True, they're all a bunch of nasty back-stabbers who are all about their personal ambitions rather than any driving cause that drove them towards politics.
That’s fair enough but any government needs a strong opposition, not only to hold them to account, but to question & challenge their statements. Without this the voting public would only get a one sided view of government.
"Always polite." Rory shows who he rubbed shoulders with all his life. The uppercrust is always polite but they can still be utter monsters. Being polite means nothing if you are part of a duplicitous oligarcy that is the conservatives. Does he even hear himself sometimes?
The wealth disparity between the exceptionally wealthy (assets more than £10m) and the working population has dramatically increased in the last 10 years. We must tax the exceptionally wealthy to defend ourselves, and provide for our country. We need more services but also need more houses/rails/power generation/etc. We don't have to accept for our children that they will live in a second or third tier nation!
I remind that top 1% earn 12.5% of income and pay 29% of income tax (house of commons library 2020/1 surely newer data exists?) so the rich should pay their share narrative is mooted by the fact they actually do pay proportionately higher tax than their share of income. There is a super rich bracket above this but that is super yacht territory and they are slippery as eels! Also if you track tax revenue growth to top rates of tax you note larger increases at periods of lowering top tax rates I guess as people pay the tax rather than hide it but i do not call out cause and effect as many other factors could impact. Before you ask I'm in the 50-90th percentile and my super yacht is an inflatable canoe - but it would be fun to spend one day as a slippery eel on a superyacht 😂
@@charlesmoss8119are you only counting direct income and not asset appreciation & leveraged low interest debt fuelling further debt acquisition? Most wealthy people aren't wealthy because they have a payslip with a big number on it.
The OBR has confirmed the Tories witheld information from them. I think tbh we're arguing semantics, we all knew it was going to be bad, but only the Tories knew exactly why and how.
It was a little more nuanced than that (though you're generally correct). OBR and IFS agree that there was a 22Bn "blackhole" however £11.6bn to give public sector workers recommended pay rises that are bigger than the 2% budgeted for by the last government which is the Labour government's own decision. I think it's kind of unfair to include that 11.6bn
@@danielo7985Not really that unfair, as the Conservatives knew 2% was never going to be enough, so this was deliberate underfunding. If the Conservatives had used a slightly more believable settlement figure of say 4% or 5% to public sector generally and 7% or 8% for junior doctors in their calculations that would have made more sense, but to use 2% was crazy and was part of the black hole creation.
@@johnharvey1786I agree that the 2% figure was too low but my point is that if that 2% increase was known then how can it be a part of the "blackhole"? My understanding is that all money included in the blackhole figure are meant to represent spending for schemes that were partially or fully undisclosed. I dont think the 2% figure was undisclosed?
"a game" - no. It's never a game watching people lose their homes; paid workers forced to attend food banks so they can pay horrific bills keeping their children warm in winter. This "game" is called cruel unnecessay poverty or needless death for too many British Citizens.
Labour were VERY open about the fact that they were going to raise taxes, it's just that the media & the commentariat like the two disingenuous ones above pretend that Labour have said they didn't. But i remember the frothing frontpages about VAT on fee-paying schools etc. What Labour said was that they weren't going to raise taxes on working people.
@@MarkAHowell energy costs are high due to a State religion which has no understanding of engineering whatsoever and is based solely on emotional thinking, much like the Puritans of the past.
With the income tax threshold frozen for three more years, the state pension itself will soon be taxed. That will mean a 20% reduction in its value. For many people, the state pension is the major component of their income in old age. If your private pension is not linked to inflation ('final salary pensions are now rare as hens teeth outside the public sector, thanks Gordon Brown, and many so called 'workplace pensions' are worth a pittance), then you face a steadily diminishing income year on year with less and less earning capacity and soon none at all.
When politicians quote numbers like £22 billion,my first reaction is prove it. Show me the numbers and how you got those figures. Otherwise I assume these politicians are lying.
As someone who joined the long, long fight to get Pension Credit many years ago, can I point out that far from the rich gaining the winter fuel payment, there are thousands who are on the borderline by a mere few pounds a week over the qualifying threshold. With the predicted higher prices for fuel coming this winter, plus ever increasing food costs, the memory of 1999's horrendous figure of 49,000 excess winter deaths seems only too repeatable. An example we found over and over again was a pensioner being released from a hospital bed - sent home to recuperate to a cold home and an empty fridge, to be readmitted just 24 hours later. Yes, means testing is needed but the actual costs of administrating any efficient scheme can outweigh money saved.
The 1999 excess winter deaths figure that you have quoted is not solely attributable to hypothermia as you imply, the figure also includes deaths from winter illnesses that (obviously) increase at this time of year.
There's probably line in a Labour spreadsheet somewhere forecasting the increase in deaths and multiplying it by the state pension and calling that a 'cost saving'
@@normanlazarus1836 if you read the select report you will discover that the figure is not all winter deaths, it is expressed as excess winter deaths among the elderly above the expected average death toll. Which is why urgent review came about re applying extra payments and a campaign highlighting the 70,000 pensioner not claiming their rightful benefit entitlement due to the need to fill in complicated forms and ( among many) the fear of means tests from negative experiences in their youth which was a degrading experience.
@@avs4365 it does kind of make the assumption that anyone who is entitled to pension credit is already receiving it. Means tested benefits always have an issue in that those that quality have to apply for it. Many will be entitled but will not claim it
@@Jaaj2009 My point exactly and indeed many are not claiming it and the reality shows in the alarm being raised by charities and organisations that work on behalf of pensioners. Finding the people who are entitled but not claiming takes more than feeding data of those who are known about into a computer.
People voted for tory austerity for 13 years because they prefer low taxes to high public services. Unfortunately its the vulnerable who need the public services. And they don't pay the taxes.
The austerity was lightweight and national debt was continually being kicked down the road. It’s easy to forget the jaw dropping 5 years of borrowing requirements announced by the late Alistair Darling which have continued to this day. Blair/ Brown inherited a golden economy thanks to Ken Clark and its the last time the Uk was in the black. No more “boom and bust” we were told.
“Do you think you could get away with borrowing more money than putting up taxes”. Response - “Yes, definitely”. Perfectly describes why the very system we elect officials by needs to change. It’s ’kick the can down the road’ politics and economics and is extremely dangerous.
Disappointed to hear Rory talk about the fear based line about Rich people leaving the country if we tax them. Many rich people hold substantial assets in the UK that are based in the UK, geography of the owner should not matter when it comes to taxing these assets. The wealthy have benefitted immensely under the Tories with changes like the Lifetime pensions allowance cap, that Labour have failed to roll back (despite pledging to do so). They pay far less tax than the average worker in terms of % on their income. Unlike normal workers who are suffering, the wealth benefit most from inflation and the rising of rates. Even if the wealthy move country, they will not sell all their assets unless government policy is very extreme, its not like they earn their income from income tax anyway. They should be paying more to fix the country they benefit from while things are such a mess
@@Jaaj2009 you should inform yourself about how international taxation actually works. It largely doesn’t matter where assets are located depending on the person and country.
@@georgemann5146 Talking about personal taxation if a person is a non-uk resident but has UK assets, then depending on their personal situation, and the country tax rules where they are now resident in, it’s entirely possible that they will pay no UK tax or have a reduced tax bill compared to a UK resident. For example when Labour were previously in power a non-UK resident selling a UK investment property would pay no CGT on that property. The Tories changed that and so tax must be paid. Given the number of digital nomad schemes (and others) I expect a large number of people like me to leave the UK to reduce or eliminate their tax burden.
The big story here is that two people from opposite (all be it less extreme) ends of the political spectrum can discuss politics using facts and no rhetoric and no insults. They happily play together in these videos. Surely this is the way politics should be conducted? How nice would it be if parliament worked like this?
@@stleonards1066 It’s hilarious that it is billed as ‘disagreeing agreeably’… although I do think Rory is too polite and deferential to Campbell and probably is biting his tongue at times. I wish he would actually call out Campbell’s disingenuous spinning of every story, but seems happy to just nod along.
Capital gains tax in Germany is effectively a flat rate of 26.375%, vs 20% or 10% in the UK depending on if you pay more than basic rate tax or the basic tax rate, respectively. In case you are wondering, in Germany there are still plenty of rich people…
I think the comment that the Olympics are being held in mainly western countries is misleading. Not only did Beijing and Rio host previously, it's also important to consider that Paris and LA were awarded when all other bids were withdrawn and that Brisbane was the only official bid for 2032. Furthermore the economic and logistic challenges of hosting the games do (rightly or wrongly) mean that weather countries with established venues and transport links are inherently better host candidates, so it makes sense that they're picked more often.
The black hole in the finances needs to discussed in the context of Brexit. Decisions have consequences and losing £40 billion in tax receipts annually impacts government finances. We cannot continue tohave politicians putting their heads in the sand and not discuss Brexit. Who has the backbone to start this debate?
Debate brexit all you want. We here in the EU still do not want you lot back. We do not exist to prop up your ailing parasitic economy. All you lot ever care for is yourselves and you never offer anything of worth to us. Always attempting to sabotage our built-out of our union. You lot do not belong in it.
It is understandable under the circumstances that Winter Fuel Payments should be means tested . Against this backdrop , MPs are to keep their £3,400pa allowance - is that correct ? If so , it will play put badly. The candidates in the Tory leadership are a very poor crop indeed. The future of the party looks increasingly bleak ; by the next GE , 1 in 6 Tory voters will have cast off their mortal coil. I can not see young people flocking to the Tory Party .
It's a tricky thing to curb MP expenses unless we only want the quite-wealthy to be able to become MPs, or want much of the work MPs do to come to a close. Tends to be endorsed by people who've never seen up close what many MPs workloads involve.
The thing about age is that everyone keeps getting older, and voting intentions shifts. Let's see how many vote for Labour next time if the Pension pots get raided.
I honestly don't give a rat's arse that what the top 1% are paying in income tax is three times what the bottom half of the workforce pay, for two reasons. The wealth of the top 1% in the UK constitutes 48% of the total wealth. So their paying 28% of the total tax bill while owning almost half of the wealth is pretty frickin outrageous. And second, when they've paid their taxes (if they haven't jetted off to a tax haven), it's not like they are suddenly poor - they remain extraordinarily wealthy. When you are poor or in that lower 50% of the wealthy, the amount that is taken from you in taxes can significantly affect your everyday normal quality of life - can you afford to put the heating on, can you afford to buy clothes, can you pay your mortgage, can your small business survive? So, the super wealthy would have to have one less property around the world because of an increase in taxes for them? Cry me a feckin river! The question is what are you going to do with that money that you would levy on the rich, can it be used wisely and efficiently, of course, otherwise we give the political class representing the rich a stick to beat us ordinary folks with.
Well said, it is a crazy argument, those with the most money should be paying a proper proportion of tax, currently the biggest tax burden (compared to earnings) is placed on the poorest.
I respect your point but it may not be the right way of thinking in 2024. Incidentally, what percentage of someone's total income should be spent on tax each year?
@@jamebrow that's not a realistic question - progressive taxation means different income brackets pay different amounts, and different countries have different resources, and finally, fiscal demands are changing all the time. So the answer is, enough to take care of what should be taken care of. And what does 'not the right thinking in 2024' have to do with it? These economics arguments have been bounced around for a century already, and 2024 hasn't answered the fundamental theories of what works best any better than any previous year. The fly in the ointment is that reducing taxes can SOMETIMES lead to increased tax revenues, when it attracts outside investment, and that is then used as a stick to beat governments or left-wing governments with, but what it represents is playing into the hands of deregulated global markets. In other words, just another variation of the usual bribery that wealthy people extol on policy makers.
Yes but remember that the top 1% that pay most of the tax are highly mobile and many many countries would welcome them with open arms. Your short sighted jealousy will leave you with much higher taxes and limited services if and when they all leave because they don’t want to continue to pay for people who hate them
whenever Rory bangs on about how much of income tax in the UK is paid by the richest people in Britain, I feel obliged to point out that income tax is ONLY 28% of the total tax rake in the UK. According to HMRC: "there were 31.6 million Income Tax payers in tax year 2018 to 2019, which is projected to increase to 32.2 million in 2021 to 2022 there are a projected 27.0 million basic rate Income Tax payers in tax year 2021 to 2022, which is a 2.6% increase from 2018 to 2019. Basic rate Income Tax payers make up a projected 83.2% of the overall Income Tax paying population in 2021 to 2022 HMRC also point out that: "the top 50% of Income Tax payers received 74.6% of total income in 2018 to 2019, or £834bn out of a total £1,120 billion" The wealthy, having stacked the deck to make themselves richer and richer, then complain that the people they have impoverished are not paying enough in taxes, even as the wealth lobby for yet more tax cuts for themselves. Rory might also take note that VAT is approximately 20% of the total tax rake in the UK and that the vast majority of that tax is overwhelmingly paid by all those people that Rory seems to think are getting off lightly under the income tax regime in the UK. Property taxes (Council tax) is paid by homeowners and renters alike (it's baked into the rents). Might I suggest that Rory should ponder MLK Jr.'s comment that "it is a cruel jest to say to a bootless man that he ought to lift himself by his own bootstraps."
Yes, they pay for your healthcare and benefits. If you want to get paid more and reduce inequality, you should advocate for policies that decrease the supply of labour.
yeah the bottom 50% only have 9% of the wealth in the uk. the top 10% have 43%. these figures were from the ONS in 2020 so it's probably worse now than it was then. it's disingenuous to look at income not wealth in this case. the top 10% should be paying 5x the amount of total tax than the bottom 50% even just to keep it balanced. if you're after wealth redistribution (which labour should be), it should be more than that.
But all these people are working people who Labour said they would not tax. You can't create wealth without working unless you are a drug dealer. Try and tax them!!
Hamburg, Budapest, Boston & Rome withdrew due to domestic opposition to Olympic hosting costs leaving only Paris & LA contending for 2024. The OCOG subsequently awarded 24' & 28' simultaneously (Paris & LA, respectively) out of concern over the dwindling number of host city applicants. The NY Times has a great article titled 'Why Is It So Hard for Olympic Host Cities to Control Costs?' explaining why certain cities tend to get selected, and it comes down to the dwindling number of cities willing to bear the cost. Athens, in particular, saw protests against hosting when it was announced they would apply (so they never did), while Hamburg held a referendum, resulting in a 'no' vote, which then persuaded the Paris mayor not to hold one (out of fear of losing). I have to say, I'm rather surprised TRIP missed this obviously political angle on the Olympic games.
@@sciencefliestothemoon2305They had the Non Habitual Resident scheme. This has been watered down now but it was very successful in transferring wealth and skills to Portugal. Spain and many others have a Digital Nomad scheme, but only certain types of employees would qualify.
Rory that old line about "much of the income from the government comes from the top" won't cut it. They get wealthy by using the working public, keeping down wages or exploiting the system and elite contacts to give themselves huge advantages over ordinary people who are constantly told to tighten our belts whilst welfare health and education suffer. They do not "earn" their money. Bezoz for example, does not work 43,000 times harder than the person who empties his bins (minimum US wage).
They are culpable themselves. That's why they never bring up wealth inequality or taxing the rich. They are the rich. It's a neoliberal shibboleth they won't transgress.
Someone’s been reading the idot’s guide to Marx… unsure of what industry you work in, but many of the ‘rich’ are workers, and they are industrious individuals who have extremely high levels of competence, conscientiousness and devote pretty much their whole lives to ascending whatever hierarchy is in front of them. Yes, in the freedom of capitalist society, you will get a few Bezoz-like billionaires who appear to earn disproportionately, but the majority of the top earners (who pay the majority of tax), exist within the same game as everyone else. Punish them at your peril.
About the Paris Olympics, what is outstanding is the way it reunited the people, even if it is for a short while. Having the Games right in the middle of a big city was really such a gamble ! And a gamble that so far has been won !
We know why the election was called for July: every month more people were remortgaging at higher interest rates and the Tories were going to be unable to sustain their fiscal policy with the next budget (in particular, the NI cutting proposal was unsustainable). Potential Tory voters would be feeling worse if they waited than if they went early. A spending review was also becoming unavoidable which would have brought the state of the public finances into sharp focus.
God, you two are so much more entertaining than Ed Balls and George Osborne. I gave them a try but it was like watching paint dry. You two have so much more personality.
Perhaps the Treasury can devise some taxes that tap into all the money flying in and around in the digital economy and the City rather than waiting for it to land.
Countries do tend to be bust in a specific sense. Ideologues and populists both want to "do stuff". In order for a country to do that stuff, the country will have to pay. They burden countries with what they want, not what the country needs and thus leaving the country too little with what it needs to do the important stuff. Which both ideologues and populists use as a reason to push on more of their stuff, because the whole country would be better if the country just did the stuff they want the country to do.
Love listening to you two, love the way you get on together, it must do you both the world of good having your friendship. Love your humour. And love Alistair’s pink shirt, colour suits you!
I have been long fan of Alastair until this podcast. Why? Not all who felt umcomfortable after watching Olympics ceremony are "far-right". He may need to reconsider his comments.
At some point the penny is going to drop amonst Labour voters - that the UK is just not rich enough to afford good public services - not even close.Growing the economy by building more houses may (possibly) be a short term boost, but will probably throw up more problems than it solves and certainly won't alleviate the housing shortage because immigration is so high. When government expenditure is £1.1Trn a year, £20bn is a mere rounding error.
Hmmm. Seems like we need to know how much value is around and what % everyone has and make that fairer. I want.my tax rates back! 1920s to 1960'a rates for business and wealthy.
Rory complaining about the speed of the alphabet. Priceless. One of the kind of things I watch you guys for. From an American with dangerously little knowledge of British politics and government. Good show, guys.
At 17:10 Rory mentions the notion that super rich people would leave the country if their wealth was taxed. I am dying to hear a more detailed discussion about this; specifically, I would love a Leading interview with Gary Stevenson, who says basically that this argument is bollocks. I respect both Rory and Gary somewhat fierce, so I am super intrigued when this kind of fundamental difference in opinion pops up. Thank you so much for the lovely podcast!
The top 1% generate over 30% of government revenue. When Labour put up the highest rate of tax to 50% the tax generated fell. People make choices. I left the UK at the end of the last tax year in anticipation that Labour will put up taxes. Even moderately wealthy people are far more mobile these days.
I believe I'm right in thinking that James C Scott was the author of a very influential book called 'The Moral Economy of the Peasant' in the late 70s. He'd studied societies in southeast Asia that relied on subsistence agriculture and, from memory, discovered or concluded that they demonstrated a surprising degree of collectivism and even altruism considering the harsh conditions in which they existed. This moral economy was severely disrupted by colonialism - a very potent conclusion in the wake of the Vietnam War. A sad loss indeed.
This will be the last podcast I listen to due to their dismissive comments on the Christian mockery at the Olympics. This was deeply offensive to many people and to be so dismissive shows their disconnect.
If you are referring to the tableau with the drag queens, as an art teacher, I must insist on correcting the assumption that this was an irreverent or disrespectful take on Da Vinci's vision of the Last Supper. It was instead parodying a pagan bacchanal, a word that survives in the English language to denote a great feast or raucous celebration, and which was a celebratory religious rite in honour of Bacchus or Dionysus, the pagan Greek god of revelry and wine. Dionysus was also revered by the Gauls and Romans in an era where ethnic or national gods were considered interchangeable, the same deities in different guises. The connection with Paris is that the River Seine is named for Sequana, the supposed daughter of Dionysus and patron deity of the Sequani, the Gaulish tribe who inhabited the area in classical times. The composition of the Last Supper just happens to borrow imagery from classical paintings of celebrations and from literary descriptions of the worship of Bacchus/Dionysus and that's why the first concept you were reminded of was Leonardo's painting. Leonardo, by the way, was apparently a queer or bisexual man, charged with sodomy after sleeping with a male sex worker at the age of 23, and who lived with his apprentice Salai for decades before the latter, in a surprising turn of events, got married. Leonardo was also a skeptic who, as attested in his own writings had very weak, minimal and heterodox religious faith and who completed the Last Supper for a commission. For money. Just like he designed fortifications for the Duke of Milan for money, or statues for the King of France...for money. All of which makes the idea that lampooning Da Vinci's Last Supper by associating it with homosexuals is some kind of blasphemy a little hard to digest. Social conservatives don't do art, do they? Or if they do, they love all the worst stuff. For all their talk of defending Western Civilisation (tm), they seem very poorly schooled about some of its major figures, events and concepts. If they knew anything about Da Vinci or the Last Supper, they'd have spotted something was up.
Rory should note the IFS have accepted that the 22Bn in year overspend is NOT the medium term 20Bn black hole they flagged pre election. It’s a different thing.
@@danielwebb8402I quote the IFS report on Reeves’ statement directly ‘Rachel Reeves' statement focused on 2024-25, the financial year in progress. These spending pressures are separate from the implied cuts to unprotected public services in future years, which have received considerably more attention.’ The spending pressures reeves identified are on top of the £18Bn black hole the IFS discussed pre election.
@@zappybazinga8124 Yeah you are quoting rather than reading / understanding. The IFS have NOT said the 22bn is unexpected. They've said maybe 4-6bn of it is. But that this also is cherry picking. You always have some budget areas over, some under. Solely shouting the over as an "error" or "hidden" before the year is even out so you see if a normal amount of also unders is cheating. The largest item in the 22m is.... Additional public sector pay rises. 9bn of it.
@@danielwebb8402The point is that this £22Bn overspend is in year. It is NOT the same thing as the IFS fiscal hole that was discussed during the campaign. It simply is not. £8Bn of in year overspend the reserves already having been spent is absolutely something that was not known. The IFS headline to their report is ‘The in-year funding pressures and overspends set out by Rachel Reeves do genuinely appear to be larger than previously thought.’
@zappybazinga8124 Agree this is in addition to what thd ifs were talking about during the election campaign. Disagree the 22bn was unknowable a month ago. At least 9bn is a Labour choice as additional public sector pay rises. The IFS have said the asylum billions should have been shared / known / is a "black hole". But then I have financial literacy and also actually watched yesterday's IFS video going through this. Rather than just parrots back a sentence that "happens" to agree with my pre position.
And why didn't Tories stand on their successes? High immigration saved the country from a long recession and an even worse decline in standard of living, higher inflation and interest rates, and their significant increase in taxes over their term saved the budget debt, NHS, School funding etc... from being even worse than they are. Missed opportunity...
Jenrick is not an option as leader of tories because the voters have long memories and haven’t forgotten the MP’s expenses scandal. Anyone who was involved in suspect claims is unacceptable.
Here’s the thing Rory: the Tories have trashed any semblance of integrity during their time. That makes it all that more believable that they have hidden the true state of the budget (like partygate, the PPE ripoffs to mates etc). Now that the OBR have confirmed it, this only makes the narrative even stronger.
I applaud Rachel Reeve’s decision to limit the winter fuel allowance. My partner and I are both pensioners and, unlike so many of our age, we have an income and savings we can live comfortably on. We are very fortunate and we don’t need the WFA. I do think, however, that it should be paid to pensioners who pay no income tax. The eligibility threshold income for Pension Credit is lower than the income tax threshold and it is unfair to penalise those who pay no income tax.
Interesting how Rory defends the Uber wealthy with the usual "go to" rhetoric of them leaving the country if their wealth is considered necessary to tax far heavily than it has been. The fact is as he says the differential between the 1% and the rest of us as increased beyond all recognition in the last 14 years while poverty continues to grow among the increasing less well off. It's time this ended. We should certainly now increase taxation on the billionaires who run this country including Capital Gains,Non Dom Status and Tax Avoidance schemes. If they leave then so be it. Other countries have done it without the threaten exodus of the mega-rich happening and it's unlikely to happen here.
Agree 100% - this is essentially blackmail, it would be like me telling my friend he needs to pick up our dinner bill, even though I am much richer than him, or I might stop going out for dinner with him. I don't believe these people would really leave the country (certainly not in numbers large enough to matter anyway). And even if they do, at least we can enjoy a fairer society without leeches like them around.
@@BankontheBarclay Do you really mean “Tax Avoidance schemes” rather than tax evasion? If so then you’re calling for scrapping the ISA accounts which are a government scheme to avoid paying taxes on savings interest. I’m all for a simplified tax system which has fewer loopholes for exploitation & making multinational corporations paying taxes on UK generated revenue although this may require changes to international standards for taxation.
Traditionally it is Conservatives who subscribe very much to the whole brain drain theory if you increase taxes on the rich. Now, it is a legitimate fear, but the fact of the matter is the vast majority of the very wealthy in this country wouldn't go anywhere if their taxes increased marginally. There is suspicion among wealthy citizens that left-wing governments will just squander their tax revenue, which leads to strong support put behind Parties that promise lower taxes on them (i.e., the Tories). The Tories take it too far, though. Truss, for example, was so ideologically driven about being a lady of the night for the wealthy that she crashed the economy. You have to strike a balance. The rich already pay a large proportion of the revenue in this country, so any increase to try to balance the books has to be sensibly done. Personally I would like to see a law forcing companies like Amazon to pay their fair share of tax. Currently the amount they pay per year is barely more than two weeks of our gross contributions to the EU (when we were a member). I understand the City and our overseas havens rely on being dodgy coves for finance/the uber rich, so increases to taxes on the wealthy is politically a lot more challenging here than it is for other countries. But it can be done.
If the Tories lurch to the right they are finished. Booted out after a decade+ of power, they need to replace the rot with completely fresh faces from the center. Seems they have learned nothing.
This entire discussion is predicated on the assumption that UK government finances are like those of a household. They are not. Households don't issue the state's currency. The government does, and it does so by spending, creating pounds in the process. Having the 'power of the purse' is one of the things that makes the government... the government.
The government is entirely beholden to international finance and markets. Print 500 bn to save the banks in 2008? Fine. Print another 500 bn to fund covid measures? Fine. Anything that might benefit society in the long run? Verboten.
@@stleonards1066 those were actual crisis that would have caused serious problems without them. You can't just borrow money to invest because investors can do that themselves and for far cheaper than the gov will. Planning reform will be far more helpful
The UK is a net import country. The government deficit printed currency is financed by other countries in trade. If China sells the UK 10 billion in goods/services, they want 10 billion in goods/services in return. If the UK doesn't have 10 billion in goods/services that China wants or needs at the time...they can put the Pounds into gilts or an investment vehicle to keep pace with inflation until they do... Or they can swap for another currency where they can receive the goods/services they want/need. China is financing the 10 billion Pounds in this scenario. Being a net import country means you depend on other countries to finance a budget deficit. When, as in the example, China no longer needs/wants to sell to the UK.. those 10 billion pounds have to find another source of financing or the Pound will drop like a stone because you will need to offer more in return to get the trade. It's called 'the balance of payments' and it operates just like a household budget. If you're like the EU/China, and you're a net exporter.. now you finance other countries deficits/currency. I think you're espousing the MMT narrative that thinks you can isolate a country's budget without looking at the international settlements that occur. MMT is not the real world of international finance.
Also, what do you mean ' The Narrative?' We're all sick of the narrative. We're sick of the media, I know how it works, I was a journo for twenty years and it's just got out of hand. What people need is the Truth, until that happens the Fantasy Politics will continue.
At 24:45, I’m not sure if Rory has noticed, but gerunds are completely absent from Priti Patel's vocabulary. She always ends her "ing" words with "in," as in, "Our NHS nurses have been amazin'." Once I noticed this, I couldn't stop hearing it.
Her gerunds are not "absent". She drops g's. It's a documented feature of English accents stretching back at least a century: see references to "huntin', shootin' and fishin''" and the like in Wodehouse.
There is no point in investing in new hospitals if you don't have the staff to staff them. Paying the doctors is a higher priority than hospital infrastructure however the latter will have to be funded sooner or later.
Murdoch, in Australia, ran hard on cancel culture.... particularly via sky Noise after dark and his tabloids, taking advantage of declining education standards in this social media era.
As a middle income tax payer who the Mail say always get hit hardest by tax, I will gladly pay more income tax/ NI if the new government can get public services working!
Stewart, completely lost it, "The leader comes from those that hold offices of state." Completely bypassing the fact that the Tories are in opposion, just as they were when David Cameron became leader, from nowhere. I can almost guarantee the new Tory leader in November, will not lead into the 2028/29 election. They will be gone, history. 👑
I've been thinking this - the candidates brag about how they aspire to be the PM after the next election, but to be honest I think they'd be doing very well just to still be Tory leader going into the election. This is a party that has gone through how many leaders recently? When you're in opposition you don't have the distraction of trying to govern getting in the way of your in fighting either.
@@guyburgess7832 Contrast them with Starmer, an MP only from 2015, became leader without being in Government. PM at first attempt and never acknowledged that his party could win until the morning of 5 July 2024, when the votes were almost counted. The Tory candidates should keep low profiles until September and stay out of public view.
@@williamhodgson1428 Well, when Gordon Brown became PM, it's been reasonably well documented that he'd held one of the main offices of state previously
@@williamhodgson1428 Tony Blair was elected in Opposition following the death of the Incumbent John Smith. Gordon Brown was Chancellor for over a decade and was crowned PM not elected per se
Will this bring about a reduction in spending on housing and supporting people who haven't paid 1 penny in? See some terrified asylum seekers who fled here in fear of their lives are taking holidays in their own country of origin?????...😂
@@supernoodles91 sounds like you also forgot that Labour were mad for the financialisation of the economy, dependent on financial services (with lax regulation) and real estate, no manufacturing base, etc, which meant we suffered worse than many in the western world!
I think that the questions put to them were ‘will taxes rise’ and then they just specified the ones they wouldn’t raise. They always knew they would raise taxes and thus if anyone concludes they weren’t attempting to mislead the voters by omission then that person doesn’t really understand the dishonesty of political spin.
They promised the same.as.the Tories amd left the same wiggle.room for other taxes elsewhere. No raise on Income Tax, VAT or National Insurance Tories would have slashed benefits and services and jobs. Borrowed to give tax break to rich. Labour will tax the rich to keep the economy afloat and borrow for infrastructure, like a mortgage. Neither will tax the rich to provide services yet.
@@vetinaris1297 Please don’t mistake me for a Tory apologist. But they are no longer in administration - Labour are, and should be held accountable for what they do.
@thewellandvalley2103 if they raise those three then yes. It was discussed enough before the election...by Tories as much as anyone...that Labour would prob raise inheritance tax or wealth taxes. They can't say they didn't know, they left the same wiggle room for themselves.
@@vetinaris1297 You are being very generous. Repeatedly asked whether they would raise ‘taxes’ (generic phrase) and they entirely evaded stating what they knew at the time - that they would be raising taxes. The whole spin since coming in ‘it’s so much worse than we thought / worst economic inheritance’ (both untruthful), is totally cynical. I would have far more respect if they had just said before that they were planning to raise more money via taxation.
They also got the Olympic flag upside down 🙂 and to be fair Alistair, quite a few people felt offended by the Last Supper tableau. That did seem somewhat misjudged.
Only two cities applied to host the 2024 Olympics (LA & Paris). Out of concern over the dwindlining number of host applicants, the OCOG awarded 2024 & 2028 at the same time.
It’s a v bad start for Reeves to contradict the OBR AND take winter fuel from pensioners.! Does she not know how tight the pension is? If people who get pension credits haven’t paid into NI for a number of years. The full state pension only still leaves pensioners making choice between food and heat.
@@teatotal8079 they are going to continue payments to people with pension credits, and stop payments to people with full state pensions. The difference in those two amounts is very small. Look it up and tell me if you think that’s a reasonable policy. You may have in your mind that this affects pensioners with large private pensions only. This is not accurate. A very large number of pensioners only have the state pension. Ie the working class.
Living standard beginning to rise..... really?! I work full time for the NHS and cannot afford to put my heating on for more than an hour a day during winter. I am mid 60's live alone and struggle continuously to manage.
Yes, that made me wonder who he's talking about! In real shopping basket terms my income has steadily declined over the last 10 years or more and is now barely adequqte!
About the controversial queer 'Last Supper' tableau: several of the performers involved said it was based on the Last Supper, as did the public channel commenting the event live, and a few performers later apologised, so it sounds somewhat disingenuous to say it 'had nothing to do with it.' It was not just that, but it was also that. Also, perhaps Christians round the world are informed enough on their own iconographic tradition to be taken seriously on that issue? That being said, you can argue that mocking or undermining religion, Christianity specifically, is a very French thing to do. Then again, you can ask whether or not it has its place in an international Olympic opening ceremony. But considering what is at stake, please just don't speak in bad faith, or you might get crucified for it (yes, terrible pun intended).
@@vetinaris1297 Have I written it is offensive? I have not. Have I asked whether the iconographic tradition represents events 'as they happened'? I have not. I have commented on Alastair Campbell's remark, and have offered arguments. Your post is irrelevant, I'm afraid.
I am losing confidence in Rory Stewart sadly. Clearly he does not rely on NHS services. NHS staff and doctors in particular have fallen behind in their pay compared to the private sector. Parroting David Gauk does him no favours. The pay review body recommendations equate to pay in the private sector. Clearly Rory Stewart is quite happy for the rest of us who cannot get a dentist or a doctor or are on NHS waiting lists because it simply doesn't affect him
Politicians and all those in financial depts relied upon by government should do a course in progressive economics . Government debt is not like a household budget. Austerity is a big fat lie.
17:00 - Yes Rory, I'm sure the top 1% do pay 28% of the income tax, but is that a relevant number? What percentage of their earnings is that? What percentage of their total wealth does that related to? After tax, how much disposable income do those people have, compared to the majority of wage earners? Put it in those terms and I bet this picture starts to look very different. And, frankly, this is less relevant than whether or not people pay tax on their assets in a way that's commensurate to the amount that's paid on wages. This kind of selective approach to the facts is taking an extremely narrow view of the problem.
It’s hard to exaggerate how little I care about the Tory leadership race
True, they're all a bunch of nasty back-stabbers who are all about their personal ambitions rather than any driving cause that drove them towards politics.
I know. Couldnt finish the video 😂
Political cartoonists are sharpening their pencils, anticipating who they'd rather be caricaturing for the next few years.
That’s fair enough but any government needs a strong opposition, not only to hold them to account, but to question & challenge their statements. Without this the voting public would only get a one sided view of government.
"most important horse race around" according to the telegraph
"Always polite."
Rory shows who he rubbed shoulders with all his life. The uppercrust is always polite but they can still be utter monsters. Being polite means nothing if you are part of a duplicitous oligarcy that is the conservatives. Does he even hear himself sometimes?
Rory's a principled guy . I thought he was the same as the rest of the Tory party. Nope, he's alright
I'd rather have bad news face to face from Rachel Reeves than be sneered at by Tories behind my back who then give my money to Michelle Mone.
Labour didnt say they wouldnt put up taxes. They said they wouldn't put taxes up on workìng people.
The wealth disparity between the exceptionally wealthy (assets more than £10m) and the working population has dramatically increased in the last 10 years. We must tax the exceptionally wealthy to defend ourselves, and provide for our country. We need more services but also need more houses/rails/power generation/etc. We don't have to accept for our children that they will live in a second or third tier nation!
@@MadameDeSquiggles you cant tax your way to prosperity
I remind that top 1% earn 12.5% of income and pay 29% of income tax (house of commons library 2020/1 surely newer data exists?) so the rich should pay their share narrative is mooted by the fact they actually do pay proportionately higher tax than their share of income. There is a super rich bracket above this but that is super yacht territory and they are slippery as eels! Also if you track tax revenue growth to top rates of tax you note larger increases at periods of lowering top tax rates I guess as people pay the tax rather than hide it but i do not call out cause and effect as many other factors could impact. Before you ask I'm in the 50-90th percentile and my super yacht is an inflatable canoe - but it would be fun to spend one day as a slippery eel on a superyacht 😂
@@garyb455 why not? The USA did all the way until Reagan.
@@charlesmoss8119are you only counting direct income and not asset appreciation & leveraged low interest debt fuelling further debt acquisition? Most wealthy people aren't wealthy because they have a payslip with a big number on it.
The OBR has confirmed the Tories witheld information from them. I think tbh we're arguing semantics, we all knew it was going to be bad, but only the Tories knew exactly why and how.
Normally we don't find the previous Government lied to the institutions overseeing them.
It was a little more nuanced than that (though you're generally correct). OBR and IFS agree that there was a 22Bn "blackhole" however £11.6bn to give public sector workers recommended pay rises that are bigger than the 2% budgeted for by the last government which is the Labour government's own decision.
I think it's kind of unfair to include that 11.6bn
@@danielo7985Not really that unfair, as the Conservatives knew 2% was never going to be enough, so this was deliberate underfunding. If the Conservatives had used a slightly more believable settlement figure of say 4% or 5% to public sector generally and 7% or 8% for junior doctors in their calculations that would have made more sense, but to use 2% was crazy and was part of the black hole creation.
@@johnharvey1786I agree that the 2% figure was too low but my point is that if that 2% increase was known then how can it be a part of the "blackhole"?
My understanding is that all money included in the blackhole figure are meant to represent spending for schemes that were partially or fully undisclosed. I dont think the 2% figure was undisclosed?
They have not said information was withheld, they've said they're conducting a review and you're jumping to the conclusion you'd like them to reach
Rory's description of the Tory candidates is frankly bizarre. They are not rude to him for a reason, they are all self serving monsters.
Basically you can't win an election saying you are going to raise taxes... That's it. That's the game.
"a game" - no. It's never a game watching people lose their homes; paid workers forced to attend food banks so they can pay horrific bills keeping their children warm in winter. This "game" is called cruel unnecessay poverty or needless death for too many British Citizens.
Heat or Eat: that's Tory politics. Hating the poorest is their favourite work. And they work very hard to succeed at that. Shame. Shame. Not "Game."
Labour were VERY open about the fact that they were going to raise taxes, it's just that the media & the commentariat like the two disingenuous ones above pretend that Labour have said they didn't.
But i remember the frothing frontpages about VAT on fee-paying schools etc.
What Labour said was that they weren't going to raise taxes on working people.
The game is who can lie the most convincingly
@@MarkAHowell energy costs are high due to a State religion which has no understanding of engineering whatsoever and is based solely on emotional thinking, much like the Puritans of the past.
With the income tax threshold frozen for three more years, the state pension itself will soon be taxed. That will mean a 20% reduction in its value. For many people, the state pension is the major component of their income in old age. If your private pension is not linked to inflation ('final salary pensions are now rare as hens teeth outside the public sector, thanks Gordon Brown, and many so called 'workplace pensions' are worth a pittance), then you face a steadily diminishing income year on year with less and less earning capacity and soon none at all.
Tax the wealthy and tax the corporations properly
When politicians quote numbers like £22 billion,my first reaction is prove it.
Show me the numbers and how you got those figures.
Otherwise I assume these politicians are lying.
As someone who joined the long, long fight to get Pension Credit many years ago, can I point out that far from the rich gaining the winter fuel payment, there are thousands who are on the borderline by a mere few pounds a week over the qualifying threshold. With the predicted higher prices for fuel coming this winter, plus ever increasing food costs, the memory of 1999's horrendous figure of 49,000 excess winter deaths seems only too repeatable.
An example we found over and over again was a pensioner being released from a hospital bed - sent home to recuperate to a cold home and an empty fridge, to be readmitted just 24 hours later. Yes, means testing is needed but the actual costs of administrating any efficient scheme can outweigh money saved.
The 1999 excess winter deaths figure that you have quoted is not solely attributable to hypothermia as you imply, the figure also includes deaths from winter illnesses that (obviously) increase at this time of year.
There's probably line in a Labour spreadsheet somewhere forecasting the increase in deaths and multiplying it by the state pension and calling that a 'cost saving'
@@normanlazarus1836 if you read the select report you will discover that the figure is not all winter deaths, it is expressed as excess winter deaths among the elderly above the expected average death toll. Which is why urgent review came about re applying extra payments and a campaign highlighting the 70,000 pensioner not claiming their rightful benefit entitlement due to the need to fill in complicated forms and ( among many) the fear of means tests from negative experiences in their youth which was a degrading experience.
@@avs4365 it does kind of make the assumption that anyone who is entitled to pension credit is already receiving it. Means tested benefits always have an issue in that those that quality have to apply for it. Many will be entitled but will not claim it
@@Jaaj2009 My point exactly and indeed many are not claiming it and the reality shows in the alarm being raised by charities and organisations that work on behalf of pensioners. Finding the people who are entitled but not claiming takes more than feeding data of those who are known about into a computer.
big fan of the funny faces Rory makes when other people are talking sometimes, very relatable
I was wondering why he does that. Is he in pain?
Gerald Ford awarded Jesse Owens the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1976, forty years after his great win
Every new government blames the previous government for the mess they have to sort out ...
As a pensioner I want my health care and if that means managing without £300 so be it. It’s better than paying for private operations and tests.
We need a podcast asap. Britain is on the map for racism and idiocy. Time for some analysis!
People voted for tory austerity for 13 years because they prefer low taxes to high public services. Unfortunately its the vulnerable who need the public services. And they don't pay the taxes.
The austerity was lightweight and national debt was continually being kicked down the road. It’s easy to forget the jaw dropping 5 years of borrowing requirements announced by the late Alistair Darling which have continued to this day. Blair/ Brown inherited a golden economy thanks to Ken Clark and its the last time the Uk was in the black. No more “boom and bust” we were told.
“Do you think you could get away with borrowing more money than putting up taxes”. Response - “Yes, definitely”. Perfectly describes why the very system we elect officials by needs to change. It’s ’kick the can down the road’ politics and economics and is extremely dangerous.
Disappointed to hear Rory talk about the fear based line about Rich people leaving the country if we tax them. Many rich people hold substantial assets in the UK that are based in the UK, geography of the owner should not matter when it comes to taxing these assets. The wealthy have benefitted immensely under the Tories with changes like the Lifetime pensions allowance cap, that Labour have failed to roll back (despite pledging to do so). They pay far less tax than the average worker in terms of % on their income. Unlike normal workers who are suffering, the wealth benefit most from inflation and the rising of rates. Even if the wealthy move country, they will not sell all their assets unless government policy is very extreme, its not like they earn their income from income tax anyway. They should be paying more to fix the country they benefit from while things are such a mess
@@Jaaj2009 you should inform yourself about how international taxation actually works. It largely doesn’t matter where assets are located depending on the person and country.
You cant tax what you cant see.
Its all in Cayman Island accounts now and untouchable anyway.
@@domlisboa4024 Again political choice, are you telling me the UK government has no power to tax assets within it own borders? They create the law fgs
@@georgemann5146 Talking about personal taxation if a person is a non-uk resident but has UK assets, then depending on their personal situation, and the country tax rules where they are now resident in, it’s entirely possible that they will pay no UK tax or have a reduced tax bill compared to a UK resident. For example when Labour were previously in power a non-UK resident selling a UK investment property would pay no CGT on that property. The Tories changed that and so tax must be paid. Given the number of digital nomad schemes (and others) I expect a large number of people like me to leave the UK to reduce or eliminate their tax burden.
How do you assess the value of assets accurately and how won't you cause a fiscal crisis because of a mass selloff of those assets
The big story here is that two people from opposite (all be it less extreme) ends of the political spectrum can discuss politics using facts and no rhetoric and no insults. They happily play together in these videos. Surely this is the way politics should be conducted? How nice would it be if parliament worked like this?
Both Tories
They are almost identical on all issues…
Watched about 100 episodes and I'm yet to see them disagree on any big societal issue. They represent the uniparty
@@stleonards1066 It’s hilarious that it is billed as ‘disagreeing agreeably’… although I do think Rory is too polite and deferential to Campbell and probably is biting his tongue at times. I wish he would actually call out Campbell’s disingenuous spinning of every story, but seems happy to just nod along.
@@dexstewart2450Neither of them are Tory
Capital gains tax in Germany is effectively a flat rate of 26.375%, vs 20% or 10% in the UK depending on if you pay more than basic rate tax or the basic tax rate, respectively. In case you are wondering, in Germany there are still plenty of rich people…
I think the comment that the Olympics are being held in mainly western countries is misleading. Not only did Beijing and Rio host previously, it's also important to consider that Paris and LA were awarded when all other bids were withdrawn and that Brisbane was the only official bid for 2032. Furthermore the economic and logistic challenges of hosting the games do (rightly or wrongly) mean that weather countries with established venues and transport links are inherently better host candidates, so it makes sense that they're picked more often.
The black hole in the finances needs to discussed in the context of Brexit. Decisions have consequences and losing £40 billion in tax receipts annually impacts government finances. We cannot continue tohave politicians putting their heads in the sand and not discuss Brexit. Who has the backbone to start this debate?
Debate brexit all you want. We here in the EU still do not want you lot back. We do not exist to prop up your ailing parasitic economy. All you lot ever care for is yourselves and you never offer anything of worth to us. Always attempting to sabotage our built-out of our union. You lot do not belong in it.
It is understandable under the circumstances that Winter Fuel Payments should be means tested . Against this backdrop , MPs are to keep their £3,400pa allowance - is that correct ? If so , it will play put badly.
The candidates in the Tory leadership are a very poor crop indeed. The future of the party looks increasingly bleak ; by the next GE , 1 in 6 Tory voters will have cast off their mortal coil. I can not see young people flocking to the Tory Party .
I'll take 2 to 1 on Tory party winning most seats at next election if you are offering
@@StuartEvans-h2h The main problem is that they’re fishing in a much smaller pool as alluded to in the discussion.
It's a tricky thing to curb MP expenses unless we only want the quite-wealthy to be able to become MPs, or want much of the work MPs do to come to a close. Tends to be endorsed by people who've never seen up close what many MPs workloads involve.
The thing about age is that everyone keeps getting older, and voting intentions shifts. Let's see how many vote for Labour next time if the Pension pots get raided.
No reason they couldn't be means tested too @@leftgrrl
I honestly don't give a rat's arse that what the top 1% are paying in income tax is three times what the bottom half of the workforce pay, for two reasons. The wealth of the top 1% in the UK constitutes 48% of the total wealth. So their paying 28% of the total tax bill while owning almost half of the wealth is pretty frickin outrageous. And second, when they've paid their taxes (if they haven't jetted off to a tax haven), it's not like they are suddenly poor - they remain extraordinarily wealthy.
When you are poor or in that lower 50% of the wealthy, the amount that is taken from you in taxes can significantly affect your everyday normal quality of life - can you afford to put the heating on, can you afford to buy clothes, can you pay your mortgage, can your small business survive? So, the super wealthy would have to have one less property around the world because of an increase in taxes for them? Cry me a feckin river!
The question is what are you going to do with that money that you would levy on the rich, can it be used wisely and efficiently, of course, otherwise we give the political class representing the rich a stick to beat us ordinary folks with.
Well said, it is a crazy argument, those with the most money should be paying a proper proportion of tax, currently the biggest tax burden (compared to earnings) is placed on the poorest.
I respect your point but it may not be the right way of thinking in 2024. Incidentally, what percentage of someone's total income should be spent on tax each year?
@@jamebrow that's not a realistic question - progressive taxation means different income brackets pay different amounts, and different countries have different resources, and finally, fiscal demands are changing all the time. So the answer is, enough to take care of what should be taken care of.
And what does 'not the right thinking in 2024' have to do with it? These economics arguments have been bounced around for a century already, and 2024 hasn't answered the fundamental theories of what works best any better than any previous year.
The fly in the ointment is that reducing taxes can SOMETIMES lead to increased tax revenues, when it attracts outside investment, and that is then used as a stick to beat governments or left-wing governments with, but what it represents is playing into the hands of deregulated global markets. In other words, just another variation of the usual bribery that wealthy people extol on policy makers.
@@jamebrow How much does a homeless veteran spend on VAT?
I'd say, make the *$%^&% tax dodgers pay AT LEAST that.
Yes but remember that the top 1% that pay most of the tax are highly mobile and many many countries would welcome them with open arms. Your short sighted jealousy will leave you with much higher taxes and limited services if and when they all leave because they don’t want to continue to pay for people who hate them
whenever Rory bangs on about how much of income tax in the UK is paid by the richest people in Britain, I feel obliged to point out that income tax is ONLY 28% of the total tax rake in the UK. According to HMRC:
"there were 31.6 million Income Tax payers in tax year 2018 to 2019, which is projected to increase to 32.2 million in 2021 to 2022
there are a projected 27.0 million basic rate Income Tax payers in tax year 2021 to 2022, which is a 2.6% increase from 2018 to 2019.
Basic rate Income Tax payers make up a projected 83.2% of the overall Income Tax paying population in 2021 to 2022
HMRC also point out that:
"the top 50% of Income Tax payers received 74.6% of total income in 2018 to 2019, or £834bn out of a total £1,120 billion"
The wealthy, having stacked the deck to make themselves richer and richer, then complain that the people they have impoverished are not paying enough in taxes, even as the wealth lobby for yet more tax cuts for themselves.
Rory might also take note that VAT is approximately 20% of the total tax rake in the UK and that the vast majority of that tax is overwhelmingly paid by all those people that Rory seems to think are getting off lightly under the income tax regime in the UK. Property taxes (Council tax) is paid by homeowners and renters alike (it's baked into the rents).
Might I suggest that Rory should ponder MLK Jr.'s comment that "it is a cruel jest to say to a bootless man that he ought to lift himself by his own bootstraps."
Of course all the revenue comes from the rich. They have all the feckin money. Jeez.
And it's a far lower proportion of their income, than the poor pay.
and they have hoarded multiple trillions in tax evasion off shore that no one mentions - have we all forgotten the panama papers etc.
Yes, they pay for your healthcare and benefits. If you want to get paid more and reduce inequality, you should advocate for policies that decrease the supply of labour.
@sasserine this is categorically untrue.
yeah the bottom 50% only have 9% of the wealth in the uk. the top 10% have 43%. these figures were from the ONS in 2020 so it's probably worse now than it was then. it's disingenuous to look at income not wealth in this case.
the top 10% should be paying 5x the amount of total tax than the bottom 50% even just to keep it balanced. if you're after wealth redistribution (which labour should be), it should be more than that.
They have a lot of room to put up taxes on corporations and the wealthy, I'm thinking capital gains taxes, excess profit taxes, wealth taxes.
But all these people are working people who Labour said they would not tax. You can't create wealth without working unless you are a drug dealer. Try and tax them!!
Hamburg, Budapest, Boston & Rome withdrew due to domestic opposition to Olympic hosting costs leaving only Paris & LA contending for 2024. The OCOG subsequently awarded 24' & 28' simultaneously (Paris & LA, respectively) out of concern over the dwindling number of host city applicants.
The NY Times has a great article titled 'Why Is It So Hard for Olympic Host Cities to Control Costs?' explaining why certain cities tend to get selected, and it comes down to the dwindling number of cities willing to bear the cost. Athens, in particular, saw protests against hosting when it was announced they would apply (so they never did), while Hamburg held a referendum, resulting in a 'no' vote, which then persuaded the Paris mayor not to hold one (out of fear of losing).
I have to say, I'm rather surprised TRIP missed this obviously political angle on the Olympic games.
BTW Portugal tax rates are very very high. People are moving to Portugal because of weather and low crime so the UK is a bit stuffed.
They have virtually no inherent tax but capital gains tax on the sale of a house is 28% even if a ppr.
@@laundryday9511isn't there just a flat rate tax for the "digital nomad types"?
@@sciencefliestothemoon2305They had the Non Habitual Resident scheme. This has been watered down now but it was very successful in transferring wealth and skills to Portugal. Spain and many others have a Digital Nomad scheme, but only certain types of employees would qualify.
@@jamebrow NHR ended last year.
Rory that old line about "much of the income from the government comes from the top" won't cut it. They get wealthy by using the working public, keeping down wages or exploiting the system and elite contacts to give themselves huge advantages over ordinary people who are constantly told to tighten our belts whilst welfare health and education suffer. They do not "earn" their money. Bezoz for example, does not work 43,000 times harder than the person who empties his bins (minimum US wage).
They are culpable themselves. That's why they never bring up wealth inequality or taxing the rich. They are the rich. It's a neoliberal shibboleth they won't transgress.
Yes he should mean, not enough of the tax comes from the wealthiest.
This might be true for some mega rich but not the majority of workers who earn well. Many work hard as employees or are small business owners.
So you can create Amazon rival tomorrow. Pay yourself only 100 times minimum wage and compete them out of business.
Someone’s been reading the idot’s guide to Marx… unsure of what industry you work in, but many of the ‘rich’ are workers, and they are industrious individuals who have extremely high levels of competence, conscientiousness and devote pretty much their whole lives to ascending whatever hierarchy is in front of them. Yes, in the freedom of capitalist society, you will get a few Bezoz-like billionaires who appear to earn disproportionately, but the majority of the top earners (who pay the majority of tax), exist within the same game as everyone else. Punish them at your peril.
About the Paris Olympics, what is outstanding is the way it reunited the people, even if it is for a short while. Having the Games right in the middle of a big city was really such a gamble ! And a gamble that so far has been won !
We know why the election was called for July: every month more people were remortgaging at higher interest rates and the Tories were going to be unable to sustain their fiscal policy with the next budget (in particular, the NI cutting proposal was unsustainable). Potential Tory voters would be feeling worse if they waited than if they went early. A spending review was also becoming unavoidable which would have brought the state of the public finances into sharp focus.
The election was called for july because the prisons were overflowing any later for an election would result in a breakdown of law and order
God, you two are so much more entertaining than Ed Balls and George Osborne. I gave them a try but it was like watching paint dry. You two have so much more personality.
You know Campbell lied his way into duping Britain into an illegal war right?
TAX THE ASSETS! You can't take those out of the country
😂 I'm sure this government will spend all our money so well and efficiently just like any other government we ever had
How will getting people building work with that
Well, only some assets. Real estate can't be moved. Financial assets are moved with the push of a button
If you tax all the assets in the UK, all you do is reduce their value and disincentivised UK investment.
why not impose capital controls? not workable in this day and age.
You say that the public sector is creaking but we have 70,000 more civil servants now than we did before COVID.
Perhaps the Treasury can devise some taxes that tap into all the money flying in and around in the digital economy and the City rather than waiting for it to land.
This whole idea of the country being "bust" shows a very poor misunderstanding of how state-level macroeconomics works.
Countries do tend to be bust in a specific sense. Ideologues and populists both want to "do stuff". In order for a country to do that stuff, the country will have to pay. They burden countries with what they want, not what the country needs and thus leaving the country too little with what it needs to do the important stuff. Which both ideologues and populists use as a reason to push on more of their stuff, because the whole country would be better if the country just did the stuff they want the country to do.
Don't need to raise or introduce new taxes ... just go after the tax evaders.
Love listening to you two, love the way you get on together, it must do you both the world of good having your friendship. Love your humour. And love Alistair’s pink shirt, colour suits you!
I have been long fan of Alastair until this podcast. Why? Not all who felt umcomfortable after watching Olympics ceremony are "far-right". He may need to reconsider his comments.
At some point the penny is going to drop amonst Labour voters - that the UK is just not rich enough to afford good public services - not even close.Growing the economy by building more houses may (possibly) be a short term boost, but will probably throw up more problems than it solves and certainly won't alleviate the housing shortage because immigration is so high. When government expenditure is £1.1Trn a year, £20bn is a mere rounding error.
Hmmm. Seems like we need to know how much value is around and what % everyone has and make that fairer.
I want.my tax rates back! 1920s to 1960'a rates for business and wealthy.
I personally think kemi Bad Enoch comes across a rude petulant
Yes she was rude on Daily Politics bbc2 recently
She will cause havoc if appointed. She’s not a uniter
Rory complaining about the speed of the alphabet. Priceless. One of the kind of things I watch you guys for. From an American with dangerously little knowledge of British politics and government. Good show, guys.
Tory Austerity got us here
and Brexit.
Please put the volume up
The scrapping of it, you mean?
Now we have labour austerity
And rory voted for it
At 17:10 Rory mentions the notion that super rich people would leave the country if their wealth was taxed. I am dying to hear a more detailed discussion about this; specifically, I would love a Leading interview with Gary Stevenson, who says basically that this argument is bollocks. I respect both Rory and Gary somewhat fierce, so I am super intrigued when this kind of fundamental difference in opinion pops up. Thank you so much for the lovely podcast!
The top 1% dont pay nearly enough. This thing that they'll leave the country if taxed fairly is rubbish.
They are leaving the country already and going to low tax regimes. Patrick Boyle did a 20 min RUclips video.
They might leave, but many of their assets can't.
The top 1% generate over 30% of government revenue.
When Labour put up the highest rate of tax to 50% the tax generated fell. People make choices.
I left the UK at the end of the last tax year in anticipation that Labour will put up taxes. Even moderately wealthy people are far more mobile these days.
Even definition of spite and envy Corbyn in his 2019 costings had increasing the higher income tax rate raising LESS revenue from millionaires plus.
@@davesy6969 Yes, but that's irrelevant if the assets they own and make passive income from remain here. The assets are what is taxed (or should be)
I believe I'm right in thinking that James C Scott was the author of a very influential book called 'The Moral Economy of the Peasant' in the late 70s. He'd studied societies in southeast Asia that relied on subsistence agriculture and, from memory, discovered or concluded that they demonstrated a surprising degree of collectivism and even altruism considering the harsh conditions in which they existed. This moral economy was severely disrupted by colonialism - a very potent conclusion in the wake of the Vietnam War. A sad loss indeed.
This will be the last podcast I listen to due to their dismissive comments on the Christian mockery at the Olympics. This was deeply offensive to many people and to be so dismissive shows their disconnect.
Ah, you should be used to it! Christians seem to be fair game for all sides these days. 😮
If you are referring to the tableau with the drag queens, as an art teacher, I must insist on correcting the assumption that this was an irreverent or disrespectful take on Da Vinci's vision of the Last Supper. It was instead parodying a pagan bacchanal, a word that survives in the English language to denote a great feast or raucous celebration, and which was a celebratory religious rite in honour of Bacchus or Dionysus, the pagan Greek god of revelry and wine. Dionysus was also revered by the Gauls and Romans in an era where ethnic or national gods were considered interchangeable, the same deities in different guises. The connection with Paris is that the River Seine is named for Sequana, the supposed daughter of Dionysus and patron deity of the Sequani, the Gaulish tribe who inhabited the area in classical times. The composition of the Last Supper just happens to borrow imagery from classical paintings of celebrations and from literary descriptions of the worship of Bacchus/Dionysus and that's why the first concept you were reminded of was Leonardo's painting. Leonardo, by the way, was apparently a queer or bisexual man, charged with sodomy after sleeping with a male sex worker at the age of 23, and who lived with his apprentice Salai for decades before the latter, in a surprising turn of events, got married. Leonardo was also a skeptic who, as attested in his own writings had very weak, minimal and heterodox religious faith and who completed the Last Supper for a commission. For money. Just like he designed fortifications for the Duke of Milan for money, or statues for the King of France...for money. All of which makes the idea that lampooning Da Vinci's Last Supper by associating it with homosexuals is some kind of blasphemy a little hard to digest. Social conservatives don't do art, do they? Or if they do, they love all the worst stuff. For all their talk of defending Western Civilisation (tm), they seem very poorly schooled about some of its major figures, events and concepts. If they knew anything about Da Vinci or the Last Supper, they'd have spotted something was up.
Rory should note the IFS have accepted that the 22Bn in year overspend is NOT the medium term 20Bn black hole they flagged pre election. It’s a different thing.
Nope.
They've said the asylum spending is an over spend. That the largest item in the 22 is public sector pay rise choices.
@@danielwebb8402I quote the IFS report on Reeves’ statement directly ‘Rachel Reeves' statement focused on 2024-25, the financial year in progress. These spending pressures are separate from the implied cuts to unprotected public services in future years, which have received considerably more attention.’ The spending pressures reeves identified are on top of the £18Bn black hole the IFS discussed pre election.
@@zappybazinga8124 Yeah you are quoting rather than reading / understanding.
The IFS have NOT said the 22bn is unexpected. They've said maybe 4-6bn of it is. But that this also is cherry picking. You always have some budget areas over, some under. Solely shouting the over as an "error" or "hidden" before the year is even out so you see if a normal amount of also unders is cheating.
The largest item in the 22m is....
Additional public sector pay rises. 9bn of it.
@@danielwebb8402The point is that this £22Bn overspend is in year. It is NOT the same thing as the IFS fiscal hole that was discussed during the campaign. It simply is not. £8Bn of in year overspend the reserves already having been spent is absolutely something that was not known. The IFS headline to their report is ‘The in-year funding pressures and overspends set out by Rachel Reeves do genuinely appear to be larger than previously thought.’
@zappybazinga8124
Agree this is in addition to what thd ifs were talking about during the election campaign.
Disagree the 22bn was unknowable a month ago. At least 9bn is a Labour choice as additional public sector pay rises. The IFS have said the asylum billions should have been shared / known / is a "black hole".
But then I have financial literacy and also actually watched yesterday's IFS video going through this. Rather than just parrots back a sentence that "happens" to agree with my pre position.
And why didn't Tories stand on their successes? High immigration saved the country from a long recession and an even worse decline in standard of living, higher inflation and interest rates, and their significant increase in taxes over their term saved the budget debt, NHS, School funding etc... from being even worse than they are. Missed opportunity...
Jenrick is not an option as leader of tories because the voters have long memories and haven’t forgotten the MP’s expenses scandal. Anyone who was involved in suspect claims is unacceptable.
Here’s the thing Rory: the Tories have trashed any semblance of integrity during their time. That makes it all that more believable that they have hidden the true state of the budget (like partygate, the PPE ripoffs to mates etc). Now that the OBR have confirmed it, this only makes the narrative even stronger.
Good to see Rory in a normal setting instead of the locked away in the basement dungeon with his books look
I applaud Rachel Reeve’s decision to limit the winter fuel allowance. My partner and I are both pensioners and, unlike so many of our age, we have an income and savings we can live comfortably on. We are very fortunate and we don’t need the WFA. I do think, however, that it should be paid to pensioners who pay no income tax. The eligibility threshold income for Pension Credit is lower than the income tax threshold and it is unfair to penalise those who pay no income tax.
Rory is absolutely away with the fairies.
They’re only polite and charming with other privileged people Rory!
We DON’T need wealthy people who DON’T pay their taxes anyway - so, let them go!
But . . . get ALL the money they stole from the taxpayer, first!!!
Well, if they don't pay taxes they're not going to care if you increase taxes lol. In fact it gives those who don't pay taxes an advantage.
Your insights on the Olympics are refreshing.
Suella didn’t get 10 Tory MPs. In fairness this is a much harder thing to do nowadays.
she'll always have her dalmations for company
I put a tenner on Rory Stewart to win the Tory leadership in 2019.
Interesting how Rory defends the Uber wealthy with the usual "go to" rhetoric of them leaving the country if their wealth is considered necessary to tax far heavily than it has been. The fact is as he says the differential between the 1% and the rest of us as increased beyond all recognition in the last 14 years while poverty continues to grow among the increasing less well off. It's time this ended. We should certainly now increase taxation on the billionaires who run this country including Capital Gains,Non Dom Status and Tax Avoidance schemes. If they leave then so be it. Other countries have done it without the threaten exodus of the mega-rich happening and it's unlikely to happen here.
Agree 100% - this is essentially blackmail, it would be like me telling my friend he needs to pick up our dinner bill, even though I am much richer than him, or I might stop going out for dinner with him. I don't believe these people would really leave the country (certainly not in numbers large enough to matter anyway). And even if they do, at least we can enjoy a fairer society without leeches like them around.
@@BankontheBarclay Do you really mean “Tax Avoidance schemes” rather than tax evasion? If so then you’re calling for scrapping the ISA accounts which are a government scheme to avoid paying taxes on savings interest.
I’m all for a simplified tax system which has fewer loopholes for exploitation & making multinational corporations paying taxes on UK generated revenue although this may require changes to international standards for taxation.
Traditionally it is Conservatives who subscribe very much to the whole brain drain theory if you increase taxes on the rich. Now, it is a legitimate fear, but the fact of the matter is the vast majority of the very wealthy in this country wouldn't go anywhere if their taxes increased marginally. There is suspicion among wealthy citizens that left-wing governments will just squander their tax revenue, which leads to strong support put behind Parties that promise lower taxes on them (i.e., the Tories). The Tories take it too far, though. Truss, for example, was so ideologically driven about being a lady of the night for the wealthy that she crashed the economy. You have to strike a balance. The rich already pay a large proportion of the revenue in this country, so any increase to try to balance the books has to be sensibly done.
Personally I would like to see a law forcing companies like Amazon to pay their fair share of tax. Currently the amount they pay per year is barely more than two weeks of our gross contributions to the EU (when we were a member). I understand the City and our overseas havens rely on being dodgy coves for finance/the uber rich, so increases to taxes on the wealthy is politically a lot more challenging here than it is for other countries. But it can be done.
The Tory leadership race is so depressing. If these people are the best they have to offer then they deserve a decade of opposition.
If the Tories lurch to the right they are finished. Booted out after a decade+ of power, they need to replace the rot with completely fresh faces from the center. Seems they have learned nothing.
I agree....but the problem is that Boris booted all those out in 2019.
Purges always backfire as all the competent people.go
Robert Jenrick was Secretary of State for Housing and Local Government for more than 2 years - so he was in Cabinet as a full member.
This entire discussion is predicated on the assumption that UK government finances are like those of a household. They are not. Households don't issue the state's currency. The government does, and it does so by spending, creating pounds in the process. Having the 'power of the purse' is one of the things that makes the government... the government.
The mini budget has scared anybody off borrowing to invest for a good decade, I'd imagine.
@@elliotpollard9083frustrating, because it was the timing that was the issue, not the concept
The government is entirely beholden to international finance and markets.
Print 500 bn to save the banks in 2008? Fine.
Print another 500 bn to fund covid measures? Fine.
Anything that might benefit society in the long run? Verboten.
@@stleonards1066 those were actual crisis that would have caused serious problems without them. You can't just borrow money to invest because investors can do that themselves and for far cheaper than the gov will. Planning reform will be far more helpful
The UK is a net import country. The government deficit printed currency is financed by other countries in trade.
If China sells the UK 10 billion in goods/services, they want 10 billion in goods/services in return. If the UK doesn't have 10 billion in goods/services that China wants or needs at the time...they can put the Pounds into gilts or an investment vehicle to keep pace with inflation until they do... Or they can swap for another currency where they can receive the goods/services they want/need. China is financing the 10 billion Pounds in this scenario.
Being a net import country means you depend on other countries to finance a budget deficit. When, as in the example, China no longer needs/wants to sell to the UK.. those 10 billion pounds have to find another source of financing or the Pound will drop like a stone because you will need to offer more in return to get the trade.
It's called 'the balance of payments' and it operates just like a household budget.
If you're like the EU/China, and you're a net exporter.. now you finance other countries deficits/currency.
I think you're espousing the MMT narrative that thinks you can isolate a country's budget without looking at the international settlements that occur. MMT is not the real world of international finance.
Oh no, I hadn't heard about James C Scott's passing. Brilliant. Always thought-provoking. Was an intellectual in the truest sense of the word.
Describing Cleverly as 'not a Gove-like intellect' has to be a great example of English understatement.
Gove is a real talent like him or not. I love that guardian cartoon about him but he really does put in a shift
@@maxhaughton1964 The civil service love him for a reason
Also, what do you mean ' The Narrative?' We're all sick of the narrative. We're sick of the media, I know how it works, I was a journo for twenty years and it's just got out of hand. What people need is the Truth, until that happens the Fantasy Politics will continue.
At 24:45, I’m not sure if Rory has noticed, but gerunds are completely absent from Priti Patel's vocabulary. She always ends her "ing" words with "in," as in, "Our NHS nurses have been amazin'." Once I noticed this, I couldn't stop hearing it.
Her gerunds are not "absent". She drops g's. It's a documented feature of English accents stretching back at least a century: see references to "huntin', shootin' and fishin''" and the like in Wodehouse.
Just like Beth Rigby on Sky News.
Or like Blair dropping his leading 'H's when he got excited
‘Amazing’ as used here is a participle, not a gerund.
There is no point in investing in new hospitals if you don't have the staff to staff them. Paying the doctors is a higher priority than hospital infrastructure however the latter will have to be funded sooner or later.
Murdoch, in Australia, ran hard on cancel culture.... particularly via sky Noise after dark and his tabloids, taking advantage of declining education standards in this social media era.
Its older voters that love culture wars & misinformation
Thank you for reporting on Bangladesh, please do share more in the future.
As a middle income tax payer who the Mail say always get hit hardest by tax, I will gladly pay more income tax/ NI if the new government can get public services working!
Does the Tory party and its members ever consider what is good for the counry not what is good for them?
Stewart, completely lost it, "The leader comes from those that hold offices of state." Completely bypassing the fact that the Tories are in opposion, just as they were when David Cameron became leader, from nowhere.
I can almost guarantee the new Tory leader in November, will not lead into the 2028/29 election. They will be gone, history. 👑
I've been thinking this - the candidates brag about how they aspire to be the PM after the next election, but to be honest I think they'd be doing very well just to still be Tory leader going into the election. This is a party that has gone through how many leaders recently? When you're in opposition you don't have the distraction of trying to govern getting in the way of your in fighting either.
@@guyburgess7832 Contrast them with Starmer, an MP only from 2015, became leader without being in Government. PM at first attempt and never acknowledged that his party could win until the morning of 5 July 2024, when the votes were almost counted.
The Tory candidates should keep low profiles until September and stay out of public view.
Tony Blair and Gordon Brown never held offices of state either if I recall correctly!
@@williamhodgson1428 Well, when Gordon Brown became PM, it's been reasonably well documented that he'd held one of the main offices of state previously
@@williamhodgson1428 Tony Blair was elected in Opposition following the death of the Incumbent John Smith. Gordon Brown was Chancellor for over a decade and was crowned PM not elected per se
Will this bring about a reduction in spending on housing and supporting people who haven't paid 1 penny in?
See some terrified asylum seekers who fled here in fear of their lives are taking holidays in their own country of origin?????...😂
Difference being Rory, is that Labour didn't crash the economy. Your party DID!
Actually a neoliberal Labour party was in charge at the same time the neoliberal banking system they were overseeing crashed in 2008...
@@stephenwood2172 I forgot that it was the UK banks issuing sub prime mortgages to customers in Illinois........
@@supernoodles91 sounds like you also forgot that Labour were mad for the financialisation of the economy, dependent on financial services (with lax regulation) and real estate, no manufacturing base, etc, which meant we suffered worse than many in the western world!
If the Tories have any sense they will go with Cleverly. No great talent, but he's not covered in controversy or corruption.
I think it might not be true that Labour said they will not raise taxes. They said they will not raise certain taxes.
I think that the questions put to them were ‘will taxes rise’ and then they just specified the ones they wouldn’t raise. They always knew they would raise taxes and thus if anyone concludes they weren’t attempting to mislead the voters by omission then that person doesn’t really understand the dishonesty of political spin.
They promised the same.as.the Tories amd left the same wiggle.room for other taxes elsewhere.
No raise on Income Tax, VAT or National Insurance
Tories would have slashed benefits and services and jobs. Borrowed to give tax break to rich.
Labour will tax the rich to keep the economy afloat and borrow for infrastructure, like a mortgage.
Neither will tax the rich to provide services yet.
@@vetinaris1297 Please don’t mistake me for a Tory apologist. But they are no longer in administration - Labour are, and should be held accountable for what they do.
@thewellandvalley2103 if they raise those three then yes.
It was discussed enough before the election...by Tories as much as anyone...that Labour would prob raise inheritance tax or wealth taxes. They can't say they didn't know, they left the same wiggle room for themselves.
@@vetinaris1297 You are being very generous. Repeatedly asked whether they would raise ‘taxes’ (generic phrase) and they entirely evaded stating what they knew at the time - that they would be raising taxes. The whole spin since coming in ‘it’s so much worse than we thought / worst economic inheritance’ (both untruthful), is totally cynical. I would have far more respect if they had just said before that they were planning to raise more money via taxation.
Rory, 'polite and charming' are so far down on my priority list for politicians, I can't even begin to tell you 😂
Labour has said not on income tax, VAT and national insurance but didn't rule out capital gains
I found out yesterday that the UK gov owns 702 billion in US Gov bonds, why the hell dont we just sell half of those and fix the country....
It’s propping up the United States
because they'll also hold our govermnment bonds - selling a chunk for short term gain would likely undermine sterling longer term
That's why they are friendly towards us on the face of it. Cash them in and the USA collapses. It could wipe out all the National Debt though.
It was obvious the Tories were leaving us in an economic hole. We need to grow our economy. What are the chances of undoing Brexit.
They also got the Olympic flag upside down 🙂 and to be fair Alistair, quite a few people felt offended by the Last Supper tableau. That did seem somewhat misjudged.
I've not seen it, and hardly support the people complaining, but its not worth giving them the outrage fuel sometimes 😂😂
Is it actually based on The Last Supper, though?
Or on the classical era art that inspired Leonardo's Last Supper?
@@sasserine well fair point, it was clearly based on the De Vinci depiction but that is famous enough for everyone to get the reference
@@joannemoore3976 Nope - Bacchus
@@dexstewart2450 yes we had Bacchus on the cornucopia but at the start there was a last supper tableau
Only two cities applied to host the 2024 Olympics (LA & Paris). Out of concern over the dwindlining number of host applicants, the OCOG awarded 2024 & 2028 at the same time.
Can we please stop using 'pulling out' and 'Suella Braverman' in the same sentence?
Rory says Govey is polite but he's a completely fake slime all, who can stab backs as it suits him
Black hole because Labour wants to spend and waste tons of money. The money has already run out.
It’s a v bad start for Reeves to contradict the OBR AND take winter fuel from pensioners.! Does she not know how tight the pension is? If people who get pension credits haven’t paid into NI for a number of years. The full state pension only still leaves pensioners making choice between food and heat.
They are not going to stop the payment to those who need it,only from those who don't need it because they are well of.
@@teatotal8079 they are going to continue payments to people with pension credits, and stop payments to people with full state pensions. The difference in those two amounts is very small. Look it up and tell me if you think that’s a reasonable policy. You may have in your mind that this affects pensioners with large private pensions only. This is not accurate. A very large number of pensioners only have the state pension. Ie the working class.
Living standard beginning to rise..... really?! I work full time for the NHS and cannot afford to put my heating on for more than an hour a day during winter. I am mid 60's live alone and struggle continuously to manage.
Yes, that made me wonder who he's talking about! In real shopping basket terms my income has steadily declined over the last 10 years or more and is now barely adequqte!
About the controversial queer 'Last Supper' tableau: several of the performers involved said it was based on the Last Supper, as did the public channel commenting the event live, and a few performers later apologised, so it sounds somewhat disingenuous to say it 'had nothing to do with it.' It was not just that, but it was also that.
Also, perhaps Christians round the world are informed enough on their own iconographic tradition to be taken seriously on that issue?
That being said, you can argue that mocking or undermining religion, Christianity specifically, is a very French thing to do. Then again, you can ask whether or not it has its place in an international Olympic opening ceremony.
But considering what is at stake, please just don't speak in bad faith, or you might get crucified for it (yes, terrible pun intended).
I don't think a photo exists of the actual last supper.
It's not offensive to recreate a painting of an event however fragile you are.
@@vetinaris1297 Have I written it is offensive? I have not.
Have I asked whether the iconographic tradition represents events 'as they happened'? I have not.
I have commented on Alastair Campbell's remark, and have offered arguments.
Your post is irrelevant, I'm afraid.
I am losing confidence in Rory Stewart sadly. Clearly he does not rely on NHS services. NHS staff and doctors in particular have fallen behind in their pay compared to the private sector. Parroting David Gauk does him no favours. The pay review body recommendations equate to pay in the private sector. Clearly Rory Stewart is quite happy for the rest of us who cannot get a dentist or a doctor or are on NHS waiting lists because it simply doesn't affect him
No different to many politicians - they're like architects designing high-rises that they will never have to live in!
Politicians FRIGHTENED by the money markets.
1) its their own fault - THEY ALL LIE
2) It's our fault - we accept the situation...
Politicians and all those in financial depts relied upon by government should do a course in progressive economics . Government debt is not like a household budget. Austerity is a big fat lie.
Rory pulls some mad goblin faces sometimes lol....
Labour could have got held to account, but no let’s talk about the conservatives
17:00 - Yes Rory, I'm sure the top 1% do pay 28% of the income tax, but is that a relevant number? What percentage of their earnings is that? What percentage of their total wealth does that related to? After tax, how much disposable income do those people have, compared to the majority of wage earners? Put it in those terms and I bet this picture starts to look very different.
And, frankly, this is less relevant than whether or not people pay tax on their assets in a way that's commensurate to the amount that's paid on wages.
This kind of selective approach to the facts is taking an extremely narrow view of the problem.
£20 B black hole ? What about the £ 40B Brexit black hole ?
Re Public Sector pay rises: Rory doesn't seem to know that Teachers have taken pay cuts of over 12% since 2010 and many have been leaving.
Rory is an ideological tory. Sure he's charming, but he sees public spending of all sorts as morally wrong. Don't be surprised
Tories have downgraded public sector pay for the last 14 yrs.
I doubt Rory has had much reason to be concerned about the pay of teachers in state schools.
No actual pay cuts, only relative to inflation (which was at pretty much 0% for a decade in any case)
@@davegaskell7680 real term pay cuts. If goods cost more wages need to be lifted
Couple of life long privileged and entitled elites. Telling us poor little people just what it's all about.
"She did not seem to have the mind to master her brief" Ouch.