Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The New Tories - Ruthlessly Incompetent. Post Examples of Tory Stupidity Here

I can’t read this, and nor will you unless you are subscribed to the Telegraph, but the headline alone makes it worth sharing:

yesterdays front page
Opera Snapshot_2021-09-09_111451_www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk.png

 
Last edited:
I can’t read this, and nor will you unless you are subscribed to the Telegraph, but the headline alone makes it worth sharing:

and here is the piece in full
hame on Boris Johnson, and shame on the Conservative Party. They have disgraced themselves, lied to their voters, repudiated their principles and treated millions of their supporters with utter contempt. And for what?
To momentarily wrong-foot Sir Keir Starmer? To steal Labour’s clothes, not for a greater purpose but because it’s easier than actually devising their own conservative policies to improve Britain? To pat themselves on the back, and boast of how brilliant they are at the Machiavellian, unprincipled game of Blair or Osborne-style triangulation politics? To further convince the electorate that every politician is only in it for themselves, for their ministerial cars, for the pathetic pretend power? Is this why all those Cabinet ministers joined the Tory party, and penned all those paeans to free enterprise and low taxes? To be complicit in the moral destruction of the Conservative Party?

This is a seminal moment in British politics, one that could turn out to be as toxic, as poisonous and as destructive as the ERM crisis, the Iraq dossier or the bank bailouts. The damage wreaked by the Government’s juvenile approach to policymaking will be immense and long-lasting, even if it doesn’t immediately register in opinion polls. Promising not to raise or to cut taxes was always the one weapon Labour couldn’t match, the most powerful way to remind voters that the socialists would steal their money; now any such pledge would remind voters that the Tories are utterly untrustworthy.
The scale of Johnson’s shift to the Left is staggering: his tax increases combined are the largest in half a century. The Treasury’s claim that it is hiking National Insurance by 1.25 percentage points is sub-Brownite spin: the tax rate on labour income has actually jumped by 2.5 percentage points. Combined with frozen income and other tax thresholds and the raid on corporation tax, total tax rises will be worth 1.6 per cent of GDP. The tax burden will hit its “highest-ever sustained level”, the Institute for Fiscal Studies calculates.
The NHS will have become the state, and the state will have become the NHS: Clement Attlee’s socialist government couldn’t have imagined just how powerful its Left-wing choice of a health funding and delivery mechanism would turn out to be at destroying conservatism and capitalism. In 2004-05, the NHS and social care accounted for 28 per cent of current public spending; by 2024-25, this will have reached 40 per cent, according to the Resolution Foundation. How long will it take to hit over 50 per cent?
The ratchet is out of control, guaranteeing the gradual socialisation of British society and the need for ever higher taxes. Just when the Left thought they had lost, their assumptions shattered by Brexit, their triumph is about to be near total.
The Tories’ have only themselves to blame: why did they never reform the funding and structure of the NHS? Why are they perverting the noble concept of private property by turning it into a taxpayer-guaranteed entitlement? Why are they nodding through Johnson’s decision to pick an absurd, statist plan for social care rather than a more insurance-based option?

Placeholder image for youtube video: KiTC0HRqCwU


In time, Labour will promise to lower the £86,000 cap; eventually, it will be zero, and all care homes will be nationalised. The Tories have learnt nothing from previous extensions of the welfare state in 1906-15 and 1948: a conservative approach is to build on the private sector, to fill in the gaps, to supplement private initiative – not supplant it, which is the way social care will now also eventually go.
In the shorter-term, Johnson’s extra spending will fail to tackle the NHS backlog. The pressure will be on to raise the levy again, but the unfairness of hammering younger generations priced out of the housing market will make calls for even more destructive taxes, this time on capital, hard to resist. Never forget that the Government was considering imposing a wealth or mansion tax shortly after it was elected. What fresh hell will Britain’s beleaguered Tory voters face next?
The present tax rises are a choice, not a necessity. The ongoing additional spending caused by the pandemic could have been met by cutting expenditure in other areas, and the one-off costs of Covid added to national debt. The coronavirus is an excuse for Johnson’s strange urge to adopt full-fat social democracy, although it is likely that the enthusiasm with which so many embraced lockdown encouraged his Government’s collectivist bent.
The National Insurance increase is not merely an unforgivable manifesto broken promise: it symbolises the party’s repudiation of the conservative and classical liberal world view, its rejection of Burke, Locke, Hayek, Friedman and Oakeshott. This Government is no longer Thatcherite, or even conservative: it is Blue Labour. It combines Left-wing economics – more tax and spending on a welfare state in hock to the producer class, ever more regulations, green central planning – with support for Brexit, patriotism and the Armed Forces. It tries (but fails) to be tough on crime, illegal immigration and the woke onslaught.
Old Labour would have loved this combination, but it is not conservatism. Ever since the rise of socialism in the 19th century, and especially during the past 40 years, conservatives have argued that a smaller state, lower taxes, and a greater reliance on markets, civil society and individual responsibility represent a philosophically and economically superior form of social organisation. Lower taxes and lower spending boosts GDP growth, they explained; personal responsibility encourages virtuous behaviour such as saving and hard work. High social costs kill jobs, they wrote: just look at France. Big increases in spending just trigger massive waste and inflation, they argued: remember Gordon Brown?
An entire intellectual tradition now lies trashed by a Conservative Party which has, for the sake of convenience, unthinkingly swallowed its opponents’ ideology. Either the Tories believe that tax rates no longer impact the economy, or they couldn’t care less, and are embracing a low-growth, stagnant future. For decades, Tories boasted about how better the UK model was than that of the Eurozone; today, they are adopting it out of laziness, despite having fought so hard to leave the EU. Reaganomics is dead in Britain: there are now two Labour parties at one on economics, but divided on culture. How bitterly, heartbreakingly disappointing.
 
It is an interesting read. To me its delusional, but you can learn a lot by what these kind of people think, even if they may just be outliers. If this is conscious Blue Labourism then it might be fair to say this a dialectic response to the successes of Corbyn.
But I dont think it is that at all, and I dont think the plans to "insurancize" the NHS are off the table - just expediently being held back a little. If Trump had won I expect Liam Foxs trade dealings would be kicking in a lot sooner.
The NHS and social care are unique within the state-landscape, I see no meaningful (as opposed to rhetorical/symbolic) sign of Blue Labourism in anything else the government do
 
This tax rise doesn’t just let down working people and those needing care.

It is also a tax on business, with the Federation of Small Businesses saying it will lead to 50,000 fewer jobs being created.

It is a Conservative choice that leaves a private landlord renting out multiple properties not paying a penny more in tax, and their hard-working tenants to pick up the burden.

It is a Conservative choice that sees an Amazon worker’s taxes raised, but Amazon itself able to squirrel profits away in tax havens and only pay a fraction of what high street shops do.

And it’s Conservative choices that would leave a key worker earning £26,000 a year hit by a pay freeze, a rising council tax bill, a freeze in personal allowance for their income tax – and now a hike in national insurance.

Hard-working families will be hit hard by the unfair hike in National Insurance
Hard-working families will be hit hard by the unfair hike in National Insurance(Getty Images)
All this at a time when food, fuel and energy prices are going up.

When it comes to key workers, last year the public clapped them, this year the Tories taxed them.

The TUC say that it is wrong to hit young and low paid workers “while leaving the wealthy untouched”. And they are right too.

There are many other ways to raise this money – including taxing the incomes of landlords and those who buy and sell large quantities of financial assets, stocks and shares – and Labour has been clear that we want those with the broadest shoulders to carry the burden.


The Chancellor is sending the message the only way to raise this money is by taxing hard-working people.

But the truth is it’s not.


Social care is a huge challenge facing our country, and there are many other big changes we face.

We must face those in a way that works and is fair for the British people.

And that is why Labour rejected this unfair tax bombshell from the Conservatives, and why we continue our fight to tackle the social care crisis.

 
should just have Patel on a boat saying they are going to push back some migrates

and the moment she starts cackling like the wickest witch of the west as they approach an didgy in the middle of the channel



someone should just shot her in the back of the head

would solve a lot of problems
 


Posted this on the political polling thread. Probably an outlier but polling done after the NICs rise.

In any case shows Labour were right not to be bounced into supporting it. On the other hand they aren’t gaining support probably because they haven’t set out an alternative of their own. Now both parties are moving towards an acceptance that investment is both economically and politically unavoidable the question is: how do you pay for it. Labour should now demand the NICs rise is the last and that that future investment will be achieved by taxing unearned income like financial assets, stocks and shares, sales of property, pension income, annuity income, interest income, property rental income and inheritance income
 
Posted this on the political polling thread. Probably an outlier but polling done after the NICs rise.

In any case shows Labour were right not to be bounced into supporting it. On the other hand they aren’t gaining support probably because they haven’t set out an alternative of their own. Now both parties are moving towards an acceptance that investment is both economically and politically unavoidable the question is: how do you pay for it. Labour should now demand the NICs rise is the last and that that future investment will be achieved by taxing unearned income like financial assets, stocks and shares, sales of property, pension income, annuity income, interest income, property rental income and inheritance income
Yes to the thrust of this...but what is also missing from the opposition is any indication that they will stand by the 2019 commitments on what will be done with the £ raised and aspire to a National Care Service...or are willing to go along with the tory model of regressive transfer of wealth into corporate care and protected middle class inheritance.
 
Yes to the thrust of this...but what is also missing from the opposition is any indication that they will stand by the 2019 commitments on what will be done with the £ raised and aspire to a National Care Service.
Agreed, unless the service is bought back under public ownership then the money will simply be syphoned away by owners and employers. My point on revenue raising was a more general one and about how a dividing line could be created and which would be popular
 

Whilst it is true in general that NI is regressive because of its step-down (the main point made by Maugham), that logic doesn’t apply to this increase, which is a flat 1.25% with no step down. It’s certainly not progressive but it’s not regressive either, in itself.
 
Whilst it is true in general that NI is regressive because of its step-down (the main point made by Maugham), that logic doesn’t apply to this increase, which is a flat 1.25% with no step down. It’s certainly not progressive but it’s not regressive either, in itself.
In itself, no. But it’s still also the case that the higher up the pay scale you go the more likely the individual is to have other forms of (unearned) income. So proportionality it could be argued as regressive.
 
Back
Top Bottom