General News Thread

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, kenny said:

Are implying that the previous government adopted lassez fairer policies?

Up until Covid practically forced them to do otherwise in critical areas. Wasn't that what "austerity" cuts were about? 

 

But in any case, rather than that single area of focus, I'm still wondering how low taxation and quality public services can coexist anywhere and at any time, and if there are examples, it would be interesting.

 

Actually, now that I think about it, South Korea in recent times seemed to make that balance reasonably (for a given value of that word) better than most, so...

[kenny]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Up until Covid practically forced them to do otherwise in critical areas. Wasn't that what "austerity" cuts were about? 

 

But in any case, rather than that single area of focus, I'm still wondering how low taxation and quality public services can coexist anywhere and at any time, and if there are examples, it would be interesting.

 

Actually, now that I think about it, South Korea in recent times seemed to make that balance reasonably (for a given value of that word) better than most, so...

You must have missed the record public spending part of my post...

 

Cameron kept public spending high, intervened in the markets in banking and housing, introduced the national living wage and had the Brexit referendum. Austerity reduced the deficit after the crash but public spending still went up.

 

I've said previously that this government is mothballing infrastructure projects and other capital expenditure in favour of wage increases. This along with a poor housing sector is messing up construction at present. I hope they start finding the cash for some proper investment projects.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, kenny said:

You must have missed the record public spending part of my post...

 

Cameron kept public spending high, intervened in the markets in banking and housing, introduced the national living wage and had the Brexit referendum. Austerity reduced the deficit after the crash but public spending still went up.

 

I've said previously that this government is mothballing infrastructure projects and other capital expenditure in favour of wage increases. This along with a poor housing sector is messing up construction at present. I hope they start finding the cash for some proper investment projects.

Well, we do agree on the infrastructure projects. 

 

Let's consider for a moment that the government 2010-2024 was lavish in terms of its spending on public services, as you suggest. If that didn't help much and so isn't the way to go, then how will the also suggested reduced taxation? Funding infrastructure projects is the right thing to do, but that's not going to mean much to the critically sick guy waiting 12 hours for a hospital bed or the SEN kid who can't get to school anymore because the transport option is no longer available.

 

Honestly, I would consider such a working model if one was demonstrably shown to actually exist. 

[kenny]

22 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Well, we do agree on the infrastructure projects. 

 

Let's consider for a moment that the government 2010-2024 was lavish in terms of its spending on public services, as you suggest. If that didn't help much and so isn't the way to go, then how will the also suggested reduced taxation? Funding infrastructure projects is the right thing to do, but that's not going to mean much to the critically sick guy waiting 12 hours for a hospital bed or the SEN kid who can't get to school anymore because the transport option is no longer available.

 

Honestly, I would consider such a working model if one was demonstrably shown to actually exist. 

Lavish? Bit of stretch, I just said record levels. You could edit headlines for the BBC.

 

Depending on where you are on the laffer curve then reduced taxation can increase the tax take. My guess is that we are getting to the point where increased taxation will not earn the government more, but will have the opposite effect.

 

In your examples, I would question if the productivity levels in the NHS being 2019 levels if the funding has increased is the cause or why the transport option has been removed under the current government when it was provided under the previous one.

 

One to take up with your Labour MP would be my suggestion.

 

 

 

 

[Zear0]

23 hours ago, Lionator said:

https://news.sky.com/story/uks-sons-and-daughters-need-to-be-ready-to-fight-amid-growing-russian-threat-says-head-of-armed-forces-13483860

 

Maybe Russia does want to invade us, there’s probably intel. 

Bit late to respond, but think the quote was relating more to being able to function in a society in conflict.  This stuff can happen very quickly and if Russian "research vessels" accidently sever internet and power cables and we lose both for a week or so, how do we think we'd all function?  Not well I'd wager.

 

Dust off your old copies of Escort Weekly and sharpen the can opener.

[leicsmac]

18 minutes ago, kenny said:

Lavish? Bit of stretch, I just said record levels. You could edit headlines for the BBC.

 

Depending on where you are on the laffer curve then reduced taxation can increase the tax take. My guess is that we are getting to the point where increased taxation will not earn the government more, but will have the opposite effect.

 

In your examples, I would question if the productivity levels in the NHS being 2019 levels if the funding has increased is the cause or why the transport option has been removed under the current government when it was provided under the previous one.

 

One to take up with your Labour MP would be my suggestion.

 

 

 

 

Believe me, if I were writing headlines for them, concerning current matters the first one would be "Trump directly incited coup against the result of free and fair election, evidence shows", and I'd stand by it no matter what instead of pussyfooting around as they have.

 

But I do appreciate the impromptu economics info (sincerely) and this discourse has certainly given me food for thought, seeing as I have a rather dim view of that particular "science". 

[kenny]

30 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Believe me, if I were writing headlines for them, concerning current matters the first one would be "Trump directly incited coup against the result of free and fair election, evidence shows", and I'd stand by it no matter what instead of pussyfooting around as they have.

 

But I do appreciate the impromptu economics info (sincerely) and this discourse has certainly given me food for thought, seeing as I have a rather dim view of that particular "science". 

I'm cheating, I had look it up. That being said, the last government wasn't as right wing as the opposition and press wanted people to believe, they did many things that were broadly similar to what Blair, brown, milliband or Starmer would have done.

[CornwallFox]

2 hours ago, kenny said:

We have gone from record spending on public services and benefits under the Tories to a government that wants to increase it further without much plan to improve how any of it works.

 

I had to Google cognitive dissonance, but whilst it may sound to you like it applies I'm pleased to say in this case it does not.

 

 

I hate "record spending".

Spending always goes up because of inflation. It's always record.

But if it goes up slower than demand+inflation then it can be record and also not enough that's what happened for 14 consecutive years under the Tories. 

 

[CornwallFox]

Just now, kenny said:

I'm cheating, I had look it up. That being said, the last government wasn't as right wing as the opposition and press wanted people to believe, they did many things that were broadly similar to what Blair, brown, milliband or Starmer would have done.

I don't think the Tories were that right wing particularly, except on the economy. Cutting spending led us to the dark economic place we're in now. The fact labour won't relax it's fiscal rules to enable greater borrowing to induce growth is problematic, but really we should have been borrowing significantly back when government borrowing was virtually free, to really drive growth. The Tories had an incredible opportunity to really do something amazing but their economic dogma prevented that, leading to what were record high tax rates, combined with record debt, combined with collapsing public services. Truly abysmal leadership. 

[CornwallFox]

1 hour ago, kenny said:

You must have missed the record public spending part of my post...

 

Cameron kept public spending high, intervened in the markets in banking and housing, introduced the national living wage and had the Brexit referendum. Austerity reduced the deficit after the crash but public spending still went up.

 

I've said previously that this government is mothballing infrastructure projects and other capital expenditure in favour of wage increases. This along with a poor housing sector is messing up construction at present. I hope they start finding the cash for some proper investment projects.

For ten straight years in the public sector I had either 0% or 1% pay rises. Ten years. Relative wages fell by about a third. The public sector absolutely did not cause the financial crisis, nor the deficit, yet public servants paid for it. That isn't good for the economy either. If public servants are poorer, they're spending less on shops, on their houses, going out etc. It's bad for the economy. It's utterly ridiculous that people are still complaining when they actually get some sort of rise after that lost decade.

 

The Tories are economically illiterate, hence them cutting relative spending (it went up, but more slowly than demand or it would have) while also raising tax rates, with wage growth at the slowest for nearly 300 years and years of stagnation. 

[kenny]

23 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

For ten straight years in the public sector I had either 0% or 1% pay rises. Ten years. Relative wages fell by about a third. The public sector absolutely did not cause the financial crisis, nor the deficit, yet public servants paid for it. That isn't good for the economy either. If public servants are poorer, they're spending less on shops, on their houses, going out etc. It's bad for the economy. It's utterly ridiculous that people are still complaining when they actually get some sort of rise after that lost decade.

 

The Tories are economically illiterate, hence them cutting relative spending (it went up, but more slowly than demand or it would have) while also raising tax rates, with wage growth at the slowest for nearly 300 years and years of stagnation. 

I took at 25% pay cut in 2008 and my wife 40%

 

We were grateful to remain employed.

 

The offer of 0 or 1% each year would have been the better one 

[leicsmac]

35 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

For ten straight years in the public sector I had either 0% or 1% pay rises. Ten years. Relative wages fell by about a third. The public sector absolutely did not cause the financial crisis, nor the deficit, yet public servants paid for it. That isn't good for the economy either. If public servants are poorer, they're spending less on shops, on their houses, going out etc. It's bad for the economy. It's utterly ridiculous that people are still complaining when they actually get some sort of rise after that lost decade.

 

The Tories are economically illiterate, hence them cutting relative spending (it went up, but more slowly than demand or it would have) while also raising tax rates, with wage growth at the slowest for nearly 300 years and years of stagnation. 

 

10 minutes ago, kenny said:

I took at 25% pay cut in 2008 and my wife 40%

 

We were grateful to remain employed.

 

The offer of 0 or 1% each year would have been the better one 

And both of these anecdotes show that the current system doesn't always, or even mostly, benefit working people or serve the purpose of reducing inequality.  

 

Goodness only knows how it will cope with some real pressure from the natural world, rather than the shot across the bows that Covid was (as damaging as it was). 

[Md9]

Wonder what absolute shite this is going to about 

[Zear0]

6 minutes ago, Md9 said:

Wonder what absolute shite this is going to about 

And it's live! 

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdxwglkpdw7o

 

Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said a group of US lawmakers will be shown the full, unedited video of a controversial September boat strike in the Caribbean.

Hegseth told reporters after a classified briefing for Senators on Tuesday that appropriate congressional committees would be allowed to see it, but not the general public.

 

If you have to deny an action that you took, then it was likely a shitty action in the first place. 

[CornwallFox]

31 minutes ago, kenny said:

I took at 25% pay cut in 2008 and my wife 40%

 

We were grateful to remain employed.

 

The offer of 0 or 1% each year would have been the better one 

What were your pay rises over the next ten years?

[CornwallFox]

19 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

 

And both of these anecdotes show that the current system doesn't always, or even mostly, benefit working people or serve the purpose of reducing inequality.  

 

Goodness only knows how it will cope with some real pressure from the natural world, rather than the shot across the bows that Covid was (as damaging as it was). 

Indeed. The current economic model only benefits the rich. 

@kenny lost a huge chunk of his wages in 2008 through no fault of his own. 

I had a decade of lost earnings, which actually is a career as those earnings will never come back, so it's a career 30% down. 

Both of us did nothing wrong. Both of us I'm sure have worked hard. Yet true wealth has flourished while we've both took hits.

Capitalism is called capitalism because it pushes the wealth of a nation towards capital (wealth). Sod the rest of us. Sell of the nation's assets and steal it's money.

Even if you hate socialism you must want something different to what the last 40 years have brought us. 

 

[Md9]

9 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdxwglkpdw7o

 

Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said a group of US lawmakers will be shown the full, unedited video of a controversial September boat strike in the Caribbean.

Hegseth told reporters after a classified briefing for Senators on Tuesday that appropriate congressional committees would be allowed to see it, but not the general public.

 

If you have to deny an action that you took, then it was likely a shitty action in the first place. 

Will probably A hand picked group of people by trump and they will all just say there is nothing wrong anyway so it’s pretty pointless and a waste of everyone’s time 

[kenny]

Just now, CornwallFox said:

What were your pay rises over the next ten years?

Promotions and professional qualifications were higher than inflation.

 

Had I stayed at the same 'band' then they would have been above inflation for 2021-2024, wages shot up after COVID probably 7-8%.

 

Below inflation 2008-2012, most people weren't getting much at all. Then probably tracking inflation for the other years.

 

Typical benefits got cut in 2008 and never came back as well.

 

We did get our mileage rate put back up to 45p a mile which was a result.

[The Bear]

Why does Trump always CAPITALISE RANDOM WORDS?

 

 

[CornwallFox]

2 minutes ago, kenny said:

Promotions and professional qualifications were higher than inflation.

 

Had I stayed at the same 'band' then they would have been above inflation for 2021-2024, wages shot up after COVID probably 7-8%.

 

Below inflation 2008-2012, most people weren't getting much at all. Then probably tracking inflation for the other years.

 

Typical benefits got cut in 2008 and never came back as well.

 

We did get our mileage rate put back up to 45p a mile which was a result.

So all a bit mixed? Big hit down, then tracked inflation, then some wins, meanwhile your career progressed? 

 

Tbh I could get into private v public, but it's not really what I believe. 

 

What I believe is that the public and private sectors rely on each other.

 

The public sector uses the private sector for huge amounts of things: direct services, construction, maintenance, goods.... Basically everything. 

 

Meanwhile the private sector sees literally hundreds of billions of pounds a year funnelled to it via public sector services. 

 

Both would be crushed without the other. 

 

One thing I dislike about right wing politics is that it talks about the private sector as an incredible wealth creator, and the public sector as a drain. That just isn't true. The private sector only creates new money when businesses take on loans, in which case banks create money when lending. Otherwise, the private sector either just moves old money around from one place to another, or takes public spending - which again can be new created money. On its own it doesn't create money. Creating wealth just means it's concentrating the nation's assets into the pockets of a few, as that's what wealth is, the concentration of assets/money. 

 

Public sector and private sector are two sides of the same coin. What ordinary people should be fighting for is better public sector pay and better private sector pensions. 

[Md9]

So he is going to be talking a lot about all his accomplishments over the last 11 months to get America back to greatness. Shouldnt take to long should it. More distractions for something he is plotting no doubt 

[kenny]

10 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

So all a bit mixed? Big hit down, then tracked inflation, then some wins, meanwhile your career progressed? 

 

Tbh I could get into private v public, but it's not really what I believe. 

 

What I believe is that the public and private sectors rely on each other.

 

The public sector uses the private sector for huge amounts of things: direct services, construction, maintenance, goods.... Basically everything. 

 

Meanwhile the private sector sees literally hundreds of billions of pounds a year funnelled to it via public sector services. 

 

Both would be crushed without the other. 

 

One thing I dislike about right wing politics is that it talks about the private sector as an incredible wealth creator, and the public sector as a drain. That just isn't true. The private sector only creates new money when businesses take on loans, in which case banks create money when lending. Otherwise, the private sector either just moves old money around from one place to another, or takes public spending - which again can be new created money. On its own it doesn't create money. Creating wealth just means it's concentrating the nation's assets into the pockets of a few, as that's what wealth is, the concentration of assets/money. 

 

Public sector and private sector are two sides of the same coin. What ordinary people should be fighting for is better public sector pay and better private sector pensions. 

Pretty much, all my pay rises were promotion rather than inflation related. Ive probably never had a inflation related pay rise, but ive given them out.

 

These days, public sector pay has risen to the point where its very comparable to typical private sector jobs. Teachers earn more than Architects for example, then get the pension on top.

 

Unfortunately, the private sector is one blob and many in public sector think that we are all on 6 figure salaries reserved for 'tech' jobs, finance or banking. The majority of white collar workers struggle to get above £50k at any point in their career.

[CornwallFox]

1 minute ago, kenny said:

Pretty much, all my pay rises were promotion rather than inflation related. Ive probably never had a inflation related pay rise, but ive given them out.

 

These days, public sector pay has risen to the point where its very comparable to typical private sector jobs. Teachers earn more than Architects for example, then get the pension on top.

 

Unfortunately, the private sector is one blob and many in public sector think that we are all on 6 figure salaries reserved for 'tech' jobs, finance or banking. The majority of white collar workers struggle to get above £50k at any point in their career.

I can only talk about myself I suppose. I'm relatively senior these days. Run a professional led service covering a region. Yet I earn less that almost all of my friends in their mid forties. And it's been that way throughout our careers. If you read our relative jobs on paper you'd expect me to be earning more, but I'm not, and never will do. With the jobs I've done in my career the private sector equivalent has always been paid far more. I could leave and join the private sector of course, but I'm an idealist and like being a public servant and not working to make money. 

 

I suspect at the low end you might have a point. But as you move through your career, and perhaps sector could have a difference here TBF, the private sector starts to get further and further ahead. Think about how much noise you hear about a public sector CEO earning £150k while running a multi billion pound organisation, Vs how much you could earn in the private sector doing that.

 

Public sector pensions are obviously still better than private but they've been made a lot worse. There have been at least three rounds of making the pension worse over the last 15 years. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

59 minutes ago, The Bear said:

Why does Trump always CAPITALISE RANDOM WORDS?

 

 

It could BE literally any of THE words in a sentence.