General News Thread

[danny.]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

That kind of plateau still results in the aforementioned age demographic crisis as the number of people above 65 will still end up disproportionate to the number of children coming into the workforce to support them. At least in the short term, anyway. 

You are assuming we need the same amount of people in the workforce in a generation's time. I can't imagine that being the case.

[leicsmac]

31 minutes ago, danny. said:

You are assuming we need the same amount of people in the workforce in a generation's time. I can't imagine that being the case.

That may well be true, which ties in rather neatly with the current chat on the AI Thread. 

 

Social structure adapts, or it doesn't survive.

[Dahnsouff]

44 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

That kind of plateau still results in the aforementioned age demographic crisis as the number of people above 65 will still end up disproportionate to the number of children coming into the workforce to support them. At least in the short term, anyway. 

You either legislate to control the population shift, or let 'market' forces handle the change. In a world where self interest overrides the needs of society, one is substantially more palatable than the other I would suggest.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

You either legislate to control the population shift, or let 'market' forces handle the change. In a world where self interest overrides the needs of society, one is substantially more palatable than the other I would suggest.

A managed and legislated plateau with a rough decade or two while age demographics reset back to something more sustainable is likely the best bad option on this one. 

[CornwallFox]

1 hour ago, danny. said:

You are assuming we need the same amount of people in the workforce in a generation's time. I can't imagine that being the case.

Tbh I'm extremely doubtful people will be allowed to enjoy life once ai and robotics are everywhere. There'll be jobs people are expected to do. No way will the plebs get to relax through life

[Greg2607]

4 hours ago, danny. said:

Support for job losses is a different thing to constant support for multiple children regardless of employment status.
 

 

Third option would be to neither grow nor shrink the population significantly. Which would be for a nuclear family to have two children. Isn’t this what a two child cap incentives?

 

GDP is a pretty worthless metric. GDP/capita is the only thing worth looking at. Sure, mass migration increases GDP, but it reduces GDP/capita and makes us all poorer. Why would we want that?

Sorry, I meant Tax Revenue not GDP. 

[Md9]

Kash Patel could push trump down the stairs in the White House in full view of the world and hesgeth and millar could walk over him as he lay on the floor and he would still somehow blame Biden for it 

[danny.]

58 minutes ago, Greg2607 said:

Sorry, I meant Tax Revenue not GDP. 

Tax revenue is also pointless looking at on its own because people also cost the government money, government spending is around £17k/person/year so anyone paying less than that in tax is not a net contributor

[danny.]

1 hour ago, CornwallFox said:

Tbh I'm extremely doubtful people will be allowed to enjoy life once ai and robotics are everywhere. There'll be jobs people are expected to do. No way will the plebs get to relax through life

I imagine it will be like life on earth is in The Expanse, if you've ever read/watched that

 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, danny. said:

I imagine it will be like life on earth is in The Expanse, if you've ever read/watched that

 

Yep. Fantastic works. 

 

And that, should things continue in the mindset that a lot of people currently have, would be the best case scenario. 

[foxes1988]

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/uk-cut-household-energy-bills-by-150-pounds-year-2025-11-26/

 

Adding a large proportion of green levies into general taxation definitely a smart move obviously makes it much more progressive.

[RobHawk]

I know the Tories are irrelevant at the moment but it boils my piss to read that kemi's new message post budget is 'cut spending, lower taxes'

 

Cut spending? Wtf? Austerity is a major contribution to the mess we are in, we have to spend to get things going again. Absolutely brain-dead response. 

[Jon the Hat]

3 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

I know the Tories are irrelevant at the moment but it boils my piss to read that kemi's new message post budget is 'cut spending, lower taxes'

 

Cut spending? Wtf? Austerity is a major contribution to the mess we are in, we have to spend to get things going again. Absolutely brain-dead response. 

Tax is at 37% of GDP.  It is completely ridiculous.  The government has lost control of spending, particularly in Welfare.  Labour had the chance to make reforms, but they lost to their own backbenchers and will reap the consequences.

[RobHawk]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

Tax is at 37% of GDP.  It is completely ridiculous.  The government has lost control of spending, particularly in Welfare.  Labour had the chance to make reforms, but they lost to their own backbenchers and will reap the consequences.

So you think now is the time to 'cut spending'? You mention the welfare bill, but we know they will cut everything. Where else do you think we can cut? 

 

Let's also not forget, it was austerity that drove up the welfare bill, the shortism of cutting spending does more long term harm. Cutting spending solves very little within the economy. 

 

Torys have wrecked this country, first privatisation, then austerity, Brexit and finally trussonomics. As I said, brain dead.

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

Tax is at 37% of GDP.  It is completely ridiculous.  The government has lost control of spending, particularly in Welfare.  Labour had the chance to make reforms, but they lost to their own backbenchers and will reap the consequences.

It was 35.3% two years ago, not hugely different. 

 

Denmark, Finland, Sweden , Belgium and Austria all have ratios of 40%+. They're also amongst the ten happiest nations in Europe.

 

My guess is that it's less about how much tax you pay and more about how well it is used. For instance, in high tax countries that work, there's less reliance on charity.

 

In the UK there are 170,862 charities, that's approximately one charity per 400 people, which is ridiculous.

[Jon the Hat]

13 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

So you think now is the time to 'cut spending'? You mention the welfare bill, but we know they will cut everything. Where else do you think we can cut? 

 

Let's also not forget, it was austerity that drove up the welfare bill, the shortism of cutting spending does more long term harm. Cutting spending solves very little within the economy. 

 

Torys have wrecked this country, first privatisation, then austerity, Brexit and finally trussonomics. As I said, brain dead.

I think Labour just put though close to 30Bn of tax rises to increase welfare spending and placate the bond markets, nothing all to help working people. Nothing to support those who will care for themselves in their retirement, nothing to create jobs, nothing to attract business to the UK.  Its all just meh.  Waste of an election win, waste of the last chance seemingly to avoid a Reform government.  

Just now, Trav Le Bleu said:

It was 35.3% two years ago, not hugely different. 

 

Denmark, Finland, Sweden , Belgium and Austria all have ratios of 40%+. They're also amongst the ten happiest nations in Europe.

 

My guess is that it's less about how much tax you pay and more about how well it is used. For instance, in high tax countries that work, there's less reliance on charity.

 

In the UK there are 170,862 charities, that's approximately one charity per 400 people, which is ridiculous.

Those countries provide really excellent public services.  Ours are in the main shit.  I am zero confidence increasing taxes to those levels would overcome that.

[foxes1988]

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Tax is at 37% of GDP.  It is completely ridiculous.  The government has lost control of spending, particularly in Welfare.  Labour had the chance to make reforms, but they lost to their own backbenchers and will reap the consequences.

There's an argument to be made about reducing the welfare bill specially pensioner benefits universal credit benefits and disability benefits but I'm not sure the general public have the stomach for it.  Maybe on UC

[Trav Le Bleu]

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

 

Those countries provide really excellent public services.  Ours are in the main shit.  I am zero confidence increasing taxes to those levels would overcome that.

That's kind of what I'm saying.

[Lionator]

Probably the most significant event in Ukraine since Feb 2022. Let’s hope they get the most corrupt gone.

 

 

[leicsmac]

Throwing more money at it won't help public services. 

 

Further cuts in the name of "waste" won't help public services. 

 

So what, exactly, will help public services? 

 

For some, this is a matter for which they don't have the luxury of the town hall discussion. They rely on these services for their lives, health and sanity. 

[Parafox]

6 hours ago, RobHawk said:

I know the Tories are irrelevant at the moment but it boils my piss to read that kemi's new message post budget is 'cut spending, lower taxes'

 

Cut spending? Wtf? Austerity is a major contribution to the mess we are in, we have to spend to get things going again. Absolutely brain-dead response. 

On welfare. As they always do.

[CornwallFox]

8 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Tax is at 37% of GDP.  It is completely ridiculous.  The government has lost control of spending, particularly in Welfare.  Labour had the chance to make reforms, but they lost to their own backbenchers and will reap the consequences.

The issue isn't spending being too high. 

The issue is that our economy has been pretty stagnant for the last 15+ years, since the 2007 financial crisis, and so we're getting decreasing tax yields per % tax rate. 

Growth is what we need so that tax revenues increase without tax rates needing to increase - the issue was indeed austerity, which dampened any chance of growth at a point in time when interest rates were at record lows so we should have been borrowing to invest in and grow the economy. That would take allowed tax rates to fall. Instead they reached record highs under the Tories and have continued to rise so far under labour as their growth initiatives are pretty long term.

Edited 28 November 2025 by CornwallFox

[CornwallFox]

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Throwing more money at it won't help public services. 

 

Further cuts in the name of "waste" won't help public services. 

 

So what, exactly, will help public services? 

 

For some, this is a matter for which they don't have the luxury of the town hall discussion. They rely on these services for their lives, health and sanity. 

I'm the short term, borrow to invest in measures that will bring about short and medium term growth. This may need to include measures to reduce cost pressures on business. Implement long term policies to provide business certainty. These measures would allow businesses to invest with clarity around things like a long term industrial strategy.

 

That will support growth more quickly than the longer term solutions so far offered by the current government, allowing tax revenues to increase, giving opportunities for future tax rate reductions on individuals.

[Tommy G]

Interesting what the OBR have published - makes RR position even more bleak. What an absolute cretin. 

[st albans fox]

27 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Interesting what the OBR have published - makes RR position even more bleak. What an absolute cretin. 

Is there anyone competent who could be brought into the role?  

I guess Angela rayner is looking to get back into cabinet  😂