UK Politics General Discussion

[Matt N]

On the illegal immigration point, it’s strange that as far as I can tell, this only seems to have been a major (or at very least, well publicised… I debate that it’s as major as the airtime it gets would imply, personally) problem post-Brexit.

Ironically given that a lot of Brexit voters wanted to reduce immigration, it seems like this has increased since Brexit. Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t we have some sort of agreement with France when we were in the EU that has now lapsed as a result of us leaving?

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

The most successful example of communism in practice is probably Cuba, and even that is still a pretty poor country.

The penalising trade embargo, which the US has been enacting on Cuba since 1958 is the explanation why Cuba is incredibly poor. They're not allowed to trade with not only the largest economy in the world, but their closest neighbouring country.

The embargo exists only because the US doesn't approve of a communist system, and fears that a successful example could threaten its preferred system of capitalist imperialism.

 

[rob666]

Communism has never really succeeded long term.
All people, by nature, are not the same, and the black market, often seen as capitalism at its finest, raises its head every last time, as does corruption being tied to high power.
I have always been an idealogical commie, but your real world mixed economy is as good as we can hope for Matt.
Renationalise the means of production, all energy, and the railways.
Tax private medicine hard.
Bring back 90% taxation for the very high earners...and spend the money on social housing and cheap purchase starter homes.
About as good as we are going to get.

 

[Dave]

They need to stop incentivising people coming here. It can't just be oh we will deal with them when they get here. It's no wonder communities up and down the country are getting absolutely fed up with hotels being packed with large numbers of men. We are a welcoming country to people in genuine need but that's being pushed to the absolute limit. Sunak was especially useless, there are rumours he allowed this to happen so that wages were suppressed to tackle inflation. Labour need to get a grip of it and I'm not convinced they are at the moment.

626 deportations is a start but there are hundreds coming every week.

We don’t incentivise people to come here with one exception, the language. But we can’t do anything about the universality of English.

 

[Matt N]

The penalising trade embargo, which the US has been enacting on Cuba since 1958 is the explanation why Cuba is incredibly poor. They're not allowed to trade with not only the largest economy in the world, but their closest neighbouring country.

The embargo exists only because the US doesn't approve of a communist system, and fears that a successful example could threaten its preferred system of capitalist imperialism.

Communism has never really succeeded long term.
All people, by nature, are not the same, and the black market, often seen as capitalism at its finest, raises its head every last time, as does corruption being tied to high power.
I have always been an idealogical commie, but your real world mixed economy is as good as we can hope for Matt.
Renationalise the means of production, all energy, and the railways.
Tax private medicine hard.
Bring back 90% taxation for the very high earners...and spend the money on social housing and cheap purchase starter homes.
About as good as we are going to get.

I’ve long felt that communism is a lovely concept in theory, but wouldn’t work well in practice.

As much as we can espouse views about “taking from the rich and giving to the poor”, going full Robin Hood-style and making everyone equal, the truth is that any attempt to do this to any kind of extreme would disincentivise people from investing in Britain and disincentivise wealth creation and economic prosperity.

I’ve heard it said that the reason for Rachel Reeves not raising taxes like capital gains tax as much as she could have done in the recent Budget was due to fears that the amount of rich people pulling their investments and wealth out of the UK would outweigh the amount of money gained from increasing the tax. Truthfully, we want these talented and wealthy individuals to stay in the UK and invest, and in the society we live in, there is some degree of give and take required for that to happen. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t agree with this being a good argument against any attempt at redistribution, as is often said by right-wing parties, but I do think it’s a reason why we perhaps don’t want to take redistribution too far or do it to too much of an extreme.

This is perhaps in large part why if pressed, I would perhaps say that my political views lean “centre-left” rather than full-on “far-left” or “left-wing”. I fully support a strong welfare state and decreasing inequality, and I think that some of the current mainstream left-of-centre parties have some economic ideas that I agree with in principle, but I also think it’s important to allow for some degree of wealth creation and entrepreneurialism to flourish. As much as I fully support extending the hand of welfare and protection to people who need it through healthy public services and a healthy welfare state, I also think we do need to allow wealth creation and entrepreneurialism to a degree to allow for people to really prosper and offer an incentive for people to really flourish. The two things are not mutually exclusive, and I think both a healthy welfare state for the worst off and healthy wealth creation and entrepreneurialism are important tenets of a good, functioning society in balance.

 

[Dave]

Sorry to divert the topic a tad, but I wanted to raise an interesting political discussion point in relation to something said by @Dave in another thread. In the thread about the closure of Studios North, he said the following:

I din’t disagree with what Dave says (given that the financial status quo evidently isn’t working for many, I feel that some form of wealth redistribution is the main tool in our economic arsenal left to try), but I have a question. In the view of the people on here, is there ever a point where the inverse happens, and the wealth distribution goes too far in favour of workers?

Now I’m by no means saying that we’re anywhere near that point here in the UK; it’s more of a hypothetical question. I do think the UK could do with some degree of wealth redistribution to solve the large-scale inequality that currently exists.

However, I do feel that if you take wealth redistribution to its absolute extreme, you’ve effectively got communism, and a lot of case studies of countries with communist economic policy are incredibly poor. The most successful example of communism in practice is probably Cuba, and even that is still a pretty poor country.

My view, admittedly without an overly strong knowledge of economics, is that some form of centrist or middle-ground economic policy is the most ideal. Enough wealth redistribution to ensure that there’s no crushing inequality and enough money to fund a healthy welfare state, but also little enough wealth restriction to allow for some form of free market and financial prosperity. I think taking the best bits of both left-wing and right-wing economic policy, merging them together and compromising a bit to get the best of both sides is the best approach.

What does anyone else think?

Put aside the debate around capitalism v communism, it’s a good debate but that’s not what economists refer to as they all subscribe to capitalism.

Many economists are acutely aware that capitalism only works if money is constantly moving. When you get to a state where a small number of people effectively hoard money (such as Musk) their money is rarely doing anything of significant economic value. Therefore economies start to stagnate.

Technically you can’t shift capitalism so far towards the workers and stagnate the economy as workers always cycle their cash. If you did push it far enough yes you effectively land in communism.

 

[GaryH]

We don’t incentivise people to come here with one exception, the language. But we can’t do anything about the universality of English.

Another hilarious comment there Dave. Got nothing to do with the language as most EU states will also speak English. As do plenty of other countries in the world.

As for no incentives:

Free NHS healthcare
Free dental treatment
Free eye sight tests
Accommodation which may be a nice hotel with 3 meals a day
Free education and school meals
A small amount of money
Maternity grant

While these may not be advertised as incentives to come to the UK, there are plenty of legal firms and scrupulous individuals who are telling people about it and the migrants arrive very well briefed on their entitlements.

And before anyone says I am against migration, I’m not, but you can’t keep filling a bottle with water when the bottle is overflowing.

Asylum support

How to apply for asylum support if you're waiting to find out if you'll be given asylum in the UK

www.gov.uk

 

[Dave]

Another hilarious comment there Dave. Got nothing to do with the language as most EU states will also speak English. As do plenty of other countries in the world.

As for no incentives:

Free NHS healthcare
Free dental treatment
Free eye sight tests
Accommodation which may be a nice hotel with 3 meals a day
Free education and school meals
A small amount of money
Maternity grant

While these may not be advertised as incentives to come to the UK, there are plenty of legal firms and scrupulous individuals who are telling people about it and the migrants arrive very well briefed on their entitlements.

And before anyone says I am against migration, I’m not, but you can’t keep filling a bottle with water when the bottle is overflowing.

Asylum support

How to apply for asylum support if you're waiting to find out if you'll be given asylum in the UK

www.gov.uk

I mean at least this time after the sarcasm you provided something to debate which I appreciate.

I get your likely major exposure to mainland Europe is the classic holiday destinations and maybe the odd big city but actually excluding a few countries English is not as prevalent as you think, and fact is to function economically in those countries you will need to learn the language, whereas thanks to our previous empire with a side order of American influence in the last 70 years English is pretty much as close to a lingua Franca as we have achieved but it’s not so far gone as you suggest.

All European countries also offer accommodation and healthcare to asylum seekers. The reason they are in tents in Calais is they are not claiming asylum in these countries for the above mentioned reason.

Fact is if the UK actually starts dealing with asylum claims things will improve. As I have mentioned in a previous post claim processing has increased by 19% in the last few months so that’s good. You either then leave the country or become economically active which reduces the tax burden on us.

 

[Matt.GC]

Put aside the debate around capitalism v communism, it’s a good debate but that’s not what economists refer to as they all subscribe to capitalism.

Many economists are acutely aware that capitalism only works if money is constantly moving. When you get to a state where a small number of people effectively hoard money (such as Musk) their money is rarely doing anything of significant economic value. Therefore economies start to stagnate.

Technically you can’t shift capitalism so far towards the workers and stagnate the economy as workers always cycle their cash. If you did push it far enough yes you effectively land in communism.

Totally this.

We've always been a capitalist country, and always will be. Social Democracy is a capitalist ideology.

The completely failed Trickle Down economics that hard right wingers harp on about has looked dated for decades. The rise of populism is a response to this failed nonsense that was supposed to create prosperity for all in 1980's. An economy that is technically "booming" is all well and good for the purposes of flashy graphs to show the electorate, but those graphs are no good if people don't feel they are benefitting from that prosperity.

A basic fundamental of economics is the movement of money and assets. Economies don't thrive when money stays still. That's what happened in 2008, and we've lived in a low growth, low investment economy in the UK ever since.

It makes no economic sense to keep money in the hands of the few. It needs to be out there, moving around the system. Countries with stable governance, good healthcare, good education, good infrastructure, and low poverty rates are good for business.

It's not as simplistic as just taxing wealth to give to the poor. It's about discouraging the hoarding of wealth, to provide a safe and prosperous country to invest in, that gives fair opportunities for people to obtain their own wealth.

That's where the imbalance is in this country. The messaging from businesses couldn't be any clearer. Keeping their taxes low is no good if they don't have prosperous customers to sell to, access to a healthy and skilled workforce, underpinned with good national infrastructure.

Wealth distribution and public service provision isn't just some wishy washy social justice cause, like right wing trickle down dinosaurs will have us believe in order to keep hold of their billions. It's also essential to a thriving economy.

 

[GaryH]

All European countries also offer accommodation and healthcare to asylum seekers.

Serious question then - if other EU countries offer healthcare etc. why the drive for these migrants who are in a safe EU country, safe from war, have food, shelter etc, why such a drive that they have to come to the UK?

There must be an incentive which the UK offers that other EU countries don’t - and I don’t believe it’s because we speak English. I would doubt the majority of asylum seekers arriving on these small boats are able to speak much English themselves.

 

[Dave]

Serious question then - if other EU countries offer healthcare etc. why the drive for these migrants who are in a safe EU country, safe from war, have food, shelter etc, why such a drive that they have to come to the UK?

There must be an incentive which the UK offers that other EU countries don’t - and I don’t believe it’s because we speak English. I would doubt the majority of asylum seekers arriving on these small boats are able to speak much English themselves.

Yes there are two big influences (it’s been investigated).

1) The asylum seekers already speak English and therefore they are drawn to a country that doesn’t require learning a new language.

2) Many have family or contacts in the UK from the migration that occurred in the 50’s and 60’s.

Obviously individuals will have a more complex spectrum of reasoning but those are the two big drivers.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

We've always been a capitalist country, and always will be.

We've only been a capitalist society since around the 18th century, before that we were a feudal society. There was about 100 years in between where we were transitioning, but for the longest time we haven't been capitalist.

A few members of the nobility held land, in trust from the crown, in exchange for military service. The rest of the public worked the land, for their local nobleman, in exchange for housing, security, food and military protection. They public also had to pay their local lord for their accomodation on the land, which they worked, in exchange for the above.

It's really not the same system at all, but that's just being a bit pedantic.

Different systems of government and economics evolve and come along. There will be better ones than democracy and capitalism, but if we use the lens of democracy and capitalism to to measure them, we won't be able to move on. Instead of wealth, we ought to look at happiness. Instead of land ownership, we should look at access to universal healthcare.

I appreciate that this is likely a different conversation entirely though.

 

[jon81uk]

Serious question then - if other EU countries offer healthcare etc. why the drive for these migrants who are in a safe EU country, safe from war, have food, shelter etc, why such a drive that they have to come to the UK?

There must be an incentive which the UK offers that other EU countries don’t - and I don’t believe it’s because we speak English. I would doubt the majority of asylum seekers arriving on these small boats are able to speak much English themselves.

Why don't you believe it is the English language that is the key factor? Seems very plausible to me.

For example - "The second language in Syria is English" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32379221

"Researchers say that, where people can choose, factors such as colonial and historical links, the presence of family members, general reputation as a safe country and language are relevant factors." https://fullfact.org/immigration/why-do-migrants-and-asylum-seekers-want-come-uk/

Its these factors that are more relevant than getting benefits.

 

[rob666]

Oh pity the poor farmers...what with IHT coming in at a million quid on the family farm.
Most on the last protest arrived in their shiny new range rovers and shoguns...but they are so poor they can't afford to keep the business in the family.
Budget and plan ahead, transfer the property before you retire to avoid the tax, but pay your actual taxes like the rest of us, and get a really poor farmer to act as your glorious leader and celebrity spokesperson.
Good old Jeremy Clarkson.
We all know how poor he is.

 

[Quantum]

Oh pity the poor farmers...what with IHT coming in at a million quid on the family farm.
Most on the last protest arrived in their shiny new range rovers and shoguns...but they are so poor they can't afford to keep the business in the family.
Budget and plan ahead, transfer the property before you retire to avoid the tax, but pay your actual taxes like the rest of us, and get a really poor farmer to act as your glorious leader and celebrity spokesperson.
Good old Jeremy Clarkson.
We all know how poor he is.

I'm 100% with farmers it's one the hardest most are underappreciated jobs in the country. Many make very little money as it is and successive governments have made it harder and harder to make a living.

I love in a rural area so see on a Daily basis the work they do to maintain the countryside. The inheritance tax will put farms out of business, there isn't a qué of young farmers with millions in Thier pockets waiting to buy these farms. They will be bought by the likes of Dale Vance to slap solar farms on or foreign entities to do with as they please. More food will need to be imported and the price of food will go up. Farmers are asset rich but cash poor.

I don't think anyone should have to pay inheritance tax btw it's a scummy death tax. Good luck to all those protesting today.

 

[jon81uk]

I'm 100% with farmers it's one the hardest most are underappreciated jobs in the country. Many make very little money as it is and successive governments have made it harder and harder to make a living.

I love in a rural area so see on a Daily basis the work they do to maintain the countryside. The inheritance tax will put farms out of business, there isn't a qué of young farmers with millions in Thier pockets waiting to buy these farms. They will be bought by the likes of Dale Vance to slap solar farms on or foreign entities to do with as they please. More food will need to be imported and the price of food will go up. Farmers are asset rich but cash poor.

I don't think anyone should have to pay inheritance tax btw it's a scummy death tax. Good luck to all those protesting today.

The actual hard working farmers will generally not be affected by the change.

The massive landowners who bought land specifically to try and avoid inheritance tax like Jeremy Clarkson and James Dyson should be paying their dues.

Also the fact tax is due should bring down the over-inflated land prices meaning even fewer genuine farmers will need to pay.

 

[Quantum]

The actual hard working farmers will generally not be affected by the change.

The massive landowners who bought land specifically to try and avoid inheritance tax like Jeremy Clarkson and James Dyson should be paying their dues.

Also the fact tax is due should bring down the over-inflated land prices meaning even fewer genuine farmers will need to pay.

It won't bring down land prices as the land will be bought by multinational companies or developers

The NFU are saying it will affect more farms than the government is claiming

The likes of Clarkson, Dyson and all the big land owners will be fine as they have the means to swerve the tax.

 

[rob666]

I'm 100% with farmers it's one the hardest most are underappreciated jobs in the country. Many make very little money as it is and successive governments have made it harder and harder to make a living.

I love in a rural area so see on a Daily basis the work they do to maintain the countryside. The inheritance tax will put farms out of business, there isn't a qué of young farmers with millions in Thier pockets waiting to buy these farms. They will be bought by the likes of Dale Vance to slap solar farms on or foreign entities to do with as they please. More food will need to be imported and the price of food will go up. Farmers are asset rich but cash poor.

I don't think anyone should have to pay inheritance tax btw it's a scummy death tax. Good luck to all those protesting today.

I wish I loved in a rural area.

Back to IHT...

It's a scummy death tax on the rich.
So it is a fair and progressive tax.
Twenty four out of twenty five estates don't pay it.
Those are the facts.

The decent real long term farming families will avoid the tax very simply, and legally, by passing the farm on to the next generation sooner.
No iht to be paid.
At all.
I know lots of farmers who are more than happy to rip out hedgerows to make a few extra quid, and all the farmers I know, (god bless the ribble valley), have a nice sideline, taxed or otherwise via the farmers wife, such as b&b, camping, minor livery, or minor farmers gate sales.

I don't know a single poor farmer.
Not a single one.
I know several rich ones, who are very nice decent people...and they have sorted everything out for the future, recently, with the change of government.

Farming is a right wing occupation.
Young Farmers...Jeez.
Labour baiting at its finest.

 

[Dave]

I'm 100% with farmers it's one the hardest most are underappreciated jobs in the country. Many make very little money as it is and successive governments have made it harder and harder to make a living.

I love in a rural area so see on a Daily basis the work they do to maintain the countryside. The inheritance tax will put farms out of business, there isn't a qué of young farmers with millions in Thier pockets waiting to buy these farms. They will be bought by the likes of Dale Vance to slap solar farms on or foreign entities to do with as they please. More food will need to be imported and the price of food will go up. Farmers are asset rich but cash poor.

I don't think anyone should have to pay inheritance tax btw it's a scummy death tax. Good luck to all those protesting today.

It will do nothing of the sort, the tax is only paid on high value farms and is paid over 10 years. It will actually stop people like clarkson buying land as a tax avoidance scheme.

Those farms actually functioning are nearly all under the cap, and many of those that are just over will barely have any tax to pay.

As an aside I would love to know why all those people saying the just stop oil protestors should be flung in jail are now ohh so quiet when the farmers block roads.

Hypocrites!

 

[Quantum]

None of the farmers near me are rich, I'm not saying there isn't wealthy farmers but the average salary of a farmer is nothing to write home about and many farms struggle to make a profit. If it paid that well they wouldn't be struggling to get younger people into the industry.

The sheer glee of the hard left at putting farms out of business is disgusting. I hope the government gets nothing from this tax and I hope they find and ways of avoiding it until it's inevitably abolished.