I plan to retire at 62 in another country outside the US that is free, safe and very cheap with a high quality of life. I could fully just rely on only my SS if I wanted to when that times arrives but l'll also have at least one pension, a 403 (b) and a very prolific Investment account with my Stephanie Janis Stiefel my FA. Retiring comfortably in the US these days is almost impossible.
I know this lady you just mentioned. Stephanie Janis Stiefel is a portfolio manager and investment advisor. She gained recognition as an employee of neuberger berman; a renowned investor she is. Stephanie Janis Stiefel has demonstrated expertise in investment strategies and has been involved in managing portfolios and providing guidance to clients.
Stephanie Janis Stiefel hooked me up with a late-stage fund that got me in on private shares of some hot companies before they hit the market or blew up. Those investments totally paid off when the companies went public and their stocks shot up. Now, I'm stoked because I'm heading into retirement with almost a million bucks in my portfolio.
😮I'm planning to retire in a conservative, Christian, White Texas community in Texas. I'll pay for my home in full and retire comfortably in My country
Can someone tell me - serious question - when austerity actually stopped because you talk about this new budget and reintroducing austerity and I don’t ever remember it not being economically shite since the mid naughties? Cheers, NHS Staff Nurse (since 1988).
Austerity means cutting public spending, which Labour are not doing as they are INCREASING spending and investment. You Russian bots are so transparent. Unsure if you realise how thick it makes Russians appear? Thick as mince
You are, of course, correct. It's the same slight of hand as inflation. "Inflation is down! It's only 3% now." So.... Prices are still going up? "Errr, yeah". They cut everything to the bone and then never raised any budgets back up. Then they claimed no austerity because they weren't cutting anymore. Politicians are just propaganda tools for the billionaire oligarchy.
It depends how you define austerity. If you mean cutting services to try and balance the books (assuming you believe it will balance the books which I don't) then a return to austerity would simply mean making more cuts. If by austerity you mean making do with less funding, then no austerity never actually stopped, so a return would just be making it worse (or better depending on your point of view).
I admire Grace but sometimes do think she lives in a bit of fantasy with the rest of the more metro left. I wouldn’t disagree with her assessments more her expectations. You cannot in three months have a clean break from austerity. That has been entrenched now for some time and will take time to reverse. I like to see what she said about the pressure from the left keeping the centre of the party honest. What I’d like to see now is people like grace take the good things of this first step and start to give more credit. This budget is a philosophical break from 14 years and rebalance that will now built upon. I hope. At this stage the sometimes overt criticism from the left doesn’t matter but what I hope is that if we see this built upon then people like grace and others such as Owen Jones’s will begin to get behind the change.
If this plan works, great! If not, it's socialism or fascism. I want to make sure that socialism is visible as a viable option, so we don't slide into the other by default...
I'm not an economist, so I try to get the 'feel' of what's what from listening to various economists to see what they have to say. Specifically, I want to hear what the following economists and other political commentators think of this budget: 1) Martin Lewis 2) Gary Stevenson 3) Maria Mazzucato 4) James Meadway 5) Richard Murphy 6) Philip Pilkington 7) Stephanie Kelton 8) George Monbiot 9) Peter Oborne 10) Zack Polanski With a few exceptions (listed below) I'll wait to see what the above people say. These exceptions are: a) The Personal Tax Allowance is WAY too low at only £12,570 before taxation 'kicks in' at 20% - which Reeves COULD and SHOULD have addressed b) The 2-Child Benefit Cap COULD and SHOULD have been lifted. Numerous charities have criticized the government on this, including Save The Children, Child Poverty Action Group, The Childhood Trust, The Children's Society, etc, etc. c) Ending Winter Fuel Payments for pensioners is a huge mistake IMO, but also in the opinion of numerous charities including Age UK, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Independent Age, etc.
@@timelwell7002increasing tax thresholds and removing the 2 child benefit cap would be great but at the same time you have to ask where the billions would come from to cover the cost or what current plans would be scaled back.
Average income is roughly £35,000. Average house price is roughly £290,000. 8.28571 is the answer. At various points in the past, the number has been between 2.5 and 5. So when the bank says they'll lend you 4 times your income, which will burden you with quite a large monthly payment, it's nowhere near enough.
Not to say that housing costs haven't gone up, they have, but your analysis is distorted in a couple of ways. Firstly, a home is typically bought using two incomes; only around 1/3rd of first time buyers are single. Secondly, the comparison to the past isn't quite accurate as interest rates were also higher back then, meaning that the cost of a mortgage was higher relative to the price of the house, and you need to compare that to incomes to get a complete picture.
@@bobbytreetop1701 That's the median UK income. Obviously there's a lot of regional variation in that though, in London it's £44k, whilst in the North East it's £31k
@@PleiadesImprezaT2000AWD-l4l Ofc, but as the 2/3 majority, that 2-income couple is driving the data that becomes the average price and is therefore the relevant comparison. If you want to use a single income, compare that to the average price paid by a single-income buyer, which would be lower.
@1:50 the "partnership with the private sector" is a ridiculous narrative, too often peddled by people who should know better like Mariana Mazucatto. Every civil servant hired by the State came from the "private sector" at 9am and returns to the private sector when they knock off work at 5 o'clock. The role of the private firm is to produce real output people want with as few workers as possible (preferably zero workers), they are not the source of unemployment. The government is the sole source of all unemployment and is the proper agent to eliminate all the unemployment they generated _by design._ The fundamental purpose of the tax _liabilities_ is to make people unemployed in the tax credits, for the _further purpose_ of then hiring them to work for public purpose since now they are seeking to exchange their goods or labour for the tax credit - which the government cannot ever run out of, it's just a scorepoint for the government. It is only a "store of wealth" to the non-government sector who cannot produce the currency by fiat nor impose taxes in _their_ I.O.U to force people to accept their private IOU.
Well it was lowered back in 2023 and now has been bought back up to 15% The employees didn’t pass in the saving to workers but now are complaining they will pass on the perceived rise to workers
The increase isn't the killer it's the reduction in threshold that will make employing people significantly more expensive. This will have a significant impact on small and medium sized business and may encourage more redundancies. My biggest fear with this budget is how it might drive up unemployment and impact independent businesses on the high street
@@williambrookings722the NI increase is only a cost vs current NI if you have more than 5 employees at median wage. If you have 5 employees at median wage it's a tiny bit cheaper. 1-4 and it's even more cheaper
50% on bus fares is regressive AF, economically & environmentally it's going in the wrong direction when both situations are critical. A quid is nothing if you have money, £10 a week is.. They don't GAF
Prior to the cap, the average adult day fare was already higher than £3. And with inflation, that £3 is lower than it was. Stop expecting taxpayers to fund every single little thing all the time.
@@jasongreenslade1143 it could do, also could have been used to nationalise the buses, invest in green tech to run the electric buses keeping costs down in the future meaning more routes could be run even if they are not relatively profitable because getting people to work is profitable to the government as they would have more tax from the workers and such. Maybe I'm just a dreamer
Or borrowing a ton of money not to buy an asset to always be yours, like a house or a water company or indeed an energy company & instead going to a private industry drug dealer & spending all the money on meth & pink coke & fenty laced ket. Oh & they took out the loan in your name & you (& the children you can't afford to have because of the last time they did this) have to pay back the debt... Forever.
Public/Private partnerships are just about funnelling state money into private companies, the directors of which are party donors. Private companies operate a profit margin, and public sector institutions/agencies operate at cost, and are far more efficient.
Sorry to say this out loud but your description is simple, plausible, incomplete and wrong! While it's true private sector companies most often need to run in a manner that delivers an acceptable level of profit to investors, it is possible to establish a public/private partnership on a non-profit basis. This might be a better model for the future. It is also true that public sector organisations often fail to invest in and deliver innovations that would allow them to run more effectively and efficiently. A private sector business might do this better and be more effective (and yet cheaper) even while making a reasonable profit for shareholders.
This whole nonsense about balancing current spend with tax revenue reminds of a friend whose family used to suffer, like not going on a holiday for few yrs straight or driving old banged up car that kept breaking… because they didn’t want to have loans. Fuel and maintenance savings alone would pay for the interest on my brand new car in that same period of time. Regarding assets and investments: several reports point to massive return on investments in things like Childcare. Whereas conservative ppl, or regressives as I call them, think of these as ”handouts” How on earth do you expect to get anything back from parents if you don’t invest and enable first?? How do they plan to activate stay home parents and stimulate growth and reverse declining trend in childbirth rates, while punishing anyone financially who dares to make kids? It’s the conservatives who are airy-fairy with no business sense whatsoever.
I think it's clear the government wants to balance current spend with tax and then redefine debt to take on more which would then be spent on the thing labour want to invest in.
I agree but your confused. This Labour goverment has been a cancer on families. Punishing hardworking families who want to put their kids in private schools (mine are in state schools before you say it), punishing people with punitive inheritance tax (I have no inheritance myself but scrimp and save with the hope I can put something away for my kids to have) , destroying confidence with employers making it harder for me to get a pay rise / moving jobs, removing the only disincentive we have of stopping illegal immigrants making our street less safe and putting further pressure on public service, wasting public money by just pouring into the NHS without reforming it...rhe just is endless with Labour they lied to get into power and tgis is the ultimate betrayal. I for one and I'm sure many think the sane that the system needs to be reformed politicians lie to get into power with few votes then abuse that power by implementing their own agenda.
I would love to hear Mazzucato talking about the budget. Her view seemed to be pragmatic where the state partnered business but took more benefit in return. Growth must come from the state in partnership since it appears the state do not have the power to do so on their own
It's pointless wasting time and money trying to reverse the decline. The top priority for any Brit under 50 should be to emigrate, because things have only gotten worse here for most of our adult lives.
@@annishilcock4587 English is the most widely spoken second language in the world. If you made a decision NOT to leave, then every bad thing that comes your way will remind you that you made the wrong decision.
14:20 That’s a good point. The reason why investors don’t make enough money on renewables is because once you scale these projects the price per unit goes down, below level of profitability. These projects should and have to be NATIONAL or otherwise non-profit (eg. Local cooperatives)- we as a Nation don’t have to make profits and pay out dividends. Quite the opposite, what’s a problem for private investors is a direct benefit to the Government. The industrial (think steel) and data centre competitiveness is directly correlated with electricity price. You don’t need MBA to see the idiocy of current system.
Renewable energy should be in no way national, that's the last thing we need. It should be local, the only way people will ever save money on energy is if they produce it themselves. It's not a coincidence that the greener we are becoming the more expensive energy is becoming is it. The installation and upkeep costs more money, that money has to come from somewhere and it ain't the public of the uk that can afford it on a national scale, as that's who will be paying for it if it was "government", funded. There is no such thing as government funded it is all tax payer funded. Of course it needs to make a profit, that's where more tax payer funded things can come from. But government is renowned for being wasteful especially labour/socialist governments. They can't run a piss up in a brewery let alone a country.
@ I don’t think you understand the point I’m trying to make. Investors aim to MAXIMIZE profit, and consumer price is one of the main levers to do that. National ownership aims to MINIMIZE cost and consumer price (to reduce Inflation and boost industrial competitiveness of the entire country) Quoting tired old soundbites for the Daily Mail is not a good idea mate.
@@AdamCiernicki so because I'm correct and you're talking nonsense I'm suddenly quoting a newspaper. Classic. All businesses should aim to maximise profit even ones own by the tax payer, that's how we get more money to pay for other things. No government in the history of the world has minimised cost. They just spend other people's money time and time again. And it's now getting worse.
The budget wasn't as radical as I hoped it would have been but overall I am satisfied with Labour's plan. Removing VAT exemption on private schools is good, the only people who can afford that are very well off, increase in capital gains tax is good, National insurance contribution has a very important stipulation that will protect small businesses or at least very heavily soften the blow. I am however still pissed off that the house of lords and royal family still exist. We're reaching record levels of wealth disparity, there is no reason that the royal family and a house of 600 well paid, completely unelected officials should still exist, there needs to be a referendum to disband them
Youth unemployment has doubled since the corrupt politicians started taxing businesses. £11 Billion in lost revenue and increased unemployment benefits due to these increased job killing taxes.
Climate, environment, fiscal, monetary, public services, energy… ≠ separate “issues”… …all of these (everything we do, or don’t) is within our ONE ECOLOGY. It’s not ‘rocket science’, not reducible to current ways of “solving issues” - Intuition goes a long way… (…and huge thanks as always, both of you!) 😊
One in seven working people (5M) are too sick to work. That is 2M sbove pre-pandemic levels. Fix the NHS, and we turn benefit payouts into taxes, which can then be used to fix the rest of piblic services...
@@markgt894 Well if you don't try you never will, and good luck with debt in an insurance based system. The NHS did work pre thatcher, but since then it has been slowly choked and starved it hasn't been given the chance to be what it once was. The argument of a different sized population doesn't work either, but a healthier population getting better and quicker treatment resulting in better productivity does. Decades of tory ideology has been the scourge of the NHS, they didn't want it when it was formed, and they never have since.
@@markgt894 it has only recently been made wasteful, by David Cameron. Breaking up the NHS into 'competing' regions that cant talk to each other. Its why you have to do the same blood test 5 times. That wasnt the case before hand - you just check the records. Undoing what cameron did to the NHS will do a lot of fixing in itself. Then modernise it as in fairness labour plan to do, but also hiring more GPs, building more hospitals. Encourage more preventative measures, and completely nationalise the NHS.
@@mogzybuster try with whose money?! Good at spending tax payers and other peoples money, to try something! How much more money to throw at it? The population was about 20 million less than today, and probably healthier. The NHS is no longer workable in this country.
Sneaky move announcing the cut back on winter fuel payments before the ‘budget’. Anyone would think they were trying to make out it had nothing to do with the budget.
However cheaply produced electricity is, surely it is still fed into the market at the market traded price? Looks like she's right, the current market system does need change to make a faster move towards renewables that work.
"the market traded price" is another problem, producers aren't allowed to, for instance, offer a local discount - Scotland is covered in wind farms but Scottish people have to pay Stock Exchange *_gas_* prices for it 😢
You're. It's you're. If you can't tell the difference then maybe you also don't know what you're talking about with regards to 'austerity tax' which is even weirder when you then start talking about prices going up, which has nothing to do with austerity or tax.
The most understated part of the budget is the bringing in of pensions into IHT including farming (farmers should be calculating winding up costs right now). The IHT change has effectively created a NEW LTA of 650K for a couple. You now have as a couple only a pot of 650k (whether it it in a SIPP, ISA or GIA) to generate income for your retirement (4% of 650k = 26k income for a couple) . Any exposure above this immediate opens you up for immediate 40% additional tax or more (if you die above 75 it becomes 52%). And because you don't know when you will die (and due to market fluctuations you would normally err on the side of a bigger pot, but with a 40%+ tax hanging over you, one would be incline to blow the excess. That's for the fortunate ones that can max out this new imposed limit. Yes, one can buy an annuity, but that why the pension reforms were done to allow more control of your destiny because everyone's health, desires and family circumstances are different. It's your savings you should spend it as you like. Why should giving away money to a politic party reduce the IHT bill? All of these do not apply to civil service pensions, but of course one forgets when the goose is dead and there is nothing to take anymore who will pay the unfunded pensions? This budget has decimated the pension industry IMHO, and enslaved the future generation (they just haven't figure out the maths yet). And imposed a £1M cap on wealth (hence the farming and entrepreneur £1M exemption). Those with a potential retirement asset pool of 650k+ will look to asset strip themselves by gifting and/or moving aboard the money.
As an 'economist' who failed to predict the damage Brexit would do to our economy, I don't have a lot of faith in Grace Blakeley. She studied PPE at Oxford like Liz Truss.
Just what do we produce to increase growth ? The Tories have hog tied us into financial services, insurance and commercial law. We don't manufacture hardly any steel, we import energy, our utilities are owned by foreign investment. Just how will this country actually grow ?
@@bernardfox9078 I was listening to Emily Thornberry on LBC the other day talking about how Labour want to build 1.5 million new houses, the long and short of it seems they don't have clue really, apart from easing planning laws and using the green belt to build on. The developers in the country are the only builders and how does she think they are going to build homes for the masses instead of the well heeled ? The vast majority of tradesmen are self employed and with the closing of many construction colleges in favour of importing skilled foreign labour has created a massive problemm since Brexit with many of them going home again. I trained and worked as a carpenter since leaving school in 1976, in the main town near where I lived there were 6 or more decent sized building firms and many school leavers were taken on as apprentices by these firms, there was 2 construction colleges in town as well, one a technical college for the clever trades like surveyors, architects etc and another for the manual trades, Bricklayers, carpenters, plumbers etc, both long gone since the mid 90s and houses built on those sites now. Virtually all of the people I worked with in my lifetime are either retired or dead now and the supply of new tradesmen dwindling. No small wonder trades like Electricians and Plumbers, Bricklayers and Carpenters are earning £300+ a day, there's high demand for their services.
I don't think they've been pushed to not be as bad, I think they've been pushed from being progressive backwards and they've managed to save a vestige of progressive measures
It's a slowing in inequality, not a reversal...& It'll never be a reversal People will lose even more faith in democracy than they do already in the next decade with inequality still rising.
I have little hope. We need radical and brave changes. One can’t complain about our infrastructure crumbling but also not want tax. Tax is fine as long as it is means tested and income based, spent correctly. We are just getting a continuous mindset as the last 25 years.
tax is not spent by the central government, it does not go in to a pot that the government then uses - the government creates the money it spends and destroys the money it collects in tax - the pervasive ideology is that the government needs taxes to spend money
@@basilmagnanimous7011 Why does Labour continue to follow the Conservatives' unsuccessful trickle-down policies initiated by Thatcher in the 1980s? Reintroduce progressive tax rates like those after WW2, before Thatcher's tax cuts for the wealthy reduced their contributions by over 40% in the 1980s, a time when we had many millionaires but no billionaires. Prohibit private healthcare, as it siphons off profitable segments of the NHS, such as dental and eye care, it also allows the wealthy to bypass waiting lists for treatment, while leaving the NHS to handle costly operations and emergencies, and the NHS has to rectify the private sector's errors when they mess up! Plus, implement a wealth tax of 2% per annum on all assets exceeding £15,000,000.
Bus fares going up from £2 to £3. 2 Child Benefit Cap retained. !0 million pensioners won't get their Winter Fuel Allowance. Gas and electric rising 10%. Water bills likely to be rising by 48%. National Insurance contributions for employers rising significantly, so small businesses, hospitality and care homes will find it hard to retain staff or pass those costs on. Spending on NHS and schools and new housing nowhere near enough. Rachel Reeves will tax to bring down government spending, so of course austerity will result. Remind me....what's so great about this budget again?
Bus fares are not going up, it's just the cap has been increased. Also the cap was due to come to an end but Labour have extended it. Would you prefer. there was no cap and bus companies could charge whatever they liked? My cities bus fare is staying at £1.75 and not going up at all.
@@stephendavis5530 did you forget about the small business exception to national insurance contribution, whereby the threshold of not contributing on your employee's salary will increase from £5,000 to £10,500, which will result in 865,000 employers no longer having to make any national insurance contributions
There's a freeze on fuel tax! Of course, most idiots yucking this up don't realise that tax is paid by the distributer on sales and the liklihood of them passing that saving on to consumers at the pump is "I've got a bridge to sell you" levels of believability..
Debt is acceleration of consumption so we're now at the point where we either start to deleverage the State or double down and just store up even more trouble down the line.
Jealousy is not smart economics........just because you (and I to be fair) are jealous of the wealth of rich people it's not necessarily smart economics to make them leave the country. Typically this makes tax receipts go down.
The worst thing is mortgages in my case near £800-£900 is interest paid to the bank that means i have a massive deficit of spending power to support the local economy and have to shop cheap. Same can be said about renting. Housing costs are strangling the economy
So would you like someone to lend money to you interest free? How would you design a monetary system without the core element which links time and money?
@bishboshs no I didn't say that did I, I just said it's a bit ridiculous to be paying that amount of interest every month. I pay £1100 Only £220ish comes off what I owe the rest goes to the bank to for lending me money to live in a house so I can sleep in it get up and go to work and pay tax. Imagine if people had even half the amount back in their pockets to do day trips in UK spend it in the local shops blah blah blah. The tax generated from thoes sales would massively boost the economy. Yes I get that banks invest the money into private sector to then further increase their profits blah blah blah. It's just feels like robbery
Great you folks got this video out so quick, but the production quality sure did take a hit - cutting in the middle of a sentence, too bright, audio sounding bad...
Considering the times that we are in - 15 years of austerity, cost of living crisis, climate breakdown, a 3rd of children in the UK living in poverty, and more, this felt like a very nothing budget. Doesn't seem to even recognise let alone try to address all the crises most of us are facing on a day to day basis.
It's probably better than a tory budget would have been where the priority would have been creaming off taxes to line the pockets of their cronies and donors. Maybe take the hit on this one and be more intense with our scrutiny on their next offering?
No this is not a return to Austerity! The budget is giving the NHS an additional £22bn spending plus 3% investment. Large boost to the minimum wage and carers allowance. Please stop randomly thinking everything is austerity
@ which is due to increase by over 2% before the end of this year due to high energy bills. According to the ONS and CSI. Next time, trying giving the full picture instead of half. It makes your comments disingenuous.
Of course they will. Labour are a pack of liars. The grownups knew exactly what this shower would do and tried to tell everyone. They turned out to be correct, liebour lied about everything like we knew they would.
What of _tidal energy?_ A simple signature puts Swansea effectively off the National Grid in maybe 2 years time liberating a couple of gas power stations to be shut down & that's not the only _"shovel-ready"_ tidal project in mothballs...
Public / Private Incorporation of The Third Way’ !!!!!! You want fast progress’ consult the Alchemist. Austerity was pernicious and personal choice !!! Add a Chairman to oversee the economic relationship.
Love the channel in general but some nonsense commentary regarding carbon capture in particular in here. Critical for energy intensive industry in the uk - to say nobody advocating for this without an investment position is rubbish.
I think it's the best we could have hoped for, it's a very difficult balancing act and I know the left want to go further but spooking the markets is costly as Truss proved, 8 out of 10 from me.
That's a made up thing to do. I'm sorry but people bringing up Truss is a terrible red herring. I don't think we realise just how insane her budget was. Even if Jeremy Corbyn had come in and tried to do his 2019 manifesto the markets wouldn't have been anywhere near as spooked as they were by Truss. Despite what people say, left wing social democracy is something that the markets are used to. They deal with it in different variations all over Europe. The issue with Truss is that she wanted to do the equivalent of taking out a mortgage on a sports car by insisting that the car was SO cool that it would get her a 6 figure job just by pulling up in front of people in it. It was that mental. Nothing this labour party could have suggested would have come close. Not wanting to spook the markets is just an excuse they use because they never wanted to implement real change to begin with. The budgets that follow will be equally inadequate. Mark my words.
Yeah, it really becomes tiring listening to people make excuses for them. It's amazing how quickly the Conservatives enacted their Austerity agenda, yet Labour need a minimum of 5 years "fixing" the problems the Tories made... (by continuing to do the things the Tories did?) before we can expect to see any good from them. That's pretty bloody convenient, don't you think? And I'm sure in 5 years time, if they even get re-elected, we'll be told that the state the country was left in was so astronomically bad and all these unforeseen things happening abroad are happening that they'll just need another 5 years to get things under control, but then -- THEN! the good times will flow.
Unexpected to hear a strong climate take tbh. The main structural point that comes to mind is the Nate Hagens (great simplification) type stuff of; saying that like energy (oil) is like the only true input to our kinda system. So yeh the jarring budget of GDP go up-- business as usual vs a fundamental shift, is a point I'm surprised to hear. The invest in making green transition happen is quite J. Doyne Farmer say pushing for institutional shifts to give the energy transition cost curves and tech a viable shot.
Um, she's definitely an economist. You can look up her credentials and her books. Just because she frequently commentates doesn't mean she isn't an economist. Is David Olusoga not a historian because he makes documentaries?
@@IshtarNike A PPE degree followed by a masters in African Studies does not make you an economist. How many peer-reviewed economics papers has Grace Blakeley published, or academic positions has she held? Zero.
It's not a clear break but it's a start and hopefully, year on year, it will improve. You cannot expect everything at once. I was actually pleasantly surprised by the budget . I was expecting austerity plus given the supposed "Black Hole " in the finances
The thing you should be analysing is why you were scared into this "Black Hole" in the first place when they seemingly cleared it up with very marginal tweaks to tax codes around the edges. And let's be clear, for all the hysteria the mainstream media is making, the "hikes" were very small in the grand scheme of things. Do a google of "UK tax intake breakdown 2023/24" and go to the parliament site to see the figures. Of the £1.1 trillion of taxes (yes, with a T) taken last year, only £39 billion of that was capital gains, as opposed to almost £277 billion in income tax. Capital Gains tax takings was less than COUNCIL TAX, it's so god damn low. So if they were able to fix this black hole and then some with relatively minor tax increases on niche elite markets, just imagine what they could achieve if they went full hog and made them pay their fair share? So no, it's not a start, it's a platitude, just like them raising the minimum wage to £12.21 when most large corporations like retailers who skirt the minimum wage are already paying £12 an hour anyway. Christ, movements in America were demanding $15 back in 2016, which was almost £12.30 at that time, and this was before Covid and the Cost of Living crisis, the argument being that this was the minimum wage people needed to live comfortably. This supposed raise that will barely materialise isn't even going to cover the added bus expense I'm getting, let alone the increased water and energy bills of which there was absolutely nothing even proposed to tackle them.
We were in tears when Starmer took over and shifted the party all the way to the right, aped the tories and took up failed neo-liberal economic policy. Enjoy your 1p cheaper, but still unaffordable pint while you can.
Okay Grace - you seem very intelligent in your field. However, storage, battery storage is a tried and tested technology. Not only does it work but it is utterly essential is we need to hit net zero (which we do). The basic essential rule (which I’m shocked you are not aware of), is that for any grid to function,supply must meet demand. When it doesn’t, you have huge power outgages. Or you see both technical and financial curtailment of generation assets which not only in the real time can ruin the asset owners financially but you will find in any form of due diligence process for the acquisition or construction of generation assets, these challenges will slow and at times prevent the development of these assets. When it is very windy or it is very sunny, renewables all create huge amount of supply. Often there is not enough demand to meet said supply, on lets say a clear sky 30 degree day, or a a messy storm. Without storage technology the 11:37 energy transition literally does not happen. I suggest that if you want to talk about energy and power markets you go and do some reading. That was one of the most flawed, pathetic statements I’ve ever heard someone say with such confidence. Note to politics Joe. This is the second time I’ve heard you making grand sweeping statements about energy policy, and you’ve been completely wrong. Do some reading, some research, try to understand the world around you. It’s embarrassing.
You're clearly quite knowledgeable and I respect you for that. It also seems that you have put a lot of thought and intention into this comment. I am therefore curious why you decided to word it in such an aggressive and essentially rude way "most flawed, pathetic statements", "it's embarrassing", "I'm shocked you are not aware of". Did you mean to incite disagreement, or helpful discussion/debate, and if you didn't mean to incite disagreement, then why did you word it in this way? I hope this doesn't come across as rude or adversarial, I genuinely don't mean it to be - I simply was interested in why you wrote this in the way that you did.
@@AlethiaDaisy-Rue I don’t have time for a media outlet that wants to position itself as better than the disgusting legacy media we have in this world, however, they then completely fail to address the argument in a sensible or useful way. I mean they should have some experts or those experts assuming they exist at politics Joe should do some post interview editorial work to adjust that messaging. Messaging like this contributes to destroying the work that people are doing to progress the energy transition. So yes it’s lazy and it’s pathetic. Yes I’m frustrated and for good fucking reason.
@@mrCameron38I get that you might be frustrated, and that there might be perfectly good reason for that, but what are you going to achieve aggressively posting about it in some comment section, even if someone from the Politics Joe team were to see your comment, all it would serve to do is aggravate them, and make them probably shut down to any criticism you are offering - so why do it?
@ look the UK has a saturated ancillary services markets but as Renewables grow this will easier over time. But, to rule storage is one of the most idiotic things I’ve ever heard l. This is trash.
Her argument about capitalism being fundamentally and intrinsically linked to the mentality around scarcity of fossil fuels doesn’t really make sense. If energy was plentiful then companies would have lower fixed costs across the board which would be a net good. Economies don’t function well with high input costs and everything slows down accordingly. Scarcity is a fact of life and I don’t think that moving to a new economic model will solve that. I also think that it is because of capitalism that we can channel our expertise into green tech (yes it is in that industry now) in the most efficient ways. Also she is a beneficiary of capitalism in what how she lives and earns a living.
Why is all the focus on the requirement for new revenue (£40bn) and its allocation rather than on the overall sources and targets of revenue and spending? For example, the overall ratio of capital to current expenditure, and the balance of tax between individuals and companies? Surely that reflects government choices more clearly? Or is much of the existing tax and spend pretty static ito where it comes from and goes to? Also, is this budget an admidsion that the government doesnt have a big theory of where growth comes from?
Desperate optimism. The method of borrowing and spending she’s married herself to just got a whole lot more expensive RE bond prices. The £ isn’t looking too healthy either. It’s austerity. It’s wage suppression. It’s ongoing fiscal drag.
Imagine being an alien passerby, observing the humans of earth. Watching them hold themselves back by their own economic failures, wandering if they're going to destroy themselves again, or evolve. The majority submitting to the ideals of the very worst of their kind, literally repressing their own technological capabilities to maintain an economic model that causes constant struggle for the vast majority. It would make for some painful watching 👽
Good grief I voted labour to say they were pushed is a real stretch. However for me it has always been housing. I feel we need 3 m council houses however if we get the 1.5m houses from the private sector then OK this is a step in the right direction. Its always going to be Housing and this is the problem around the developed world for the next 20 years.
But they will probably be lucky in that falling inflation will mean falling interest rates and I think they are walking into a falling interest rate cycle
The bit neither the conservatives nor labour do is tax the rich They could have done this by bringing cgt up to income tax levels, taxing farm land at the same rate as IHT as for everyone else not with a 50% discount and putting a tax free threshold on pension pot subject to iht if say 500k or 1m
Im on the fence, the money is well needed however, i am not convinced that the public sector can be trusted to manage the money, I suppose the proof will be in the pudding. Having managed in the private sector across thirty years I can see the businesses needing to recoup their margin through lower pay rises, I will wait and see, but it could lead to price rises, inflation, interest rate rises, which is everything that people lent the labour party their vote to avoid,
And you trust the private sector? Have you seen the water companies? The energy companies? The trains? The buses? The post office? The supermarkets? Elon Musk?
@@davidbates3057 like i say lets see if the schools are repaired, hospital waiting list drop, people can know get a doctors and dentist appointment the potholes are repaired, only time will tell. Dont get me wrong, I want it to be a success. Unfortunately, if it isn't people will turn to right wing politics like they have all over Europe
Ow we finally have a realistic value on net zero 2050 is £10 billion without backup. Provision which will be as much again, why are we not looking to provide feasibility studies on it. Why does this woman not tell us about the one thing that will ruin us and why this is not in her mind ?
The big wealth is offshore..how do you tax that.. we would have to start a special offshore fiscal agency.. & success would be based on how it’s manned & funded.. “not a quick fix”.. isn’t that what your wanting ? 🤔
Are you talking about a budget or the environment? And just blanket stating that this is what will happen to the environment in the future is unhelpful when the weather forecasters can rarely tell accurately the weather in 3 days time! Wealth taxes will just push more people to leave and then you have no one to wealth tax left. Just copy Hong Kong or Singapore economics and then you’ll actually have a thriving set of islands
She's talking a load of rubbish. She's saying it's not a break with austerity. But to go further Reeves would have had to tax much more than she did which is hardly credible. And to mention the Blair public private partnerships was way off beam. That was a very specific model which is not being promoted at all by Reeves. What they are trying to do is begin to fix public services "fix the foundations" so business will be more willing to invest. Why should business want to invest when the public services are so broken. It's a big gamble but I think the only way they could have chosen and I don't think they could have gone further at this stage..
Productivity is down 20% since 2010, many hidden parts of the UK now resemble the 3rd world after 14 years of austerity, along with the rise of Amazon killing off the high street, we need a bold Government or there's no way back and have to accept we're much poorer. If Germany is struggling, what chance do we have ? Perhaps bolder in the next budget or one after. I didn't vote for them, couldn't after the purge and lies from the leader. Labour are on probation, let's hope they stay on the straight and narrow, or we risk Farage becoming PM.
Total fiscal outlay for 2023 was £463 billion, so a £20bn "shortfall" would only need a 4.3% increase to the fiscal budget to cover. This is trivial, since they do it for war, they do it for CONVID, but they don't do it for public services or worker tax cuts
Liz Truss tried to do it for tax cuts. It didn't end well. The funding for day to day spend is not the same a one offs. Stuff like war or a pandemic are usually considered one off spends. They aren't expected to last forever, so the funding model treats them differently. Also, consider this. While it is only 4.3% of the total fiscal outlay, to get an extra £20 billion out of the roughly 35 million available workers works out to about £550 to £600 extra per head in tax revenues. The amount is far less trivial when put like that. Would you consider a £550 tax rise trivial? Obviously, Labour cannot just put up everyone's tax like this. They've had to be thoughtful and considerate of how to raise those tax revenues, while avoiding raising tax rates on those who cannot afford it, so as to keep with their manifesto promises.
A Fiscal deficit is not a debt (the money was not borrowed, it was created). The money to pay treasuries comes from the same place as fiscal spending (thin air). A “fiscal deficit” is a private sector surplus, i.e. it is income for you, I, and everyone else. Conversely, a fiscal surplus (a surplus sounds good, eh?) is a drop in private sector (our!) incomes. Don’t worry about outstanding treasuries, since sovereign govts cannot involuntarily go insolvent. Worry about private debt (search for: credit delinquency). The proof is that the Tories created a record fiscal deficit in 2020/21, and inflation was below 3%. It only jumped to near double digits once the BoE raised interest rates and utility companies started price gouging (record profits were posted across the whole UK energy sector in 2022)
You just couldn’t leave out the normal cyclical weather and big it up as climate change. Newsflash the climate is always changing and not supposed to be stable forever.
It's not a very good budget. It doesn't address inequality, won't fix public services and does nothing for the environment. What I'm reading though is a lot of rejoicing from the left that it's not another absolute disaster zone budget like the ones we have seen in recent years from the Tories. I mean, has the bar really been so low for so long that we accept this rubbish as a triumph? The Tory media moaning is no marker for success either. Anything even remotely left of a Libertarian budget from Labour would have them foaming at the mouth calling them communists.
@@leejohnson3209 I wish lefties would support Labour like righties support ANYONE on the right. Its the best in 15 years but you made a negative comment. This is how we elect fascists like Nigel Farage.
@@henryburton6529 There was never much support for Jeremy Corbyn. I'm much more supportive of post socialist Labour than they ever have been of people with my opinions. They would still label me a racist and a threat to Britain and not accept me in their party. So whilst I accept they're preferable to the Tories, and if I had to would tactically vote for them. I will never accept the continued running of the NHS for private profit. I will never accept unfair taxes. I will never accept protection to the accumulation and concentration of wealth at the expense of the poor and the environment.
@@henryburton6529 I support Labour so far as, if I needed to I would lend them my vote to keep the Tories out. But I cannot condone the values and policies of New Labour 2.0. I am a socialist and supporter of Palestine. The party has made it clear that people like me are not welcome in it so the fact they would even get my vote at all they should be thankful for. This budget shows that it values the interests of the few above human life, needs of the many and the environment.
She's giving a very generous interpretation? She ignores or doesn't understand how technocratic the public/council management class have become - they are pure careerists. Labour might have invested a little more money in the public sector but from my experience as a frontline worker this managerial class are utterly conditoned by neoliberal doctrine (because if your not your an irrational, socialist, Troysky, anti-semite etc, etc and your career is over). In other words the iron rule is public money must go to private companies - outsourcing and privatisation. So this money won’t go to help school children or NHS patients it will go to their donors, the City of London and Wallstreet. Blakey is also ignoring how much of this money will go straight back to the Treasury in the raised employer NI. So she's wrong, for us at the bottom of the pile it will definitely mean more austerity. This budget is a travesty. Blakey I think is being very generous because she wants to maintain her seat in the television studios as the house lefty, maintain her public image and sell more books.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
I plan to retire at 62 in another country outside the US that is free, safe and very cheap with a high quality of life. I could fully just rely on only my SS if I wanted to when that times arrives but l'll also have at least one pension, a 403 (b) and a very prolific Investment account with my Stephanie Janis Stiefel my FA. Retiring comfortably in the US these days is almost impossible.
I know this lady you just mentioned. Stephanie Janis Stiefel is a portfolio manager and investment advisor. She gained recognition as an employee of neuberger berman; a renowned investor she is. Stephanie Janis Stiefel has demonstrated expertise in investment strategies and has been involved in managing portfolios and providing guidance to clients.
I plan on moving to Hungary
There’s good healthcare in Hungary
Stephanie Janis Stiefel hooked me up with a late-stage fund that got me in on private shares of some hot companies before they hit the market or blew up. Those investments totally paid off when the companies went public and their stocks shot up. Now, I'm stoked because I'm heading into retirement with almost a million bucks in my portfolio.
How can i reach her, if you don't mind me asking?
😮I'm planning to retire in a conservative, Christian, White Texas community in Texas.
I'll pay for my home in full and retire comfortably in My country
Can someone tell me - serious question - when austerity actually stopped because you talk about this new budget and reintroducing austerity and I don’t ever remember it not being economically shite since the mid naughties? Cheers, NHS Staff Nurse (since 1988).
The new budget is not even a return to austerity
Austerity means cutting public spending, which Labour are not doing as they are INCREASING spending and investment.
You Russian bots are so transparent. Unsure if you realise how thick it makes Russians appear? Thick as mince
You are, of course, correct. It's the same slight of hand as inflation.
"Inflation is down! It's only 3% now." So.... Prices are still going up? "Errr, yeah".
They cut everything to the bone and then never raised any budgets back up. Then they claimed no austerity because they weren't cutting anymore.
Politicians are just propaganda tools for the billionaire oligarchy.
It depends how you define austerity. If you mean cutting services to try and balance the books (assuming you believe it will balance the books which I don't) then a return to austerity would simply mean making more cuts. If by austerity you mean making do with less funding, then no austerity never actually stopped, so a return would just be making it worse (or better depending on your point of view).
austerity never stopped
Taking away money from us hasn't worked to grow anything in the last 14 years, one thing I can guarantee is if you give us money we will spend it.
I completely agree. Something that boggles my mind about western economic policy of the last 15 years
So where should they get it from then Dickie ?
@@tradeladder146 Give people money to spend, maybe look at other countries economical models dickie ;)
What money did they take away from you?
@@lonyo5377 They took my pennies and my heart was broken, I saved so long for my pennies , buy me a penny sweet please
I admire Grace but sometimes do think she lives in a bit of fantasy with the rest of the more metro left. I wouldn’t disagree with her assessments more her expectations. You cannot in three months have a clean break from austerity. That has been entrenched now for some time and will take time to reverse. I like to see what she said about the pressure from the left keeping the centre of the party honest. What I’d like to see now is people like grace take the good things of this first step and start to give more credit. This budget is a philosophical break from 14 years and rebalance that will now built upon. I hope.
At this stage the sometimes overt criticism from the left doesn’t matter but what I hope is that if we see this built upon then people like grace and others such as Owen Jones’s will begin to get behind the change.
If this plan works, great!
If not, it's socialism or fascism. I want to make sure that socialism is visible as a viable option, so we don't slide into the other by default...
I'm not an economist, so I try to get the 'feel' of what's what from listening to various economists to see what they have to say. Specifically, I want to hear what the following economists and other political commentators think of this budget:
1) Martin Lewis
2) Gary Stevenson
3) Maria Mazzucato
4) James Meadway
5) Richard Murphy
6) Philip Pilkington
7) Stephanie Kelton
8) George Monbiot
9) Peter Oborne
10) Zack Polanski
With a few exceptions (listed below) I'll wait to see what the above people say. These exceptions are:
a) The Personal Tax Allowance is WAY too low at only £12,570 before taxation 'kicks in' at 20% - which Reeves COULD and SHOULD have addressed
b) The 2-Child Benefit Cap COULD and SHOULD have been lifted. Numerous charities have criticized the government on this, including Save The Children, Child Poverty Action Group, The Childhood Trust, The Children's Society, etc, etc.
c) Ending Winter Fuel Payments for pensioners is a huge mistake IMO, but also in the opinion of numerous charities including Age UK, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Independent Age, etc.
She's probably more knowledgeable than you in fairness.
@@Matt-ou7tu So is Jeremy Hunt, but he's also dangerous.
@@timelwell7002increasing tax thresholds and removing the 2 child benefit cap would be great but at the same time you have to ask where the billions would come from to cover the cost or what current plans would be scaled back.
Average income is roughly £35,000. Average house price is roughly £290,000.
8.28571 is the answer. At various points in the past, the number has been between 2.5 and 5.
So when the bank says they'll lend you 4 times your income, which will burden you with quite a large monthly payment, it's nowhere near enough.
Average income 35 k ….says who ?
Not to say that housing costs haven't gone up, they have, but your analysis is distorted in a couple of ways. Firstly, a home is typically bought using two incomes; only around 1/3rd of first time buyers are single. Secondly, the comparison to the past isn't quite accurate as interest rates were also higher back then, meaning that the cost of a mortgage was higher relative to the price of the house, and you need to compare that to incomes to get a complete picture.
@@bobbytreetop1701 That's the median UK income. Obviously there's a lot of regional variation in that though, in London it's £44k, whilst in the North East it's £31k
@@PJH131/3rd may not be a majority, but it is a significant proportion.
@@PleiadesImprezaT2000AWD-l4l Ofc, but as the 2/3 majority, that 2-income couple is driving the data that becomes the average price and is therefore the relevant comparison. If you want to use a single income, compare that to the average price paid by a single-income buyer, which would be lower.
@1:50 the "partnership with the private sector" is a ridiculous narrative, too often peddled by people who should know better like Mariana Mazucatto. Every civil servant hired by the State came from the "private sector" at 9am and returns to the private sector when they knock off work at 5 o'clock. The role of the private firm is to produce real output people want with as few workers as possible (preferably zero workers), they are not the source of unemployment. The government is the sole source of all unemployment and is the proper agent to eliminate all the unemployment they generated _by design._
The fundamental purpose of the tax _liabilities_ is to make people unemployed in the tax credits, for the _further purpose_ of then hiring them to work for public purpose since now they are seeking to exchange their goods or labour for the tax credit - which the government cannot ever run out of, it's just a scorepoint for the government. It is only a "store of wealth" to the non-government sector who cannot produce the currency by fiat nor impose taxes in _their_ I.O.U to force people to accept their private IOU.
Did i miss it or did they dodge the hike on NI contributions for employers? Was hoping to hear their opinions on how this drives growth.
It will probably drive employers to cut back in various ways, like salary raises.
Well it was lowered back in 2023 and now has been bought back up to 15%
The employees didn’t pass in the saving to workers but now are complaining they will pass on the perceived rise to workers
The increase isn't the killer it's the reduction in threshold that will make employing people significantly more expensive. This will have a significant impact on small and medium sized business and may encourage more redundancies.
My biggest fear with this budget is how it might drive up unemployment and impact independent businesses on the high street
@@williambrookings722the NI increase is only a cost vs current NI if you have more than 5 employees at median wage.
If you have 5 employees at median wage it's a tiny bit cheaper. 1-4 and it's even more cheaper
@williambrookings722
It will not encrease in small business actually they got a break and some with like 4 or 10 ppl will not pay
50% on bus fares is regressive AF, economically & environmentally it's going in the wrong direction when both situations are critical.
A quid is nothing if you have money, £10 a week is..
They don't GAF
Let’s just say it’s £ 500 more a year . To get to work .
Prior to the cap, the average adult day fare was already higher than £3. And with inflation, that £3 is lower than it was.
Stop expecting taxpayers to fund every single little thing all the time.
We don't get it around my area.
Bus fare to nearest city is £14 return.
What if it is paying for the new roll out of electric busses which is spreading?
@@jasongreenslade1143 it could do, also could have been used to nationalise the buses, invest in green tech to run the electric buses keeping costs down in the future meaning more routes could be run even if they are not relatively profitable because getting people to work is profitable to the government as they would have more tax from the workers and such. Maybe I'm just a dreamer
It’s just putting the brakes on - instead of turning round and going in the opposite direction from last 14 years
well to turn round, you have to stop first. It's a step in the right direction.
@@Zenkrypt hahaha
@@Zenkryptyou haven't seen me drive
Or borrowing a ton of money not to buy an asset to always be yours, like a house or a water company or indeed an energy company & instead going to a private industry drug dealer & spending all the money on meth & pink coke & fenty laced ket.
Oh & they took out the loan in your name & you (& the children you can't afford to have because of the last time they did this) have to pay back the debt... Forever.
What a beautiful and profound way to express fuck all.
Public/Private partnerships are just about funnelling state money into private companies, the directors of which are party donors. Private companies operate a profit margin, and public sector institutions/agencies operate at cost, and are far more efficient.
Very well put
People are propagandized to think of privatization = "good"
Nationalisation = "bad".
Sorry to say this out loud but your description is simple, plausible, incomplete and wrong!
While it's true private sector companies most often need to run in a manner that delivers an acceptable level of profit to investors, it is possible to establish a public/private partnership on a non-profit basis. This might be a better model for the future.
It is also true that public sector organisations often fail to invest in and deliver innovations that would allow them to run more effectively and efficiently. A private sector business might do this better and be more effective (and yet cheaper) even while making a reasonable profit for shareholders.
Totally agree.
This whole nonsense about balancing current spend with tax revenue reminds of a friend whose family used to suffer, like not going on a holiday for few yrs straight or driving old banged up car that kept breaking… because they didn’t want to have loans.
Fuel and maintenance savings alone would pay for the interest on my brand new car in that same period of time.
Regarding assets and investments: several reports point to massive return on investments in things like Childcare. Whereas conservative ppl, or regressives as I call them, think of these as ”handouts”
How on earth do you expect to get anything back from parents if you don’t invest and enable first?? How do they plan to activate stay home parents and stimulate growth and reverse declining trend in childbirth rates, while punishing anyone financially who dares to make kids? It’s the conservatives who are airy-fairy with no business sense whatsoever.
Thought provoking- thanks for posting.
I think it's clear the government wants to balance current spend with tax and then redefine debt to take on more which would then be spent on the thing labour want to invest in.
I agree but your confused. This Labour goverment has been a cancer on families. Punishing hardworking families who want to put their kids in private schools (mine are in state schools before you say it), punishing people with punitive inheritance tax (I have no inheritance myself but scrimp and save with the hope I can put something away for my kids to have) , destroying confidence with employers making it harder for me to get a pay rise / moving jobs, removing the only disincentive we have of stopping illegal immigrants making our street less safe and putting further pressure on public service, wasting public money by just pouring into the NHS without reforming it...rhe just is endless with Labour they lied to get into power and tgis is the ultimate betrayal.
I for one and I'm sure many think the sane that the system needs to be reformed politicians lie to get into power with few votes then abuse that power by implementing their own agenda.
I’m looking forward to hearing Richard J Murphy’s take on this
Budget.
Thanks for introducing me to Grace Blakeley, just bought her book!
I would love to hear Mazzucato talking about the budget. Her view seemed to be pragmatic where the state partnered business but took more benefit in return. Growth must come from the state in partnership since it appears the state do not have the power to do so on their own
Some good points especially about the human toll on people in the public services.
It's pointless wasting time and money trying to reverse the decline. The top priority for any Brit under 50 should be to emigrate, because things have only gotten worse here for most of our adult lives.
You’re right thats the plan and other western countries
Emigrate to where? The problems she is talking about affect the entire world.
Where has Better outcomes than the U.K?.
@@annishilcock4587 south east asia if you can leave do it or plan to it’s never going to get better in the uk and i was born here!
@@annishilcock4587 English is the most widely spoken second language in the world. If you made a decision NOT to leave, then every bad thing that comes your way will remind you that you made the wrong decision.
14:20 That’s a good point. The reason why investors don’t make enough money on renewables is because once you scale these projects the price per unit goes down, below level of profitability. These projects should and have to be NATIONAL or otherwise non-profit (eg. Local cooperatives)- we as a Nation don’t have to make profits and pay out dividends. Quite the opposite, what’s a problem for private investors is a direct benefit to the Government.
The industrial (think steel) and data centre competitiveness is directly correlated with electricity price. You don’t need MBA to see the idiocy of current system.
Renewable energy should be in no way national, that's the last thing we need. It should be local, the only way people will ever save money on energy is if they produce it themselves. It's not a coincidence that the greener we are becoming the more expensive energy is becoming is it. The installation and upkeep costs more money, that money has to come from somewhere and it ain't the public of the uk that can afford it on a national scale, as that's who will be paying for it if it was "government", funded. There is no such thing as government funded it is all tax payer funded. Of course it needs to make a profit, that's where more tax payer funded things can come from. But government is renowned for being wasteful especially labour/socialist governments. They can't run a piss up in a brewery let alone a country.
@ you mean it should make profit, just like our Water did? Makes total sense mate “)
@ I don’t think you understand the point I’m trying to make. Investors aim to MAXIMIZE profit, and consumer price is one of the main levers to do that.
National ownership aims to MINIMIZE cost and consumer price (to reduce Inflation and boost industrial competitiveness of the entire country)
Quoting tired old soundbites for the Daily Mail is not a good idea mate.
@@AdamCiernicki so because I'm correct and you're talking nonsense I'm suddenly quoting a newspaper. Classic. All businesses should aim to maximise profit even ones own by the tax payer, that's how we get more money to pay for other things. No government in the history of the world has minimised cost. They just spend other people's money time and time again. And it's now getting worse.
The budget wasn't as radical as I hoped it would have been but overall I am satisfied with Labour's plan. Removing VAT exemption on private schools is good, the only people who can afford that are very well off, increase in capital gains tax is good, National insurance contribution has a very important stipulation that will protect small businesses or at least very heavily soften the blow.
I am however still pissed off that the house of lords and royal family still exist. We're reaching record levels of wealth disparity, there is no reason that the royal family and a house of 600 well paid, completely unelected officials should still exist, there needs to be a referendum to disband them
Puff
Youth unemployment has doubled since the corrupt politicians started taxing businesses. £11 Billion in lost revenue and increased unemployment benefits due to these increased job killing taxes.
Climate, environment, fiscal, monetary, public services, energy… ≠ separate “issues”…
…all of these (everything we do, or don’t) is within our ONE ECOLOGY.
It’s not ‘rocket science’, not reducible to current ways of “solving issues” - Intuition goes a long way…
(…and huge thanks as always, both of you!) 😊
One in seven working people (5M) are too sick to work. That is 2M sbove pre-pandemic levels. Fix the NHS, and we turn benefit payouts into taxes, which can then be used to fix the rest of piblic services...
"Yeah but that means I have to do something and it's haaaaard 😢" - neo-lib Government
Fix the NHS. Good luck with that 😂 It’s too wasteful and was designed at a time when the population was significantly less.
@@markgt894 Well if you don't try you never will, and good luck with debt in an insurance based system. The NHS did work pre thatcher, but since then it has been slowly choked and starved it hasn't been given the chance to be what it once was. The argument of a different sized population doesn't work either, but a healthier population getting better and quicker treatment resulting in better productivity does. Decades of tory ideology has been the scourge of the NHS, they didn't want it when it was formed, and they never have since.
@@markgt894 it has only recently been made wasteful, by David Cameron. Breaking up the NHS into 'competing' regions that cant talk to each other. Its why you have to do the same blood test 5 times. That wasnt the case before hand - you just check the records.
Undoing what cameron did to the NHS will do a lot of fixing in itself. Then modernise it as in fairness labour plan to do, but also hiring more GPs, building more hospitals. Encourage more preventative measures, and completely nationalise the NHS.
@@mogzybuster try with whose money?! Good at spending tax payers and other peoples money, to try something! How much more money to throw at it? The population was about 20 million less than today, and probably healthier. The NHS is no longer workable in this country.
Sneaky move announcing the cut back on winter fuel payments before the ‘budget’. Anyone would think they were trying to make out it had nothing to do with the budget.
It won't help Labour..just puts added stress and strain on the nhs!
However cheaply produced electricity is, surely it is still fed into the market at the market traded price? Looks like she's right, the current market system does need change to make a faster move towards renewables that work.
yes, electricity is billed as if it was generated by _gas_ regardless of the actual source 😢
"the market traded price" is another problem, producers aren't allowed to, for instance, offer a local discount - Scotland is covered in wind farms but Scottish people have to pay Stock Exchange *_gas_* prices for it 😢
@@alanhat5252 There's no such thing called the 'Stock exchange gas price" which you would know if you're from the UK or infact weren't a bot.
It's stealth austerity tax. You cannot see it but you know it's their. Prices are going up but your standing still.
You're. It's you're. If you can't tell the difference then maybe you also don't know what you're talking about with regards to 'austerity tax' which is even weirder when you then start talking about prices going up, which has nothing to do with austerity or tax.
The most understated part of the budget is the bringing in of pensions into IHT including farming (farmers should be calculating winding up costs right now). The IHT change has effectively created a NEW LTA of 650K for a couple. You now have as a couple only a pot of 650k (whether it it in a SIPP, ISA or GIA) to generate income for your retirement (4% of 650k = 26k income for a couple) . Any exposure above this immediate opens you up for immediate 40% additional tax or more (if you die above 75 it becomes 52%). And because you don't know when you will die (and due to market fluctuations you would normally err on the side of a bigger pot, but with a 40%+ tax hanging over you, one would be incline to blow the excess. That's for the fortunate ones that can max out this new imposed limit. Yes, one can buy an annuity, but that why the pension reforms were done to allow more control of your destiny because everyone's health, desires and family circumstances are different. It's your savings you should spend it as you like. Why should giving away money to a politic party reduce the IHT bill?
All of these do not apply to civil service pensions, but of course one forgets when the goose is dead and there is nothing to take anymore who will pay the unfunded pensions?
This budget has decimated the pension industry IMHO, and enslaved the future generation (they just haven't figure out the maths yet). And imposed a £1M cap on wealth (hence the farming and entrepreneur £1M exemption).
Those with a potential retirement asset pool of 650k+ will look to asset strip themselves by gifting and/or moving aboard the money.
There is no public money only tax payers money ,in the famous wards of a certain PM.
As an 'economist' who failed to predict the damage Brexit would do to our economy, I don't have a lot of faith in Grace Blakeley. She studied PPE at Oxford like Liz Truss.
She's not a proper economist just a political commentator
9:30 this is when we find out how good Grace Blakeley's grasp of astrophysics is
Just what do we produce to increase growth ? The Tories have hog tied us into financial services, insurance and commercial law. We don't manufacture hardly any steel, we import energy, our utilities are owned by foreign investment. Just how will this country actually grow ?
Investment in new industries and new technology is the only way to go.
@@bernardfox9078 I was listening to Emily Thornberry on LBC the other day talking about how Labour want to build 1.5 million new houses, the long and short of it seems they don't have clue really, apart from easing planning laws and using the green belt to build on. The developers in the country are the only builders and how does she think they are going to build homes for the masses instead of the well heeled ? The vast majority of tradesmen are self employed and with the closing of many construction colleges in favour of importing skilled foreign labour has created a massive problemm since Brexit with many of them going home again. I trained and worked as a carpenter since leaving school in 1976, in the main town near where I lived there were 6 or more decent sized building firms and many school leavers were taken on as apprentices by these firms, there was 2 construction colleges in town as well, one a technical college for the clever trades like surveyors, architects etc and another for the manual trades, Bricklayers, carpenters, plumbers etc, both long gone since the mid 90s and houses built on those sites now. Virtually all of the people I worked with in my lifetime are either retired or dead now and the supply of new tradesmen dwindling. No small wonder trades like Electricians and Plumbers, Bricklayers and Carpenters are earning £300+ a day, there's high demand for their services.
I don't think they've been pushed to not be as bad, I think they've been pushed from being progressive backwards and they've managed to save a vestige of progressive measures
It's a slowing in inequality, not a reversal...& It'll never be a reversal
People will lose even more faith in democracy than they do already in the next decade with inequality still rising.
I have little hope. We need radical and brave changes. One can’t complain about our infrastructure crumbling but also not want tax. Tax is fine as long as it is means tested and income based, spent correctly.
We are just getting a continuous mindset as the last 25 years.
tax is not spent by the central government, it does not go in to a pot that the government then uses - the government creates the money it spends and destroys the money it collects in tax - the pervasive ideology is that the government needs taxes to spend money
@@basilmagnanimous7011
Why does Labour continue to follow the Conservatives' unsuccessful trickle-down policies initiated by Thatcher in the 1980s?
Reintroduce progressive tax rates like those after WW2, before Thatcher's tax cuts for the wealthy reduced their contributions by over 40% in the 1980s, a time when we had many millionaires but no billionaires.
Prohibit private healthcare, as it siphons off profitable segments of the NHS, such as dental and eye care, it also allows the wealthy to bypass waiting lists for treatment, while leaving the NHS to handle costly operations and emergencies, and the NHS has to rectify the private sector's errors when they mess up!
Plus, implement a wealth tax of 2% per annum on all assets exceeding £15,000,000.
Bus fares going up from £2 to £3. 2 Child Benefit Cap retained. !0 million pensioners won't get their Winter Fuel Allowance. Gas and electric rising 10%. Water bills likely to be rising by 48%. National Insurance contributions for employers rising significantly, so small businesses, hospitality and care homes will find it hard to retain staff or pass those costs on. Spending on NHS and schools and new housing nowhere near enough. Rachel Reeves will tax to bring down government spending, so of course austerity will result. Remind me....what's so great about this budget again?
Bus fares are not going up, it's just the cap has been increased. Also the cap was due to come to an end but Labour have extended it. Would you prefer. there was no cap and bus companies could charge whatever they liked? My cities bus fare is staying at £1.75 and not going up at all.
@@joetrent4753 They are going to increase from £2 to £3. To my logic, that is an increase.
@@stephendavis5530 did you forget about the small business exception to national insurance contribution, whereby the threshold of not contributing on your employee's salary will increase from £5,000 to £10,500, which will result in 865,000 employers no longer having to make any national insurance contributions
@@shamrock141 Only for some. The vast majority will be paying 13.8% on earnings above £175 a week or £9,100 a year.
There's a freeze on fuel tax! Of course, most idiots yucking this up don't realise that tax is paid by the distributer on sales and the liklihood of them passing that saving on to consumers at the pump is "I've got a bridge to sell you" levels of believability..
Debt is acceleration of consumption so we're now at the point where we either start to deleverage the State or double down and just store up even more trouble down the line.
God Bless you Rachel, Nom Doms are Crying, Sunak went Mental. 😂
Jealousy is not smart economics........just because you (and I to be fair) are jealous of the wealth of rich people it's not necessarily smart economics to make them leave the country. Typically this makes tax receipts go down.
It’s austerity. there are no groundbreaking changes which you’re going to help fix
the problems.
The worst thing is mortgages in my case near £800-£900 is interest paid to the bank that means i have a massive deficit of spending power to support the local economy and have to shop cheap.
Same can be said about renting.
Housing costs are strangling the economy
So would you like someone to lend money to you interest free? How would you design a monetary system without the core element which links time and money?
@bishboshs no I didn't say that did I, I just said it's a bit ridiculous to be paying that amount of interest every month. I pay £1100 Only £220ish comes off what I owe the rest goes to the bank to for lending me money to live in a house so I can sleep in it get up and go to work and pay tax.
Imagine if people had even half the amount back in their pockets to do day trips in UK spend it in the local shops blah blah blah.
The tax generated from thoes sales would massively boost the economy.
Yes I get that banks invest the money into private sector to then further increase their profits blah blah blah.
It's just feels like robbery
Great you folks got this video out so quick, but the production quality sure did take a hit - cutting in the middle of a sentence, too bright, audio sounding bad...
Funny how, during the 2010's, the money supply increased by 50% and minimum wage increased by 20%. Austerity, my assterity.
Considering the times that we are in - 15 years of austerity, cost of living crisis, climate breakdown, a 3rd of children in the UK living in poverty, and more, this felt like a very nothing budget. Doesn't seem to even recognise let alone try to address all the crises most of us are facing on a day to day basis.
You obviously weren't listening.
Exactly! She's being unreasonably generous in her assessment. Keep her tv studio seat as house lefty?
Remember the last policy of the tory government was "scorched earth" and that needs to be fixed before we can grow Britain
It's probably better than a tory budget would have been where the priority would have been creaming off taxes to line the pockets of their cronies and donors. Maybe take the hit on this one and be more intense with our scrutiny on their next offering?
No this is not a return to Austerity! The budget is giving the NHS an additional £22bn spending plus 3% investment. Large boost to the minimum wage and carers allowance. Please stop randomly thinking everything is austerity
literally the first thing she says is that it's not a return to austerity
hahaha
3% is just about an inflation increase, not an actual increase.
@ inflation is currently 1.7% so this is an above inflation increase. Basic maths
@ which is due to increase by over 2% before the end of this year due to high energy bills. According to the ONS and CSI. Next time, trying giving the full picture instead of half. It makes your comments disingenuous.
She's very good
...looking?
@matt49125 that as well
Won't "working people" effectively pay for the increase in employers' National Insurance contributions though...
Of course they will. Labour are a pack of liars. The grownups knew exactly what this shower would do and tried to tell everyone. They turned out to be correct, liebour lied about everything like we knew they would.
What of _tidal energy?_ A simple signature puts Swansea effectively off the National Grid in maybe 2 years time liberating a couple of gas power stations to be shut down & that's not the only _"shovel-ready"_ tidal project in mothballs...
Public / Private
Incorporation of The Third Way’ !!!!!!
You want fast progress’ consult the Alchemist.
Austerity was pernicious and personal choice !!!
Add a Chairman to oversee the economic relationship.
Love the channel in general but some nonsense commentary regarding carbon capture in particular in here. Critical for energy intensive industry in the uk - to say nobody advocating for this without an investment position is rubbish.
Surely people come before the economy.
I think it's the best we could have hoped for, it's a very difficult balancing act and I know the left want to go further but spooking the markets is costly as Truss proved, 8 out of 10 from me.
That's a made up thing to do. I'm sorry but people bringing up Truss is a terrible red herring. I don't think we realise just how insane her budget was. Even if Jeremy Corbyn had come in and tried to do his 2019 manifesto the markets wouldn't have been anywhere near as spooked as they were by Truss. Despite what people say, left wing social democracy is something that the markets are used to. They deal with it in different variations all over Europe. The issue with Truss is that she wanted to do the equivalent of taking out a mortgage on a sports car by insisting that the car was SO cool that it would get her a 6 figure job just by pulling up in front of people in it. It was that mental. Nothing this labour party could have suggested would have come close. Not wanting to spook the markets is just an excuse they use because they never wanted to implement real change to begin with. The budgets that follow will be equally inadequate. Mark my words.
Yeah, it really becomes tiring listening to people make excuses for them. It's amazing how quickly the Conservatives enacted their Austerity agenda, yet Labour need a minimum of 5 years "fixing" the problems the Tories made... (by continuing to do the things the Tories did?) before we can expect to see any good from them.
That's pretty bloody convenient, don't you think? And I'm sure in 5 years time, if they even get re-elected, we'll be told that the state the country was left in was so astronomically bad and all these unforeseen things happening abroad are happening that they'll just need another 5 years to get things under control, but then -- THEN! the good times will flow.
Unexpected to hear a strong climate take tbh. The main structural point that comes to mind is the Nate Hagens (great simplification) type stuff of; saying that like energy (oil) is like the only true input to our kinda system. So yeh the jarring budget of GDP go up-- business as usual vs a fundamental shift, is a point I'm surprised to hear. The invest in making green transition happen is quite J. Doyne Farmer say pushing for institutional shifts to give the energy transition cost curves and tech a viable shot.
What in this budget is going to improve investment from business?
She's not an economist. She's just a commentator.
random
Um, she's definitely an economist. You can look up her credentials and her books. Just because she frequently commentates doesn't mean she isn't an economist. Is David Olusoga not a historian because he makes documentaries?
@@IshtarNike A PPE degree followed by a masters in African Studies does not make you an economist. How many peer-reviewed economics papers has Grace Blakeley published, or academic positions has she held? Zero.
It's not a clear break but it's a start and hopefully, year on year, it will improve. You cannot expect everything at once. I was actually pleasantly surprised by the budget . I was expecting austerity plus given the supposed "Black Hole " in the finances
The thing you should be analysing is why you were scared into this "Black Hole" in the first place when they seemingly cleared it up with very marginal tweaks to tax codes around the edges. And let's be clear, for all the hysteria the mainstream media is making, the "hikes" were very small in the grand scheme of things.
Do a google of "UK tax intake breakdown 2023/24" and go to the parliament site to see the figures. Of the £1.1 trillion of taxes (yes, with a T) taken last year, only £39 billion of that was capital gains, as opposed to almost £277 billion in income tax. Capital Gains tax takings was less than COUNCIL TAX, it's so god damn low. So if they were able to fix this black hole and then some with relatively minor tax increases on niche elite markets, just imagine what they could achieve if they went full hog and made them pay their fair share?
So no, it's not a start, it's a platitude, just like them raising the minimum wage to £12.21 when most large corporations like retailers who skirt the minimum wage are already paying £12 an hour anyway. Christ, movements in America were demanding $15 back in 2016, which was almost £12.30 at that time, and this was before Covid and the Cost of Living crisis, the argument being that this was the minimum wage people needed to live comfortably. This supposed raise that will barely materialise isn't even going to cover the added bus expense I'm getting, let alone the increased water and energy bills of which there was absolutely nothing even proposed to tackle them.
Sewage in the water, ecological decline, a farming and risk of a systemic climate breakdown. Guess its time to cut the DEFRA budget by 30%.
Looking at the thread below, anyone would think it’s a scam! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Lots of ultra socialists and Corbyn fans will be in tears tonight over this budget.
I’ll raise a glass to you with my £0.01 cheaper pint.
We were in tears when Starmer took over and shifted the party all the way to the right, aped the tories and took up failed neo-liberal economic policy. Enjoy your 1p cheaper, but still unaffordable pint while you can.
@@michaelstimpson1137 A party that went from losing for 14 years to a win. Seems like a worthwhile trade to me.
Tears over want? Do try not to talk such utter nonsense
@@michaelstimpson1137Corbyn is a brexiteer - enough said
@@EchoingHellWin? Ehm... Yes, a right wing government was indeed elected. If that's a win... Congratulations?
Austerity for the private sector
Okay Grace - you seem very intelligent in your field. However, storage, battery storage is a tried and tested technology. Not only does it work but it is utterly essential is we need to hit net zero (which we do). The basic essential rule (which I’m shocked you are not aware of), is that for any grid to function,supply must meet demand. When it doesn’t, you have huge power outgages. Or you see both technical and financial curtailment of generation assets which not only in the real time can ruin the asset owners financially but you will find in any form of due diligence process for the acquisition or construction of generation assets, these challenges will slow and at times prevent the development of these assets.
When it is very windy or it is very sunny, renewables all create huge amount of supply. Often there is not enough demand to meet said supply, on lets say a clear sky 30 degree day, or a a messy storm. Without storage technology the 11:37 energy transition literally does not happen. I suggest that if you want to talk about energy and power markets you go and do some reading. That was one of the most flawed, pathetic statements I’ve ever heard someone say with such confidence.
Note to politics Joe. This is the second time I’ve heard you making grand sweeping statements about energy policy, and you’ve been completely wrong. Do some reading, some research, try to understand the world around you. It’s embarrassing.
You're clearly quite knowledgeable and I respect you for that. It also seems that you have put a lot of thought and intention into this comment. I am therefore curious why you decided to word it in such an aggressive and essentially rude way "most flawed, pathetic statements", "it's embarrassing", "I'm shocked you are not aware of". Did you mean to incite disagreement, or helpful discussion/debate, and if you didn't mean to incite disagreement, then why did you word it in this way?
I hope this doesn't come across as rude or adversarial, I genuinely don't mean it to be - I simply was interested in why you wrote this in the way that you did.
Frustration 🧐
@@AlethiaDaisy-Rue I don’t have time for a media outlet that wants to position itself as better than the disgusting legacy media we have in this world, however, they then completely fail to address the argument in a sensible or useful way. I mean they should have some experts or those experts assuming they exist at politics Joe should do some post interview editorial work to adjust that messaging. Messaging like this contributes to destroying the work that people are doing to progress the energy transition. So yes it’s lazy and it’s pathetic. Yes I’m frustrated and for good fucking reason.
@@mrCameron38I get that you might be frustrated, and that there might be perfectly good reason for that, but what are you going to achieve aggressively posting about it in some comment section, even if someone from the Politics Joe team were to see your comment, all it would serve to do is aggravate them, and make them probably shut down to any criticism you are offering - so why do it?
@ look the UK has a saturated ancillary services markets but as Renewables grow this will easier over time. But, to rule storage is one of the most idiotic things I’ve ever heard l. This is trash.
Her argument about capitalism being fundamentally and intrinsically linked to the mentality around scarcity of fossil fuels doesn’t really make sense. If energy was plentiful then companies would have lower fixed costs across the board which would be a net good. Economies don’t function well with high input costs and everything slows down accordingly. Scarcity is a fact of life and I don’t think that moving to a new economic model will solve that. I also think that it is because of capitalism that we can channel our expertise into green tech (yes it is in that industry now) in the most efficient ways. Also she is a beneficiary of capitalism in what how she lives and earns a living.
This is Stankovite economics.
4:28 this is a very long way of saying she is breaking her manifesto commitments
Why is all the focus on the requirement for new revenue (£40bn) and its allocation rather than on the overall sources and targets of revenue and spending? For example, the overall ratio of capital to current expenditure, and the balance of tax between individuals and companies? Surely that reflects government choices more clearly? Or is much of the existing tax and spend pretty static ito where it comes from and goes to? Also, is this budget an admidsion that the government doesnt have a big theory of where growth comes from?
yep on the later!
Parliament, through your M.P. is the way to protest.Not on the streets!
Where have you been Grace, i,ve missed you
Desperate optimism. The method of borrowing and spending she’s married herself to just got a whole lot more expensive RE bond prices. The £ isn’t looking too healthy either.
It’s austerity. It’s wage suppression. It’s ongoing fiscal drag.
End of austerity? For many it'll never end, only get worse
Minimum wage increase wasn't good, barely covers the increase in bus fair. Rather obvious that its those on min are the most likely to use the bus.
How is a rise in capital gains tax a good thing?
😅
maybe you should watch some reputable economics vids like IFS to answer a big question like that
It's better than rises for income tax, national insurance or VAT 🙂
@@markwelch3564 I agree.🙂
@@Jabskin Thanks for the recommendation.
Imagine being an alien passerby, observing the humans of earth. Watching them hold themselves back by their own economic failures, wandering if they're going to destroy themselves again, or evolve. The majority submitting to the ideals of the very worst of their kind, literally repressing their own technological capabilities to maintain an economic model that causes constant struggle for the vast majority.
It would make for some painful watching 👽
Good grief I voted labour to say they were pushed is a real stretch. However for me it has always been housing. I feel we need 3 m council houses however if we get the 1.5m houses from the private sector then OK this is a step in the right direction. Its always going to be Housing and this is the problem around the developed world for the next 20 years.
Yeah but don't forget how much the Tories left us the shit - especially in the last 5 years. The OBR is going to tell us exactly what's been going on.
Pieute spotted! Are you using Ed's laptop? Or is it Laura's?
But they will probably be lucky in that falling inflation will mean falling interest rates and I think they are walking into a falling interest rate cycle
The bit neither the conservatives nor labour do is tax the rich
They could have done this by bringing cgt up to income tax levels, taxing farm land at the same rate as IHT as for everyone else not with a 50% discount and putting a tax free threshold on pension pot subject to iht if say 500k or 1m
What of the touted Sovereign Wealth Fund or GBEnergy? Are they so miniscule they're irrelevant?
This is a managed decline. 2008 saw much wealth disappear and never return
Im on the fence, the money is well needed however, i am not convinced that the public sector can be trusted to manage the money, I suppose the proof will be in the pudding. Having managed in the private sector across thirty years I can see the businesses needing to recoup their margin through lower pay rises, I will wait and see, but it could lead to price rises, inflation, interest rate rises, which is everything that people lent the labour party their vote to avoid,
And you trust the private sector? Have you seen the water companies? The energy companies? The trains? The buses? The post office? The supermarkets? Elon Musk?
@@davidbates3057 like i say lets see if the schools are repaired, hospital waiting list drop, people can know get a doctors and dentist appointment the potholes are repaired, only time will tell. Dont get me wrong, I want it to be a success. Unfortunately, if it isn't people will turn to right wing politics like they have all over Europe
Ow we finally have a realistic value on net zero 2050 is £10 billion without backup. Provision which will be as much again, why are we not looking to provide feasibility studies on it. Why does this woman not tell us about the one thing that will ruin us and why this is not in her mind ?
Yet another discussion about climate change without mentioning the biggest cause. Animal agriculture
Isn't she talking about the AMOC, which is a water current.
The big wealth is offshore..how do you tax that.. we would have to start a special offshore fiscal agency.. & success would be based on how it’s manned & funded.. “not a quick fix”.. isn’t that what your wanting ? 🤔
Grace, calm down on AMOC. Btw, it's not anthropogenic, we can't spend our way out of climate chahge, but we can try and adapte.
Take a look at what actual, real-world climate scientists are saying about AMOC before you start believing oil-company propaganda! 😮
What's with the huge amounts of reverb on Oli's voice at various points through the video? You're not Batman mate 😂
I was expecting an economist
Is the wealth fund not a not to the future?
Are you talking about a budget or the environment? And just blanket stating that this is what will happen to the environment in the future is unhelpful when the weather forecasters can rarely tell accurately the weather in 3 days time! Wealth taxes will just push more people to leave and then you have no one to wealth tax left. Just copy Hong Kong or Singapore economics and then you’ll actually have a thriving set of islands
She's talking a load of rubbish. She's saying it's not a break with austerity. But to go further Reeves would have had to tax much more than she did which is hardly credible. And to mention the Blair public private partnerships was way off beam. That was a very specific model which is not being promoted at all by Reeves. What they are trying to do is begin to fix public services "fix the foundations" so business will be more willing to invest. Why should business want to invest when the public services are so broken. It's a big gamble but I think the only way they could have chosen and I don't think they could have gone further at this stage..
public sector spends money efficiently! what planet do you live on. temperatures are going to fall, but were going to burn, thats a new one.
Clever and articulate for sure but is she really an economist? I studied Chemistry for years, I’m not a scientist.
Productivity is down 20% since 2010, many hidden parts of the UK now resemble the 3rd world after 14 years of austerity, along with the rise of Amazon killing off the high street, we need a bold Government or there's no way back and have to accept we're much poorer.
If Germany is struggling, what chance do we have ?
Perhaps bolder in the next budget or one after.
I didn't vote for them, couldn't after the purge and lies from the leader.
Labour are on probation, let's hope they stay on the straight and narrow, or we risk Farage becoming PM.
If one takes a look at the roots of the recent German model, it will become clear why it has failed.
I'll take Nigel as PM
Jim Davidson's not happy
Great budget for the rich
Total fiscal outlay for 2023 was £463 billion, so a £20bn "shortfall" would only need a 4.3% increase to the fiscal budget to cover. This is trivial, since they do it for war, they do it for CONVID, but they don't do it for public services or worker tax cuts
Liz Truss tried to do it for tax cuts. It didn't end well.
The funding for day to day spend is not the same a one offs. Stuff like war or a pandemic are usually considered one off spends. They aren't expected to last forever, so the funding model treats them differently.
Also, consider this. While it is only 4.3% of the total fiscal outlay, to get an extra £20 billion out of the roughly 35 million available workers works out to about £550 to £600 extra per head in tax revenues.
The amount is far less trivial when put like that. Would you consider a £550 tax rise trivial?
Obviously, Labour cannot just put up everyone's tax like this. They've had to be thoughtful and considerate of how to raise those tax revenues, while avoiding raising tax rates on those who cannot afford it, so as to keep with their manifesto promises.
A Fiscal deficit is not a debt (the money was not borrowed, it was created). The money to pay treasuries comes from the same place as fiscal spending (thin air). A “fiscal deficit” is a private sector surplus, i.e. it is income for you, I, and everyone else. Conversely, a fiscal surplus (a surplus sounds good, eh?) is a drop in private sector (our!) incomes.
Don’t worry about outstanding treasuries, since sovereign govts cannot involuntarily go insolvent. Worry about private debt (search for: credit delinquency).
The proof is that the Tories created a record fiscal deficit in 2020/21, and inflation was below 3%. It only jumped to near double digits once the BoE raised interest rates and utility companies started price gouging (record profits were posted across the whole UK energy sector in 2022)
You just couldn’t leave out the normal cyclical weather and big it up as climate change. Newsflash the climate is always changing and not supposed to be stable forever.
It's not a very good budget. It doesn't address inequality, won't fix public services and does nothing for the environment.
What I'm reading though is a lot of rejoicing from the left that it's not another absolute disaster zone budget like the ones we have seen in recent years from the Tories.
I mean, has the bar really been so low for so long that we accept this rubbish as a triumph?
The Tory media moaning is no marker for success either. Anything even remotely left of a Libertarian budget from Labour would have them foaming at the mouth calling them communists.
It’s the best budget in 15 years
@@henryburton6529 that is true.
@@leejohnson3209 I wish lefties would support Labour like righties support ANYONE on the right.
Its the best in 15 years but you made a negative comment.
This is how we elect fascists like Nigel Farage.
@@henryburton6529 There was never much support for Jeremy Corbyn. I'm much more supportive of post socialist Labour than they ever have been of people with my opinions. They would still label me a racist and a threat to Britain and not accept me in their party.
So whilst I accept they're preferable to the Tories, and if I had to would tactically vote for them. I will never accept the continued running of the NHS for private profit. I will never accept unfair taxes. I will never accept protection to the accumulation and concentration of wealth at the expense of the poor and the environment.
@@henryburton6529 I support Labour so far as, if I needed to I would lend them my vote to keep the Tories out. But I cannot condone the values and policies of New Labour 2.0. I am a socialist and supporter of Palestine. The party has made it clear that people like me are not welcome in it so the fact they would even get my vote at all they should be thankful for.
This budget shows that it values the interests of the few above human life, needs of the many and the environment.
If she an economist. Next time you see her, ask her. “What are the economic benefits of Brexit”?
Excellent budget..not for the filthy rich tho
Would love to hear what you have to say but the background music is SOOO distracting! Please don’t do that, just human speech next time thank you
She's giving a very generous interpretation?
She ignores or doesn't understand how technocratic the public/council management class have become - they are pure careerists. Labour might have invested a little more money in the public sector but from my experience as a frontline worker this managerial class are utterly conditoned by neoliberal doctrine (because if your not your an irrational, socialist, Troysky, anti-semite etc, etc and your career is over). In other words the iron rule is public money must go to private companies - outsourcing and privatisation. So this money won’t go to help school children or NHS patients it will go to their donors, the City of London and Wallstreet. Blakey is also ignoring how much of this money will go straight back to the Treasury in the raised employer NI.
So she's wrong, for us at the bottom of the pile it will definitely mean more austerity. This budget is a travesty. Blakey I think is being very generous because she wants to maintain her seat in the television studios as the house lefty, maintain her public image and sell more books.