The Labour Government

[The perfect fumble]

In the 80s, the Tories were able to strip back employment protections, and piece by piece take apart all low wage protections.

Can you imagine today, if anyone started talking about 'natural rates of unemployment', or started cutting the minimum wage until it was worthless, and then abolishing it? Council houses weren't being built - they were being sold off. Railways are going to be nationalised, bus companies deregulated, and polling consistently shows that the majority of the public would support energy and water renationalisation.

Going back further, is much more complex, because society was so different, and I wasn't there to understand any of those complexities. But that doesn't change my argument that we're further to the left economically now than we were from the late 70s to mid 90s.

The basic tenets of Thatcherism are all around us, we live with them everyday, here and there, their more egregious consequences are being timidly addressed with the odd sticking plaster, applied piecemeal by dull political minnows like Starmer and Reeves, who still operate in her shadow.

Thatcherite fundamentals are very much in place and they still will be five years from now.

The Overton window hasn't moved to the left, we've just given it a wipe.

 

[bluenova]

The basic tenets of Thatcherism are all around us, we live with them everyday, here and there, their more egregious consequences are being timidly addressed with the odd sticking plaster, applied piecemeal by dull political minnows like Starmer and Reeves, who still operate in her shadow.

Thatcherite fundamentals are very much in place and they still will be five years from now.

The Overton window hasn't moved to the left, we've just given it a wipe.

What do you think is more right wing than the 80s?

 

[meltonblue]

I agree on the second part, but if anything, I think the Overton window has moved to the left. Both socially and economically, the 80s were a lot more right wing than society today.

I was referring more to over the last twenty years and both main parties since the end of new Labour and start of the coalition.

Comparing it to Thatchers time is more interesting, I can see arguments for both, although I do think the window has narrowed further on the left.

 

[Brewster's millions]

In the 80s, the Tories were able to strip back employment protections, and piece by piece take apart all low wage protections.

Can you imagine today, if anyone started talking about 'natural rates of unemployment', or started cutting the minimum wage until it was worthless, and then abolishing it? Council houses weren't being built - they were being sold off. Railways are going to be nationalised, bus companies deregulated, and polling consistently shows that the majority of the public would support energy and water renationalisation.

Going back further, is much more complex, because society was so different, and I wasn't there to understand any of those complexities. But that doesn't change my argument that we're further to the left economically now than we were from the late 70s to mid 90s.

Politicians may not currently refer to the natural rate of unemployment, and discuss its movement in terms of the government’s policy decisions, but the concept itself is still absolutely central to UK economic policy.

The OBR’s entire forecasting process revolves around the natural rate of unemployment, and the economy’s supply performance more generally, and so the economic doctrines which became mainstream under Thatcher are still very much in place. Monetary growth in itself isn’t a key metric for the Bank of England, but again the analysis of the supply side and the natural rate of unemployment within that is still the predominant focus.

Monetary policy independence and to a lesser extent the introduction of the OBR means that politicians refer to these factors much less than they did previously, but the options available to them in terms of fiscal decisions are still determined by them.

I certainly wouldn’t agree with your argument about being economically further left currently than at any time since the mid-90s. The growth in e-commerce for example has shifted the economy further right in terms of its competitive structure, and that won’t change anytime soon.

Also, the railways and buses are questionable bellwethers in terms of the electorate’s preference for renationalisation.

 

[The perfect fumble]

What do you think is more right wing than the 80s?

With the exception of the minimum wage, everything with added Brexit.

Of course 80s Thatcher spunked our oil wealth to finance the great give away to the rich, no such largesse exists today.

UK workers are on course for two decades of lost living standards with real wages not forecast to recover to their 2008 level until 2028. The TUC estimates that the average worker has lost £14,800 since 2008.

The difference between now and the 80s, is the 80s was when it happened, and now is its consequences. I'm 67 years old, I remember the world before Thatcher, I remember possibilities that most people under forty have difficulty imagining, that's not a criticism, that's just the reality of the narrow window of possibilities we live in now.

I went to university in 1975, with a full grant and no fees, my family lived in a council house, I joined a company final salary pension scheme in 1980 and cashed in two of them to retire early when I was 60.

I lived in a world where you travelled by British Rail, had nationalised gas, electricity, water and a true NHS without a whiff of the private sector, Thatcher and New Labour destroyed all of it.

Today it's more right wing than the 80s, because in the 80s it was still possible to imagine a different world, soon, there'll be no one left alive who will be able to even conceptualise the post war social contract.

 

[bluenova]

With the exception of the minimum wage, everything with added Brexit.

Of course 80s Thatcher spunked our oil wealth to finance the great give away to the rich, no such largesse exists today.

UK workers are on course for two decades of lost living standards with real wages not forecast to recover to their 2008 level until 2028. The TUC estimates that the average worker has lost £14,800 since 2008.

The difference between now and the 80s, is the 80s was when it happened, and now is its consequences. I'm 67 years old, I remember the world before Thatcher, I remember possibilities that most people under forty have difficulty imagining, that's not a criticism, that's just the reality of the narrow window of possibilities we live in now.

I went to university in 1975, with a full grant and no fees, my family lived in a council house, I joined a company final salary pension scheme in 1980 and cashed in two of them to retire early when I was 60.

I lived in a world where you travelled by British rail, had nationalised gas, electricity, water and a true NHS without a whiff of the private sector, Thatcher and New Labour destroyed all of it.

Today it's more right wing than the 80s, because in the 80s it was still possible to imagine a different world, soon, there'll be no one left alive who will be able to even conceptualise the post war social contract.

I agree about the changes that have happened over that time period.

What I would say is that the Overton window surely refers to what's politically acceptable, and I don't think the callous economics, and stripping back of employment rights that we saw in the 80s, would be acceptable for any mainstream party now. So we're still living with many of the consequences, but the movement has been to the left since then.

 

[Vic]

He’s not the only one who couldn’t care less.
Assuming it’s not Labour voters who predominantly signed the petition there’s another 15 million of them who didn’t sign it compared to the 3 million that have, so just 1 in 6 non-Labour voters feel strongly enough about it to sign a pointless petition.

Did no-one start a similar petition when Liar Johnson unlawfully prorogued Parliament?

No-one had time to do it with Truss.

 

[Vic]

What do you think is more right wing than the 80s?

Greed is good.

 

[dennishasdoneit]

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

We have exactly those issues where I live, however.. the population is swayed heavily towards white, British and about average for the UK with around 20% of people over the age of 60. Those figures derived from various sources.

There is a debate going on over a proposed development of a brownfield site. A well known retirement homes builder is applying for planning permission. There is an outcry that the town needs affordable housing for the youngsters, which it does. The point though, is that without immigration to blame the Social Media ire has turned on the older people, blaming them for the lack of housing, Doctor's appointments and even the heavy traffic in the town. The next doctor's appointment is 3rd week in January.

My point is that it becomes easy to blame any group of people for the woes that an area and the country faces but it is by no means clear cut on any one group. Much of the housing shortage can be attributed to the very different nature of the diverse way families now live eg following divorce etc, but it is easy to blame minority groups

Oh, by the way, the brownfield site is actually the town's police station that has been sitting empty for at leat the last 8 years.

I understand what you are saying, but do you think where you live you are isolated from the economic pressures that immigration puts on the UK in general. Of course you're not, you may not see many immigrants in your area , but a rising UK population, above what the UK can cope with, means less money per person to distribute across all services and rising house prices. Scotland aside to a degree due to the block grant, there are not areas of the UK that are not economically isolated.

I would add immigration is clearly not the sole cause of the issues we face, but to pretend its not a major contributing factor is not correct.

 

[Palerider]

With the exception of the minimum wage, everything with added Brexit.

Of course 80s Thatcher spunked our oil wealth to finance the great give away to the rich, no such largesse exists today.

UK workers are on course for two decades of lost living standards with real wages not forecast to recover to their 2008 level until 2028. The TUC estimates that the average worker has lost £14,800 since 2008.

The difference between now and the 80s, is the 80s was when it happened, and now is its consequences. I'm 67 years old, I remember the world before Thatcher, I remember possibilities that most people under forty have difficulty imagining, that's not a criticism, that's just the reality of the narrow window of possibilities we live in now.

I went to university in 1975, with a full grant and no fees, my family lived in a council house, I joined a company final salary pension scheme in 1980 and cashed in two of them to retire early when I was 60.

I lived in a world where you travelled by British rail, had nationalised gas, electricity, water and a true NHS without a whiff of the private sector, Thatcher and New Labour destroyed all of it.

Today it's more right wing than the 80s, because in the 80s it was still possible to imagine a different world, soon, there'll be no one left alive who will be able to even conceptualise the post war social contract.

A little bit of rose coloured nostalgia there.
Life expectancy in 1960 was 71.13, and in 1980 it had gone up to 73.68. So an increase of 2.55 over 20 years.
Life expectancy in 1980 73.68 and 2000 77.74. So an increase of 4.06 over the next 20 years.
Life expectancy in 2020 is 81.40 so an increase of 3.66 over the last 20 years or so.

Now I do not know any better way of fairly comparing countries, political systems or different time spans than looking at the AVERAGE life expectancy. It takes all political and personal bias out of the argument.

 

[bluenova]

Politicians may not currently refer to the natural rate of unemployment, and discuss its movement in terms of the government’s policy decisions, but the concept itself is still absolutely central to UK economic policy.

The OBR’s entire forecasting process revolves around the natural rate of unemployment, and the economy’s supply performance more generally, and so the economic doctrines which became mainstream under Thatcher are still very much in place. Monetary growth in itself isn’t a key metric for the Bank of England, but again the analysis of the supply side and the natural rate of unemployment within that is still the predominant focus.

Monetary policy independence and to a lesser extent the introduction of the OBR means that politicians refer to these factors much less than they did previously, but the options available to them in terms of fiscal decisions are still determined by them.

I certainly wouldn’t agree with your argument about being economically further left currently than at any time since the mid-90s. The growth in e-commerce for example has shifted the economy further right in terms of its competitive structure, and that won’t change anytime soon.

Also, the railways and buses are questionable bellwethers in terms of the electorate’s preference for renationalisation.

I don't think any politician these days would be able to stay in power with 1980s unemployment rates, especially if they justifies them by saying it was good for the economy.

Railways and buses are clearly a lot easier to bring back into state control, but polling shows huge levels of support for nationalisation of energy and water. I don't buy that as outright support, for the same reason it's not being done - People like the idea, but they wouldn't be keen on the costs of buying back private companies. For many, there was a genuinely positive attitude towards privatisation in the 80s, which I don't think would be an easy sell today.

I'd agree that the internet has sent a lot of industries rightwards. I don't know whether that would be an indication that the Overton window has changed (which is what this discussion was about), as I think technology has been moving faster than politicians, and the wild west online economy doesn't necessarily reflect people's beliefs.

Still, what's nice is that you get to agree with Postman Pep about something, which is quite heart warming at this time of year. So Merry Xmas to you :)

 

[bluenova]

This was introduced by the Tories, and the October 2025 start date was announced in 2023.

 

[bluenova]

Greed is good.

And lunch is for wimps :)

 

[Vic]

A little bit of rose coloured nostalgia there.
Life expectancy in 1960 was 71.13, and in 1980 it had gone up to 73.68. So an increase of 2.55 over 20 years.
Life expectancy in 1980 73.68 and 2000 77.74. So an increase of 4.06 over the next 20 years.
Life expectancy in 2020 is 81.40 so an increase of 3.66 over the last 20 years or so.

Now I do not know any better way of fairly comparing countries, political systems or different time spans than looking at the AVERAGE life expectancy. It takes all political and personal bias out of the argument.

Of course. It proves the benefit of the NHS for life expectancy. And the problem it creates of unaffordable pensions for an ageing population - not releasing housing so younger people can't afford to start a family, so we need more immigrants to pay people pensions for 20-30 years.

Is that what you meant by taking political bias out of the argument?

 

[Palerider]

Of course. It proves the benefit of the NHS for life expectancy. And the problem it creates of unaffordable pensions for an ageing population - not releasing housing so younger people can't afford to start a family, so we need more immigrants to pay people pensions for 20-30 years.

Is that what you meant by taking political bias out of the argument?

No. You have used your own political bias to try and take some form of credit for the life expectancy increase. I'm saying that life in the UK and the world in general is getting better and better all the time based purely on life expectancy. i.e Mexico, a country without the NHS and, I believe, more people leaving the country than arriving, has increased it's life expectancy from 55 in 1960 to 70 in 2020. Russia on the other hand, has moved from 67 in 1960 to 72 in 2020. The USA has moved from 70 in 1960 to 77 in 2020. China, from the data I'm looking at has moved from 33 (why so low I do not know) in 1960 to 79 in 2020. Germany, the gold standard in Europe apparently, has moved from 69 in 1960 to 82 in 2024, so pretty much matching the much maligned UK!

My whole point is that we are nowhere near as badly off as many people believe. In plain English, 'They are talking shit and they are talking us down'!

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

And sandwiches are for wimps the woke:)

 

[The perfect fumble]

A little bit of rose coloured nostalgia there.
Life expectancy in 1960 was 71.13, and in 1980 it had gone up to 73.68. So an increase of 2.55 over 20 years.
Life expectancy in 1980 73.68 and 2000 77.74. So an increase of 4.06 over the next 20 years.
Life expectancy in 2020 is 81.40 so an increase of 3.66 over the last 20 years or so.

Now I do not know any better way of fairly comparing countries, political systems or different time spans than looking at the AVERAGE life expectancy. It takes all political and personal bias out of the argument.

No.

No rose coloured specs here, I was 19 when my family got a council house, I was brought up in a terraced slum in Lower Broughton. Both parents had false teeth, dad smoked 30 Woodbines a day, as for diet! I really don't want to go there.

Progress isn't a uniform linear process, somethings progress even in the face of general decline and even then it's relative. For most people things are better now in 2024 than they were in 1964, across the board, but, and this is the point, in 1964 my dad, who didn't have to have two halfpennies to rub together, knew I'd have a better life than he did, how many dads can say the same today?

 

[hilts]

No. You have used your own political bias to try and take some form of credit for the life expectancy increase. I'm saying that life in the UK and the world in general is getting better and better all the time based purely on life expectancy. i.e Mexico, a country without the NHS and, I believe, more people leaving the country than arriving, has increased it's life expectancy from 55 in 1960 to 70 in 2020. Russia on the other hand, has moved from 67 in 1960 to 72 in 2020. The USA has moved from 70 in 1960 to 77 in 2020. China, from the data I'm looking at has moved from 33 (why so low I do not know) in 1960 to 79 in 2020. Germany, the gold standard in Europe apparently, has moved from 69 in 1960 to 82 in 2024, so pretty much matching the much maligned UK!

My whole point is that we are nowhere near as badly off as many people believe. In plain English, 'They are talking shit and they are talking us down'!

I'm not sure being better at keeping people alive necessarily means one is 'better off'

 

[i kne albert davy]

I'm not sure being better at keeping people alive necessarily means one is 'better off'

Hard to be worse off than dead.