wrong with bringing in cheap low wage migrants to work in care homes, or wherever, for minimum wage with mutiple economically inactive dependents who will never be net contributors but it’s ‘racist’ to say this !
There’s four major “can’t be done”’s in the picture I posted. At least.
Skilled inward migration is not only desirable, I’d say it was essential. Plug gaps we don’t have.
European carmakers are, if the global market was fair, like one of TSE’s stepmoms
We knew the change to EVs was coming; it's been government policy here and in Europe for decades.
But our governments (and most of the industry, which was enjoying the tail end of legacy manufacturing profits) just sat back doing almost nothing, while China planned their future economy around it, with the investment to back it.
And a significant part of their manufacturing is built around technology developed in Europe and the US, which they then continued to develop.
He’s shit. He came away from the Labour conference weakened.
Having said all that, he never seemed a very nice guy (from a distance, I've never met him other than this fleeting interaction). Extremely full of himself. And the sexist stuff is well known. Another example of how extremely smart people can behave extremely stupidly.
Europe had nearly four years to get its act together, and we're now going to suffer the consequences of failing to do so.
I guess there's still theoretically a possibility that Putin has folded - reportedly the latest budget statistics from Russia are very ugly - but I don't have high hopes.
8. Conclusion
Laffer curves for labor and capital income taxation have been characterized quantitatively for the US, the EU-14 and individual European countries by comparing the balanced growth paths of a neoclassical growth model featuring ‘‘constant Frisch elasticity’’ (CFE) preferences.
The point is, in placing your trust in any particular Laffer curve you are placing your trust 100% whatever models underpin it. It's not evidence-based science, nor should it be taken as fact.
In any event, amusingly given the number of people who quote the Laffer curve as a reason taxes should be reduced, the paper indicates consistently, based on the model it uses, that higher tax rates would yield more revenue see for example figures 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 in that paper. E.g.
https://home.uchicago.edu/~huhlig/papers/uhlig.trabandt.jme.2011.pdf
Raise taxes on the wealthier, improve public services, obliterate the deficit, pay down government debt, reduce debt interest payments. That is what we should be doing.
The locals are all very happy with the situation, even when they’re only 15% of the population.
With two dependent children it's not impossible they are on a low (equivalised) income. OTOH, their after housing costs income is probably pretty good.
The biggest barrier to innovation is often “we don’t do it like that” - the accreted socio-economic structures of the existing organisation.
After WWII the Koreans built a modern ship building industry. Which didn’t have all the old “proper way” of doing things. The ideas they used - modular construction etc - were invented in the West, but never became widespread because “that’s not proper ship building”. Kaiser used early forms of that for the Victory Ships, but post war, US yards rapidly went back to the “proper way”. In the U.K., Beardmores did modular construction - but went out of business in the 1920s….
In the European car industry, changing to EVs was nicked by the huge investment in engines and gearboxes. Whole divisions would become obsolete. *Board members* power bases would be destroyed. So they delayed. And delayed.
I was merely pointing out to boulay that a by election would be "asking his constituents".
*I believe we have in any event already tested the idea of making a popular mayor leader of the country, with less than outstanding results. (As has the US.)
Most Western countries right now see immigration as a problem, not as an opportunity as we do in the sandpit.
I note the Russians don't play games with Turkey after they shot them down.
BBC News - Russian spy ship pointed lasers at RAF pilots tracking it, says UK - BBC News
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx24028k7edo
The idea of our future security being negotiated between a mass murdering autocrat, and a semi-senile grifter, with us excluded, is not an appealing one.
Cars, perhaps more like changing from sail to steam (but still steel) cargo ships.
For example, I wouldn't necessarily expect BAe to be best-placed to develop drones for the British military, so we'd want to see British startups that were developing the new technology with new ideas. Is that happening? If not, why not?
Capitalism relies on new companies to outcompete existing companies. You can't expect existing companies to compete against themselves.
"Fuck off, Bernard"
Yet Reform want lower immigration; they want net zero immigration. That could only happen by substantially cutting skilled inward migration.
This is why I say nuance is missing. Most UK immigration is skilled, but Reform and fellow travellers still seek to cast all immigrants as, at best, scroungers, or worse.
Employment terms and conditions now very different in the UAE, when compared to Saudi or Qatar.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-50060769
Funding social care more via NI as Boris proposed and Truss stupidly scrapped is better, Japan funds social care largely via insurance
The only way a car industry making (then) record profits was going to cannibalise its own business, was if it was forced to do so.
If government had mandated, and assisted with steady investment over the last decade and a half, we might be somewhere close to where China is now.
As it is, European industry is now forced to make the transition just for its own survival, and had ceded any kind of leadership for the next decade in all likelihood.
That, and Brexit, have left us in what is probably a worse position still.
Similar very often in the US - see the endless propping up of legacy auto.
Future wars will be fought with $500 drones, not $5m drones.
https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/Internal_Favourability_250929_w.pdf
They were told.
It was legislated.
They could have invested some of those record profits.
But no - culturally they had to wait. For a handout. For someone else to do something. For the horse to learn to sing….
Half the reason that Merkel fit the Tesla factory was to shout WAKE! UP! at the German car industry.
That contribution doesn’t always have to be financial, for example hiring a bunch of care workers on minimum wage, but public support starts to break down when a care worker is allowed to sponsor six adult relatives, none of whom work but all of whom end up on a path to citizenship, which simply adds to the Ponzi Scheme of future pension liabilities.
The key in the sandpit is that the guest workers are guest workers, including me. We’ll never be citizens, and will be “asked” to leave if they commit crimes or become unable to support themselves.
He’s a bottle job.
Had his chance and flunked it. Bottled it since then.
But your main point: I think there's probably a strong consensus in favour of 80% of the immigration we see - the families from Hong Kong who are keen to integrate, the nice Indian doctor who helps out at the cricket club, the Ukrainians who work in the construction industry, the American engineers who find life in the UK rather more agreeable than in their home country, the Australian student. All of these people contribute, none expect special treatment or the rules to be changed for them.
That doesn't however mean it is not important to deal with the other sirt of immigrant who turn up ininvited and cause problems.