Today's discussion about the news
Comments
-
This feels overly pessimistic given the amount of countries that will be supplying armaments to Ukraine. I would have thought the bigger issue is what happens when the war ends. Will Ukraine need to repay countries for what they provided and, if so, how will they find the funds? You raise Chechnya, they managed to make life tough for Russia with far less international support and without even being recognised as an independent nation. I suspect the bit about it being attritional is correct and feel the only ways it will end is with Russia having a leadership change with someone more moderate taking power or with Ukraine ceding most of the occupied land and Russia declaring they've achieved their original aims.rick_chasey said:FT podcast on Ukraine war was fairly miserable.
Basically it's a war of attrition and if it stays the way it is Ukraine probably loses, unless the Western industrial effort moves to more of a war footing.
For context, at the beginning of the war, the UK's shell production capacity was equal to Ukraine's current daily use. It's improved a bit, but not much.
Apparently a lot of the western countries are asking private companies to produce a bit more with no guarantee of future demand, so the companies are reluctant to invest the necessary amounts to increase capacity.
Russia is on a full war footing and is putting everything into this war. Europe needs to follow if they want to avoid a Russian victory, or even what Russia did with Chechnya, which is have a failed invasion, call a truce, put the squeeze on them while they rebuild and then flatten the place to take it.0 -
https://ig.ft.com/sites/2014/deficit-calculator/?s=IX40000000surrey_commuter said:
Focus on the UK. Assume that we are maxed out on borrowing.rick_chasey said:I guess you start from the position you need to find the funding from somewhere ,and work back from there, mixture of financing and tax rises/spending cuts, and you go from the least important down.
How much do you think we should put in per annum for the next decade?
Now what areas of spending are you going to deprioritise?
Just back of a censored packet - where would you find £10-20bn pa that was politically doable?
Charge £10 per GP consultation, excluding most vulnerable
Scrap TV licence for over 75
Cut 10% from housing benefit bill
Cut resource spending to Scotland, Wales and NI by 10%
Add 1p to the top rate of income tax
Levy "mansion tax" on properties over £2m
gets you to £11.9bn.
How's that?
If I'm Keir Starmer, what you gonna do, go vote for the Tories?!
0 -
surrey_commuter said:
People like Putin think that democracies are soft and do not have the appetite for the long term sacrfices to fight a war. Trump is just the icing on the cake.Jezyboy said:I presume Russia just has to hold on until Trump is back in the White House...
I see this thread as a barometer of the propaganda pumped out. Whilst it has never been acknowledged that the massive summer offensive was a failure there has been a dramatic fall in the positive messaging.
I have not changed my mind that they will end up with a new border roughly where they are now where the water forms a natural boundary
It's looking increasingly likely, I'll reluctantly admit. There don't appear to be any rabbits in hats.0 -
Not sure TV licence will go into Govt coffers.rick_chasey said:
https://ig.ft.com/sites/2014/deficit-calculator/?s=IX40000000surrey_commuter said:
Focus on the UK. Assume that we are maxed out on borrowing.rick_chasey said:I guess you start from the position you need to find the funding from somewhere ,and work back from there, mixture of financing and tax rises/spending cuts, and you go from the least important down.
How much do you think we should put in per annum for the next decade?
Now what areas of spending are you going to deprioritise?
Just back of a censored packet - where would you find £10-20bn pa that was politically doable?
Charge £10 per GP consultation, excluding most vulnerable
Scrap TV licence for over 75
Cut 10% from housing benefit bill
Cut resource spending to Scotland, Wales and NI by 10%
Add 1p to the top rate of income tax
Levy "mansion tax" on properties over £2m
gets you to £11.9bn.
How's that?
If I'm Keir Starmer, what you gonna do, go vote for the Tories?!
I approve of the regional cuts until they are in line with England. HB. cut by 10% I would see a a start point and would continue to ratchet it down.
I am not convincd 1p on top rate will mov the needle.
I would siphon off some of the defence budget.
Assuming US cuts to nothing then we will probably be closer to £20bn with a commitment to do so for a decade.
And count artillery shells as part of the aid budget0 -
Cut housing benefit when there are already people who can't afford housing and then take funding from 3 of the 4 home nations whilst leaving England untouched. Yep, that seems fair especially if the savings are to be used to help fund a war between two other countries!rick_chasey said:
https://ig.ft.com/sites/2014/deficit-calculator/?s=IX40000000surrey_commuter said:
Focus on the UK. Assume that we are maxed out on borrowing.rick_chasey said:I guess you start from the position you need to find the funding from somewhere ,and work back from there, mixture of financing and tax rises/spending cuts, and you go from the least important down.
How much do you think we should put in per annum for the next decade?
Now what areas of spending are you going to deprioritise?
Just back of a censored packet - where would you find £10-20bn pa that was politically doable?
Charge £10 per GP consultation, excluding most vulnerable
Scrap TV licence for over 75
Cut 10% from housing benefit bill
Cut resource spending to Scotland, Wales and NI by 10%
Add 1p to the top rate of income tax
Levy "mansion tax" on properties over £2m
gets you to £11.9bn.
How's that?
If I'm Keir Starmer, what you gonna do, go vote for the Tories?!0 -
They want devolution don't they? What's the problem.Pross said:
Cut housing benefit when there are already people who can't afford housing and then take funding from 3 of the 4 home nations whilst leaving England untouched. Yep, that seems fair especially if the savings are to be used to help fund a war between two other countries!rick_chasey said:
https://ig.ft.com/sites/2014/deficit-calculator/?s=IX40000000surrey_commuter said:
Focus on the UK. Assume that we are maxed out on borrowing.rick_chasey said:I guess you start from the position you need to find the funding from somewhere ,and work back from there, mixture of financing and tax rises/spending cuts, and you go from the least important down.
How much do you think we should put in per annum for the next decade?
Now what areas of spending are you going to deprioritise?
Just back of a censored packet - where would you find £10-20bn pa that was politically doable?
Charge £10 per GP consultation, excluding most vulnerable
Scrap TV licence for over 75
Cut 10% from housing benefit bill
Cut resource spending to Scotland, Wales and NI by 10%
Add 1p to the top rate of income tax
Levy "mansion tax" on properties over £2m
gets you to £11.9bn.
How's that?
If I'm Keir Starmer, what you gonna do, go vote for the Tories?!0 -
-
Scrap Trident, scrap UK's power, and standing. I'm in favour theoretically but understand it would diminish us even further on the world scale.rick_chasey said:Would you scrap Trident in return for more on-the-ground capability?
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Fair enough. Adds about 10% of the MOD budget if you do get rid of it.pblakeney said:
Scrap Trident, scrap UK's power, and standing. I'm in favour theoretically but understand it would diminish us even further on the world scale.rick_chasey said:Would you scrap Trident in return for more on-the-ground capability?
0 -
Pross said:
Cut housing benefit when there are already people who can't afford housing and then take funding from 3 of the 4 home nations whilst leaving England untouched. Yep, that seems fair especially if the savings are to be used to help fund a war between two other countries!rick_chasey said:
https://ig.ft.com/sites/2014/deficit-calculator/?s=IX40000000surrey_commuter said:
Focus on the UK. Assume that we are maxed out on borrowing.rick_chasey said:I guess you start from the position you need to find the funding from somewhere ,and work back from there, mixture of financing and tax rises/spending cuts, and you go from the least important down.
How much do you think we should put in per annum for the next decade?
Now what areas of spending are you going to deprioritise?
Just back of a censored packet - where would you find £10-20bn pa that was politically doable?
Charge £10 per GP consultation, excluding most vulnerable
Scrap TV licence for over 75
Cut 10% from housing benefit bill
Cut resource spending to Scotland, Wales and NI by 10%
Add 1p to the top rate of income tax
Levy "mansion tax" on properties over £2m
gets you to £11.9bn.
How's that?
If I'm Keir Starmer, what you gonna do, go vote for the Tories?!
As mentioned previously, in effect it doesn't help those whom it's supposed to, as it ends up in the bank accounts of the landlords by artificially inflating rent rates. as there's an imbalance in the power of landlords and renters. Not sure how you change that imbalance so that the help is better targeted.0 -
I found myself ticking all the tax increase boxes - maybe I really am a Leftie who should be voting Labour! The main problem I found was some of the all or nothing options e.g. I would scrap the winter fuel allowance for some / most depending on ability to pay. I don't really get the concept of handing out freebies to people where the only basis is that they are over a certain age rather than are actually in need of support. There are also some on the list that I would scrap but wouldn't really provide any significant gain such as the 'Christmas bonus' that feels so pointless it is almost an insult to the people they are giving it to.
Of the big ticket items, scrapping Trident seemed the most logical to me. I really don't see the point in it - if we ever have to use it we are about to be annihilated in any case, it is just political willy waving albeit there will be a lot of jobs dependent on it. Charging for GP appointments appeals to me, I can see the downsides of some people potentially not getting checked out but conversely it may help in that someone with a genuine issue is more likely to go to be seen if they don't have to wait due to time wasters.
In terms of big savings I think what is really needed is for politicians to be able to completely review the NHS and welfare systems without the knee jerk reaction that this is a bad thing or that the NHS is going to be privatised. What we have in place has developed piecemeal over nearly 80 years and as with other things, such as infrastructure and housing, it can get harder and harder to adapt to the changes that have happened around it but it will continue to get worse as it is used as a political football up to the point where it is simply no longer sustainable.0 -
I suppose we could put a large tax water supplies to places like Liverpool and Birmingham. People were happy enough to utilise the raw materials from places like Wales to build the Victorian golden age or oil from Scottish waters to give a boost in the late 20th century without really providing anything in return. You sound like a Brexiteer!rick_chasey said:
They want devolution don't they? What's the problem.Pross said:
Cut housing benefit when there are already people who can't afford housing and then take funding from 3 of the 4 home nations whilst leaving England untouched. Yep, that seems fair especially if the savings are to be used to help fund a war between two other countries!rick_chasey said:
https://ig.ft.com/sites/2014/deficit-calculator/?s=IX40000000surrey_commuter said:
Focus on the UK. Assume that we are maxed out on borrowing.rick_chasey said:I guess you start from the position you need to find the funding from somewhere ,and work back from there, mixture of financing and tax rises/spending cuts, and you go from the least important down.
How much do you think we should put in per annum for the next decade?
Now what areas of spending are you going to deprioritise?
Just back of a censored packet - where would you find £10-20bn pa that was politically doable?
Charge £10 per GP consultation, excluding most vulnerable
Scrap TV licence for over 75
Cut 10% from housing benefit bill
Cut resource spending to Scotland, Wales and NI by 10%
Add 1p to the top rate of income tax
Levy "mansion tax" on properties over £2m
gets you to £11.9bn.
How's that?
If I'm Keir Starmer, what you gonna do, go vote for the Tories?!0 -
Funding publicly owned housing so that the money is used directly is probably the only real long term solution. Maybe have a rolling system of building Council housing, giving the tenants and opportunity to buy and then reinvesting in more Council housing. The problem as ever is that you need to maintain the spending on the current system whilst you build the replacement. It's the same with infrastructure, you have to spend money up front and the benefits take years to come into effect but if you don't do it you fall further and further behind (and increasingly seem to be reliant on foreign investment).briantrumpet said:Pross said:
Cut housing benefit when there are already people who can't afford housing and then take funding from 3 of the 4 home nations whilst leaving England untouched. Yep, that seems fair especially if the savings are to be used to help fund a war between two other countries!rick_chasey said:
https://ig.ft.com/sites/2014/deficit-calculator/?s=IX40000000surrey_commuter said:
Focus on the UK. Assume that we are maxed out on borrowing.rick_chasey said:I guess you start from the position you need to find the funding from somewhere ,and work back from there, mixture of financing and tax rises/spending cuts, and you go from the least important down.
How much do you think we should put in per annum for the next decade?
Now what areas of spending are you going to deprioritise?
Just back of a censored packet - where would you find £10-20bn pa that was politically doable?
Charge £10 per GP consultation, excluding most vulnerable
Scrap TV licence for over 75
Cut 10% from housing benefit bill
Cut resource spending to Scotland, Wales and NI by 10%
Add 1p to the top rate of income tax
Levy "mansion tax" on properties over £2m
gets you to £11.9bn.
How's that?
If I'm Keir Starmer, what you gonna do, go vote for the Tories?!
As mentioned previously, in effect it doesn't help those whom it's supposed to, as it ends up in the bank accounts of the landlords by artificially inflating rent rates. as there's an imbalance in the power of landlords and renters. Not sure how you change that imbalance so that the help is better targeted.0 -
I feel like that's the sort of number that will sound like a lot of cash, but disappear easily if spread around the remaining 90%rick_chasey said:
Fair enough. Adds about 10% of the MOD budget if you do get rid of it.pblakeney said:
Scrap Trident, scrap UK's power, and standing. I'm in favour theoretically but understand it would diminish us even further on the world scale.rick_chasey said:Would you scrap Trident in return for more on-the-ground capability?
0 -
At least you're not denying itbriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:Tbf, Brian is facing some stiff competition from Carol Vorderman to be crowned 'most anti-tory ex-tory supporter' on the planet, so he is trying pretty hard.
Quite happy with that comparison 👍😃
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
At least you're not denying itbriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:Tbf, Brian is facing some stiff competition from Carol Vorderman to be crowned 'most anti-tory ex-tory supporter' on the planet, so he is trying pretty hard.
Quite happy with that comparison 👍😃
I'm not sure why I would. I'd hate to be thought of as a Tory now.0 -
I'd never have guessed...briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
At least you're not denying itbriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:Tbf, Brian is facing some stiff competition from Carol Vorderman to be crowned 'most anti-tory ex-tory supporter' on the planet, so he is trying pretty hard.
Quite happy with that comparison 👍😃
I'm not sure why I would. I'd hate to be thought of as a Tory now."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]1 -
Isn't this a sort of cakeism?Pross said:
I suppose we could put a large tax water supplies to places like Liverpool and Birmingham. People were happy enough to utilise the raw materials from places like Wales to build the Victorian golden age or oil from Scottish waters to give a boost in the late 20th century without really providing anything in return. You sound like a Brexiteer!rick_chasey said:
They want devolution don't they? What's the problem.Pross said:
Cut housing benefit when there are already people who can't afford housing and then take funding from 3 of the 4 home nations whilst leaving England untouched. Yep, that seems fair especially if the savings are to be used to help fund a war between two other countries!rick_chasey said:
https://ig.ft.com/sites/2014/deficit-calculator/?s=IX40000000surrey_commuter said:
Focus on the UK. Assume that we are maxed out on borrowing.rick_chasey said:I guess you start from the position you need to find the funding from somewhere ,and work back from there, mixture of financing and tax rises/spending cuts, and you go from the least important down.
How much do you think we should put in per annum for the next decade?
Now what areas of spending are you going to deprioritise?
Just back of a censored packet - where would you find £10-20bn pa that was politically doable?
Charge £10 per GP consultation, excluding most vulnerable
Scrap TV licence for over 75
Cut 10% from housing benefit bill
Cut resource spending to Scotland, Wales and NI by 10%
Add 1p to the top rate of income tax
Levy "mansion tax" on properties over £2m
gets you to £11.9bn.
How's that?
If I'm Keir Starmer, what you gonna do, go vote for the Tories?!
I don't really have a horse in this race so I'm not gonna really argue it, (and the missing 2nd person plural is annoying in the English language) but either you (collectively)/they want to be part of Westminster and get all the extra funding from London/England, or you (collectively)/they want to be devolved and you/they lose that money?
It'd be different if devolution didn't include finances but it does.0 -
Devolution didn't include tax raising powers at the time of the referendum (the result of which made the Brexit referendum look like a landslide) although there are now some tax powers. I mean, you could make the same argument about much of England with the bulk of the wealth being generated in London but ultimately the City made a lot of its money historically either from the Empire or trading things that were produced in those other parts of the country.
I believe only 10% of basic and 10% higher rate tax levied as Welsh income tax goes to the Welsh Government so under your system would this be increased as it would seem unreasonable for the UK (English?) Government to get the same cut if they are giving less in return.
You are also stealing SC's pet policy!0 -
Seems fairly uncontroversial to me to distribute funds on the basis of need rather than postcode.Pross said:Devolution didn't include tax raising powers at the time of the referendum (the result of which made the Brexit referendum look like a landslide) although there are now some tax powers. I mean, you could make the same argument about much of England with the bulk of the wealth being generated in London but ultimately the City made a lot of its money historically either from the Empire or trading things that were produced in those other parts of the country.
I believe only 10% of basic and 10% higher rate tax levied as Welsh income tax goes to the Welsh Government so under your system would this be increased as it would seem unreasonable for the UK (English?) Government to get the same cut if they are giving less in return.
You are also stealing SC's pet policy!
Same concept as not giving people free bus passes and winter fuel allowance based upon how many tines they have orbited the Sun rather than based upon need.
Or giving £2k a year to poor people rather than people who have children0 -
Don't know if you ever filled out a form for tax credits, but means testing is time consuming and therefore expensive. If you allocate the money more fairly but end up having to allocate more to cover the cost of the means testing, who are you helping?surrey_commuter said:
Seems fairly uncontroversial to me to distribute funds on the basis of need rather than postcode.Pross said:Devolution didn't include tax raising powers at the time of the referendum (the result of which made the Brexit referendum look like a landslide) although there are now some tax powers. I mean, you could make the same argument about much of England with the bulk of the wealth being generated in London but ultimately the City made a lot of its money historically either from the Empire or trading things that were produced in those other parts of the country.
I believe only 10% of basic and 10% higher rate tax levied as Welsh income tax goes to the Welsh Government so under your system would this be increased as it would seem unreasonable for the UK (English?) Government to get the same cut if they are giving less in return.
You are also stealing SC's pet policy!
Same concept as not giving people free bus passes and winter fuel allowance based upon how many tines they have orbited the Sun rather than based upon need.
Or giving £2k a year to poor people rather than people who have children1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
More civil servants?rjsterry said:
Don't know if you ever filled out a form for tax credits, but means testing is time consuming and therefore expensive. If you allocate the money more fairly but end up having to allocate more to cover the cost of the means testing, who are you helping?surrey_commuter said:
Seems fairly uncontroversial to me to distribute funds on the basis of need rather than postcode.Pross said:Devolution didn't include tax raising powers at the time of the referendum (the result of which made the Brexit referendum look like a landslide) although there are now some tax powers. I mean, you could make the same argument about much of England with the bulk of the wealth being generated in London but ultimately the City made a lot of its money historically either from the Empire or trading things that were produced in those other parts of the country.
I believe only 10% of basic and 10% higher rate tax levied as Welsh income tax goes to the Welsh Government so under your system would this be increased as it would seem unreasonable for the UK (English?) Government to get the same cut if they are giving less in return.
You are also stealing SC's pet policy!
Same concept as not giving people free bus passes and winter fuel allowance based upon how many tines they have orbited the Sun rather than based upon need.
Or giving £2k a year to poor people rather than people who have children
Future use of AI?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I do wish that the journos would investigate the true cost of means testing, so we can find out what the cost for each £1 paid out actually is. I suspect we would be horrified by the expense.
One of the reasons behind the 2015 State Pension reforms was to take people out of means testing.
I suspect it is significantly cheaper to give things like the winter fuel payments to eveyone than to means test it. That said, I guess they could then apply similar taxrules to it as to Child Benefit.0 -
Certainly feels like they would never have the manpower to actually take advantage of the rights to look in everyone's bank account...Dorset_Boy said:I do wish that the journos would investigate the true cost of means testing, so we can find out what the cost for each £1 paid out actually is. I suspect we would be horrified by the expense.
One of the reasons behind the 2015 State Pension reforms was to take people out of means testing.
I suspect it is significantly cheaper to give things like the winter fuel payments to eveyone than to means test it. That said, I guess they could then apply similar taxrules to it as to Child Benefit.0 -
Eventually computers and AI will do that for themJezyboy said:
Certainly feels like they would never have the manpower to actually take advantage of the rights to look in everyone's bank account...Dorset_Boy said:I do wish that the journos would investigate the true cost of means testing, so we can find out what the cost for each £1 paid out actually is. I suspect we would be horrified by the expense.
One of the reasons behind the 2015 State Pension reforms was to take people out of means testing.
I suspect it is significantly cheaper to give things like the winter fuel payments to eveyone than to means test it. That said, I guess they could then apply similar taxrules to it as to Child Benefit. 0 -
There's some maths theory about the frequency with which some digits occur. This frequency is not the same when humans make up numbers. HMRC, apparently, have used this for years to pick out suspect tax returns. These days it would be called AI.rick_chasey said:
Eventually computers and AI will do that for themJezyboy said:
Certainly feels like they would never have the manpower to actually take advantage of the rights to look in everyone's bank account...Dorset_Boy said:I do wish that the journos would investigate the true cost of means testing, so we can find out what the cost for each £1 paid out actually is. I suspect we would be horrified by the expense.
One of the reasons behind the 2015 State Pension reforms was to take people out of means testing.
I suspect it is significantly cheaper to give things like the winter fuel payments to eveyone than to means test it. That said, I guess they could then apply similar taxrules to it as to Child Benefit.1 -
Oh goody future material for some journo to write a book in AI disasters.rick_chasey said:
Eventually computers and AI will do that for themJezyboy said:
Certainly feels like they would never have the manpower to actually take advantage of the rights to look in everyone's bank account...Dorset_Boy said:I do wish that the journos would investigate the true cost of means testing, so we can find out what the cost for each £1 paid out actually is. I suspect we would be horrified by the expense.
One of the reasons behind the 2015 State Pension reforms was to take people out of means testing.
I suspect it is significantly cheaper to give things like the winter fuel payments to eveyone than to means test it. That said, I guess they could then apply similar taxrules to it as to Child Benefit.0 -
Journalists actually doing some work to verify what they've regurgitated rather than copy and pasting a press release? I've heard some wild notions on here, but that's right up there.Dorset_Boy said:I do wish that the journos would investigate the true cost of means testing, so we can find out what the cost for each £1 paid out actually is. I suspect we would be horrified by the expense.
One of the reasons behind the 2015 State Pension reforms was to take people out of means testing.
I suspect it is significantly cheaper to give things like the winter fuel payments to eveyone than to means test it. That said, I guess they could then apply similar taxrules to it as to Child Benefit.
Yes, that was ongue in cheek, there are some hard working investigative journalists. But a lot of them give meaning to the term 'gutter press'1 -
I agree that the debate about means testing seems to be stuck in the '70s.Dorset_Boy said:I do wish that the journos would investigate the true cost of means testing, so we can find out what the cost for each £1 paid out actually is. I suspect we would be horrified by the expense.
One of the reasons behind the 2015 State Pension reforms was to take people out of means testing.
I suspect it is significantly cheaper to give things like the winter fuel payments to eveyone than to means test it. That said, I guess they could then apply similar taxrules to it as to Child Benefit.
Even if you scrapped the winter fuel payments and free bus passes and stuck it straight on the state pension you would be getting tax back.0 -
Agreed; just making it part of the taxable income is a much better way of doing it than making people fill out forms to receive it.surrey_commuter said:
I agree that the debate about means testing seems to be stuck in the '70s.Dorset_Boy said:I do wish that the journos would investigate the true cost of means testing, so we can find out what the cost for each £1 paid out actually is. I suspect we would be horrified by the expense.
One of the reasons behind the 2015 State Pension reforms was to take people out of means testing.
I suspect it is significantly cheaper to give things like the winter fuel payments to eveyone than to means test it. That said, I guess they could then apply similar taxrules to it as to Child Benefit.
Even if you scrapped the winter fuel payments and free bus passes and stuck it straight on the state pension you would be getting tax back.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0
