[Politics] The Labour Government

[Me Atome]

Firstly, I`m not sure if there is a shortage of train drivers globally (although another poster points out problems on LNER) - train some more? Fruit pickers there seem to be (maybe pay them more?) I disagree with your definiton of inflation. A one off increase in price is not infaltion. Inflation is the continouous rise in the price level, so the price level has to be rising for a number of time periods. Also, the government, in terms of the train drivers, doesnt have to increase train fares as a result. That is their policy choice. I would argue for a drastic reduction in the cost of rail travel as we have some of the most expensive fares in Europe. Even if a negotiated pay increase for the doctors or rail workers might result in an increase in prices, this might be a necessary but not sufficient condition for an inflationary process to unfold.

I would agree that the rise in cost of one item does not constitute inflation, but the "cost of labour" refers to the cost of all labour, in this case not limiting it to train drivers or whoever you wanted to highlight. The availability of labour is limited; that does not mean there is a shortage, it means there is a limit. And as you stated, a rise in the cost of a limited resource gives rise to inflation. You probably don't remember the 1970's.

 

[darkwolf666]

I’ll take a pass if that’s ok

Ditto …. All I need now is Watford Zero for the hat trick!!


It doesn’t have to be petty jealousy though does it? That’s a very opinionated and short sighted view.

There are many anti monarchists in this country, I don’t expect it’s out of petty jealousy or that they would like Buckingham Palace for themselves.

These pay rises will result in either tax increases, even more expensive rail fares, inflation or all 3.

No they won’t…

Wage rises are driving inflation? Don’t swallow this dangerous rightwing myth | Owen Jones

All the evidence is there: corporate greed is the culprit, but policymakers daren’t take on big business, says Guardian columnist Owen Jones

www.theguardian.com

 

[BenGarfield]

I would agree that the rise in cost of one item does not constitute inflation, but the "cost of labour" refers to the cost of all labour, in this case not limiting it to train drivers or whoever you wanted to highlight. The availability of labour is limited; that does not mean there is a shortage, it means there is a limit. And as you stated, a rise in the cost of a limited resource gives rise to inflation. You probably don't remember the 1970's.

I do rememberr the 70s and that resource shortage was oil. All resources are limited and that and inflation are the limits to government expenditure and not income from tax. I was answering your originaI question on how do we pay for government spending - and the answer is we dont have to. I dont think we necessarily have a shortage of labour.

 

[A1X]

 

[Guinness Boy]

I’ll take a pass if that’s ok

Ditto …. All I need now is Watford Zero for the hat trick!!


It doesn’t have to be petty jealousy though does it? That’s a very opinionated and short sighted view.

There are many anti monarchists in this country, I don’t expect it’s out of petty jealousy or that they would like Buckingham Palace for themselves.

These pay rises will result in either tax increases, even more expensive rail fares, inflation or all 3.

The irony is, of course, we’d pay way less tax if we weren’t propping up the monarchy, who are shafting the working class, train drivers included.

The other irony is that if you don’t give pay rises to high earners they eventually get caught up by the low earners. Well done comrade.

 

[carlzeiss]

Well meet me.

My concern in daily life is that stuff works properly. If I have to travel to work or the football I’d like the trains to be running. If I get sick or hurt I’d like a hospital bed or a GP appointment, rather than a trolley in a corridor or a phone call with a PA.

That places quite a bit higher than petty jealousy over what someone gets paid for doing a job I couldn’t.

A strong leader that makes the trains run on time , just what Great Britain needs right now ,well done Sir Kier

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I would agree that the rise in cost of one item does not constitute inflation, but the "cost of labour" refers to the cost of all labour, in this case not limiting it to train drivers or whoever you wanted to highlight. The availability of labour is limited; that does not mean there is a shortage, it means there is a limit. And as you stated, a rise in the cost of a limited resource gives rise to inflation. You probably don't remember the 1970's.

The 70s were nothing compared with the Lawson (boom and) bust with 15% interest rates at one point.

 

[rogersix]

That's the theory. But as I said my biggest fear in this is inflation.

could we deflate that issue by taxing the rich?

 

[BLOCK F]

On here at the moment, there is no point in criticising anything the Labour Party are doing as they are in their honeymoon period and the great and good of NSC won’t countenance any of it.
Give it a bit more time, and if we are lucky, gentle criticism/ suggestions may be permitted, just maybe, mind you.

 

[Rdodge30]

On here at the moment, there is no point in criticising anything the Labour Party are doing as they are in their honeymoon period and the great and good of NSC won’t countenance any of it.
Give it a bit more time, and if we are lucky, gentle criticism/ suggestions may be permitted, just maybe, mind you.

Are the teachers on strike yet?

 

[BLOCK F]

Are the teachers on strike yet?

Probably not as it is the school holidays!

 

[WATFORD zero]

Probably not as it is the school holidays!

Starmer really needs to pull his finger out. Johnson had already lied to the Queen and broken the law in his first 6 weeks, Truss had crashed the economy in hers

 

[BLOCK F]

Starmer really needs to pull his finger out. Johnson had already lied to the Queen and broken the law in his first 6 weeks

I take it that you are not seriously suggesting that Keir follows the Boris book of ‘How to do Politics’, are you?

 

[Weststander]

The 70s were nothing compared with the Lawson (boom and) bust with 15% interest rates at one point.

Mortgage rates were equally high under Healey/Howe 78 onwards. But you and I weren’t affected.

The difference was that far fewer were affected due to credit controls. People had to jump tons of hoops for the all powerful building society manager to even consider lending.

I know of many businessmen who lost everything in the 70’s due to interest rates.

 

[BLOCK F]

Mortgage rates were equally high under Healey/Howe 78 onwards. But you and I weren’t affected.

The difference was that far fewer were affected due to credit controls. People had to jump tons of hoops for all powerful building society manager to even consider lending.

I know of many businessmen who lost everything in the 70’s due to interest rates.

View attachment 187420

My first wife and I got our mortgage in 1974, then we parted company at the end of 1975 and I was left paying the mortgage on my own from then on. It wasn’t always the easiest of times!

 

[Weststander]

My first wife and I got our mortgage in 1974, then we parted company at the end of 1975 and I was left paying the mortgage on my own from then on. It wasn’t always the easiest of times!

1970 to early 80’s, overall, was an awful time economically for the UK. Not sure about the 60’s …. I was just a nipper scared of Dr Who and Arthur Brown . A series of crashes that brought down businesses, we produced the worst goods in the developed world, rising unemployment, mass industrial disputes, ascending nations such as Italy laughed at us as “the sick man of Europe”.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

My first wife and I got our mortgage in 1974, then we parted company at the end of 1975 and I was left paying the mortgage on my own from then on. It wasn’t always the easiest of times!

Similar experience in 89-92. I came very close to losing the house.

 

[5Ways Gull]

I take it that you are not seriously suggesting that Keir follows the Boris book of ‘How to do Politics’, are you?

Think BoJo was using the Ladybird "How to do Politics" book 1b.

 

[WATFORD zero]

1970 to early 80’s, overall, was an awful time economically for the UK. Not sure about the 60’s …. I was just a nipper scared of Dr Who and Arthur Brown . A series of crashes that brought down businesses, we produced the worst goods in the developed world, rising unemployment, mass industrial disputes, ascending nations such as Italy laughed at us as “the sick man of Europe”.

I had my first ever mortgage late 70's early 80's

But the highlighted line was exactly where we were heading at an ever increasing speed 6 weeks ago and we are a long, long, long way from turning it around yet

I'm certainly not convinced by Starmer, but the fact he's got six weeks in without lying to the monarchy, breaking the law or crashing the economy means he's demonstrably doing better than two of the last three PMs in the last 5 years (Sunak only getting away with it as he was charged with breaking the law while he was still chancellor).

 

[Weststander]

Which was exactly where we were heading at an ever increasing speed 6 weeks ago and we are a long, long, long way from turning it around yet

Genuinely, I don’t know about that.

In the 70’s we really were sh1t. It probably passed everyone here by at the time, because kids/teens/20’s were having a good time being young.

Very different scenarios. The last 25 years has been notable for greed, wealth built on just owning a decent home in southern England, BTL’s, holiday homes in Spain/France/West Country, and the ever growing numbers (10m’s) of have-nots.

The last few weeks have seen the beginnings of rebalancing.

The next step …. far closer trading, scientific, r&d ties with the EU.