Bye Bye Rachel Reeves

[Simon]

It's inevitable isn't it? Straight after getting into government she's throwing money at the train drivers etc, ham fists the the winter fuel allowance (largely rolled back), PIP overhaul (largely toothless now) and commits to spending more on NHS and defence with absolutely no way to pay for it all.

So after promising 'no tax rises on working people', she's gonna freeze the tax bands again and, I'm predicting here, will raise NICs back to 10% (which is what they should've done in the first place, but they backed themselves into a corner). Then she'll be sacrificed on the alter of the largely illiterate media by Christmas. No way will she be around for next March's budget.

What say you?

[IanF]

I admire her principles, but the real world doesn’t work like that. RIP Rachel

[Mito Man]

She's just the messenger and from what I've read she's pushed back on a lot of the tax increases that the party wanted. But yeah, she's not long for this role.

[Rich B]

It's inevitable isn't it? Straight after getting into government she's throwing money at the train drivers etc, ham fists the the winter fuel allowance (largely rolled back), PIP overhaul (largely toothless now) and commits to spending more on NHS and defence with absolutely no way to pay for it all.

So after promising 'no tax rises on working people', she's gonna freeze the tax bands again and, I'm predicting here, will raise NICs back to 10% (which is what they should've done in the first place-, but they backed themselves into a corner). Then she'll be sacrificed on the alter of the largely illiterate media by Christmas. No way will she be around for next March's budget.

What say you?

The biggest thing the tory press jumped on was the winter fuel, but it absolutely did need to change - we can’t have money going to rich people just because they’re old. They went a bit too far initially, then have listened to everyone and reeled it back a bit without reversing the overall concept. I really don’t see how that’s a bad thing?

The way politics/the press has gone nowadays is counter productive to the country as a whole. Slaying someone for being bought a pair of glasses or taking 2 goes to change a fundamental unfairness in society doesn’t help any of us.

[jamcg]

The national insurance rise for companies is crippling small businesses, is actively preventing wage rises, and forcing everyone to raise prices

[Jobbo]

I agree with Rich.

The issue with means testing is that one or two people who would really benefit probably don't qualify, and the testing part means a layer of complexity which requires administration which is going to partly negate any saving. I think politically it was a bit of a silly hill to try to die on, and U-turning (even in part) just looks worse, like they don't know what they're doing.

Same with PIP; it may be a large expense for the country but it's not that long since PIP replaced DLA and that caused enough fuss; it's not as if they waded into this without realising how it would look and knowing the political capital which would be made.

Much as I'd dislike it, I think raising income tax would do what they need in terms of revenue raising with less political fall-out, despite the manifesto promise.

@jamcg - at least the rise in employer NI means companies will have less profits to be taxed at the increased corporation tax rate!

[Carlos]

PIP is a strange one, as you can be earning £ 100,000 a year and still receive it. I know of a semi-professional football player who gets it due to his ADHD

No doubt, for many, it's necessary, but it appears to be a benefit where some people are entitled to it, but are far from needing it and that doesn't sit comfortably with me.

[Simon]

I'm confused by PIP. It's supposed to be money that you need to live an independent life. Yea according to official figures some 3.7 million people receive it. Are we really saying that nearly 4 million people in the UK need a state handout to live an independent life? That's over twice the rate per capita than Germany, for example. Crazy numbers. I have autism and ADHD. Following Carlos' example, what money would I need to live 'independently'? None. It just doesn't add up.

[GG.]

I admire her principles, but the real world doesn’t work like that. RIP Rachel

I don't admire her principals either, though arguably she is merely a conduit for the envious socialists that surround her on the benches.

If you were being charitable you could say that she is at least in favour of balancing the books (or at least realises it is a necessity... which can't even be said of all recent Tory chancellors...), however, the ideological hit jobs on VAT on schools and dismantling the non-dom regime instead of reforming it, etc. have all shown that they will in all likelihood raise nothing and/or will actually lose money for the treasury. That then means she's going to have to scramble to find even more savings and raise taxes in even more unpopular and wide reaching ways to offset that.

The only solace you can take from any of this is that it does vindicate those who pointed out that people would change their behaviour in relation to these tax changes (which, given they are obsessed with taxes on sugar, etc. to "nudge" people into making different choices should come as absolutely no surprise). The argument, for example, that private schools have increased their fees by 70% since 2000 so 15-20% in a year is also OK and won't mean people leave is so laughable you'd think that was actually released by the Conservatives to troll them. Outflows of tax payers are hard to quantify ahead of HMRC releasing specific figures but the fact people like the European CEO of Goldman, Lakshmi Mittal, etc. have all moved out gives a few high profile examples of what I can see and hear is happening and the uptick on people moving to the UAE is turning into a flood.

It has also shown that for all their bluster about economic competence they've very quickly made the overall situation worse which is not going to be that helpful for them building on their record low voting percentage for a majority government. I'd say their chances of being voted back in at the next election are precisely nought.

With regard to PIP I think its become clear and apparent to anyone with a brain that significant amounts are claimed improperly, particularly post Covid, and it needs widespread reform but the problem is it is much harder to taketh away than it is to dole out in the first place and ultimately will take a party with a lot more reforming zeal than Labour to ever grasp that nettle.

[Nefarious]

I have long seen the major two parties in this country as a choice between outright thieves and well-meaning idiots, but the time since the election has shown that contrast to be even starker than I'd previously though.
The every aspect of the winter fuel payments thing showed just how slick, professional and effective the tory PR machine is and what utter rank amateurs Labour are. As Rich and others have said, it is clearly ridiculous that large numbers of wealthy people receive a handout simply for being old, but oh my god, the messaging could've been handled so much better. Frame it as streamlining, frame it as reversing social injustice, shmooze the journalists and fill the news with smarmy Nigel Farage-types boasting of how they've been gaming the system for years. Play the fucking game, and don't leave a gaping wide open goal for the tory shitpeddlers to take potshots at.
And when you do finally climb down, don't hold your hands up to a colossal u-turn and play the sack-cloth and ashes act, give it a new name, call it an overhaul to deeply flawed system, drop phrases like "laser targeting to the areas of greatest need" and congratulate yourselves for replacing a blunt stick with a scalpel.

The bottom line is that labour has inherited a poisoned chalice - borrowing already at the limit of what the markets will tolerate, taxation all maxed out to what the population will tolerate, and no prospect of any massive windfalls on the horizon. Meanwhile, all major public services are creaking from decades of underinvestment in infrastructure, the selling of the family silver, and the covert shifting of budgetary responsibility. Oh, and we suddenly have to prepare for a potential war. The rock has never been rockier nor the hard place harder.

[Rich B]

All that. It was amazing to see all the Tory politicians who’d changed their schedule to jump on LBC this morning to capitalise on RR crying (whilst also expressing their sympathy for any personal situation that she maybe suffering - they do care after all…)

That’s just what politics is now. it’s not about solving problems for everyone - it’s about point scoring and optics.

Starmer could announce a policy that solves world hunger, stops war and cures cancer, and he’s still have Badenoch telling us it’s the wrong direction for the country and he’s out of touch with the people.

[Nefarious]

And where is all this petty squabbling and disingenuous point scoring going to end up? Handing the whole shooting match over to Reform, simply because they are "something else".

[Swervin_Mervin]

And where is all this petty squabbling and disingenuous point scoring going to end up? Handing the whole shooting match over to Reform, simply because they are "something else".

Hopefully with the collapse of our 2 party system. Although sadly that'll probably not happen until those shithouses Reform get in.

It's fairly clear that between the 2 parties, we actual have 4 parties loosely held together into 2, and that has been the case for decades now. The Tories never got their house in order, and it's increasingly apparent that neither has Labour. It's a bit of a shame as, whilst I think their economic decisions have been absolutely crackpot, speaking from a professional perspective their proposals to overhaul the planning system are, largely, exactly what is needed. My fear is that now the harder left have got a taste for blood after the welfare reform bill fiasco, some of the better ideas they've had are going to eventually be watered down as well.

[ZedLeg]

I wonder how “lesser evil” voting will go when it’s Greens v reform

[IanF]

Corbyn and Sultana setting up a new party..

IMG_0897.png (324.93 KiB) Viewed 777 times

[GG.]

Seems like a potential huge act of self harm for Corbyn as if he strips away the hard left / socialist portion of Labour voters then we're nudged quite a lot closer to Reform forming a government territory.

[Rich B]

Seems like a potential huge act of self harm for Corbyn as if he strips away the hard left / socialist portion of Labour voters then we're nudged quite a lot closer to Reform forming a government territory.

You think he should sit back and do nothing, being massively unhappy with both parties, but content that he has a tiny representation in one of them?

I don’t like Corbyn, but that sounds like a pretty shit way to approach anything. If you want change, then you have to make change - that sometimes means breaking away from the safe option (which doesn’t really work.)

Reform are 5 MPs who couldn’t organise their breakfast, but they still have massive influence over the media due to a characterful leader. Who’s to say the Fruit and Nut party can’t do the same.

[Jobbo]

Corbyn hadn't confirmed the announcement by the end of yesterday apparently - not sure if he has now: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2 ... emy-corbyn


Going well then...

[GG.]

[Simon]

Everyone getting ready for their November reaming at the hands of Rachel from accounts? I see we're borrowing near record amounts again so prepare for taxes to rise less we enter a death spiral on borrowing costs.

One reality, is, that despite people not feeling it, that lower incomes in this country pay far less tax than their European counterparts. The personal allowance went up and up under Osborne, along with the minimum wage, all whilst a continue narative under both the Tories and the previous coalition that 'those with the broadest shoulders' etc etc. The upshot of it all means that unless you're earning £40 something thousand a year you are a net beneficiary from the state. The higher earners, with their child benefit charge and £100k cliff edges are paying their way. Unfortunately a lot of middle and lower earners just are not (but they won't be agreeing with this with the cost of living being what it is).

So, 'tax the rich' only goes so far, because there are only so many of them. Taxes will need to go up, but no doubt the Labour back benchers will do anything they can to make sure that a diminishingly small number of people will be net contributors and as many people as possible should continue to get a handout whether it pushes us into an IMF bailout or not.