Sir Ralph

To be fair the Tories also allowed this happen but the issues of Labour not being able to get through their welfare reforms because of their backbenchers are one of the reasons for the budget shortfall. They allegedly now are going to come after people’s property value, despite those people having invested in their homes and been responsible (eg the couple mentioned in the graph). It’s the feeding of the net taker mentality, not encouraging net givers who are productive. Being a cynic the more net takers you can create, the more voters you have but ultimately it kills economic growth.

I didn’t ever say external factors couldn’t impact inflation. Inflation is impacted by both external and domestic factors. It would be irrational to suggest otherwise. You may have commented on food prices but the point was made by posters generally (that you align with) that domestic policy doesn’t really impact inflation. This isn’t a reasonable point in my opinion. To contextualise this, the point I made is the difference between the European countries inflation rates and our inflation rate (which is x2, x3 or x4 ours) has been widely commented upon as being linked to domestic government policy. European countries experience similar external factors to us so rationally many people have identified the significant inflation rates difference as being linked to recent government policy. It also suggests that domestic policies are having a notable impact on inflation, hence the difference between our inflation rates and that of other European countries. I think you are saying that Government policy has had a detrimental impact on inflation at least to some degree so we have common ground in principle at least. The increased minimum wage will also have had a notable impact, in my opinion.

I responded to the point about the FT article above. You are focusing on food inflation only - whilst this is one main factor, the Government's policies have impacted inflation overall. I genuinely struggle to understand how somebody can make the case that our closest comparables (european countries) have external forces that our so different to ours, other than national policies, which mean our inflation rate is double theirs (or x 4 in the case of France). Even the article you have found suggests its a factor, albeit attributes less weight than most other commentators. As I mentioned above, I commented because another poster was rubbished for making a legitimate point. I think we will agree to disagree.

The point was made on here that hypochondriac was incorrect to blame the current jump in inflation on Government policy and various people told him he wasn't correct. I responded to address that point, with evidence, to which nobody has given a rationale argument against. To be fair, I think you're latest response agrees that Government policy has had a detrimental impact on the current inflation rate but to a lesser degree. The topic has now shifted to borrowing. Its good that net borrowing reduced (not borrowing overall). My concern around this is that the reduced net borrowing has been driven by increases in tax rises which is having other negative impacts on the economy (e.g. inflation). You will note that the article states that overall borrowing is up £6 billion compared to this time last year. So essentially the Government is borrowing more but covering it by taxing people more. In my opinion that isn't the best approach and isn't sustainable in the longer run. On the FT Article about the flight of wealth, you need to read the article in full, rather than just the headline. Factually I also never “rubbished” it. In fact I didn’t respond to it. I know a number of people that have left (including another friend who is leaving this week). I was previously asked why I took this view and to give examples. I explained the people I know who have left and some people didn't believe me. Frankly I don't care if some of those on here do or don't, it doesn't change the facts. I'm relatively rationale so obviously not going to dispute the figures in that article. However, the article says that those leaving is in line with projections (e.g. 25% of non-doms with trusts and 10% of those without trusts would leave). It basically says it isn't worse than expected (I hasten to add, yet) but doesn't say that people haven't left. I don't think we ever discussed whether the number of people leaving would be worse than projections. The article also says that the Government is awaiting further data to decide whether it rows back on its non-dom policies. So you need to read the context and also see what other data comes out over the next year or so. To clarify I wasn't a Brexiteer just because my views are more conservative in nature. I tend to gravitate towards pro-economic policies and frankly don't care which party comes up with them. If I thought Labour's policies were genuinely pro-growth, I would vote for them, but I don't think they are.

1. We are at 3.8% inflation. Eurozone at 2%, France at 0.9% 2. Inflation likely to rise to 4% in the next few month. Economic growth poor 3. Inflation linked to increases in food due to NI increases, wage inflation from minimum wage change and regulation introduced around packaging 4. Due to increased inflation, interest rates will be limited by BoE. So in summary, everyone else's inflation is less than ours and the difference is mainly linked to Government policies. You may struggle to link the two but whether you like it or not, that's what it says. I trust the FT and they are clearly saying this significant difference is based on Government policies. This is contrary to the opinions of various posters here.

https://www.ft.com/content/25d080e1-ca2b-4c4f-8d9e-b36ba42ce7f9 Eurozone countries are running at 2% inflation nearly half the UK. Direct quote attributing the key reasons for the difference to domestic policies by this “government”: Wage growth is proving stickier in the UK than in the euro area, analysts said, with chancellor Rachel Reeves’ increases in employer national insurance contributions and a boost to the living wage contributing to more persistent price rises.

Overall a good performance. I thought tactically a tight unit second half. Stopped the gap between centre backs and wing backs that happened first half. What did you think? I also thought we have shown good character in both games - do you agree?

Fair enough. Good point on that basis. I liked the way we have dug in in both games

I don’t recall Ipswich having a decent chance either, other than at the end with the header. Good point at this stage of the season

1. I’m not a liar - never admitted to it. Your opinion is I’ve been caught out cause you don’t agree. Poor form to stoop that low. 2. On this lounge forum I’ve been called various names, including a c£&@. I don’t recall ever resort to such chat. Poor form. 3. Im not going to explain what I do in real estate. If you couldn’t work out from earlier when I explained to some of your friends the basics of foreign investment in real estate, then me explaining it further is pointless. You think I got that from chat GPT? Your friends have taken the Michael out of me for even asking what they do and the relevance. I’ve given much more information about my background (and to be fair you have) than the rest of the contributors on here. 4. I believe that most contributors on this page have socialist views and don’t have any basic idea about business or how the capitalist system works (ps the world is based upon it). All too embarrassed to admit you’re socialist so you fudge the answer - saying that’s an old school view on life is frankly shirking the answer. To me that means you have socialist views as any true capitalist would be happy to admit what they are. 5. When the inner circle is debated or challenged for a certain period you tend to get abusive and try to take the piss. A few of you continue to engage sensibly but the rest are unable to. I’ve seen it with other people, other than me, that have engaged with different views. They eventually get called irrational or stupid. Hence I realised it’s an echo chamber. No real forum does that. 6. Good night. I’ll revisit this in a year and let’s see what happens. Hopefully Labour will turn the economy around but I doubt they will. If they do I will genuinely come back and admit I was wrong. I would be delighted if that happens. If they don’t I look forward to more excuses from the echo chamber. In the meantime UTS and I wish you well.

Incorrect - I’ve never lied never do. It’s poor form. Don’t make stuff up.

It’s funny that people never realise they are one - echo chamber (16). Lads you never all agree with one another and back each other at all. Convince yourselves as much as you like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echo_chamber_(media)

Good lad egg. Good luck in all your future endeavours.

Well done chaps - reverting to name calling says a lot. I’ve never done that. Stay classy comrades x

People that don’t want to admit being capitalist or socialists tend to be socialists - they just can’t admit it to themselves unfortunately cause it’s a bit embarrassing

I appreciate you’re asking a legitimate question but the lounge forum is the equivalent of a few guys (none of which who will tell their background or whether they are capitalists or socialists - I suspect the latter). It’s an echo chamber. Again I appreciate the genuine question but I’m out. Enjoy convincing each other that labour are going to do well. I’ll be back next year and look forward to discussing with further evidence - hopefully I’ll be wrong, but I doubt it

You can’t answer it - I’ve never ever met a non exec who wouldn’t say they are a capitalist. Says it all. Not one of you will admit to being capitalist- socialist echo chamber. Good luck chaps. I’m sure labour will potentially grow they economy

Don’t make me laugh - the tax justice website - read up about them. This is just laughable.

But I have given you a load. I’ve experienced it. I could debate the point if you knew or worked with people who may move as you might experience it or otherwise. Whelk - what do you do? Why will nobody explain their jobs. Also if I quoted the Daily Mail you would laugh. This guy is a one man band socialist working out of his bedroom. If this is the scope of research data you guys are relying on that looks desperate., in my opinion.

This is what you pulled out the bag? I’ll be very polite and say this has limited value as evidence. https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/about/ He advises the TUC - not a left wing at all. He probably thinks the Venezuelan Government is progressive. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Murphy_(tax_campaigner) Can I ask what you do for a living?

Bearing in mind non Dom’s bring in many multiples of income tax, capital gains tax and NI contributions, compared to your average UK resident, regardless of how much tax you think they should be paying, I don’t understand your eagerness for them to leave. Your only reason is that there will be more properties on the market. They will tend to own properties in high value areas in London and other areas. Again your position on non Dom’s leaving and flooding the market with new property to assist Joe Public isn’t likely at all - it will just mean expensive properties for others at possibly lower values. Would you say you are a capitalist in your general economic position? No capitalist or entrepreneur I have met would take this view. They all have a drive to make money and be successful - some on here would call this selfish (naively in my opinion) but it drives jobs and the economy. If you aren’t, that’s fine, at least we understand one another’s principles with regards to mindset.

https://www.devere-group.com/uk-should-be-wooing-the-wealthy-warns-devere-ceo/ https://www.businessinsider.com/rich-used-to-flock-to-the-uk-now-theyre-fleeing-2025-6 https://www.theguardian.com/news/2025/jul/07/non-doms-labour-super-rich-leaving-the-uk This is before the IHT changes that are going to made in the Autumn to offset the fact that the Labour Party cannot address welfare reform, among other matters. The message to me is clear - don’t invest, don’t save, don’t be responsible- this is creating a bad business culture of low growth and government dependence, both in terms of dependence on welfare and a bloated / unproductive public sector. I have spoken to investors, asset holders, business owners etc across different sector over the past months and NOT ONE has had a positive response to Labours overall economic policies. Like I said before I liked the sound of some of their policies initially but I struggle to understand why you defend them so vehemently now. Are the people you are speaking to saying that there economic policies are doing a good job and encouraging investment? As a matter of principle would you say you are a capitalist? I think a number on here aren’t capitalist but more socialist in their views which means the positions of principle result in us never agreeing.

Ok well I didn’t vote for brexit. I doubt anyone with a business view would, in the same way I would be surprised if a majority of business people voted labour. So you agree at least that it has had a negative impact, albeit less than my experience. You think I’m making it up and that’s fine. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you aren’t but are probably in a location or sector where you haven’t seen this.

So you’re saying that labours policies have had no impact on wealthy people leaving the country? Is that what you really believe? Has it had a net positive effect then?

Ok let’s say I’m making it all up. Which I’m not. They are in real estate, finance and insurance mainly just to correct you. I said I’m not a tax expert but I know these people that left and they didn’t get into any details other than referencing IHT as a key driver. Are you saying that isn’t true? Also they are friends - so we talk about life and life decisions. I’m surprised you don’t know anyone at all that has left as the vast majority of people in business in London do if you have any sort of credentials. I find that “very, very funny”. If you’re experience is certain levels of business then I understand your experience but that’s ok. Also most very wealthy people I know never let on how much they earn, who they know or anything like that. You have done all voluntarily which indicates to me otherwise. I only responded when asked. I think it’s absolutely bizarre you defend labours policies as an alleged business man. We both don’t believe each other so let’s leave it there. https://www.ft.com/content/a3fc89ea-6e9a-4795-9d42-e555551d0a0f https://news.sky.com/story/why-rachel-reeves-may-want-to-rethink-one-of-her-pivotal-policies-13408251