In a wonderful example of stiff upped lipped British under statement the Institute for Fiscal Studies has released some research under the headline “Spending as much as other countries but taxing less is unlikely to be sustainable”. Well doh, that’s obviously true, you might think. If you need to spend more you can either tax more or run up debts until they become unsustainable. But remember the last 45 years or so have been built on the lie that you can cut taxes and still have a well functioning state. You know an army, an NHS, courts and police that work, good transport and all the rest.
Yes; as Tax Research showed (June 2021) the Tories have always borrowed more and repaid less than Labour because their political offer is low tax but they can't get re-elected with the commensurate cuts in public spending. Its the fantasy of the Tory right that they will deliver ultra low tax through huge cuts in state spending. But they simply won't accept that historical British success was due to military power and captive markets, not as they would have it, entrepreneurial individuals and free trade. The states that were late to the party tried the military route and failed so post WW2, the only route was an effective development policy run by the government (Germany, South Korea, Japan, China).
The problem for Labour will I suspect be that we will have to develop the expertise to deliver that and there will be mishaps and some wastage along the way to getting it right. Whether the public will tolerate that or just fall for the usual (picking winners doesn't work) critique offered by the Tories and the right wing press, will determine Britain's future for the next couple of decades.
“unlikely to be sustainable” - likely to lead to increased lawlessness and social breakdown, qualified tax-paying folk to flee to more enlightened places and an increasingly fast descent to third world status and beyond. That’s what 14 years of all this lying, chum-serving shit is leading to
Yes; as Tax Research showed (June 2021) the Tories have always borrowed more and repaid less than Labour because their political offer is low tax but they can't get re-elected with the commensurate cuts in public spending. Its the fantasy of the Tory right that they will deliver ultra low tax through huge cuts in state spending. But they simply won't accept that historical British success was due to military power and captive markets, not as they would have it, entrepreneurial individuals and free trade. The states that were late to the party tried the military route and failed so post WW2, the only route was an effective development policy run by the government (Germany, South Korea, Japan, China).
The problem for Labour will I suspect be that we will have to develop the expertise to deliver that and there will be mishaps and some wastage along the way to getting it right. Whether the public will tolerate that or just fall for the usual (picking winners doesn't work) critique offered by the Tories and the right wing press, will determine Britain's future for the next couple of decades.
“unlikely to be sustainable” - likely to lead to increased lawlessness and social breakdown, qualified tax-paying folk to flee to more enlightened places and an increasingly fast descent to third world status and beyond. That’s what 14 years of all this lying, chum-serving shit is leading to