Labour Party conference

Whitewavemark2

GrannyGravy13

Rachel Reeves was interviewed this morning, Ed Balls brought up a very good point. Labour have costed a lot of their plans on rescinding the Nom Dom Tax status which they estimate will bring in 1.6 billion to the treasury.

There is absolutely no guarantee that these wealthy individuals will pay up and remain U.K. taxpayers/citizens as opposed to upping sticks and moving abroad permanently.

Sir Starmer was repeatedly asked by Victoria Derbyshire on Sunday why he thinks under Labour that the U.K. will buck what is not only an Europe wide trend by World wide trend of slow/no growth. He is relying heavily on growing the economy to add to the money received or not from Nom Dom tax revenue.

I cannot see any difference between Labour & Conservative, Labour are relying on what are currently unknown amounts of revenue to fund their policies…

Honestly gg13 you can’t be serious!!

The difference between both conferences is profound, as are the policies.

Growth in the economy will be achieved by investment both by business and the government.

I think you need to wait until nearer the time of the election as Labour is still ensuring the cards are kept hidden for the Tories who are out of ideas as is obvious from their conference.

Starmer has said that the minute detail of policy will not be revealed until much nearer the election.

All we are getting at the moment is a broad brush view.

Both parties have the same soundbite growing the economy

GrannyGravy13

Jaxie

Shortage of doctors & nurses? The Tories made nursing a degree profession & closed nurses’ accommodation. They closed medical schools. They are not concerned because they can buy medical care. Which idiot would ever vote for the Tory Party again?

It was decided by the then Health Minister in December 2008 that nursing would become a degree profession

This was under a Labour Government…

But the Tories monetised it.

GrannyGravy13

Rachel Reeves was interviewed this morning, Ed Balls brought up a very good point. Labour have costed a lot of their plans on rescinding the Nom Dom Tax status which they estimate will bring in 1.6 billion to the treasury.

There is absolutely no guarantee that these wealthy individuals will pay up and remain U.K. taxpayers/citizens as opposed to upping sticks and moving abroad permanently.

Sir Starmer was repeatedly asked by Victoria Derbyshire on Sunday why he thinks under Labour that the U.K. will buck what is not only an Europe wide trend by World wide trend of slow/no growth. He is relying heavily on growing the economy to add to the money received or not from Nom Dom tax revenue.

I cannot see any difference between Labour & Conservative, Labour are relying on what are currently unknown amounts of revenue to fund their policies…

Honestly gg13 you can’t be serious!!

The difference between both conferences is profound, as are the policies.

Growth in the economy will be achieved by investment both by business and the government.

I think you need to wait until nearer the time of the election as Labour is still ensuring the cards are kept hidden for the Tories who are out of ideas as is obvious from their conference.

Starmer has said that the minute detail of policy will not be revealed until much nearer the election.

All we are getting at the moment is a broad brush view.

Jaxie

Shortage of doctors & nurses? The Tories made nursing a degree profession & closed nurses’ accommodation. They closed medical schools. They are not concerned because they can buy medical care. Which idiot would ever vote for the Tory Party again?

It was decided by the then Health Minister in December 2008 that nursing would become a degree profession

This was under a Labour Government…

Shortage of doctors & nurses? The Tories made nursing a degree profession & closed nurses’ accommodation. They closed medical schools. They are not concerned because they can buy medical care. Which idiot would ever vote for the Tory Party again?

Rachel Reeves was interviewed this morning, Ed Balls brought up a very good point. Labour have costed a lot of their plans on rescinding the Nom Dom Tax status which they estimate will bring in 1.6 billion to the treasury.

There is absolutely no guarantee that these wealthy individuals will pay up and remain U.K. taxpayers/citizens as opposed to upping sticks and moving abroad permanently.

Sir Starmer was repeatedly asked by Victoria Derbyshire on Sunday why he thinks under Labour that the U.K. will buck what is not only an Europe wide trend by World wide trend of slow/no growth. He is relying heavily on growing the economy to add to the money received or not from Nom Dom tax revenue.

I cannot see any difference between Labour & Conservative, Labour are relying on what are currently unknown amounts of revenue to fund their policies…

To make all what possible Amalegra? I am assuming you didn't listen to Rachel Reeves. She was laying out the plan for how not to need a magic money tree.

Where did the Conservatives lay out any plans? They elected Truss as there leader for heavens sake. Rachel Reeves set out exactly the rules Labour will work under and praise is rolling in from businesses big and small, from Banking, and from politicians on all sides.

Guardian columnist Martin Kettle says "Pay attention to Rachel Reeves: her economic thinking is a return to sanity" It seems many in the know agree with this.

Forgive me if I don’t believe most politicians. That is simply an opinion and does not require either forgiveness or acceptance. What does become unforgivable is the making up or twisting of facts.

Everybody has a right to their opinion, but nobody has a right to be wrong in their facts.(Bernard Baruch 1946)

No one in their right mind is going to volunteer for extra hours and then get hammered for tax. Often it can mean losing their personal allowance, child benefit and tax credits. As well as any free government child care. Thats one of the main reasons why skilled people are reducing their hours and going part time.

Ive seen thread after thread on Mumsnet where someone has come on asking if it was worthwhile accepting a pay rise or promotion. Then being helped to see that when all the implications are weighed up they will be no better off or even worse off.

Labour will have to do something about removing the unfair and sneaky tax changes which are behind "fiscal drag" before people agree to work extra hours.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Quotes a deleted post.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Amalegra

Still waiting to hear about the plans from Labour to grow the Magic Money Trees that will make all this possible! So many promises and I am awaiting the concrete economic statements to back them up. More borrowing-and nifty little plans to make that possible -on paper of course. Forgive me if I don’t believe most politicians. We need a radical reform of our society and its expectations and I don’t think there is anyone of any party brave enough to do that!

They don't have to 'borrow' anything. They can just issue the money.

Hasn't £900billion of Quantitative Easing, where the Bank of England 'created' the money to buy up government bonds, told us anything?

The BoE 'created ' the money to buy the bonds; in theory, the government now 'owes' that money to the BoE, but in practice, as the state owns the BoE, it cannot repay a 'loan' of its own money...

If the government spends money into the economy it will not only grow the economy by creating economic activity, but much of it will return to the government via the taxation which is a result of that growth.

Of course, another way they can finance government expenditure is to revise the tax system so that the wealthy , and companies making windfall profits, pay their fair share.

Some ideas here:

taxingwealth.uk/2023/09/13/the-taxing-wealth-report-2024-recommendations-to-date-and-their-suggested-value/

Amalegra

Still waiting to hear about the plans from Labour to grow the Magic Money Trees that will make all this possible! So many promises and I am awaiting the concrete economic statements to back them up. More borrowing-and nifty little plans to make that possible -on paper of course. Forgive me if I don’t believe most politicians. We need a radical reform of our society and its expectations and I don’t think there is anyone of any party brave enough to do that!

The same place as the Tories I expect.

Oreo

I have some sympathy for what Bastani says as well Grany
We won’t know if Starmer is any good until he’s in power and even then I’m not confident like some are that the land of milk and honey will happen in the next few years and that all their conference promises will materialise.
What choice is there tho?

Is anybody at all thinking that the future will be a land of milk and honey? If so, speak now!

Still waiting to hear about the plans from Labour to grow the Magic Money Trees that will make all this possible! So many promises and I am awaiting the concrete economic statements to back them up. More borrowing-and nifty little plans to make that possible -on paper of course. Forgive me if I don’t believe most politicians. We need a radical reform of our society and its expectations and I don’t think there is anyone of any party brave enough to do that!

ronib

MaizieD agree wasteful spending on colossal scale - National Debt being pushed further and further into the future surely?

Oh, ronib, the country has run with a 'National Debt' for 100s of years. It hasn't caused any noticeable problems.

Do you have Premium Bonds, an account with NS&I, a pension plan? If you have, would you like the government to pay back the money they 'owe' you? When I suggested that on a Gnet Premium Bonds thread no-one wanted their money back...

The 'National Debt' just represents savings and investments made by individuals and institutions in a guaranteed safe investment vehicle. It's guaranteed safe because the government cannot run out of the money it creates.

A state is not like a business or a household, it doesn't have to earn its money, or make a surplus. The state just has to ensure that there is enough money for the economy to function and to tax back enough of the money it issues in the first place to avoid excessive inflation.

And while that money is being invested in the economy where it will promote economic activity and will get a return via taxation it will be fine. The problem with the covid money is that, while some of it kept the economy running, a lot of it has gone into the pockets of individuals to bolster their store of 'wealth' where it lies idle, doing nothing for the economy and not coming back via taxation... To compound it, a great deal went on excessively priced unusable PPE which it has cost the nation £millions to store and to destroy.

Very good speech by Rachel Reeves.

I can't wait for Labour to put their policies into action, when I was a student nurse I got paid for working and studying, now student nurses end up with a big dent. Staff at the NHS are brilliant at pulling together, I expect Labour policies & Labour in gov't will rejuvenate all and they'll gather round knowing they'll get paid a fair wage for their work.

ronib

MaizieD agree wasteful spending on colossal scale - National Debt being pushed further and further into the future surely?

Don't forget that the National Debt is funded by peoples' savings. And, as Maizie and I have pointed out before the Debt has expanded and been repaid over the years since the inception of the Bank of England.

MaizieD

I have some sympathy with what Bastani says in regard to Starmer & Reeve's approach to our economic problems.

However, when my attempts to explain how government funding actually works, how spending comes before taxation , how governments create money and how the 'debt' is actually other people's savings and investments, I am greeted with disbelief, or derision or just ignored. Even a bit of mild Keynesianism is held to be beyond the pale.

So, can you imagine what an uproar there would be in the media and among voters if Labour were to say they were just going to 'create' the money and they'd get it back from a massive boost to business and from taxation.

So, best to keep quiet about how it's really done...

Interesting, though. Nobody ever asks the tories 'How are you going to pay for it?' They can spaff £billions away with absolutely nothing to show for it and no-one turns a hair...

I think that careful listening to Starmer’s ideas shows that growth is the key to greater public expenditure, and he is clearly in my view going to promote a much more Keynesian policy. Not necessarily a MMT, but it amounts to much the same in the long run. Of course he is being careful about what he says because desperate Tories - and as time goes on unless the polls change will get even more desperate, - will use anything and everything to dish as much dirt as they can together with trying to trash labour policies.

I have some sympathy for what Bastani says as well Grany
We won’t know if Starmer is any good until he’s in power and even then I’m not confident like some are that the land of milk and honey will happen in the next few years and that all their conference promises will materialise.
What choice is there tho?

My local doctor is away on a course this week (he pronounces it curse) on sleep apnea. It's 8 or 9 hour days but at least he's in a good place, with interesting food. Corsica!. I told hm that he 's a jammy so and so and he understood me. (His English is very good)

ronib

So presumably the incentive for doctors to work at the weekends will mean that all private patients will be denied treatment or treated in a less timely way?

The Doctors that see private patients are Consultants. Their contracts allow for one day a week (within 5 days) to be devoted to private practice, so it won’t impact on that at all! Working weekends does not increase the length of the working week, no more than it does with any other workers.

MaizieD agree wasteful spending on colossal scale - National Debt being pushed further and further into the future surely?

I have some sympathy with what Bastani says in regard to Starmer & Reeve's approach to our economic problems.

However, when my attempts to explain how government funding actually works, how spending comes before taxation , how governments create money and how the 'debt' is actually other people's savings and investments, I am greeted with disbelief, or derision or just ignored. Even a bit of mild Keynesianism is held to be beyond the pale.

So, can you imagine what an uproar there would be in the media and among voters if Labour were to say they were just going to 'create' the money and they'd get it back from a massive boost to business and from taxation.

So, best to keep quiet about how it's really done...

Interesting, though. Nobody ever asks the tories 'How are you going to pay for it?' They can spaff £billions away with absolutely nothing to show for it and no-one turns a hair...

There are two serious flaws in Keir Starmer’s plan to fund public services by growing the economy.

Has Keir Starmer publicised plans for a new taxation structure for the UK? No. He has been courting businesses because he wants their donations. In turn, this means they’ll want tax breaks from him, or they’ll threaten to remove their financial support.

Firstly, economic growth doesn’t necessarily mean more money for the Treasury.

In order to put new public money into services, a responsible government (that isn’t borrowing) will need to tax a similar amount out of us all – and a responsible Labour government would ensure that such taxation is weighted to put most of the burden onto the rich and profitable businesses.

Worse still is this: Keir Starmer has no contingency plan if the economy does not grow.

Three times, in the interview with Victoria Derbyshire he was asked to explain what he would do then – and all three times, his only answer was that he believes the economy will grow.

Faith is a wonderful thing, but you can’t fuel the economy of a developed western nation on hot air and fantasy.

Se