The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[Farmer Saint]

https://observer.co.uk/news/business/article/the-uk-has-a-productivity-problem-cuts-wont-fix-it

 

[egg]

15 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I'm not sure what labour can do tbh. Half of the MPs won't accept spending cuts -some of which are necessary -and half the electorate aren't going to accept big tax rises without any spending cuts.

That's a fair point which highlights the shit hand they've been dealt.

What's clear though is that the masses want unspecified cuts. What they appear to want, but won't explicitly say, is cuts in welfare, although not the welfare they want.

Essentially, what this boils down to is people wanting to see benefit cuts against people who can't work, unspecified austerity, and a solution to the cost of immigration. 

[whelk]

14 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

https://observer.co.uk/news/business/article/the-uk-has-a-productivity-problem-cuts-wont-fix-it

 

Ralph?

Claiming, as some do, that tens of billions of pounds in further cuts could be found easily through a crackdown on “waste” is not a helpful or serious contribution to the debate.

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

Ralph?

Claiming, as some do, that tens of billions of pounds in further cuts could be found easily through a crackdown on “waste” is not a helpful or serious contribution to the debate.

It's as if he's been reading this thread over the past few months.

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, whelk said:

Ralph?

Claiming, as some do, that tens of billions of pounds in further cuts could be found easily through a crackdown on “waste” is not a helpful or serious contribution to the debate.

TBF something like that is hardly a surprise coming from the Observer- whether you agree with it or not. They are hardly likely to support cuts. 

[Farmer Saint]

19 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

TBF something like that is hardly a surprise coming from the Observer- whether you agree with it or not. They are hardly likely to support cuts. 

TBF it's an opinion piece written by Ben Zaranko, associate director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

TBF it's an opinion piece written by Ben Zaranko, associate director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

Fair enough I didn't read that bit. 

[trousers]

3 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

https://observer.co.uk/news/business/article/the-uk-has-a-productivity-problem-cuts-wont-fix-it

 

 

2 hours ago, whelk said:

Ralph?

Claiming, as some do, that tens of billions of pounds in further cuts could be found easily through a crackdown on “waste” is not a helpful or serious contribution to the debate.

I don't usually comment on this kinda stuff, as it inevitably ends up in a futile circular debate, but one thing that did leap out at me reading that piece is that he very much focuses on front line staff when he talks about the challenges of getting productivity gains in the public sector.

Which made me wonder what the productivity spilt is between back office and front line staff. One would imagine it's easier to make savings in the back office compared to the front line?

As I say, just an observation rather than wishing to stir the opinion pot. 

Edited 7 hours ago by trousers

[whelk]

27 minutes ago, trousers said:

 

I don't usually comment on this kinda stuff, as it inevitably ends up in a futile circular debate, but one thing that did leap out at me reading that piece is that he very much focuses on front line staff when he talks about the challenges of getting productivity gains in the public sector.

Which made me wonder what the productivity spilt is between back office and front line staff. One would imagine it's easier to make savings in the back office compared to the front line?

As I say, just an observation rather than wishing to stir the opinion pot. 

Problem is the term back office implies to some that not required. You need IT systems to run social care, somebody to purchase truncheons for police etc., organise NHS operations.

I am sure there are inefficiencies in so many areas although not easy to resolve without huge culture shift and that won’t come from many of the managers who have made, and are comfortable in that culture. Happens in many larger private sector companies too.

Need budget increases to be ring fenced for front line IMO, you must have more infantry etc not more contractors tossing it off on MoD procurement, more nurses not managers but even then you have to trust the organisation and not let some fuckwit proposing nonsense in the name of efficiency eg reducing support services (back office) and making police do their own admin and then less time on street etc. Simplistic but you get my point.

Seen so many examples of devolve, centralise, devolve again to undo centralisation, centralise again in name of efficiency. Many involved aren’t around long enough to account for consequences of their poor decisions either. 

[iansums]

4 hours ago, egg said:

His support for his chancellor will cost him his job at some point. 

Milliband would be a disaster. Haigh I like though, but her economic ideas won't curry favour with the slash and cut crowd. 

I have two rules in life:

1. Don't trust anyone with loads of tatoos

2. Don't trust anyone who dyes their hair red

[egg]

26 minutes ago, iansums said:

I have two rules in life:

1. Don't trust anyone with loads of tatoos

2. Don't trust anyone who dyes their hair red

Good rules!! 

[Farmer Saint]

2 hours ago, trousers said:

 

I don't usually comment on this kinda stuff, as it inevitably ends up in a futile circular debate, but one thing that did leap out at me reading that piece is that he very much focuses on front line staff when he talks about the challenges of getting productivity gains in the public sector.

Which made me wonder what the productivity spilt is between back office and front line staff. One would imagine it's easier to make savings in the back office compared to the front line?

As I say, just an observation rather than wishing to stir the opinion pot. 

And this leads into the large scale operational analysis and IT improvement that I've continuously said costs so much to do, and takes so much time. The problem is with knot 5 years in power this is never going to properly happen so each party has to suffer from mistakes of previous parties.

[Whitey Grandad]

On 11/11/2025 at 08:38, whelk said:

You are always on cruises Whitey so assume you aren’t reliant on it?

It's my hard earned money. What I do with it is none of your business. I worked hard all my life. Didn't drink, didn't smoke, didn't gamble. Why should what I earned (after a lot of tax) and what my dear wife saved up be given to the feckless and indolent?

[iansums]

2 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

It's my hard earned money. What I do with it is none of your business. I worked hard all my life. Didn't drink, didn't smoke, didn't gamble. Why should what I earned (after a lot of tax) and what my dear wife saved up be given to the feckless and indolent?

You did do drugs pretty heavily though didn’t you? It’s an interesting point with means testing of pensions. There are lots of people who are careful with their money, put what they can afford into a private pension building up a decent pot, then they would get punished if means testing was brought in.

[Farmer Saint]

Need to get some of @Sir Ralph mates on this.

 

[Sir Ralph]

6 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Need to get some of @Sir Ralph mates on this.

 

Stop listening to Gary economics. The bloke has socialist views. I assume you know he is known for being left leaning? I didn’t even watch the video. Can you remind me what credentials this guy has above some of the greater minds in this country. Being a Citibank trader really doesn’t count - two a penny. I could go down the local pub and find completely opposite views to him from another 10 traders

Edited 1 hour ago by Sir Ralph

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Didn't drink, didn't smoke, didn't gamble.

Typical referee…

[whelk]

7 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Stop listening to Gary economics. The bloke is a socialist tool. I assume you know he is known for being left leaning? I didn’t even watch the video. Can you remind me what credentials this guy has above some of the greater minds in this country. Being a Citibank trader really doesn’t count

Couldn’t help but think of you repeating this line.

 

[whelk]

10 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Stop listening to Gary economics. The bloke is a socialist tool. I assume you know he is known for being left leaning? I didn’t even watch the video. Can you remind me what credentials this guy has above some of the greater minds in this country. Being a Citibank trader really doesn’t count

Also you can learn something if you listened to him

[Farmer Saint]

8 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Stop listening to Gary economics. The bloke has socialist views. I assume you know he is known for being left leaning? I didn’t even watch the video. Can you remind me what credentials this guy has above some of the greater minds in this country. Being a Citibank trader really doesn’t count - two a penny. I could go down the local pub and find completely opposite views to him from another 10 traders

What? So what if he has socialist views. I would never tell someone to stop reading or listening to a specific person or publication. The only way that you can make informed decisions is by having all the information.

He's asking for people for a TV show on Channel 4 - millionaires who have moved abroad because they are scared of the wealth tax that doesn't exist, as they can't find any...I'm just saying you know loads so should get them involved.

[whelk]

2 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

What I do with it is none of your business

Stop fucking telling us then

[Sir Ralph]

4 minutes ago, whelk said:

Couldn’t help but think of you repeating this line.

 

Let’s see it appear mamdanis expected taxes will be notably higher than anything before

[Farmer Saint]

5 minutes ago, whelk said:

Couldn’t help but think of you repeating this line.

 

Fucking propaganda, and the weak, stupid and impressionable will always lap up the fear.

Sad times.

[Sir Ralph]

2 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

What? So what if he has socialist views. I would never tell someone to stop reading or listening to a specific person or publication. The only way that you can make informed decisions is by having all the information.

He's asking for people for a TV show on Channel 4 - millionaires who have moved abroad because they are scared of the wealth tax that doesn't exist, as they can't find any...I'm just saying you know loads so should get them involved.

I’m happy to listen to people with left leaning views but not Gary….the bloke grates on me. 
 

Ill make sure to remind them to watch the video

[whelk]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

Let’s see it appear mamdanis expected taxes will be notably higher than anything before

There can’t be many left as assumed they’d all moved to West Virginia

[Sir Ralph]

1 minute ago, whelk said:

There can’t be many left as assumed they’d all moved to West Virginia

You will only see the impact once the taxes have come in and those businesses that have decided to relocate will. 

[badgerx16]

10 minutes ago, whelk said:

Couldn’t help but think of you repeating this line.

 

Pete Hegseth showing how he is qualified to head the DoD.

[whelk]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

You will only see the impact once the taxes have come in and those businesses that have decided to relocate will. 

Boom time for you flogging all those houses in Dubai

Edited 59 minutes ago by whelk

[Sir Ralph]

8 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Fucking propaganda, and the weak, stupid and impressionable will always lap up the fear.

Sad times.

So in 15 years there has been an increase in millionaires. This is such a crude assessment:

1. How much have taxes in NY increased since then? I don’t believe these will be nearly at the level the new mayor wants and therefore the impact is clearly going to be different.

2 Inflation has increased by 50% since 2010 so people earn more. I’d bloody hope there were more millionaires by salary since 2010.

3. What is the increase in millionaires in real terms alongside what the increase in tax rises were - that’s the question.

 

 

Edited 55 minutes ago by Sir Ralph

[whelk]

4 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

So in 15 years there has been an increase in millionaires. This is such a crude assessment:

1. How much have taxes in NY increased since then? I don’t believe these will be nearly at the level the new mayor wants and therefore the impact is clearly going to be different.

2 Inflation has increased by 50% since 2010 so people earn more. I’d bloody hope there were more millionaires by salary since 2010.

3. What is the increase in millionaires in real terms alongside what the increase in tax rises were - that’s the question.

 

 

It’s not analysis it is just pointing out the same old line about taxes since time began. So do you believe all those since 2012 saying millionaires have fled each year from NYC because of taxes?

Edited 51 minutes ago by whelk

[Sir Ralph]

Here’s some proper evidence! So as a share of millionaires NY has a lesser share of millionaires falling from 12.7% to 8.7% (a 31% decrease by share) because they have mainly moved to lower tax areas. As a result lesser tax generated.
 

Oh dear chaps…..whoever made that video by the Daily Post is an economic illiterate. Interested in the gangs thoughts on this? 

https://cbcny.org/research/hidden-cost-new-yorks-shrinking-millionaire-share#:~:text=As a result%2C New York's,billions of dollars every year.

Edited 44 minutes ago by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

Just now, whelk said:

It’s not analysis it is just pointing out the same old line about taxes since time began. So do you believe all those since 2012 saying millionaires have fled NYC because of taxes?

See above. Pesky evidence

[whelk]

4 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

See above. Pesky evidence

Citizens Budget Commission sounds like the Tax Payers Alliance. What’s California’s secret?

[Sir Ralph]

5 minutes ago, whelk said:

Citizens Budget Commission sounds like the Tax Payers Alliance. What’s California’s secret?

I don’t know but they quote US treasury figures. So actually that Daily Post video is BS as it doesn’t consider the huge inflationary (50%) impact which completely devalues it. It has no standing as any form of evidence. Maybe Gary Economics produced it…..

Ive given you guys real and fair statistics from a source which quotes the treasury and much more accurately reflects NY performance in terms of attracting / keeping the wealthy so either accept them or please provide me with contradictory statistics.

Deja vu chaps

Edited 39 minutes ago by Sir Ralph

[whelk]

The evidence about the impact of taxes is not clear cut but also is not based on New York’s current circumstances. New York City residents now pay the nation’s highest top marginal personal income tax rate. Furthermore, economic shifts, quality of life and affordability concerns, hybrid work, and dispersion of amenities increasingly challenge New York’s ability to attract and retain residents and businesses. 

 

 

[Sir Ralph]

17 minutes ago, whelk said:

The evidence about the impact of taxes is not clear cut but also is not based on New York’s current circumstances. New York City residents now pay the nation’s highest top marginal personal income tax rate. Furthermore, economic shifts, quality of life and affordability concerns, hybrid work, and dispersion of amenities increasingly challenge New York’s ability to attract and retain residents and businesses. 

 

 

I’m not sure why you are mentioning this specifically. It’s a report caveat which explains you can’t attribute everything to tax rises as there will always be other factors at play. However the whole report talks about the impact of taxes so it is clearly saying that it has a huge impact! Quoting this is really scrabbling around.

This has happened on a few occasions now where I get baited and then provide strong evidence to the contrary. Then there’s tumbleweed…..
 

My advice is sometimes to accept that you might not necessarily be right rather than cling onto a held position which is not supported by evidence rather than the opinion of the local rag or a you tuber. Probably a lesson for me also

Edited 22 minutes ago by Sir Ralph

[Farmer Saint]

This is just brilliant stuff as per normal Ralph, posting the first thing you find on Google without checking your sources - so predictable! 

TBF, I moved out of California in 2022, and it wasn't due to low taxes...

[Sir Ralph]

9 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

This is just brilliant stuff as per normal Ralph, posting the first thing you find on Google without checking your sources - so predictable! 

TBF, I moved out of California in 2022, and it wasn't due to low taxes...

You can mock but where is your evidence to the contrary? I assume you don’t have any hence the sarcastic response?

I’m not a specialist in NY millionaires by any means but basic economics leads you to likely impacts so it didn’t find long to find this report. 

Edited 11 minutes ago by Sir Ralph