Forum menu
Its odd how after years of repetitive ranting from the self declared grown ups on the Corbyn, trump and tory threads there is suddenly a dislike of ranting
You are not alone with your observation. They like to dish plenty out but run away and hide when they've been shown to be wrong.
yes, it does, because it's looking at whether households are net beneficiaries of the state or net contributors to the state. Also, the weather forecast doesn't tell you the football scores.
Running deficits for more or less 50 years tells you everyone is a net beneficiary of the state. Unless you want to opt out of using schools, roads, amenities, health, policing and infrastructure etc or perhaps live in Dubai?
Emiratis are MASSIVE net beneficiaries of the state. Interestingly, I saw a suggestion that Pavel Durov, one of the founders of Telegram, has Emirati citizenship. It's the first time I'd heard of a non-Arab foreigner getting it (maybe a couple of ancient ****stani businessmen that had been born there...?). They were reluctant enough to give it to resident Arab spouses of Emiratis traditionally...
I wonder what it was that made Emirati authorities think that Durov could contribute to the success and security of the country? Certainly not money, they have enough of that. 🤔🤔🤔
Ironic swear filter appearance there!
Emiratis are MASSIVE net beneficiaries of the state
Its a weird mix, like many of the petroleum states, of locals looked after by the state and then the minimal taxation on the immigrants living there as well who, so long as they arent the manual workers, can have a rather nice lifestyle.
Was curious about who could get citizenship there and apparently it was changed somewhat in 2021 to allow those who "contribute to our development journey" with no strict rules but simply having the royals/officials nominate them and then the cabinet decide.
So I guess there will be a few others but very very few.
Quick google suggests some random cases such as a Brit who was ceo of emirates air and is still associated with it and a couple of similar businessmen closely linked to the country.
Its odd how after years of repetitive ranting from the self declared grown ups on the Corbyn, trump and tory threads there is suddenly a dislike of ranting
Oh they still like ranting, binners was in full swing on Monday. Ironically what appears to have shut him up completely isn't the lefties on here but Starmer.
Trying to defend the indefensible is hard enough but this week Starmer-Reeves placed the bar so high that it wasn't even worth the effort.
But hey, let's blame the lefties on here if the Starmer-Reeves double act can't be defended.
This week even what must be the least corbynite couple in the Labour Party, Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper, couldn't stomach the latest Starmer-Reeves austerity cuts. You don't have to be very left-wing to oppose what and Starmer-Reeves are doing, just not a Tory.
Any context to that link? Looks like a techno optimist think tank talking about policy recommendations to the treasury? The classic techno optimist trope of tech to unlock growth seems to be in there. I'm not really sure what we're supposed to be reading into it/them?
Hi binners 👋
This handy new feature on the forum means that I can see you looking at this thread 😉
Context - I was asked when we are going to hear about the spending review, albeit not in those exact terms.
Short answer - was going to be April, now June. There may be some announcements earlier than June but I'm not going to give any details of things I may be privy to. Free choice whether you accept that or not, I've not hidden who I work for or the areas we work in.
Why that link? - it explains the CSR process in easily followed terms. I don't really agree with the 'Techno Optimist think tank' - it's (one of) the UK Digital /Tech Industries Trade Associations. Which is the area I work in (STEM) hence came high up in my google search for a link. I don't necessarily agree with all their opinions and of course they will be lobbying for the industries/members they represent to get an appropriate share of the SR pie, that's what Trade Associations do.
But there are many other links saying the same thing about where we are in the SR process, for example
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/what-is-a-spending-review
Hope that makes sense.
etc.
That’s great and good to see investment in an area where presumably the tories would not have invested?
however, it is completely meaningless to all the people in the country who need more help and support from a country with high inequality. Labour seem to be doing very little in that area.
I said I wasn't engaging and then something like this happens.
Fire at an electricity substation. Airport closed for the day, 16,000 homes and businesses without power. Call to arms for those that rely on electricity for medical care (I'm thinking like home dialysis, COPD support equipment, etc.) to be in touch so they can be restored asap.
The national grid relies on the time signal to function. It's not fallen over yet but also relies on co-operation with other nations for resilience, and in the changing geopolitical world can you guarantee that for ever? And infrastructure like that isn't just bought in, or built overnight if it turns out we need it. Have a read about RETSI.
Just one example, but how do you prioritise investment into that against other things? Foreign aid? Welfare? The Arts? The first duty of the state is to protect its citizens, etc. These aren't academic research programmes, this is CNI.
Go ahead and sneer at 'tough choices' and one at least is going to say that we should just print money and do both. But until we have the whole picture about what the spending plan is and why it's been prioritised in that way, I find it impossible to either defend or condemn out of hand no matter how bad or unpopular these pre-decisions appear to be.
So for now at least I'll stay away from the goading of the 'centrists' and the pervading everything is shit, tories in different clothes narrative on here.
Carry on.
it is completely meaningless to all the people in the country who need more help and support from a country with high inequality.
The point is that it isn't. It might feel meaningless to them, but where's any balanced discussion in the press, etc., looking with balance at the big picture. It's just brushed away in the same way as the 'where's all the great plans you can't tell us about?' comments like last night.
That’s great and good to see investment in an area where presumably the tories would not have invested?
I can't hand on heart say they weren't / wouldn't have also invested in it. But I can say that it was increasingly obvious that the tories had plans that didn't add up, hence why a proper Comprehensive Spending Review is vital.
(Rone will be here shortly to say it isn't, obviously)
My water rates up today £130 a year (mine starts from april)
My business leccy jumped from £175 to £264 (monthly payment mess plus rise and catch up over winter.)
My home energy jumped from £224 to 269
And my council tax up - not sure how much - probably £150ish.
Interest rates stayed the same too (4.5%)
Next week we get the spring statement and more crackers economics plus the NI hike etc.
I'm one of the lucky ones too - even though my business is crawling along. Lucky to have a partner that mucks in.
The whole system is about preservation of wealth for a few people and the public have no real choice but to lap it up and accept it as the way it is.
Labour have missed all this sort of stuff - basic stuff that impacts people's lives hugely, and the dumb robots look like they're still trying to create an environment of fiscal insanity.
Well what goes around comes around. If I was Starmer I'd have been thinking about the impact of this with forthcoming elections in the face of all the nonsense about fiscal rules / savings and 22bn black-hole (my god he repeats that a lot at PMQs.)
I can't hand on heart say they weren't / wouldn't have also invested in it. But I can say that it was increasingly obvious that the tories had plans that didn't add up, hence why a proper Comprehensive Spending Review is vital.
(Rone will be here shortly to say it isn't, obviously)
That's what a debate is yeah? I also spotted right from the start Labour were going to go down this path.
You can't get away from a bigger deficit to make the investments. Do all the comprehensive spending reviews you like it doesn't increase money into the economy if the Chancellor invents rules about what they can and can't spend.
Jonv - there is all the evidence you need. When do you give up on years of believing shrinking the state leads to anything other than poor outcomes. That would included GDP too.
Surely you can see it rolling out in front of you?
We absolutely have to get away from the idea that the government saves . The is no mechanism in the system for saving. Sure there are spreadsheets and budgets - but they assume the government is a household. In other words as we know self-imposed fiscal limits. Botched up over a 5 year rule - I mean WTF? If that's not ideological then what is.
tories had plans that didn't add up,
Becuase they don't add up - they simply don't. If they did add up then there would be no investment from a given budget to enter the economy. It's entirely normal. Do you think Labour just thought of something amazing?
We can have a discussion about what money should be spent on and the real limits (inflation - resources) but chasing a balanced budget defies logic unless you don't want government money in the economy and the economy to grow.
Blew - out of date now but just shows how rare and irrelevent is to run a surplus.
The issue is what has the money been spent on - for the Tories they actually carried on spening like buggers but no on the thinks that a count.
Labour have missed all this sort of stuff - basic stuff that impacts people's lives hugely, and the dumb robots look like they're still trying to create an environment of fiscal insanity.
With an increasing hint of cruelty, not much different to the lot we've just got rid of.
The attacks on PIP and UC are leaving a bitter taste, probably with core Labour voters. I'm starting to feel like Starmer's government is going to be a one termer, crippled by adhering to some made up fiscal rules and trying to keep squarely in an overton window drawn by Nigel Farage...
Also - sorry it expired. It's looking like the government is about to issue 305bn in gilts - that tells you they will run a bigger deficit in the next financial year.
I'm not quite sure how this pans out but it does tell you 22bn was a pointless noise that failed to gain any traction - if the deficit is about to be enlarged. In other words Labour are just creating an even bigger black-hole. Fiscal rules may just drip away with creative accounting.
Which is fine by me - it's not big enough but hey they're shit scared of the markets which will just lap up the extra bonds.
The issue is what has the money been spent on - for the Tories they actually carried on spening like buggers but no on the thinks that a count.
Not sure what I put there. I was trying to articulate the Tories still enlarged the debt - but money simple didn't go on the right things.
"Govt as a household budget" is the toxic legacy of Thatcher and it's done untold damage to the country in the subsequent decades.
(I assume she didn't invent the concept but she certainly popularised it.)
With an increasing hint of cruelty, not much different to the lot we've just got rid of.
The attacks on PIP and UC are leaving a bitter taste, probably with core Labour voters. I'm starting to feel like Starmer's government is going to be a one termer, crippled by adhering to some made up fiscal rules and trying to keep squarely in an overton window drawn by Nigel Farage...
That's pretty much where I am.
And Labour are squarely in Farage's Overton Window. We have a supposedly Labour government punching down on some of the most vulnerable people in society to save £5bn in 5 years time, but also arguing that there is no economic case to rejoin the EU. When the increased GDP from doing so would easily cover this £5bn and a lot of bringing defence spending up to 2.5%.
Game, set and match Farage.
I was asked when we are going to hear about the spending review, albeit not in those exact terms.
Short answer - was going to be April, now June. There may be some announcements earlier than June but I'm not going to give any details of things I may be privy to.
What you were asked is when are we going to hear about these exciting and important government investment projects which you hinted about last August. Your answer is now June, almost a full year later.
There are obviously two problems with that. Firstly why is the government so secretive about this planned investment? It is not normal for governments to be secretive about what they hope to achieve, especially when they believe that it should be celebrated. In fact the complete opposite is usually true - they like to proudly advertise their expected targets, they do it all the time.
And the second point is that your belief that we should not be critical of the current government because you know stuff that you can't share with anyone is obviously not reasonable.
On Monday there were two or three Starmer supporters on this thread claiming that it was totally unacceptable to trust a Guardian article which accurately detailed what was about to be announced by the government the following day.
So you will forgive me if I am a tad sceptical about trusting the word of a Starmer supporter on a MTB forum who insists that I shouldn't criticise Starmer because he is doing a great job but I need to wait almost a year to fully understand what a great job he is doing. 🙃
And Labour are squarely in Farage's Overton Window. We have a supposedly Labour government punching down on some of the most vulnerable people in society to save £5bn in 5 years time, but also arguing that there is no economic case to rejoin the EU. When the increased GDP from doing so would easily cover this £5bn and a lot of bringing defence spending up to 2.5%.
I'm not above admitting that I was quite wrong about this Labour government, like lots of people I thought they'd be better than the last lot, and would learn a few lessons even, but I am struggling to identify the silver linings here.
Perhaps I was naive (probably), but it's all feeling very Tory right now, deepening poverty gaps, lots of growth talk, hammering the poor and rolling on through increasing calls for a wealth tax (from their own back benches)...
Ed Milliband has just been on bigging up GB energy and renewables (including carbon bloody capture) wonder when 'the project' will turn it's attention on that area of policy.
Rayner's seemingly been benched, Reeves can apparently do no wrong, Streeting increasingly sounds like a bit of a git whenever they wheel him out. And they're doing quiet briefings to press chums... It's like the days of Boris but with less catchy slogans...
"Govt as a household budget" is the toxic legacy of Thatcher and it's done untold damage to the country in the subsequent decades.
(I assume she didn't invent the concept but she certainly popularised it.)
She popularised it because as the UK's first ever female Prime Minister her gimmick was to portray herself as a sensible housewife who went shopping within her means.
It's like the days of Boris but with less catchy slogans
Presumably Starmer hasn't been porking random women on the family sofa, though...
But yes - Tory policy delivered with swagger and gloating versus Tory policy delivered with apology and apparent reluctance*. What's the ****ing difference?
*Although in the cases of Kendall and Streeting, I'm not sure. Kendal (bless her) is not the brightest and probably thinks snarling whilst cutting benefits is the will of the people (remember that one?) Whilst Streeting is just a Tory in a red tie - the private healthcare industry's each-way bet for when the actual Tory party imploded.
Guns not butter. Flag-shagging not cooperating.
There's a tiny part of me still waiting to see after 12 months. But, at the moment, if there was a GE tomorrow, I probably wouldn't bother to vote. And I'm about as average as it is possible to be demographic-wise.
There are obviously two problems with that. Firstly why is the government so secretive about this planned investment? It is not normal for governments to be secretive about what they hope to achieve, especially when they believe that it should be celebrated. In fact the complete opposite is usually true - they like to proudly advertise their expected targets, they do it all the time.
Because decisions haven't been made. You don't have to believe me, it's in the links above, although the bit that it doesn't say is that it's all a negotiation: How much do you need to do this / ach, can't afford that much, what can be pushed to the right / what could you do with this much / etc.
There's plenty of 'Intent' out there in the public domain; the nuts and bolts are Work in Progress. How much will UKRI have to invest in these key areas? What will they choose to support, and how, etc.?
https://www.ukri.org/who-we-are/our-vision-and-strategy/tomorrows-technologies/
And the second point is that your belief that we should not be critical of the current government because you know stuff that you can't share with anyone is obviously not reasonable.
You can do what you want. I think that you are premature, and in time will come to realise that but nothing I can say will convince you I'm sure, so no point in trying.
Also FWIW - we would love it if the process went faster, retaining staff thru' the uncertainty of the next round of funding is hard for all labs like ours. But it's not an easy task unpicking the problems of the last 14 years.
[quote data-userid="4786" data-postid="13549205"
Ed Milliband has just been on bigging up GB energy and renewables (including carbon bloody capture) wonder when 'the project' will turn it's attention on that area of policy...
there are plenty of bad ideas in the world, but I'd love to see the end of carbon bloody capture and ID sodding cards. Legend has it that if you say "ID cards" three times in the mirror Tony Blair will crawl out of his crypt to suggest them as the cure to terrorism, fraud and the common cold.
What worries me about all this is that is that if the Labour Party ****s it up we are doomed to some sort of Tory/reform mash-up after the next GE - or as a minimum some hard right version of the Tories in Government
In a related question - who you all going to vote for in the next General Election? (obvious caveat that there is 4 years to next GE)
I'm not above admitting that I was quite wrong about this Labour government, like lots of people I thought they'd be better than the last lot, and would learn a few lessons even, but I am struggling to identify the silver linings here.
Put me in the same camp. GBE could be very positive, but a lot of the related energy announcements are rebrands of funding agreed by the previous government.
Whatever Streeting says, the amusing thing is the graph about halfway down.
The number of nurses in the NHS from non-Uk, non-EU countries* is 2.5 times what it was in 2016.
*And thus more likely to be black/brown skinned.
Leave voters really didn't know what they were voting for, did they...
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Hoisted by her own petard! When the day comes I'm going to really enjoy seeing Rachel from accounts dumped onto the political scrapheap.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/mar/21/uk-borrowing-rises-rachel-reeves-spring-statement
Yeah, the UK is an economic mess. Much if it due to the choices "we've" made, but not nearly all of it. The government's increased spending commitments are already fast out pacing taxation rises and a stagnant real economy... and forecasts are getting worse and worse. Time to start serious talks with the EU? Just spending more isn't enough. The UK making, doing, and trading much more is needed.
Oh, and on the Chancellor's immediate choices... more tax rises are needed (despite the dent the last lot made on public support for the government)... more "borrowing" is required, and happening (despite the moaning of "market" watchers)... and making more hard choices (yes, governments do have to make choices) on where the increased spending goes will have to come. She'll be criticised for doing any of that, and realistically needs to do all of it.
The 2024 fiscal rules are already for the bin... presenting it as otherwise will be the normal politicking though.
Toynbee has turned!
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/21/disability-cuts-family-labour-5bn
I believe the Shakespeare quote is hoist by her own petard.
But yes, she's ****ed as far as I can see.
She either shreds what little is left of her own credibility, changes the rules and tries to brassneck it out. Or she reaches into the drawer for the bottle of scotch and the revolver.
And, to think, all of this (defence spending and not cutting benefits) could easily be covered by being adult enough to admit that imposing economic sanctions on ourselves is a stupid idea.
Strange old world, sometimes...
Toynbee has turned!
The final lines of that say it all for me.
"I won’t be able to afford to work – we could lose everything"
As I said on the other page, for many people PIP, especially mobility allowance, arguably need to be increased to keep people in work. Not decreased, or removed. There may be ways to stop the increasing budget for disability related welfare payments as a whole... but if doing so takes people out of work, rather than help more people into work... it's going to end up as a net loss for the UK as whole, not just the people immediately effected. With more to come before changes are reviewed, voted on, and implemented... whether this can be avoided or not is key as far as I'm concerned. And, in the meantime, the uncertainty for those that could be hit must be hell.
Politically a way out for Reeves is too do similar to the new German chancellor - ie paradigm shift in world order, new financial rules for new times etc. Not just to cover defence spending, but more widely measures to support society through the impact of war, avoid austerity dragging on growth etc. It's reasonable to suggest that the war in Ukraine has directly affected the economic position across Europe and a rebuilding phase with greater debt is needed even within her own ideology.
Also use the war as a reason for closer working economic relationship with Europe - begin gentle pitch rolling for a return to free trade/ common market. Keep the subtext of Trump in sight but off stage as the politics there are hard until Europe more widely gets its collective act together.
The number of nurses in the NHS from non-Uk, non-EU countries* is 2.5 times what it was in 2016.
There are shortages of nurses across Europe, 1.2 million from the article below, competition for nurses from European countries even if we re-joined the EU would not be as simple a fix as some imagined. Actually making nursing a more attractive better paid job should be the solution, making it an inspirational job for UK and Europeans. And lets be honest nursing jobs create a hell of a lot of value to society and are wages that are likely to be re-spent into local economies. The whole western world needs to revaluate what it values and refocus on what society needs, which isn't running the economy for psychopaths and oligarchs at the cost of the majority, as the current rules do.
Remember that picture that used to be posted of the tory cabinet in the 80's laughing (supposedly about trickle down). does anyone really think that the economy is not a great ****ing big step more right wing now than then, that Thatcherite and Regan economics have not been concreted in, and many more layers of that same trickle down economic theory has been built up to become the dominant accepted wisdom by the whole of the western world at the cost of normal working people.
How can we afford it? We are paying the costs every day, how can we afford not too change? That should be what everyone is asking, rather than defending the twisted mess that of our establishment economic dogma.
Also use the war as a reason for closer working economic relationship with Europe - begin gentle pitch rolling for a return to free trade/ common market.
For example... being a "third country" means the increased state spending across Europe (be that on defence or anything else) won't be increasing production in the UK as much as it could be.
Actually making nursing a more attractive better paid job should be the solution, making it an inspirational job for UK and Europeans.
We hear this again and again... and of course it's true... but expecting all countries to get their specialist work forces the correct size, given the lag of training and the whim of a public who might well prefer other work, isn't realistic. Flows of people in all industries is essential for them to prosper. The difference with healthcare is that we all suffer when staffing levels are wrong.
Oh, on EU nurses and care staff especially, the draw to Germany is strong right now... not just because of demand, but because residency brings benefits denied elsewhere (like here in the UK). Nurses needs to be treated with dignity in the UK, wherever they are from... charging them and treating them as outsiders, rather than contributors, needs to stop.
Because decisions haven't been made. You don't have to believe me, it's in the links above, although the bit that it doesn't say is that it's all a negotiation:
I completely believe you that decisions haven't been made! You appear to be getting excited over intentions which is fine but I can't see why the government needs to be so secretive about their intentions and not make them public.
You seem to want us to ignore what the government has done and is doing and instead focus on what it intends to do but hasn't yet made any decisions over or even bothered to tell us. That really isn't reasonable.
What would you say to the growing number of Labour MPs who are becoming dissatisfied with the direction Starmer and Reeves are taking........ have a look at this MTB forum where someone is claiming everything looks quite positive to them but unfortunately they can't say why?
We have the Runcorn by-election coming up, Labour will be judged by the direction they have taken since forming a government in July plus their vision of the future which they offer voters, not their undeclared intentions.
And quite right too......it is totally unreasonable to expect voters to put their blind trust in politicians in this day and age. Especially politicians that have repeatedly lied, backpedaled, and carried out screeching u-turns.
Next week is going to be interesting for sure. The numbers are all over the place with the fiscal headroom touted as being used up already.
Also - counterintuitively deficits can enlarge when you try to shrink them because you are shrinking the state but giving money away to less deserving 'causes'. Which might be what's going off here.
Tories broke their fiscal rules several times during the Obsborne years and beyond. They never last and get changed over the terms.
Fiscal rules are inherently a waste of time, and lack dynamic capability to adjust to changing circumstances.
They just need to go - they are their to falsely appease the wrong kind of people and suffocate good outcomes.
The numbers are all over the place with the fiscal headroom touted as being used up already.
Economists expect the deteriorating outlook to eat up the £9.9bn of headroom she had in order to meet her own fiscal rules in the October budget.
You'll hear about how the "world has changed", with global uncertainly knocking growth and forcing countries to invest more in defence.
This is all part of the chancellor seeking to distance sluggish growth from her own budget decisions last October
and making more hard choices (yes, governments do have to make choices)
Thanks for informing us of this. Honestly I thought they had no choice since thats the only reason for a Labour party to follow the tory austerity path. Now though I am going to have to reconsider.
Going back to the NHS the latest private eye had an article about the new NHS England chair Penny Dash who has been described in glowing terms by Streeting as a "radical reformer". Unfortunately, as they pointed out, those radical reforms include the NHS over the last 20 years, including as the McKinsey health care partner whilst they had a bunch of contracts advising Lansley, so I do have to wonder whether she is really the person to fix the mess she helped cause.
Will she turn round and tax the wealth of multi millionaires and tax assets next week?, nah will she ****.......this labour government can **** right off
the McKinsey health care partner whilst they had a bunch of contracts advising Lansley, so I do have to wonder whether she is really the person to fix the mess she helped cause.
I think centrist Labour politicians links with private healthcare providers is probably at least as strong as Tory politicians.
https://democracyforsale.substack.com/p/private-healthcare-millions-starmer-alan-milburn
How private health has invested in Wes Streeting
https://goodlawproject.org/how-private-health-has-invested-in-wes-streeting/
More than 60% of the registered donations accepted by the health secretary come from people and companies linked to private health.
What worries me about all this is that is that if the Labour Party ****s it up we are doomed to some sort of Tory/reform mash-up after the next GE - or as a minimum some hard right version of the Tories in Government
Exactly it feels like Labour are just warming the seat for the proper fascists to take over on a "common sense" footing.
All I here from people is how this is the worst government ever, with the worst PM. I don't agree with the statement just yet but non-the-less that's how a lot of people feel.
As far as I can see energy and fuel costs have caused the vast majority of serial price rises across the UK. The promise of cheap abundant green energy, seems like a con to most people and play thing for the rich and privileged.
Pricing people out of (now and in the future plans) basics like gas, electricity, water, decent healthcare/dentistry, holidays abroad (you can watch celebrities on telly instead), vehicles you don't get penalised on a daily basis, just going to work etc. On the face of it, it looks like an economic apartheid facilitated by government, dished out by private sector liars and profiteers. Any grants offered (conditional) are always toward new very expensive "solutions" where the grant is a butty on top of the going rate, such is the real world! All this going on at the same time as services are reduced, made worse, more expensive, charged for when previously free/included or completely removed. Things were already in a piss poor state, where you thought it couldn't possibly get any worse!
Got a note stuck to my bin by the bin police. This country has got to be the most petty on the planet. Apparently I need a permit costing 59 quid PA for garden waste now. That will go with the permit the private sector bouncers said I need for tip.
I don't know anyone who asked or voted for this bullshit.
We have a piece of paper we have to show at the tip. Not really the end of the world.
When I see people bothering to complain about such trivialities as bin collections or potholes, it cheers me to see that at least some have no significant troubles in their lives.
Things can't really be that bad when potholes are the number one problem for so many people, surely?
https://bsky.app/profile/tomcalver.bsky.social/post/3ljwmbm2xfk2d