The Labour Government

[Vic]

Could the weather have had something to do with that.
Not wanted to step outside ,never mind cross the Channel.

Of course, just as fine weather early in the year had something to do with the high numbers.

 

[BlueHammer85]

17% increase on the year.

I know you lefties neither like nor understand data, and you try your best to ignore the facts, but that’s the reality of the situation.

reality is that many measures are being put in place and many bills are going through parliament.

Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill/new powers to law-enforcement to tackle people-smuggling gangs/enhance data-sharing, allow prosecution of those facilitating or endangering illegal crossings/ expand right-to-work checks (especially in gig-economy sectors) and require a new mandatory digital ID to block unauthorised work/ UK–France “one in, one out” return deal/Formal return-and-readmission framework with France/Commitment of funding for French border enforcement and extended cooperation/UK–Germany treaty targeting smuggling networks and criminalising migrant-smuggling facilitation/Closer broader cooperation on migration and security with Germany/tougher enforcement of deportations (including possible family-removal measures) / revamping the asylum-status regime to impose regular reviews rather than automatic settlement.

You cling on to the 17% knowing Labour are working tirelessly and doing far more than the Tories in the last 14 years - You sound like you want all the above to fail.

 

[WRicko]

How does knocking £150 off everyone’s bills encourage them to be careful of their energy consumption, be more green, and help the climate?

I appreciate it’s not as impactful as the Tory decision to cap energy bills a couple of year back (which I hated as a policy) so this isn’t a political point but a principled one.

So we should pay more for our energy ? Why ? How much more how about so much that we don’t use any energy that will solve climate change !

 

[metalblue]

So we should pay more for our energy ? Why ? How much more how about so much that we don’t use any energy that will solve climate change !

We should use what we can afford to use. If we can’t afford it we use less, use less the price goes down. Simple supply and demand that in turn helps the environment.

Or do you subscribe to the fallacy of the green movement that we can fix climate change by someone else paying for it?

 

[hilts]

David Lammy wants to do away with Jury Trials.
Is it in the Labour manifesto?
NO.
Then go to the country and find out what happens if you try to push that particular move to an authoritarian state.

Not surprised they just walk away from jail anyhow:-)

 

[hilts]

We should use what we can afford to use. If we can’t afford it we use less, use less the price goes down. Simple supply and demand that in turn helps the environment.

Or do you subscribe to the fallacy of the green movement that we can fix climate change by someone else paying for it?

Yeah but err..... Chinese people have radiators....I fink so

 

[BlueAnorak]

Starmer cow towing to China now - I fucking despair, I really do.

 

[We've got Guardiola]

Of course it does, not having to pay rent or a mortgage allows you to spend the money you have on other things, it fixes your cost base so you dont run the risk of the landlord putting up your rent or the bank increasing your mortgage repayment.

The value of an asset is really down to how much enjoyment the owner gets out of it. If you like your home, you feel at ease, feel secure then surely that is money well spent. If you were just buying the property as an asset to make money then its a different argument.

As for the benefit to the economy and dead money, well if we go down that route, we might as well all just get paid an allowance and all the money go in a central pot. Nobody have any saving, etc. How does that work out in the long run, looking at the nearest equivalents to that approach you end up with an even smaller concentration of wealthy individuals holding all the power. No middle class, no upward progression etc, just a wealthy elite and everyone else.

This isnt a question of not paying tax, tax is what funds our public services, the more people working and paying tax the better. Everyone paying more income tax in exchange for better public services is something I have been an advocate of and posted about on this thread multiple times.

We all go on about tax in Scandinavian and how good their services are, workers on the basic rate of income tax in Sweden pay 32.4% (including the municipal tax), higher rate they pay 52%, VAT is charged at 25%, yet they have no wealth or inheritance tax. You pay more tax if you live near a major city, and less if you live out in the countryside, because quite sensibly, you benefit more from the services on offer living near a city. The tax free allowance is also much smaller being a minimum of around £1400 for higher earners to around £3600 for those earning around £25k with it tapering on both sides of this figure. If you're over 66 a bigger allowance of around £13k tax free.

For comparison the basic marginal tax rate is 28% (Income tax plus NI) and the higher rate is 42%, with the additional rate being as much as 60% due to the removal of the tax free allowance, with VAT at 20%. What that says to me is that if we want Swedish levels of healthcare, both basic and higher rate earners need to pay more and we need to up VAT (which I know is a regressive tax if you dont do it selectively).

Personally if tax has been paid on it already and its been subject to IHT as well, then 2 bites of the cherry is sufficient to say that someone has paid their fair share on anything left to their kids. If tax loop holes are allowed to exist then they should be closed for everyone, but for some reason they are allowed to continue to exist, but increasingly only for a smaller and wealthier echelon of society.

I understand this but the problem is the working/middle classes are already heavily taxed. There is no room for manoeuvre when it comes to income taxes so it has to come from somewhere else. The working classes probably pay no tax at all but then at this level it's almost pointless to work versus going on UC because pay is so low.

The Scandinavian countries are very different when it comes to this because the spread of wealth is better. The average salary in Norway is for example £10k higher than here. Living costs are of course higher but measures on inequality are around 20% better so the lowest and highest paid enjoy a relatively similar standard of living.

The Scandinavian countries also have stronger union laws and collective bargaining which gives better pay. We don't have that here, companies would rather pay people nothing and that means less income tax is paid. We have companies like Tesco making £bn's profit and yet they pay workers the minimum wage. This does not happen in the Scandinavian countries where wages are collectively bargained and tied to a standard of living versus flat pay.

So in reality if we want to pay less tax on assets or IHT then we should argue for companies to pay people better because that means more tax comes into the treasury. It is just stupidity to increase income taxes versus increasing pay, it literally reduces the standard of living and drives the economy down as people will just spend less. Labour didn't touch income tax which is fine but they've still failed to really tackle the problem of pay.

Or we could take the Reform/Tory approach, reduce taxes to zero, give companies free reign to do whatever they want and MP's benefit from their little side deals. However, the tax intake will collapse so they'll have to drive public services into the gutter and their solution to that as always will be to blame the immigrants.

 

[abu13]

David Lammy wants to do away with Jury Trials.
Is it in the Labour manifesto?
NO.
Then go to the country and find out what happens if you try to push that particular move to an authoritarian state.

I dont recall anything about digital ID either, Two huge changes that are looking to be implemented without a mandate.

 

[Vic]

Starmer cow towing to China now - I fucking despair, I really do.

Is towing cows to China something like Truss's opening up pork markets there?

Britain musn’t ‘pitchfork away’ investment from China says Johnson

‘China is a great civilisation’ says PM

www.independent.co.uk

Liz Truss secretly lobbied ministers to ‘expedite’ defense exports to China

Former UK prime minister’s private correspondence revealed in documents obtained by POLITICO.

www.politico.eu

Sunak vows to engage with China but consigns ‘golden era’ to the history books

UK prime minister says Beijing ‘poses a systemic challenge to our values and interests’ — but he’s criticized for softening his stance.

www.politico.eu

 

[WRicko]

We should use what we can afford to use. If we can’t afford it we use less, use less the price goes down. Simple supply and demand that in turn helps the environment.

Or do you subscribe to the fallacy of the green movement that we can fix climate change by someone else paying for it?

What are you on about ?

Your complaining that it’s not green energy usage will go up but now your talking of a green fallacy so which is it

 

[blueinsa]

How does knocking £150 off everyone’s bills encourage them to be careful of their energy consumption, be more green, and help the climate?

I appreciate it’s not as impactful as the Tory decision to cap energy bills a couple of year back (which I hated as a policy) so this isn’t a political point but a principled one.

Anybody who thinks we are going to get £150 knocked off our energy bills in April came down in the last shower and that’s not a dig at the government either, it just won’t work out that way, it never does.

 

[hampshireblue]

Of course, just as fine weather early in the year had something to do with the high numbers.

Ah, but the weather isn't an excuse when the numbers are high. I remember Nick Ferrari scoffing when there was a bad week in the summer and the weather was a mitigation.

 

[hampshireblue]

Anybody who thinks we are going to get £150 knocked off our energy bills in April came down in the last shower and that’s not a dig at the government either, it just won’t work out that way, it never does.

Well the revised standing charges have already been published I believe.

 

[Kompany Car]

I understand this but the problem is the working/middle classes are already heavily taxed. There is no room for manoeuvre when it comes to income taxes so it has to come from somewhere else. The working classes probably pay no tax at all but then at this level it's almost pointless to work versus going on UC because pay is so low.

The Scandinavian countries are very different when it comes to this because the spread of wealth is better. The average salary in Norway is for example £10k higher than here. Living costs are of course higher but measures on inequality are around 20% better so the lowest and highest paid enjoy a relatively similar standard of living.

The Scandinavian countries also have stronger union laws and collective bargaining which gives better pay. We don't have that here, companies would rather pay people nothing and that means less income tax is paid. We have companies like Tesco making £bn's profit and yet they pay workers the minimum wage. This does not happen in the Scandinavian countries where wages are collectively bargained and tied to a standard of living versus flat pay.

So in reality if we want to pay less tax on assets or IHT then we should argue for companies to pay people better because that means more tax comes into the treasury. It is just stupidity to increase income taxes versus increasing pay, it literally reduces the standard of living and drives the economy down as people will just spend less. Labour didn't touch income tax which is fine but they've still failed to really tackle the problem of pay.

Or we could take the Reform/Tory approach, reduce taxes to zero, give companies free rein to do whatever they want and MP's benefit from their little side deals. However, the tax intake will collapse so they'll have to drive public services into the gutter and their solution to that as always will be to blame the immigrants.

Norway is an outlier due to its sovereign wealth fund based on energy. That’s why I used Sweden. Based on the most recent figures Sweden has a median salary of 36700 SEK per year that equates to just under £3k per month or £36k per year. The median salary in the UK is £37430. This is the median not average, as the average would be skewed by outliers.

It’s clear that previous and the current government aren’t spending the money in the appropriate way. Additionally the rowing back on the employment rights, would have been a great opportunity to bring in family friendly measures enshrined in law.

I don’t disagree that large businesses should pay more. In Sweden they seem to be able to pay exceptionally good Maternity and Paternity pay which helps families along with subsidised state run nursery from 3yrs old, because the legislation mandates it. Along with a host of other family friendly policies.

 

[cpa]

Ah, but the weather isn't an excuse when the numbers are high. I remember Nick Ferrari scoffing when there was a bad week in the summer and the weather was a mitigation.

Yes but it was @Vic who brought it up, presumably as a way of showing how well labour were doing.
As soon as I made a comment on the weather, just as a serious point , you go into complete whataboutery mode, which is ridiculous and all this topic ever seems to do, which is why I tend to steer clear of it .

 

[hampshireblue]

Yes but it was @Vic who brought it up, presumably as a way of showing how well labour were doing.
As soon as I made a comment on the weather, just as a serious point , you go into complete whataboutery mode, which is ridiculous and all this topic ever seems to do, which is why I tend to steer clear of it .

Maybe I should have put a smiley after my first sentence. :-)

 

[We've got Guardiola]

Norway is an outlier due to its sovereign wealth fund based on energy. That’s why I used Sweden. Based on the most recent figures Sweden has a median salary of 36700 SEK per year that equates to just under £3k per month or £36k per year. The median salary in the UK is £37430. This is the median not average, as the average would be skewed by outliers.

It’s clear that previous and the current government aren’t spending the money in the appropriate way. Additionally the rowing back on the employment rights, would have been a great opportunity to bring in family friendly measures enshrined in law.

I don’t disagree that large businesses should pay more. In Sweden they seem to be able to pay exceptionally good Maternity and Paternity pay which helps families along with subsidised state run nursery from 3yrs old, because the legislation mandates it. Along with a host of other family friendly policies.

The real question is how does a country like Sweden maintain a high standard of living whilst growth is flat? The simple reality is it's because the Swedish and other Scandinavian governments prioritise people above growth whereas even Labour are pushing us more towards the opposite.

When Reform seemingly get in they will prioritise a growth based ideology at the expense of everything else. That means you miss out on a payrise, you get reduced paternity/maternity leave or you even goto work when you're sick or disabled. Profit will be maximised and personal misery will be maximised.

People are just unfortunately stupid because today all they can see is a faux agenda against brown people and that has become the smokescreen for what will become the greatest bonfire of rights and standard of living in history.

People really want Denmark, Norway or Sweden but their voting record is unfortunately taking us towards the US. It has meant that even the Labour Party, the so called party of workers and equality are today no different to the Tories who came before them which is just incredible really.

 

[hilts]

The real question is how does a country like Sweden maintain a high standard of living whilst growth is flat? The simple reality is it's because the Swedish and other Scandinavian governments prioritise people above growth whereas even Labour are pushing us more towards the opposite.

When Reform seemingly get in they will prioritise a growth based ideology at the expense of everything else. That means you miss out on a payrise, you get reduced paternity/maternity leave or you even goto work when you're sick or disabled. Profit will be maximised and personal misery will be maximised.

People are just unfortunately stupid because today all they can see is a faux agenda against brown people and that has become the smokescreen for what will become the greatest bonfire of rights and standard of living in history.

People really want Denmark, Norway or Sweden but their voting record is unfortunately taking us towards the US. It has meant that even the Labour Party, the so called party of workers and equality are today no different to the Tories who came before them which is just incredible really.

Do Denmark like Brown people?

 

[mind your car Mr?]

reality is that many measures are being put in place and many bills are going through parliament.

Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill/new powers to law-enforcement to tackle people-smuggling gangs/enhance data-sharing, allow prosecution of those facilitating or endangering illegal crossings/ expand right-to-work checks (especially in gig-economy sectors) and require a new mandatory digital ID to block unauthorised work/ UK–France “one in, one out” return deal/Formal return-and-readmission framework with France/Commitment of funding for French border enforcement and extended cooperation/UK–Germany treaty targeting smuggling networks and criminalising migrant-smuggling facilitation/Closer broader cooperation on migration and security with Germany/tougher enforcement of deportations (including possible family-removal measures) / revamping the asylum-status regime to impose regular reviews rather than automatic settlement.

You cling on to the 17% knowing Labour are working tirelessly and doing far more than the Tories in the last 14 years - You sound like you want all the above to fail.

name one of the above measures that have worked, it's a wonder your'e not calling for starmer to be the next manager of wet spam