What does increasing wealth mean, Rachel Reeves?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 июл 2024
- Wealth is not just pounds saved. It’s also good health and education, a sustainable environment, decent housing and so much more. So why does Labour, when it talks about growth, only seem to talk about finance?
#uk #politics #economics #labourparty #primeminister #parliament #bank #money #rachelreeves
ABOUT RICHARD MURPHY
Richard Murphy is Professor of Accounting Practice at Sheffield University Management School. He is director of Tax Research LLP and the author of the Funding the Future blog. His best known book is ‘The Joy of Tax’.
This video was edited by Thomas Murphy.
DONATE TO KEEP THIS CHANNEL ADVERT FREE
ko-fi.com/taxresearch
RICHARD MURPHY ON TWITTER
Follow Richard on his Twitter: RichardJMurphy or on his blog: www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/
HIT SUBSCRIBE & GET NOTIFICATIONS
Subscribe and get notified of new videos released.
INTRODUCTION: • Welcome to my channel ...
PLAYLISTS:
Accountancy: • Accounting
Economics: • Economics
Tax: • Tax
Taxing Wealth Report: • Taxing Wealth Report 2024
Green New Deal: • Green New Deal
Money: • Money
Questions from subscribers: • Questions
Miscellaneous: • Miscellaneous
#richardmurphy #richardjmurphy #economy #economics #accountancy #accounting #tax #uktax #ukeconomy #greennewdeal
![College Football 25 Road To Glory - Transfer Portal & First Team All-American [FRESHMAN YEAR]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/U8UYgoKneCo/mqdefault.jpg)
We’ve had Thatcherism since 1979 which serves the interests of the wealthy. The problem with Thatcherism is that you eventually run out of assets like Thames Water to sell to investors so that they can rip off British consumers. Reduce inequality by taxing the asset wealth of the rich.
No Politician in history has transferred more money from Government to ordinary people than Thatcher with her right to buy policy
That's a slippery slope.
So where are the trillions of pounds of wealth the workers have given the welfare state?
@@garyb455under right to buy, ordinary people took out mortgages and gave lump sums of cash to local authorities. They bought government assets, that never got replaced, leaving a shortfall in social housing.
@@adenwellsmith6908being liquid and keeping the economy flowing
That's it in a nutshell.
Still waiting for any mainstream media presenter to ask a government minister this simple question.
Its personal INCOMES that need to increase. Theres plenty of Wealth, the problem is its concentrated in the hands of too few people, the top 1%
Precisely. Labour is the friend of the rich under the red Tories. It should be redistributing wealth on behalf of the majority. It never talks about redistribution because red Tories do not believe in it. They are straight out of neoliberal central casting- small state, austerity, lack of investment in public services, stringent anti trade union laws to prevent collective bargaining, high levels of inequality to keep the money in the hands of the rich, pro corporation, etc. Nothing wrong with making money, in fact it should be encouraged as long as there is also a concomitant understanding that those who earn more, be it individuals or businesses, should pay more. The Labour right is the cuckoo in the nest and should have formed the 'left' of the Tory party years ago.
I know families in my area who have had the same land since the Norman invasion of Wales..... This isn't taught in school for a reason
The top 1% hold 28% of wealth and 20% of incomes.
Agree with you completely Richard - sadly.
You’re absolutely spot on 🤔
Highlighting what people always suspected about MP's.
Very good points. Ideas like this are not left or right. They are common sense.
Wise words, thanks
"There is no wealth but life" as John Ruskin pointed out over 160 years ago
They can't build more housing stock as it could/will lead to falling house prices, the real reason why both Labour and Tories have not built housing in the past, especially for the poor!
As Robert Kennedy said on GDP, it measures everything "except that which makes life worthwhile". Inequality is stifling growth in wealth for the majority... Plain and simple.
I'm so happy I made productive decisions about my finances that changed my life forever,hoping to retire next year.. Investment should always be on any creative man's heart for success in life .
You're correct!! I make a lot of money without relying on the government. Investing in stocks and digital currencies is beneficial at this moment.
Thanks for the advice! I'm new to financial planning and wasn't sure where to start. Any tips on finding a reliable financial adviser or resource to guide beginners?
As a beginner, it's essential for you to have a mentor that is verified by finra and SEC to keep you accountable. I'm guided by a widely known financial consultant Stacey Macken
Stacey doesn't just see trading as a way to make money for herself. She's been actively teaching others her strategies and helping them achieve financial independence too
Stacey demonstrates an excellent understanding of market trends, making well informed decisions that leads to consistent profit
The problem is people are not taught in school to be greedy and ambitious they are taught to be envious, you will get nowhere with that
It is not about increasing wealth but about increasing wealth for whom? Labour will follow the same policies on wealth generation as the Tories; a combination of the 30 year discredited"trickle down economics"and laissez faire allowing the richest in society to continue to hide wealth abroad
It needs addressing in the right order as well. Before your build the houses deal with the shit in the rivers and make sure that you can deal with the shit coming from the new houses so thats not going into the rivers.
I agree with you & when discussing "wealth" I really wish people would be more precise in the words that they are using....because "wealth" can come i many forms, not all obviously financial...i.e. a clean environment.....
Great points
The wealth is in the hands of the few. Quality of life for the average person will improve if there is a fairer distribution of the wealth. Labour governments of the past tried to deliver that, but Starmer seeks donations to the party from those hoarding the wealth, rather than taxing them for the good of all.
I don’t think it's a cade that they don’t know, I just think they don’t care.
Just been reading on BBC Verify, about Labours plan for 1.5 million new homes. As usual they only talk about the south of England.
It's 300 000 houses a year and exactly the same targets the Torys had.
Sorry that simply isn’t correct .
Londoncentrism is a sin of both right and left in UK and has been for generations.
built by and sold by the private sector......
@@user-io5tv1rv4vit's a great time to own a big construction company
Wealth, if it means anything, should be the stock of human well-being. And any govt should be following maximin strategy so nobody gets left behind. Meritocracy/social mobility are necessary but not sufficient.
I think they're being intentionally vague with 'wealth' so it appears it can apply to the prosperity of the working classes.
They mean to make the rich, richer, and expecting the disproven theory of trickle-down economics to work.
If they want to improve things for everyone, blitz tax the wealth of the richest (they can leave the country but a lot of those assets are slow or impossible to move) and give it to the poor and middle-income people who will actually spend it and stimulate the economy.
I fear they know exactly what they are doing regarding wealth creation.
They are doing what their backers, both financially and in the media, expect. Paying their dues.
We shall not see an improvement in the quality of life, merely a slower erosion of the current standard.
Lovely!!
It means preserving the power of the Club Klaus Clique...
Your analysis, seems correct and I agree with it. The problem is that lots of ordinary people only think we are improving if there is an increase in money, or shown to be an increase. I think Labour are putting it in those terms until there is a change in mindset of the general populace, or at least the MSM reading people.
Might also help if our national wealth was spread rather more evenly.
Financial wealth gives people options and freedom
It's unusual for someone with an accountancy background to understand the meaning of wealth in the economics sense rather than in financial terms. This is the difference between neoliberalism and real economics too.
All the things you rightly want cost lots of money that's going to be hard for the Labour Government to get. If you can't make, and keep a good proportion of your profits nobody is going to invest in anything
Some things aren't naturally profitable, and shouldn't be profitable - but are essential for other fields to be profitable, and the country as a whole to be profitable
This is the argument for nationalised infrastructure - stop trying to make a profit from your foundations, and instead focus on making them effective for making profit across the wider economy
Where does the income of one of the richest half dozen countries in the world go that we can't afford civilised conditions for our citizens?
The wealth is there, the Government don't get a sensible share and, being Quislings, spend too much of what they get on non-benefits like weapons systems. The people sleeping in cardboard boxes don't need defending from North Korea, they need defending from a callous brutalised neighbour.
@@markwelch3564they are highly profitable just because they are a natural monopoly if essential services.
Thatcherism, that Starmer admires, was an organised attack on the citizens to enrich the already wealthy at their expense.
To get rid of corrupt Tories people (on a low turnout) have voted for more Thatcherism, more Austerity, more poverty, more NHS pillaging and more wealth for the wealthy.
#UniParty
#getPRdone
I doubt many sensible people, left or right, would disagree with companies keeping a "good" proportion of their profits. But under the Tories, companies have been keeping too much. That's assuming they pay anything like as much tax as they should of course, which is another problem.
@@markwelch3564Yes, but also focus on ensuring the money taxpayers do pay is done so efficiently and effectively. Few would disagree the NHS for example could be run better. Let's have a laser focus on delivery improvements.
Wealth needs to be redistributed. Wealth in the UK are assets, such as land, property, equity and bonds.
@@melch4040 It will be distributed further to the rich. Red Tories will deliver.
Labour are speaking about growth as we all know. Growth means bigger GDP and tax revenue. What would they do with this money. First on wish list is likely 2 child cap allowance and tuition fees. They are also looking for growth through housing on onshore renewable. All these objectives are desirable. Not sure if Labour are going to deliver but clearly the correct objectives. This video is just verbal gymnastics.
They want to do what's best for their donors and whoever they want to get cushy jobs with after politics.
Private financial wealth in the UK is £15T. Private financial wealth in the US is £150T.
Refences?
The USA is 40 times the size of the UK.
@@malcolm8564 The sahara desert is large. Why does that mean it must be wealthy?
@@malcolm8564 Where's the trillions of pounds of wealth the Socialist Welfare state has taken from people?
Pretty much the opposite of increasing earnings, or increasing material comfort for the majority of people. Wealth means someone is already wealthy. Increasing that wealth is irresponsible, since that's what's driven the issues we're facing.
liebour could print money lots of it it worked for Zimbabwe and made everyone multimillionaires
why are all these Americans commenting on this...telling us that they are rich enough to invest thousands of dollars with a banker ?
Increase wealth? Are you sure, because it seems to me that they are saying they want to increase growth?
Well if you consider GDP or productivity, something accomplished, goods made or services rendered etc., is wealth, then before Coal as an energy source, GDP was only about 1.6 % (unless one had slaves). Wealth increased as the use of fossil fuel increased.
The Elites have decided that in the West, oil production peaked in Nov 2018 and will not go above this level ever again to preserve Western reserves (and the wealth of the Elite) . UK has I think less than 2% production from our reserves of oil/gas (lots of coal though) and so financial instruments are vitally important for the UK has to obtain fossil fuels from abroad. That much is true of the ‘vicious circle’. But the whole picture is very complicated and the politicians think the public won’t comprehend our real situation.
Renewables don’t have the density of usable entropy to increase overall GDP. The propaganda that they can is impossible physics.
No increase in western oil production equals no more increase in western wealth. Period.
So the Starmer is just parroting gov. advisers who are knowledgeable in financial matters only and so can only explain financial imperatives. So the answer to Richard’s question is yes and nob and wealth means being able to do lots of things above basic survival level.
This is all to do with Brexit , we are currently losing around 40/50 billion pounds each year as a result of Brexit .
Now given that labour doesn't want to talk about the elephant in the room the only way to make up for the lost earnings is through growth and wealth creation .
£120 billion.
I do wish the government would listen to you.
They're trapped in fake Keynesianism, the government I mean.
Wealthy people earn their money from assets
Ordinary working people earn their money from working, they get paid for their time.
So far economic growth has meant the rich get richer and the poor get poorer but the country as a whole has more wealth within it.
I hear in Bulgaria a man can raise a family and own his own house on one wage ! Just like my grandparents did !
Quite a poor country in comparison to the amount of wealth within Britain and yet we are in comparison very poor…
Maybe Growing the economy is not such a great idea if you intend to own a house and raise a family?
Bulgaria is the most unequal country in Europe. Not exactly a guiding light.
@@eightiesmusic1984 just trying to make a point that just because there’s lots of wealth within a nation it doesn’t mean we will all be wealthy. In fact our grandparents were wealthy and the nation has a lot more wealth than it did back then. My grandfather raised 5 kids without the need for my gran to work but now you need both parents working and a benefits top up!!
More wealth doesn’t mean more for the workers as we can see for ourselves that even in the last 20yrs workers have gotten poorer never mind the last 50yrs.
I fear I am going to continue to listen to more of your doom mongering every day. It is a bad habit I have got into.
It is so easy to carp from the sidelines, however, in order to enact policy, you have to get elected which they have done and you (and I) have not. Coming from their start point in 2019 that is some achievement and they had to make compromises to make it happen.
They have been in power for less than a week. Let's see what they actually do.
Journalism and analysis is important - we need people making policy, and we need people holding the policy makers to account
I think Richard Murphy is good at holding them to account, and hope he continues 🙂
Labour got less votes than they got in 2019. They won by default of Tory collapse. There was no need for starmer neutering the party and making it less popular, he is not vindicated in the slightest.
They have got elected, or the tories unelected themselves?
@@markwelch3564 Sure, we should hold them to account.
However, to do that, they have to have done something to be accounted for. All they have done so far is get elected which given where they started from in 2019 is some achievement albeit, undoubtably, helped by the total incompetence that was Boris and co.
Right now Mr Murphy is simply criticising hot air rather than "holding policy makers to account". I can listen to GB news for that quality of analysis.
Do you really see doommongering? I see hope and vision.
Perhaps we're so used to Tory graft, cronyism, sleaze and incompetence we think good sense is somehow radical.