UK and European Politics 2024 Thread

[Grecian2K]

FAO @arthur

What do you think about Phillip Inman’s article on page 59 of The Observer today ?

The online edition does not have traditional page numbers so I have to ask ...
Is that the one urging the abolition of absurd tax breaks to streamline the system?

How to reverse austerity? Scrap some of the tax-relief schemes worth £204bn | Philip Inman

Even the HMRC doesn’t know if any of the 341 tax breaks promote economic growth – many merely line the pockets of company owners and the super-rich, writes Phillip Inman, economics editor

www.google.co.uk

If so I wholeheartedly agree.

 

[Alistair20000]

The online edition does not have traditional page numbers so I have to ask ...
Is that the one urging the abolition of absurd tax breaks to streamline the system?

How to reverse austerity? Scrap some of the tax-relief schemes worth £204bn | Philip Inman

Even the HMRC doesn’t know if any of the 341 tax breaks promote economic growth – many merely line the pockets of company owners and the super-rich, writes Phillip Inman, economics editor

www.google.co.uk

If so I wholeheartedly agree.

No that’s not what I read. The article I read argues for caution and not grand plans

 

[tavyred]

It’s not a disaster, more of a slow strangulation

Being a remainer I’ll never forget the amount of goading I received from family in the aftermath of the referendum. It’s caused a permanent split. Whenever I’m forced to meet them now, they say nothing at all about it…….silence

That’s success is it?

I’ll make no comment on the family bit, sounds awful.
I kind of half agreeing with you, it’s not been a disaster and if a slow strangulation is taking place (I don’t think it is) then it’s definitely too early to say IMO.
The disaster narrative around Brexit is hopelessly overstated and speaks to more to the bitterness of the remainer set rather than reality. If it were a reality politicians would be seeking to make political capital out of it rather than it being the subject no one wants to speak about in this GE campaign.

 

[Grecian2K]

No that’s not what I read. The article I read argues for caution and not grand plans

Ah, "yours" was buried deep in the "Business Section" - us poor paups tend to read that bit last.
Both were in today's on-line subscribed Observer.
To an extent I agree with the "caution" argument although I don't see a problem in borrowing for SOUND investments. Isn't that the cornerstone of most modern capitalist businesses (expect for the the spiv-speculators (and water companies!!! ) that leverage their acquisitions to the hilt, not to "invest" but merely pay themselves massive dividends.

Incidentally, is Mr Inman a bit "economically bipolar". Of the two I far prefer Nils Pratley in the Guardian.

 

[Spanks]

I’ll make no comment on the family bit, sounds awful.
I kind of half agreeing with you, it’s not been a disaster and if a slow strangulation is taking place (I don’t think it is) then it’s definitely too early to say IMO.
The disaster narrative around Brexit is hopelessly overstated and speaks to more to the bitterness of the remainer set rather than reality. If it were a reality politicians would be seeking to make political capital out of it rather than it being the subject no one wants to speak about in this GE campaign.

Couldn’t disagree more. Despite the negatives of Brexit, an even bigger negative would be the continuation of the splits and divides that MDG was talking about.
The country is tired of it, and that’s its only success. There won’t be another referendum as we saw it, it’ll be gradual alignment, because that’s the most obvious, and sensible, way to re-engage on the subject.

 

[Spoonz Red E]

No that’s not what I read. The article I read argues for caution and not grand plans

Caution, not grand plans, is needed if Labour is to build wealth in Britain | Philip Inman

Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves will need skill and stealth to make progress amid financial and institutional adversity, writes Philip Inman, economics editor

www.theguardian.com

 

[Phil Sayers]

If it were a reality politicians would be seeking to make political capital out of it rather than it being the subject no one wants to speak about in this GE campaign.

Do you think this may be due to politicians exercising a rare bit of wise psychology and correctly concluding that a lot of Leave voters may have privately concluded they made a mistake but are not (yet) willing to publicly acknowledge that and don't wish to be reminded of their mistake in the election campaign? Human pride being what it is, many people prefer to double down on a mistake if the only options are to do that or to admit to having made one?

 

[elginCity]

Whether Brexit is best described as ‘disastrous’ or merely ‘negative’, nobody, but nobody, is claiming it’s been a success or even a positive. No one.

The country IS in tatters - a fair description imo. Not totally attributable to Brexit, that’s true, but there’s plenty that is.

 

[tavyred]

Couldn’t disagree more. Despite the negatives of Brexit, an even bigger negative would be the continuation of the splits and divides that MDG was talking about.
The country is tired of it, and that’s its only success. There won’t be another referendum as we saw it, it’ll be gradual alignment, because that’s the most obvious, and sensible, way to re-engage on the subject.

……but Brexit is a disaster Spanks!
The people must be allowed the option to reverse this disaster at the earliest opportunity!

 

[tavyred]

Whether Brexit is best described as ‘disastrous’ or merely ‘negative’, nobody, but nobody, is claiming it’s been a success or even a positive. No one.

The country IS in tatters - a fair description imo. Not totally attributable to Brexit, that’s true, but there’s plenty that is.

Suggest you look up the dictionary definition of ‘tatters’ and come back with a more suitable less hyperbolic word instead Elgy.