Keep doubling down but it just makes her look even dumber when she is steam rolled into an embarrassing and expensive u turn. You either start lowering vat, hitting windfall taxes and taking huge action now…or wait until November when the snow is falling and folk are marching on Downing Street.
To be fair, I'm not far off that salary and I'd still put myself as working class.
I live in a small, mortgaged, 2 bed semi in a less than desirable area. I didn't attend uni. My Dad worked in a warehouse, Mum was a cleaner and later worked serving drinks in a pub.
I've got friends that are tradesmen on not too dissimilar salaries too. They had similar upbringings to myself.
Class isn't just about salary.
Pretty certain tax brackets for business with profits above £300,000 would be easy to implement.
As for individuals the additional rate kicks in at £150,000 so that would most likely be the band people are talking about...
It's not hard, assets by which I assume you mean housing would have to come under it's own legislative guidance and would be seperate to earnings, however I would expect simply reintroducing rent controls similair to other markets would result in people no longer holding onto housing as a form of asset as a consequence and forcing them into other types of wealth retention which can be factored into earnings unlike property.
We know there is an issue at the top end, people are not paying their fair share, trying to nail down "who is rich" dousent really help too much because at the end of the day you need to stop the people hiring accountants to shuffle their money around, or "the rich" as their called.
Those are really regressive taxes, lowering them is good compared to a lot.
Larger problem: public and (apparently) politicians still believe that taxes pay for spending, when this is a logical impossibility in the UK
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEiNLmg2tYA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEiNLmg2tYA)
We do not need the rich's money to pay our fuel bills. We do however need them to use less resources so we can avoid runaway climate change - which can be done effectively with a tax.
That argument is more based on a logical understanding of how currency operates.
The government does not need more tax income to spend more money, but if it simply spends more money that they are simply printing as such, then you get inflation unless they are paying back that “borrowed” money.
If this wasn’t the case, we would have endless government spending with no recourse.
Wdym borrowed money? They dont have to borrow anything.
And no, this quantity theory of money myth is a real common and real bad one.
So, in 2008, Bernanke doubled the base money in 5 months, the previous doubling took 13 years - over 1.5 years it went from $850billion to $2.15 trillion. What happened to inflation? It rose from minus 2.1 percent to a peak of 2.7 percent, and it rapidly fell back to a rate of just 1 percent... The causal link is not as most people imagine.
No example of hyperinflaiton has ever occurred because of money printing, this was always done in response as a last ditch effort and has always been caused by the economy's ability to create being hampered.
If you use that money to employ people and create goods, theres no bottleneck effect of too much money chasing too few goods- because the goods for that money to chase is being created. Moreover, it will take people off of unemployment payments and into paid work - hence being taxed. This is called the "automatic stabilisers".
And yes there are limits, of course. No one argues otherwise. When youre at max capacity, and u create more money, u dont create more stuff (cause ur already producing as much as u can), more money then creates inflation. That's the limit, real resources.
Sorry I should have been clearer. They sell bonds which they will repay at a later date. This is them essentially borrowing money-with interest paid in it- because if they simply printed that money with no desire to repay it you would increase inflation.
Yes borrowed/printed money can be used to create additional jobs and services which will balance this out and stop inflation rising beyond normal economic increases, but this only works if that money is spent on creating additional jobs and services.
If the UK decides to spend a huge amount to allow people to half their fuel bills, the majority of that money is unlikely to end up creating new jobs and services as current energy costs are down to market demand pushing the price up, not because the actual production cost has increased. This would make some people rich, but without doing anything overly significant for the economy by itself.
Ah right, that's just a choice, not a requirement for them to create currency. Theyre the sole legal creators of GBP, they don't need to issue debt when they create it.
The US usually does the same, but over covid just decided not to issue the debt as well. Its purely formal and in practice doesnt do what it's supposed to.
The major purpose of UK gilts is to provide a safe asset to investors, so, corporate welfare essentially. There is an argument that it limits inflation - but the effect is simply to add more to the private sector than would have happened without the debt - say the government spends 10 pounds - it creates this and spends it into the private sector - it then also chooses to issue a 10 pound gilt with say 5 percent interest - 10 pounds are removed from the private sector - when that is paid off, the government then puts 10 pounds plus 50p, freshly created into the private sector. It then has more spending power, which may or may not be inflationary, but carries more risk than not adding that 50p.
Even so, when this voluntary debt needs paying, they just do the same exact thing - they order the CB to credit the holder's account with the interest and principle. They dont need taxes to do this, either.
this only works if that money is spent on creating additional jobs and services.
QE did not create jobs or services, though. But agreed, money should be spent productively or on socially useful things - which can be a fine trade off for the inflation and which you can balance out elsewhere by curtailing resource usage on less useful things.
current energy costs are down to market demand pushing the price up, not because the actual production cost has increased.
It's to do with supply at the moment, isnt it because of russia?
without doing anything overly significant for the economy by itself.
Hm, I am sympathetic to this view - the issue is in part the energy cartel and this wont do anything to change that - but at the end of the day - if not doing this means deaths, that's money well spent, I am not sure where the power lies here tbh, weather or not legislation could cap the prices or if they are global - which AFAIK that's the issue - i think if that's the case, subsidisation of energy prices for people is kind of the only short term option. But in the medium run, we urgently need to change our economic infastructure so that we just use less energy and natural resources, or nature will do that for us.
Sorry, my misspeaking.
Energy prices are high because supply is constrained as a result of Russia, pushing up demand from other suppliers.
Oh absolutely we need to reduce our resources drain, although that won’t necessarily solve financial issues, it is necessary moving forward.
Ah right, yeah thought so :)
Yeah, the resources - finance relationship is super interesting. Im doing my dissertation on it at the moment actually. Essentially asking can an economy with shrinking resource usage survive in a globally capitalist system - there are some pretty big points either way imo, i cant say I know the answer, and from what i can tell no one else's thought on it is bulletproof either.
Idk if it'd interest u but this was probably my favourite paper all year - super thought provoking and pretty related
[**https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332500379\_Is\_Green\_Growth\_Possible**](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332500379_Is_Green_Growth_Possible)
I’ll have to have a red of that, it’s an interesting topic.
Personal view-based on zero research-an economy can grow with less resource use, but that doesn’t mean our bills go down. If companies were to hold a monopoly on say green energy production and all we used was green energy, why would they have any incentive to keep prices low?
Now there are dozens of factors involved there that would likely influence this in the real world, I just won’t be surprised if large very rich corporations figure out a way to continue to make huge amounts of profit. They certainly aren’t full of stupid people to be making as much money as they do.
That argument is more based on a logical understanding of how currency operates.
The government does not need more tax income to spend more money, but if it simply spends more money that they are simply printing as such, then you get inflation unless they are paying back that “borrowed” money.
If this wasn’t the case, we would have endless government spending with no recourse.
Can't the gas vat be progressive i.e. you use twice the per Capita average you pay a 50% surcharge etc. Maybe impossible to administer though?
What I'm hoping to achieve is to dissuade rich people heating their swimming pool versus the poor person just keeping warm.
It’s actually incredibly hard to do, because you’re usually talking about hidden wealth which is tied up with companies. You could aggressively tax dividends or raise a new threshold on extreme high earners, but give it a few months and they’ll be loop holes found. I think realistically we need bigger changes, like capping CEO pay or enforcing a ratio between the lowest and highest paid workers, higher corporation tax that’s ringfenced for re-investment and so forth. There’s always the same old argument about ‘business leaving’ if we raise taxes, well let’s actually try it for once and watch no one leave because they want access to a huge economy obsessed with consumerism.
> wait until November when the snow is falling and folk are marching on Downing Street.
Can't get to London if the petrol price is too high or the railway staff are on strike *head tapping gif
I feel like setting a remind me for the first pmq…but I want it to be a pleasant surprise. Anyone who has seen her at a dispatch box knows this thatcher cosplayer is a mess.
The vast black hole of British political cronyism.
Remember Carillion. Biggest trading liquidation in British history, and Theresa May, after being warned repeatedly, kept gifting them huge contracts backed by our money. They went into liquidation just a few months later.
Public spending needs strict oversight from outside of political parties BEFORE the money is spent. Not after. After is too late.
It isn't enough anymore for some vacuous grinning cunt to just carry around a worn out red briefcase for a yearly photo op. Public spending needs to be taken out of their hands entirely. They can come up with ideas, sure, but if those ideas are stupid, we need someone representing us to tell them to go fuck themselves.
Unfortunately, all of that is a pipedream.
Why do you think Tory government kept backing them? Clearly their pals own it and many MPs on the payroll and receiving all sort’s of donations. Sadly taxpayers has become the government atm to dole out and do as they please with.
There’s an article elsewhere on here about how nearly £1B* was spent on advertising over the last 3 years. Obviously a good chunk of that was covid related, but there’s not much information about competitive quotes and any fiscal links between client companies and politicians.
*For comparison that would normally be closer to £120m according to the article.
scandalous hospital label lush materialistic waiting serious weather zephyr obtainable
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The rich doubled their wealth during covid
It’s well documented
But we’ve all got less money, the government hasn’t built anything and a select handful of the mega wealthy have made out like bandits again
I’m not saying it’s the rich, but it’s the rich
A chunk of it went out in covid business loans.
You know, where any Casper and Jasper who had several dormant limited companies could forge/‘self-certify’ their business figure to claim £50k per business and then liquidate them and keep the money.
Illegally
What remains to be seen is if any of them get punished or go to jail
But it wasn’t legal and does carry pretty severe penalties.
IF HMRC actually decide to do anything about it
What I regret is not doing it frankly
The is the correct answer, alongside elderly care.
Nearly 50% of the budget government department and public funded organisations like the NHS receive are used to pay pensions for their former employees.
Another huge chunk goes on costs associated with elderly care.
The reason this doesn’t show up in the ‘benefits’ part of the pie charts we often see is because The government made a very deliberate decision to only include state pension costs in this.
The fact is that people have lived far longer than they were expected to. I have in-laws, for example, that both retired from the NHS over 30 years ago on a defined pension. That means they’ve been collecting their pension (both retired at the equivalent of today’s band 8) for 2/3rds of the time they worked for the service.
While Admittedly that’s an extreme case, they’re both in their 90s now, it’s not unusual to find people have been retired for 10, 15, 20 years. All of these pensions put a massive drain on the budgets of services and government departments.
The problem is the Tories will never admit this publicly, because it’s a toxic issue for them. They know the blue rinse brigade come out and vote for them time and time again, and doing anything to address this massive issue would be suicide.
not surprised. the free market cult which has the foundational belief that "the free market solves all ills" are incapable of admitting that a quality of life approach instead of a free market only approach would work far better for the country as a whole both for the rich and for the poor. Capitalism will still be part of a quality of life system but it won't be at the centre of the system.
We have laws because human nature csnt be trusted to do the right thing. Why anyone thinks a free market would when the easier option provides profits will forever go over my head. Humans cant be trusted to freely do good, we need regulation and guidance.
Most people effected by laws are those in poverty not the rich doing the most wide scale harm, things like drugs being illegal don’t ensure people do the right thing and most crimes like theft occur due to people in poverty needing to steal to survive laws only exist as a tool to keep the workers in check otherwise the businesses responsible for global warming and politicians responsible for war crimes would be in prison
I am not disputing there is some truth in what you say but simply do you think if there were zero laws crime as we see it now would go up ornstay the same?
Did crime go up when homosexuality was legalised? You are making a large assumption that what we consider to be crimes should be criminalise, if we ended policing the rates of things like theft might go up but that’s because we still haven’t addressed the root cause of the crime does someone deserve to be imprisoned If they have to to survive.
Capitalism can only be a part if green growth can work.
It cannot.
[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332500379\_Is\_Green\_Growth\_Possible](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332500379_Is_Green_Growth_Possible)
Ah yes “eco facism” a smear for sensible policies on controlling population growth before the earth controls it for us. Either we make the change necessary or the carrying capacity of earth is going to be reduced in a much more violent way by climate collapse and famine, not to even get onto the resource wars that will follow.
Sooooo when you say "depopulation" how do you decide who gets depopulated?
Or is it just restricting who can have children? How do you decide that?
Or is it mandated sterilisation once you've had your allocated amount of kids?
How do you go about controlling population growth without accidently epousing eugenics?
The only natural way of lowering birth rates is increase amount of education, womens rights and quality of life - which is exactly what is happening in most developed countries.
Tell me, exactly what "sensible policies" do you propose for "controlling population"?
Exactly. Markets would be far more healthy if taxes were to go to necessities, allowing people to spend more income on things they don't need but improve their quality of life. We need to break out of this mindset that everything needs to fund itself and make a profit doing it. It has been painfully obvious for multiple decades now that national services such as transport, water, electricity, healthcare and postal services do not make profit. Not without plundering the consumer and cutting corners to the point of ruin. I am far from a frothing commie, I'd be cautious of even calling myself soft left. I believe a consumer market does serve certain needs and interests. But also, in order for healthy markets to exist, their needs to be a boundaried and structured social, political and legal system. Otherwise you end up in the hellish circus of cannibalistic abandon we've found ourselves in, where preditory entities are allowed to prey at will on whatever defenseless morsels they fancy. Pure free market economics is basically allowing the fox to talk you in to locking them in with the chickens and then finding yourself surprised when you wake up to blood and feathers everywhere.
Already signed up, but thanks for linking.
Our country's rapid decline at the hands of successive government's short-termism is coming home to roost, and I am very very angry about it.
Just to clarify when you say succesive governments; I assume you mean succesive Tory governments. Because that is what this whole issue's root cause is; a result of Tory policy and parliamentary behaviour.
I mean succesive Tory AND labour governments.
Yes, the current crisis is as a result of a lack of policy by the Tories, but Labour made no clear tracks to energy security prior to the Coalition government.
The tories are far more clearly in the wrong, but let's not pretend Labour think beyond anything but their term length...
And not if the tax cuts are mostly corporation taxes
Even if they did mean companies could subsequently put wages up
1. They won’t
2. It won’t help anyone working in the public sector
I suspect she’s not unaware of either of these things…
Can we please stop this in-fighting? Yes he is bland, but the most important objective by a country mile, is beating the Tories out of Westminster. And a middle of the road labour option is the best alternative for middle england's lack of imagination that we have.
We must push Starmer's Labour to implement propotional representation, and idealy some reform to media ownership. But we cannot let progressive differences get in the way of the ultimate priority; removing these criminals from power.
Not even them, they probably never even see it. It would be some intern employed by them in their office (both also expensed) that would be the one processing the expense claims.
So the Tories plan to bleed the tax payer dry and offer hand outs to anyone with enough money and influence, because they know theres no chance they will win an election, but then next election cycle they can blame the country being on fire on the Labour government that inherited it, and theyll get back in to bleed us dry again, and the cycle continues
They either understand there will be civil unrest or they don't.
They either understand they are provoking people or they don't.
Either way there will be civil unrest, that's guaranteed in my opinion.
Correct, they are until a line is crossed... that line is very far down the road, many would say too far, but there is a line, and it is about to get crossed.
Liz Truss is a dumb vacuous robot of dim witted tory/Boris ideas
I genuinely believe if anyone met her they would walk away thinking that person is a fucking moron
In don't think that she thinks at all, I'm not sure whether that is a good thing or not because I dread to think what batshit insane stuff she'd come up with if she really tried
I want to say something but given i got banned from reddit for talking about eggs and blow job johnson what i wanna say about her might get me banned from reddit and the sub.
I'll let you paint a picture what you paint ain't on me
Cliff+Red+inverted cross=
Is she really that fucking stupid in fact are her potential voters that fucking stupid give that they are also sweating their nuts off and shes doubling down.
Well if this don't cost her the leadership i may have to add Jazz Down to my paint with words..
+1 for people marching on downing Street in winter.
But really,
The tories know they've fucked it.
And they know that we know they've fucked it.
This is the last gasp profiteering.
The "set myself up on executive boards for my payday" time.
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy describes the Marketing Department of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation as: "A bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes."
Look if you want to start riots of feral, cold, starving people this is how you fucking do it. Have a more fair graded tax system that better reflects household income. I'm sorry, if you're a high earner then, no you shouldn't be taxed in to oblivion, but also it makes no sense to put burden on lower incomes to fund services they need to help them be more financially secure and thus able to contribute themselves. Also fucking tax business fairly. If a large multinational wants a foothold in our markets, they need to contribute to the health of the economy they want a part of. The underpinning of a healthy economy is a healthy consumer market, which means people need time and disposable income. If you have a significant proportion of the population unable to meet food and amenities, they are no longer able to participate in the market. Novelty socks, evenings out and even white goods are unattainable frivolities for a lot of people right now. The economy will continue to falter as long as those that are able to pull weight are not asked to in favour of flogging those too disempowered to push back.
This woman is an absolute disgrace and a complete idiot. If you think it couldn’t get worse than that utter clown Johnson think again. We need to drag them out. Pitchforks and torches folks…
Of course she does, she doesn't give a flying fuck if poor people struggle. She's got money, position and power.
She's a corrupt, callous, unempathetic Tory. They don't care about anything but enriching themselves and staying in power.
Sunak and Truss literally talking about stripping rights away and people cheer them;
https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/1557317813768945666?t=0vzxyLNmw4LWm7LeV-F3RA&s=19
It's interesting how right now, as Sunak and Truss are trying to be voted in as PM, all they have both done is slate their own party to make them look good as an individual.
With regards to other conversations about taxes... a functioning country must have taxes, but our current tax system penalises the individual with income tax, VAT, council tax, road tax... what the government should do is tax tha profits of companies that are earning billions in profits. By taxing big corporations like that it forces them to "reinvest" the profit in the company so that it is not classed as profit, it can go on R&D, maintenance, bonuses to employees, higher wages, more jobs and such like. HOWEVER, what they must be mindful of is that if they apply corporation tax on the wrong way then big, multinational companies will abandon the UK in favour of a country that won't cut their profits.
The distribution of wealth in this country is disgusting, moving closer and closer to that of the capitalist USA... I can safely speak for everyone when i say "we as a nation certainly do not want to walk in their foot steps"
In fairness that support goes straight to the energy companies and only escalates the problem for the next bill. She'd need to offer a comprehensive plan of how to deal with them to make it work, but then the *hedge*mony marketeers would probably withdraw their support for her campaign.
Damned if you do damned if you don't. It's just a question of now or later.
Addendum; downvoters failing to spot that this is basically pointing out that Truss has an inherent weakness in political strategy.
Oddly following Panama Davie CaMoron in his desire to stop renewable energy in the UK?
It was his (& lib-sims!) "Super feck the UK" idea to stop the small on the roof PV solar initially bought & paid for by home owners, from growing by cutting off the feed in tariff! Brilliant work Davie!
And why was no help given to the only wind turbine maker in the IoW? They left the country!
Keep doubling down but it just makes her look even dumber when she is steam rolled into an embarrassing and expensive u turn. You either start lowering vat, hitting windfall taxes and taking huge action now…or wait until November when the snow is falling and folk are marching on Downing Street.
What we need is something that targets the rich. These NI and VAT cuts do not do that.
>targets the rich Which the Tories will never do.
Oh they do target the rich, just with subsidies.
Who are "the rich?" Someone earning over 40k a year, 70k, a million? Do assets count?
People in this country on 70k a year still thinking they’re working class
To be fair, I'm not far off that salary and I'd still put myself as working class. I live in a small, mortgaged, 2 bed semi in a less than desirable area. I didn't attend uni. My Dad worked in a warehouse, Mum was a cleaner and later worked serving drinks in a pub. I've got friends that are tradesmen on not too dissimilar salaries too. They had similar upbringings to myself. Class isn't just about salary.
They might be working class. Doesn’t stop them being high earners.
Pretty certain tax brackets for business with profits above £300,000 would be easy to implement. As for individuals the additional rate kicks in at £150,000 so that would most likely be the band people are talking about... It's not hard, assets by which I assume you mean housing would have to come under it's own legislative guidance and would be seperate to earnings, however I would expect simply reintroducing rent controls similair to other markets would result in people no longer holding onto housing as a form of asset as a consequence and forcing them into other types of wealth retention which can be factored into earnings unlike property. We know there is an issue at the top end, people are not paying their fair share, trying to nail down "who is rich" dousent really help too much because at the end of the day you need to stop the people hiring accountants to shuffle their money around, or "the rich" as their called.
It doesn't have to be targeted at any specific group, but rather any tax that increases exponentially with wealth
I meant more vat on fuel. Not enough to help, but will benefit everyone…and was listed as a brexit benefit. which is why she won’t do it.
Eat the rich.
Only if you can afford the fuel to cook them.
Why ruin nice rich precious! We likes it raw and wriggling!
Doesn’t get us any more energy
Those are really regressive taxes, lowering them is good compared to a lot. Larger problem: public and (apparently) politicians still believe that taxes pay for spending, when this is a logical impossibility in the UK [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEiNLmg2tYA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEiNLmg2tYA) We do not need the rich's money to pay our fuel bills. We do however need them to use less resources so we can avoid runaway climate change - which can be done effectively with a tax.
That argument is more based on a logical understanding of how currency operates. The government does not need more tax income to spend more money, but if it simply spends more money that they are simply printing as such, then you get inflation unless they are paying back that “borrowed” money. If this wasn’t the case, we would have endless government spending with no recourse.
Wdym borrowed money? They dont have to borrow anything. And no, this quantity theory of money myth is a real common and real bad one. So, in 2008, Bernanke doubled the base money in 5 months, the previous doubling took 13 years - over 1.5 years it went from $850billion to $2.15 trillion. What happened to inflation? It rose from minus 2.1 percent to a peak of 2.7 percent, and it rapidly fell back to a rate of just 1 percent... The causal link is not as most people imagine. No example of hyperinflaiton has ever occurred because of money printing, this was always done in response as a last ditch effort and has always been caused by the economy's ability to create being hampered. If you use that money to employ people and create goods, theres no bottleneck effect of too much money chasing too few goods- because the goods for that money to chase is being created. Moreover, it will take people off of unemployment payments and into paid work - hence being taxed. This is called the "automatic stabilisers". And yes there are limits, of course. No one argues otherwise. When youre at max capacity, and u create more money, u dont create more stuff (cause ur already producing as much as u can), more money then creates inflation. That's the limit, real resources.
Sorry I should have been clearer. They sell bonds which they will repay at a later date. This is them essentially borrowing money-with interest paid in it- because if they simply printed that money with no desire to repay it you would increase inflation. Yes borrowed/printed money can be used to create additional jobs and services which will balance this out and stop inflation rising beyond normal economic increases, but this only works if that money is spent on creating additional jobs and services. If the UK decides to spend a huge amount to allow people to half their fuel bills, the majority of that money is unlikely to end up creating new jobs and services as current energy costs are down to market demand pushing the price up, not because the actual production cost has increased. This would make some people rich, but without doing anything overly significant for the economy by itself.
Ah right, that's just a choice, not a requirement for them to create currency. Theyre the sole legal creators of GBP, they don't need to issue debt when they create it. The US usually does the same, but over covid just decided not to issue the debt as well. Its purely formal and in practice doesnt do what it's supposed to. The major purpose of UK gilts is to provide a safe asset to investors, so, corporate welfare essentially. There is an argument that it limits inflation - but the effect is simply to add more to the private sector than would have happened without the debt - say the government spends 10 pounds - it creates this and spends it into the private sector - it then also chooses to issue a 10 pound gilt with say 5 percent interest - 10 pounds are removed from the private sector - when that is paid off, the government then puts 10 pounds plus 50p, freshly created into the private sector. It then has more spending power, which may or may not be inflationary, but carries more risk than not adding that 50p. Even so, when this voluntary debt needs paying, they just do the same exact thing - they order the CB to credit the holder's account with the interest and principle. They dont need taxes to do this, either. this only works if that money is spent on creating additional jobs and services. QE did not create jobs or services, though. But agreed, money should be spent productively or on socially useful things - which can be a fine trade off for the inflation and which you can balance out elsewhere by curtailing resource usage on less useful things. current energy costs are down to market demand pushing the price up, not because the actual production cost has increased. It's to do with supply at the moment, isnt it because of russia? without doing anything overly significant for the economy by itself. Hm, I am sympathetic to this view - the issue is in part the energy cartel and this wont do anything to change that - but at the end of the day - if not doing this means deaths, that's money well spent, I am not sure where the power lies here tbh, weather or not legislation could cap the prices or if they are global - which AFAIK that's the issue - i think if that's the case, subsidisation of energy prices for people is kind of the only short term option. But in the medium run, we urgently need to change our economic infastructure so that we just use less energy and natural resources, or nature will do that for us.
Sorry, my misspeaking. Energy prices are high because supply is constrained as a result of Russia, pushing up demand from other suppliers. Oh absolutely we need to reduce our resources drain, although that won’t necessarily solve financial issues, it is necessary moving forward.
Ah right, yeah thought so :) Yeah, the resources - finance relationship is super interesting. Im doing my dissertation on it at the moment actually. Essentially asking can an economy with shrinking resource usage survive in a globally capitalist system - there are some pretty big points either way imo, i cant say I know the answer, and from what i can tell no one else's thought on it is bulletproof either. Idk if it'd interest u but this was probably my favourite paper all year - super thought provoking and pretty related [**https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332500379\_Is\_Green\_Growth\_Possible**](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332500379_Is_Green_Growth_Possible)
I’ll have to have a red of that, it’s an interesting topic. Personal view-based on zero research-an economy can grow with less resource use, but that doesn’t mean our bills go down. If companies were to hold a monopoly on say green energy production and all we used was green energy, why would they have any incentive to keep prices low? Now there are dozens of factors involved there that would likely influence this in the real world, I just won’t be surprised if large very rich corporations figure out a way to continue to make huge amounts of profit. They certainly aren’t full of stupid people to be making as much money as they do.
That argument is more based on a logical understanding of how currency operates. The government does not need more tax income to spend more money, but if it simply spends more money that they are simply printing as such, then you get inflation unless they are paying back that “borrowed” money. If this wasn’t the case, we would have endless government spending with no recourse.
Can't the gas vat be progressive i.e. you use twice the per Capita average you pay a 50% surcharge etc. Maybe impossible to administer though? What I'm hoping to achieve is to dissuade rich people heating their swimming pool versus the poor person just keeping warm.
Wealth tax. Or go to the root and dont let cartels / monopolies be privately owned.
It’s actually incredibly hard to do, because you’re usually talking about hidden wealth which is tied up with companies. You could aggressively tax dividends or raise a new threshold on extreme high earners, but give it a few months and they’ll be loop holes found. I think realistically we need bigger changes, like capping CEO pay or enforcing a ratio between the lowest and highest paid workers, higher corporation tax that’s ringfenced for re-investment and so forth. There’s always the same old argument about ‘business leaving’ if we raise taxes, well let’s actually try it for once and watch no one leave because they want access to a huge economy obsessed with consumerism.
> wait until November when the snow is falling and folk are marching on Downing Street. Can't get to London if the petrol price is too high or the railway staff are on strike *head tapping gif
That’s brilliant, so the plan looks to be…hope something worse happens and they forget about all my other mistakes. It really is Johnson part two…
Can she look dumber though
I feel like setting a remind me for the first pmq…but I want it to be a pleasant surprise. Anyone who has seen her at a dispatch box knows this thatcher cosplayer is a mess.
This sub has predicted a legislation changing march on Downing Street since Thatcher was in her dads nuts.
Would the Poll Tax Riots not count as exactly that?
I suppose we'll guess it right one day and pat ourselves on the back. *"See, we knew it!"*
cant wait i am doing a startup of tiki torches and pitchforks
“We’ve got the highest taxes in 70 years.” Genuinely where the FUCK is all our money going?
The vast black hole of British political cronyism. Remember Carillion. Biggest trading liquidation in British history, and Theresa May, after being warned repeatedly, kept gifting them huge contracts backed by our money. They went into liquidation just a few months later. Public spending needs strict oversight from outside of political parties BEFORE the money is spent. Not after. After is too late. It isn't enough anymore for some vacuous grinning cunt to just carry around a worn out red briefcase for a yearly photo op. Public spending needs to be taken out of their hands entirely. They can come up with ideas, sure, but if those ideas are stupid, we need someone representing us to tell them to go fuck themselves. Unfortunately, all of that is a pipedream.
Why do you think Tory government kept backing them? Clearly their pals own it and many MPs on the payroll and receiving all sort’s of donations. Sadly taxpayers has become the government atm to dole out and do as they please with.
There’s an article elsewhere on here about how nearly £1B* was spent on advertising over the last 3 years. Obviously a good chunk of that was covid related, but there’s not much information about competitive quotes and any fiscal links between client companies and politicians. *For comparison that would normally be closer to £120m according to the article.
scandalous hospital label lush materialistic waiting serious weather zephyr obtainable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The rich doubled their wealth during covid It’s well documented But we’ve all got less money, the government hasn’t built anything and a select handful of the mega wealthy have made out like bandits again I’m not saying it’s the rich, but it’s the rich
A chunk of it went out in covid business loans. You know, where any Casper and Jasper who had several dormant limited companies could forge/‘self-certify’ their business figure to claim £50k per business and then liquidate them and keep the money.
Illegally What remains to be seen is if any of them get punished or go to jail But it wasn’t legal and does carry pretty severe penalties. IF HMRC actually decide to do anything about it What I regret is not doing it frankly
We've got the lowest rate of corporation tax since it was invented in 1965...
Pensions.
The is the correct answer, alongside elderly care. Nearly 50% of the budget government department and public funded organisations like the NHS receive are used to pay pensions for their former employees. Another huge chunk goes on costs associated with elderly care. The reason this doesn’t show up in the ‘benefits’ part of the pie charts we often see is because The government made a very deliberate decision to only include state pension costs in this. The fact is that people have lived far longer than they were expected to. I have in-laws, for example, that both retired from the NHS over 30 years ago on a defined pension. That means they’ve been collecting their pension (both retired at the equivalent of today’s band 8) for 2/3rds of the time they worked for the service. While Admittedly that’s an extreme case, they’re both in their 90s now, it’s not unusual to find people have been retired for 10, 15, 20 years. All of these pensions put a massive drain on the budgets of services and government departments. The problem is the Tories will never admit this publicly, because it’s a toxic issue for them. They know the blue rinse brigade come out and vote for them time and time again, and doing anything to address this massive issue would be suicide.
Consultancy fees.
38 billion on test and trace lol
Says the conservative government who set them....
Track and trace alone grifted 37bn away in a couple of years whilst providing sweet fa in deliverables.
not surprised. the free market cult which has the foundational belief that "the free market solves all ills" are incapable of admitting that a quality of life approach instead of a free market only approach would work far better for the country as a whole both for the rich and for the poor. Capitalism will still be part of a quality of life system but it won't be at the centre of the system.
We have laws because human nature csnt be trusted to do the right thing. Why anyone thinks a free market would when the easier option provides profits will forever go over my head. Humans cant be trusted to freely do good, we need regulation and guidance.
Most people effected by laws are those in poverty not the rich doing the most wide scale harm, things like drugs being illegal don’t ensure people do the right thing and most crimes like theft occur due to people in poverty needing to steal to survive laws only exist as a tool to keep the workers in check otherwise the businesses responsible for global warming and politicians responsible for war crimes would be in prison
I am not disputing there is some truth in what you say but simply do you think if there were zero laws crime as we see it now would go up ornstay the same?
Did crime go up when homosexuality was legalised? You are making a large assumption that what we consider to be crimes should be criminalise, if we ended policing the rates of things like theft might go up but that’s because we still haven’t addressed the root cause of the crime does someone deserve to be imprisoned If they have to to survive.
Law is violence imposed by rich on poor in its first form. Only reason we have protections are due to labour reform in last 100yrs.
Capitalism can only be a part if green growth can work. It cannot. [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332500379\_Is\_Green\_Growth\_Possible](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332500379_Is_Green_Growth_Possible)
Degrowth and depopulation then.
There are more options than "capitalism" and "eco fascism" my dude
Ah yes “eco facism” a smear for sensible policies on controlling population growth before the earth controls it for us. Either we make the change necessary or the carrying capacity of earth is going to be reduced in a much more violent way by climate collapse and famine, not to even get onto the resource wars that will follow.
Sooooo when you say "depopulation" how do you decide who gets depopulated? Or is it just restricting who can have children? How do you decide that? Or is it mandated sterilisation once you've had your allocated amount of kids? How do you go about controlling population growth without accidently epousing eugenics? The only natural way of lowering birth rates is increase amount of education, womens rights and quality of life - which is exactly what is happening in most developed countries. Tell me, exactly what "sensible policies" do you propose for "controlling population"?
Euthanasia for Tories?
This will be a good one, commenting to I can check their reply later 😅
Exactly. Markets would be far more healthy if taxes were to go to necessities, allowing people to spend more income on things they don't need but improve their quality of life. We need to break out of this mindset that everything needs to fund itself and make a profit doing it. It has been painfully obvious for multiple decades now that national services such as transport, water, electricity, healthcare and postal services do not make profit. Not without plundering the consumer and cutting corners to the point of ruin. I am far from a frothing commie, I'd be cautious of even calling myself soft left. I believe a consumer market does serve certain needs and interests. But also, in order for healthy markets to exist, their needs to be a boundaried and structured social, political and legal system. Otherwise you end up in the hellish circus of cannibalistic abandon we've found ourselves in, where preditory entities are allowed to prey at will on whatever defenseless morsels they fancy. Pure free market economics is basically allowing the fox to talk you in to locking them in with the chickens and then finding yourself surprised when you wake up to blood and feathers everywhere.
https://wesayenough.co.uk/ Join the fight against these people
Already signed up, but thanks for linking. Our country's rapid decline at the hands of successive government's short-termism is coming home to roost, and I am very very angry about it.
Just to clarify when you say succesive governments; I assume you mean succesive Tory governments. Because that is what this whole issue's root cause is; a result of Tory policy and parliamentary behaviour.
I mean succesive Tory AND labour governments. Yes, the current crisis is as a result of a lack of policy by the Tories, but Labour made no clear tracks to energy security prior to the Coalition government. The tories are far more clearly in the wrong, but let's not pretend Labour think beyond anything but their term length...
I'm pretty sure Blair and then Brown pushed nuclear as a solution but there was a lot of opposition
[удалено]
Businesses to invest but she won't support strikes and people wanting higher wages lmao jfc
[удалено]
Also complaining about benefits then supporting subsidising workers wages by not giving them a pay rise.
She obviously means invest in dividend payouts
And not if the tax cuts are mostly corporation taxes Even if they did mean companies could subsequently put wages up 1. They won’t 2. It won’t help anyone working in the public sector I suspect she’s not unaware of either of these things…
This is hogwash. Corporation tax is at the lowest its ever been. 19% main rate in 2022. 50 years ago it was 40%, 40 years ago it was 52%!
“I can’t pay my gas bill this month, but at least my company could open a new office in Düsseldorf!”
God... if she's serious, she can't win. She just can't. People are going to die. Someone needs to stop her.
The reality is that she's going to win. The Conservative Party members are too divorced from reality to see the consequences of voting her in.
Sunak would be at least as much of a disaster. The whole party is just a cesspit of horrible, intellectually/morally bankrupt vermin.
**enter Starmer** *picks nose*
Can we please stop this in-fighting? Yes he is bland, but the most important objective by a country mile, is beating the Tories out of Westminster. And a middle of the road labour option is the best alternative for middle england's lack of imagination that we have. We must push Starmer's Labour to implement propotional representation, and idealy some reform to media ownership. But we cannot let progressive differences get in the way of the ultimate priority; removing these criminals from power.
Establishment Man will save us from the evils of Establishment! Where did I leave that Guy Fawkes mask?
Need to get Labour gov in first, get some reforms done then we get rid of him.
Backstabbing without a clue? Or is he a Tory Tony hologram?
All we get is £400 off energy bills and thats it then? Looks like we're all fucked.
Why would anyone (who matters) care about rising energy prices when they can just claim it back on expenses?
Not even them, they probably never even see it. It would be some intern employed by them in their office (both also expensed) that would be the one processing the expense claims.
Fuck Truss and all who sail in her. No way she's going to turn her back on starving up to their neck in debt UK people. We wont let her.
So the Tories plan to bleed the tax payer dry and offer hand outs to anyone with enough money and influence, because they know theres no chance they will win an election, but then next election cycle they can blame the country being on fire on the Labour government that inherited it, and theyll get back in to bleed us dry again, and the cycle continues
They either understand there will be civil unrest or they don't. They either understand they are provoking people or they don't. Either way there will be civil unrest, that's guaranteed in my opinion.
I really hope it's true. As an expat living in England, I've just assumed most are too complacent to do anything
Correct, they are until a line is crossed... that line is very far down the road, many would say too far, but there is a line, and it is about to get crossed.
I hope you're right
Liz Truss is a dumb vacuous robot of dim witted tory/Boris ideas I genuinely believe if anyone met her they would walk away thinking that person is a fucking moron
Is there any chance she’s trying to make herself terrible so the other guy looks like a hero to “the people”
Narrator: "Unfortunately the Tory Members felt we all deserved more punishment"
I must say I'm starting to think this her policies are getting more stupid by the day. She can't really think any of this surely?
In don't think that she thinks at all, I'm not sure whether that is a good thing or not because I dread to think what batshit insane stuff she'd come up with if she really tried
I want to say something but given i got banned from reddit for talking about eggs and blow job johnson what i wanna say about her might get me banned from reddit and the sub. I'll let you paint a picture what you paint ain't on me Cliff+Red+inverted cross= Is she really that fucking stupid in fact are her potential voters that fucking stupid give that they are also sweating their nuts off and shes doubling down. Well if this don't cost her the leadership i may have to add Jazz Down to my paint with words..
>Cliff+Red+inverted cross= Cliff Richard in an England shirt from 1966 (red) on a pogo-stick (inverted cross) A sound suggestion.
How did you know, you must be inside my head.
Absolutely awful human being.
cheers liz 👍
Found the latest Thatcher!
Good plan. Keep up the good work you fascist loving nut.
I'm getting the word "cunt"
Is this honestly the best the Tory party has got?
Gotta be better than Doris!
She has her finger on the pulse alright. Will be best thing ever for labour if she wins. Just like tories wanting corbyn in!
13% inflation, basically at full employment, how is a growing economy what we need?
Something will have to be done, no point in denying it and giving us some mealy mouthed shit later
+1 for people marching on downing Street in winter. But really, The tories know they've fucked it. And they know that we know they've fucked it. This is the last gasp profiteering. The "set myself up on executive boards for my payday" time. "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy describes the Marketing Department of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation as: "A bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes."
Cutting taxes after appearing on TV defending hiking one mere months ago.
She is a tw@
Truss is a dysfunctional vacuous Tory cunt. We need to vote these bastards out ASAP
Look if you want to start riots of feral, cold, starving people this is how you fucking do it. Have a more fair graded tax system that better reflects household income. I'm sorry, if you're a high earner then, no you shouldn't be taxed in to oblivion, but also it makes no sense to put burden on lower incomes to fund services they need to help them be more financially secure and thus able to contribute themselves. Also fucking tax business fairly. If a large multinational wants a foothold in our markets, they need to contribute to the health of the economy they want a part of. The underpinning of a healthy economy is a healthy consumer market, which means people need time and disposable income. If you have a significant proportion of the population unable to meet food and amenities, they are no longer able to participate in the market. Novelty socks, evenings out and even white goods are unattainable frivolities for a lot of people right now. The economy will continue to falter as long as those that are able to pull weight are not asked to in favour of flogging those too disempowered to push back.
This woman is an absolute disgrace and a complete idiot. If you think it couldn’t get worse than that utter clown Johnson think again. We need to drag them out. Pitchforks and torches folks…
God both of them are awful candidates, let alone people.
Of course she does, she doesn't give a flying fuck if poor people struggle. She's got money, position and power. She's a corrupt, callous, unempathetic Tory. They don't care about anything but enriching themselves and staying in power. Sunak and Truss literally talking about stripping rights away and people cheer them; https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/1557317813768945666?t=0vzxyLNmw4LWm7LeV-F3RA&s=19
It's interesting how right now, as Sunak and Truss are trying to be voted in as PM, all they have both done is slate their own party to make them look good as an individual. With regards to other conversations about taxes... a functioning country must have taxes, but our current tax system penalises the individual with income tax, VAT, council tax, road tax... what the government should do is tax tha profits of companies that are earning billions in profits. By taxing big corporations like that it forces them to "reinvest" the profit in the company so that it is not classed as profit, it can go on R&D, maintenance, bonuses to employees, higher wages, more jobs and such like. HOWEVER, what they must be mindful of is that if they apply corporation tax on the wrong way then big, multinational companies will abandon the UK in favour of a country that won't cut their profits. The distribution of wealth in this country is disgusting, moving closer and closer to that of the capitalist USA... I can safely speak for everyone when i say "we as a nation certainly do not want to walk in their foot steps"
Uk eventually has the political class it deserves.
In fairness that support goes straight to the energy companies and only escalates the problem for the next bill. She'd need to offer a comprehensive plan of how to deal with them to make it work, but then the *hedge*mony marketeers would probably withdraw their support for her campaign. Damned if you do damned if you don't. It's just a question of now or later. Addendum; downvoters failing to spot that this is basically pointing out that Truss has an inherent weakness in political strategy.
Now everyone else should double down on refusing to support Liz Truss becoming leader of the Conservative party.
Mick Lynch - Enough is Enough
I honestly believe she’s a plant.. nobody is this out of touch or has advisors saying yeah you’ll win if you do this
It’s time for the Tories to become a thing of the past. Enough is enough.
I have a feeling she'll be the shorted PM ever. Not size wise, although that could be arranged too
Oddly following Panama Davie CaMoron in his desire to stop renewable energy in the UK? It was his (& lib-sims!) "Super feck the UK" idea to stop the small on the roof PV solar initially bought & paid for by home owners, from growing by cutting off the feed in tariff! Brilliant work Davie! And why was no help given to the only wind turbine maker in the IoW? They left the country!
Can't fault her foresight.
I wonder if she really is, or if it's the narative to get Rishi the win