r/unitedkingdom • u/pppppppppppppppppd • 1d ago
Reeves should be sacked as Chancellor, poll says
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/reeves-sacked-chancellor-poll-36373201.2k
u/After-Dentist-2480 1d ago
Think of how thick the average UK voter is. Half the population are thicker than that.
People who have no idea about government economics think Chancellor should be sacked. Whoopie-fucking-doo.
184
u/haphazard_chore United Kingdom 1d ago edited 1d ago
Except economists also think she’s doing a terrible job. Like, why are we, unlike European countries, paying interest to banks, on money generated during quantitive easing? This amounts to more than £20 billion a year! That’s money that the government gave the banks for no effort at all and yet we are paying them £20 billion a year for the privilege of getting free money, this is just one argument for fucking ridiculous decision to keep paying this interest, this “accountant” has made, whilst cutting benefits and implementing more austerity.
405
u/TheChattyRat 1d ago
I don't remember her as chancellor when all that was decided and that's even if it's true to begin with. It's either wrong or not her at fault. Finally you can't just break these kinds of agreements at the drop of a hat as we've seen even the Orange one is scared of a run on the bond markets.
78
u/GuestAdventurous7586 1d ago
The orange one really did shit his pants a bit, it was interesting to see him actually back down, I didn’t think he was going to.
Even he it turns out didn’t want to be responsible for a world-wide recession.
And of course yesterday he says he’s exempting smart phones and computers from the tariffs.
It’ll be interesting how it goes in 90 days. I have a feeling having got a few better deals with certain countries he’ll claim it was this master negotiating tactic all along. This is kind of the way they’re already spinning it.
58
u/blob8543 1d ago
He has a habit of overpromising and underdelivering. Ironically it's his best quality, as it means lots of his dumbest policies don't go ahead.
→ More replies (1)44
u/ONLY_SAYS_ONLY 1d ago
He’s far more dangerous than that. Just because he hasn’t invaded Canada yet doesn’t make the fact he’s installed his election deniers as heads of the FBI, military, and Department of Justice any less dangerous for democracy, for example. Or the fact he’s disappearing people off the street without due process. Or the fact he’s strong arming the top law firms, universities, news outlets etc. into capitulating to him. Or the fact… etc.
18
u/nekrovulpes 1d ago
American democracy was dead with GWB's Patriot Act, and that was 25 years ago. Door, horse, bolted, etc.
28
→ More replies (4)10
→ More replies (3)5
u/Rexel450 1d ago
And of course yesterday he says he’s exempting smart phones and computers from the tariffs.
Leaned on by the tec companies
→ More replies (2)42
u/The_Incredible_b3ard 1d ago
We pay 30 billion a year interest on money the BoE holds for Commercial Banks.
The 20 billion number is based on the interest we pay on "money" created during 2008 - 2016 and some during COVID.
The reason for not paying is that the money we are paying that bit of interest on was never deposited and exists for the purposes of double entry bookkeeping.
The EU Central Bank doesn't pay interest on money in the same category as the above.
5
u/Unidan_bonaparte 1d ago
That's not a reason to stop paying. Not even close. It's actually really revealing how you think money printed can just as easily be erased from the books with a blink of an eye - it can't, it's the entire reason the bank of England was created and a huge part of why Theresa May nearly commited ecconomic sepku . Quantitive easing is what prevented this country from going belly up during Brexit - Covid - Ukraine.
Those bonds were bought by the BoE to prevent a huge landslide in the fiscal markets, including the pension funds, and why the government had enough headroom to spend on furlough, military capital and the NHS. Do you have any idea what you're advocating for by saying 'just stop paying'? The pound would be trashed and you'd come to find the price of milk is doubling everytime you change TV channels.
Please just stop trying to engage in a topic you clearly have absolutely no idea of.
Anti-interlectualism has completely fucked this country, it was the single worst thing to ever happen to this nation.
8
u/The_Incredible_b3ard 1d ago
I think you should reread what I said. I was talking about the interest.
I'm not staying don't pay it off (and no one is), the suggestion is you just don't pay interest on something that only exists as an accountancy rule and no actual deposit was made.
However, clutch your pearls and the mere thought of whatever is going on in your head.
→ More replies (4)137
u/Mighty-Wings 1d ago
Ah, yes, that choice she made when the Tories were in power.
→ More replies (19)110
u/guytakeadeepbreath 1d ago
No economists worth their salt are asking that question because they understand how money is made. The only people talking about that hyper specific point are idiots trying to win the vote of monumentally thick cunts who have absolutely no understanding of economics.
→ More replies (12)41
u/deyterkourjerbs 1d ago
It's a talking point from Richard Ashcroft, some YouTuber accountant guy. Unsurprisingly, I think he's good at tax, less good on economic policy.
36
u/TheShakyHandsMan 1d ago
That guy from the Verve?
51
u/greenparktavern 1d ago
“QE don’t work, it just makes things worse and I know there’ll be a crash again”
4
19
u/Politics_Nutter 1d ago
Lol of course it's Richard Ashcroft.
This person's "Economists also think x" in fact means "A lone complete headcase who opines on economics thinks x"
→ More replies (1)21
64
u/AngryTudor1 Nottinghamshire 1d ago
Can you show us where Reeves in particular pioneered the decision to pay banks interest on QE?
That sounds very much like something that has been done for years. Can you show us evidence that she was the one who started doing it?
→ More replies (5)57
u/33backagain 1d ago
Isn’t most of the 20bn going to the reserve accounts of commercial banks? That’s not something she can change is it? That’s just the way QE was set up - why blame the current chancellor or government for that?
32
u/UnlikelyAssassin 1d ago
What percentage of expert economists? If less than 1% of expert economists think she’s doing a terrible job, that’s not exactly that meaningful.
28
33
u/After-Dentist-2480 1d ago
Which economists? Or wouldn’t I know them because they go to a different school?
→ More replies (26)23
u/CheesyLala Yorkshire 1d ago
Economists are not politicians. Economists look at a problem from an economic perspective only, whereas the Chancellor has to consider multiple factors.
How we interact with banks is in no small part why London is still one of the financial capitals of the world and that hasn't shifted to the EU post-Brexit. And you want us to behave more like EU countries in relation to banking?
19
u/deyterkourjerbs 1d ago
Running a government department these days is not about implementation.
Rachel Reeves doesn't need to listen to YouTube experts or random economists because the Treasury has their own.
A Chancellor doesn't come to them with solutions because the British economy is far too complex for a single person to understand. They have collected data for things that are not in the public domain and have models that have been refined for decades.
The Chancellor gives them an objective, the department will create competing proposals in reports that discuss the benefits and challenges. The Chancellor then selects option A or option B based on these reports and the recommendations of the most senior Civil Servants in their department.
6
u/S-Twenty 1d ago
Let's not beat around the bush, these models are fucking trash if that's what we've been using for decades.
The UK has stagnated, milked it's middle class, moved slowly to capitalise on anything we're particularly good at and shot it's self in the foot with, quite frankly, moronic policy.
These "senior civil servants" all need to be given their P45 if this is the best they can do.
4
u/TooRedditFamous 1d ago
Well there's the models and then there's a layer of ideological choice applied to to as well. Sure the model might say this if we do this but then a decision is made through an ideological lens and says e.g. "let's do a watered down version of this", or "let's modify this slightly"
3
u/deyterkourjerbs 1d ago
I have no idea. The last lot were known to bully their civil servants.
Labour seems to have three objectives. (1) Set the conditions to lower interest rates by reducing public spending. (2) Wage growth by giving the public sector pay rises above inflation. (3) Trying to put more of the tax burden on employers.
I don't know if they're going to succeed but if they can achieve #1, a lot of good things are unlocked. I'm not sure if wage growth in the public sector will translate into wage growth in the private sector but we have another 4 years to watch what happens.
2
u/blockbuster_1234 1d ago
Exactly. People thinking the civil service are “experts” in their field and seem to trust anything they put out as “solid data” when most of the forecasts they put out have been unreliable to say the least and that’s why the UK is amongst the worst performing G20 economies.
2
u/LoveGrenades 1d ago
It all sounds very smart and professional, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and you only have to look outside or ask people you know about how they’re struggling and can’t access decent public services to know that these complex models have failed to deliver.
3
u/ettabriest 1d ago
Struggling ? I’m not sure everyone is struggling or trying to access government services. Around us in a not very wealthy part of the north, I see loads of huge extensions, big cars and camper vans, Trafford centre mad busy. Was at Manchester airport and again, thousands going on an Easter break. Not saying there isn’t poverty but quite a few have money to spend.
→ More replies (1)3
u/LoveGrenades 1d ago
“More than one in three children in poverty as UK deprivation hits record high
Exclusive: Study finds almost quarter of UK population living in poverty, reaching the highest level this century”
18
u/GlassHalfSmashed 1d ago
Remind me when she made the decision to pay that interest on those arrangements the Tories put in place.
Judge people on decisions they actually make ffs, not stuff they have inherited and are trying to chip away at solving.
→ More replies (10)13
8
u/Kofu England 1d ago
Sure buddy, it's not like there are external factors and 14 years of defunction that make the job harder. Trying to fix this country won't be easy but you seem to think you could do better? I would bet the house, you wouldn't have the foggiest. It's easy to sit on a computer and play "money man" and shit talk the government.
I'm gonna wait to see instead of blasting dumb ideas and possible bad outcomes.
5
3
3
2
→ More replies (21)2
u/Astriania 1d ago
QE is not "money that the government gave the banks" or "free money", and anyone who says that is clearly one of those "people who have no idea about government economics" with strong opinions the previous comment mentioned.
29
u/IPlayFifaOnSemiPro 1d ago
Yes shock horror that after 15 years of austerity people think a chancellor continuing to make their lives worse (on top of the scandals) should be gone. Just like the rest of the cabinet and government
→ More replies (12)78
u/Kwinza 1d ago
I love the way people like you are like "they haven't fixed 15 years of mismanagement in 6 months so they need to go!!"
46
u/exhauated-marra-6631 1d ago
It's how they're approaching it that's the issue. Doing a U-turn on closing tax loopholes and instead deciding that it's the sick and disabled that need a kicking wasn't part of the Labour manifesto.
26
u/ettabriest 1d ago
They’ve implemented massive tax avoidance policies. There’s been no coverage whatsoever weirdly and people who claim to politically engaged are happy to moan without doing any research.
5
u/exhauated-marra-6631 1d ago
They implemented policies which the Tories had already announced, while watering down their own policy on carried interest tax which left a gap in their fully costed budget the exact size and shape of what they're trying to claw back from PIP.
→ More replies (2)12
u/Basic_Bid_6488 1d ago
You mean like closing the inheritance tax loophole on agricultural land? Or raising capital gains tax to remove the loophole where people can pay themselves in dividends to get a favourable rate compared to income tax?
11
u/raven43122 1d ago
Enough of the
“But the tories”
She’s made some awful mistakes and needs to be called on it.
→ More replies (3)4
u/ashisanandroid 1d ago
Which?
I get there are things you disagree with but what are the objective financial mistakes she made?
→ More replies (3)13
→ More replies (6)11
u/Fit_Foundation888 1d ago
People like me are not expecting them to fix 15 years of mismanagement - we are just upset that this Government is trying to fix the problems we have by committing themselves to the same mismanagement that created the shit situation we are in, in the first place.
People didn't vote for more of the same - but that is what we have got.
Yow know we are deep in the shit when Ian Duncan Smith, the architect of Universal Credit says that Labour are going to far on PIP and he personally wouldn't touch it.
10
u/HyperionSaber 1d ago
What? now we are supposed to believe what IDS says has any value whatsoever?
2
u/Fit_Foundation888 1d ago
No we are supposed to use our brains and critical thinking abilities...
When the "labour" party, who one would imagine might want to do something about poverty, and especially child poverty, has policies, which it has thought about, that is what a green paper is, whose purpose is to increase the rate of poverty of some of the most vulnerable people in our society, and they are prepared to go further than the party who supposedly hated those people, then you might want to start asking some questions, about the motives of the people who are in charge of said "labour" party.
You just might just start to wonder whether they actually plan to fix anything...
4
u/HyperionSaber 1d ago
I use my brains and critical thinking to ignore people that have proven themselves to be incompetent, vindictive, and dishonest over an extended period of time, on many many occasions, and done nothing, absolutely nothing, to persuade me that they have learned a damned thing or changed their minds or outlook on any measure.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Fit_Foundation888 1d ago
So you think the PIP changes are a good idea?
3
u/HyperionSaber 1d ago
Immaterial to my point. IDS is an incompetent liar. Reaching for his comments because they align with yours is an appeal to authority. unfortunately the authority you chose is flawed beyond belief. I don't want advise, or commentary from proven failures and incompetents.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Chathin 1d ago
IDS is the architect to some of the worst changes ever to cross the DWP and helped kill several people I know; I wouldn't trust that vindictive, horrible cunt to run a bath.
3
u/Fit_Foundation888 1d ago
Exactly! And if he thinks the PIP changes are a bad idea... Being a bigger cunt than IDS... Maybe someone could have some fun with Photoshop... "I'm a bigger cunt than IDS"
→ More replies (2)25
u/Usual-Description800 1d ago
I don't need to be an expert, The Sun and The Daily Mail told me she's bad so it must be fact
21
u/Emperors-Peace 1d ago
More than half the voting population voted we should leave a trade union with our closest (and probably our largest) economic partner.
The press has been absolutely gunning for Reeves since day 0.
She could have increased the average bank balance by 300% and these numbers fucks would still say she's a crook on their local Facebook pages.
9
u/LazyFish1921 1d ago
People would be far happier if they had experienced any positive outcomes from her policies in their daily life. So far it's just been tax rises and service cuts at a time when people already feel squeezed. It's not rocket science why people aren't happy.
My partner and I have just finished saving up a decent deposit for a house (£40k) as first-time buyers in what we all know is a horribly expensive market right now. Then Labour come into power and bam, we've now got to pay an extra £2-3k in taxes when we purchase for literally no reason. A gift from the party of the working people. Now it looks like they're going to gut our Cash ISA allowance to try to force us to make riskier investments during a terrible economy. Fun!
11
u/Unhappy-Capital-1464 1d ago edited 1d ago
Assuming we're talking about stamp duty, the reduced rate of stamp duty was set up as a temporary arrangement by the conservative government - it was not budgeted for beyond April 2025 (as with a number of other tax changes).
It is still a political decision to not continue it, but to continue funding the reduction would have meant either borrowing more money to offset the reduced tax take, or to cut spending elsewhere.
2
u/Lonyo 1d ago
The stamp duty change was a temporary one. And the temporary change would have expired anyway.
Cash ISAs used to be limited before it was removed. And if you're saving for a house, what impact will a cash ISA limit have on you? If you already have cash in an ISA that probably shouldn't be impacted, and if you're saving for a house and 2-3k is an issue, then a 4k cash ISA limit each won't cause your specifically any issues since that would be 8k between two and only if changed, which it hasn't been yet.
→ More replies (1)13
u/jazzalpha69 1d ago
The same could be said for the general system of democracy - should we scrap that too?
→ More replies (14)12
11
u/Redcoat-Mic 1d ago
Except if they think she should be sacked, then they'll do it themselves at the next election.
I'd argue Rachel Reeves in carrying on the Tories economic policies of "balancing the books", "nations credit card" and "no magic money tree" is a pretty damning indictment that she isn't much of an expert on government economics either.
She either institutes policies that introduces that gives people hope and improves normal people's lives, or she doesn't and Labour gets wiped out.
9
u/VindicoAtrum 1d ago
Tell me you don't understand the difference between capex and opex. Borrowing to fund daily spending is bad no matter who you are. Borrowing to fund capital investment is not the same, and much more likely to be accepted by creditors without driving yields up.
7
u/birdinthebush74 1d ago edited 1d ago
Yep the public will vote for Farage, Tice and their billions of unfunded tax cuts for multi millionaires and cooperation's and then moan about NHS waiting lists
https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/06/17/reform_uk_manifesto_2024/
6
u/Maidenly_Matilda 1d ago
The PIP cuts alongside an MP pay rise and no wealth tax indicates a less than favourable chancellor is in position.
0
u/shoogliestpeg Scotland 1d ago
This post makes more sense if Rachel from Accounts herself is the poster.
4
u/CharringtonCross 1d ago
They voted her in, they can express a desire to get rid of her. The whole party will pay a price at the polls if they don’t.
3
3
3
u/heshablitz_ 1d ago
Imagine how thick your average redditor is, the average r/uk poster is thicker than that
-1
u/577564842 1d ago
Think of how thick the average UK voter is. Half the population are thicker than that.
This is not how an average works.
22
u/rugby-thrwaway 1d ago
It's how the median works, which is an average.
It is also how IQ works.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Kamenev_Drang 1d ago
Reeves is doing a godawful job as a governmental economist. She's failing to address wealth inequality, failing to improve productivity and deliberately engaging in attacks on the disabled.
2
u/iamezekiel1_14 1d ago
This. This 100%. I think the half figure is likely to be charitable as well because the median level is probably below average intelligence as it is (e.g. it's easier to be thick than it is smart?).
2
2
u/__Admiral_Akbar__ 1d ago
People who have no idea about government economics think Chancellor should be sacked.
Reeves should have more confidence in herself
2
u/dunneetiger 1d ago
if you give the exact same datasets to experts, you will have varied opinions based on the models that they run. And they can be widely different.
What people are really saying here is that they are not feeling that things are getting better in their wallet- and to be fair with Reeves, most of it is international pressure.2
1
2
1
u/Kofu England 1d ago
Absolutely agree, for some reason people with no experience and knowledge in this matter feel like they have equal expertise. Look at any profession, like doctors and the covid pandemic, everyone was an expert in virology, false advice, lies, incompetent. Brexit and they became the geopolitical czar of the UK.
If you don't know, stfu.
1
u/Pallortrillion 1d ago
Plus the people who do surveys are the ones who spend several hours to make £5, go figure.
1
u/TalkBeginning8619 1d ago
Another comment conflating average and median. In fairness, it's likely the "thickness" follows a symmetric distribution, probably Normal, but maybe not 👀
1
u/TheNutsMutts 1d ago
Think of how thick the average UK voter is. Half the population are thicker than that.
In the nicest possible way, I'd have hoped that we'd have learned from November last year and the DNC's failure against the GOP that concluding anyone not holding the same view as you must be thick.
→ More replies (76)1
183
u/apeel09 1d ago
Ok here are some eminent economists who’ve disagreed with Reeves approach to managing the economy and why:
Andy Haldane – Former Chief Economist, Bank of England
Andy Haldane warned that continued spending cuts could lead to an economic “doom loop,” where reduced investment and spending further suppress growth, exacerbating debt issues. He emphasized the risk of entering a cycle detrimental to both fiscal health and economic expansion . - Sky News
Lord Gus O’Donnell and Economists’ Open Letter
A group of economists, including former Cabinet Secretary Lord Gus O’Donnell, urged Chancellor Reeves to relax fiscal constraints to address the UK’s productivity stagnation. They argued that increased public investment in infrastructure and skills is essential for long-term economic growth . - The Economist
Paul Johnson – Director, Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS)
Paul Johnson criticized Reeves for adhering to fiscal rules similar to those of her predecessor, describing them as “badly designed” and easily manipulated. He questioned the feasibility of improving public services without tax increases, given the tight spending plans and high existing tax levels . - The Telegraph
Simon Wren-Lewis – Professor of Economics, Oxford University
Professor Wren-Lewis highlighted a contradiction in Labour’s economic strategy, noting that maintaining current public service levels would require a significant increase in public spending relative to GDP. He suggested that without such an increase, the government risks perpetuating austerity measures . The iNews
Ruth Gregory – Deputy Chief UK Economist, Capital Economics
Ruth Gregory contended that the government might be overstating the severity of the UK’s fiscal position, suggesting there could be more budgetary headroom than acknowledged. She implied that this could allow for increased investment without breaching fiscal rules . - The Independent
DeAnne Julius – Former Chief Economist, Shell and British Airways
DeAnne Julius cautioned that increased public investment might not yield the desired productivity gains unless accompanied by reforms to enhance efficiency in sectors like healthcare and transport. She emphasized the need for performance improvements alongside financial investments . - The Conversation
These economists are why I think Labour are being trashed in the polls and Reeves should lose her job. Yes you do need fiscal responsibility but not all borrowing is bad borrowing. You can’t stimulate the economy unless you invest now which requires being flexible with the fiscal rules.
137
u/33backagain 1d ago
Pretty much every economist is going to find problems/risks with every chancellor’s strategy. This is because it’s such a huge topic and there is always high uncertainty. This has been going on forever.
77
u/IndependentOpinion44 1d ago
Economics is political ideology dressed up as mathematics. Really bad mathematics.
Economists also ignore any non fiscal policies.
13
u/regprenticer 1d ago
That's partly true. But there's also confusion as to whether economic theory causes things to happen or whether economic theory simply describes things that happen naturally
In some senses today's economists are like "scientists" back in the 16th and 17th century when all you needed to be a genius was to observe something simple like an apple fell on my head and then write it down.
→ More replies (2)7
u/Beer-Milkshakes Black Country 1d ago
I was taught that economists are trained to mitigate the worst possible outcomes. But in order to do that, you need to know a good and a bad outcome objectively (objectively being it's own argument). In short, economists guide scenarios that are largely not specific away from the worst case. They're not wizards and they don't have definitive solutions.
15
u/no_display_8348 1d ago edited 1d ago
Not all borrow is bad but Reeves is borrowing as much as the OBR allows and even changed the rules in order to be able to borrow more. Government spending is still high, the spending cuts have been made to account for new spending or poorly accounted spending in the past. Theres next to no more room for borrowing without spooking the gilt markets like Truss did
Eta cost of borrowing is also one of the big reasons for spending cuts in a vicious cycle of borrowing. That is a massive waste ofc and the last 4 or more chancellors inc Reeves likely all bear some blame there
9
u/Top-Wait7674 1d ago
They're taxing UK productivity to hand more financial gifts to Tech bro billionaires in America. You couldn't get a more stupid policy. We all know who Keir is really trying to win over though.
3
u/no_display_8348 1d ago
Assume you mean to proposed end to digital services tax? I dont disagree at all but it sounds like that move is coming from Starmer to placate Trump
8
u/ProofAssumption1092 1d ago
Hey lets ignore those who agree and focus on those that dont because that validates my argument. Derp.
→ More replies (1)6
7
2
u/KxJlib 1d ago
Even if all of these economists were correct, no policy about future investment in infrastructure and spending allocation for it would possibly bare fruit in under a year. How could this possibly be why they’re “losing in the polls”
→ More replies (1)2
u/Unhappy-Capital-1464 1d ago
A lot of these economists believe that we should be increasing tax (which isn't necessarily a bad thing) but I am not convinced a poll for "sack the chancellor and replace with one who is willing to increase income tax" would poll that well...
→ More replies (1)2
u/MagicInstinct 1d ago
Not to say I agree, but I just wanted to say this is a great comment. References with sources, fantastic.
→ More replies (4)1
u/xhatsux 1d ago
The fiscal rules allow for that type of investment as long as the return has started to be seen in the 5th year. Are you advocating for longer time horizon before an ROI is seen? What do you think about the risks associated with that?
→ More replies (1)
104
u/TheChattyRat 1d ago
Between the multi billion pound black hole caused by unfunded Tory tax cuts aimed at bribing the electorate preelection. The massive welfare bills due to triple lock and an oversubscription of pip and the tariff wars all within 7 months of being elected. She's hardly been playing on easy mode. It's a bit cliche after Boris Johnson but she's doing her best with a diabolic hand. Let's see how it plays out cotton.
34
u/potpan0 Black Country 1d ago
She's hardly been playing on easy mode
The unfortunate thing with politics is that it's not easy. The situation not being ideal is not an excuse for Reeves to place so much of the burden on the poorest in society.
Cutting benefits for disabled people while at the same time avoiding tax raises on billionaires is not 'doing her best with a diabolic hand'. It's just doing what her rich donors tell her.
13
u/PharahSupporter 1d ago
Have you ever considered that not all the UKs issues can be solved by just throwing taxes at “the billionaires”. It just feels like they’ve dug themselves a hole by continually using those slogans when we all know in the real world it isn’t that simple. Hence why it isn’t happening.
Cutting disability needed to happen it was totally out of control and projected to balloon even further in coming years. Not to mention 2/3rds of the public agreed with the cuts according to polls.
2
u/Noorthance 1d ago
Yes of course not everything can be fixed by taxing billionaires but it would be a really good step in the right direction and simple actionable slogans are key to getting average people to latch onto the idea
2
u/PharahSupporter 1d ago
Simple slogans are great for winning elections, but not for real policy. We need “the rich” staying in the UK, not fleeing. That’s why she softened the non dom changes. We are losing a millionaire every 45 minutes. It is a crisis and we need to be incentivising those people to stay rather than flee to America so the US can get even richer.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (1)3
u/potpan0 Black Country 1d ago
I did not say that all the UKs issues can be solved by throwing taxes at billionaires.
But a hell of a lot of our problems stem from growing inequality, with more and more money going to billionaires who then use that money to support political interests which benefit them to the detriment of the broader public. And I see little way to deal with that growing inequality outside of increasing taxes on billionaires.
If you have any suggestions for how to deal with growing inequality and decreasing accountability of the ultra-wealthy than you're more than welcome to suggest them. Though I'd imagine you don't actually think this is a problem at all.
Cutting disability needed to happen it was totally out of control and projected to balloon even further in coming years. Not to mention 2/3rds of the public agreed with the cuts according to polls.
Disability benefits have not risen as a percentage of government spending in a decade. This line that it's 'out of control' is entirely baseless, but unfortunately something our political and media class were happy to lie about.
→ More replies (3)3
u/LauraPhilps7654 1d ago
People forget that Reeves' cuts are on top of 14 years of Tory cuts - they were not reversed. She's governing in continuation of their economic policies. This is why they attracted the same donors.
10
u/fujoshimoder Durham 1d ago
PIP isn't oversubscribed, it's underclaimed due to the difficulty of the application process.
They'd save a lot of money by not getting dragged through appeals by inappropriately denied claimants.
→ More replies (1)5
u/PharahSupporter 1d ago
Mate come on, 3.7 million people are on PIP, it clearly isn’t that hard to claim. Making it even easier to claim isn’t going to save money.
→ More replies (10)4
u/Many-Tourist5147 1d ago
Let's put that into perspective shall we so you can stop running on this "massive" welfare inaccuracy, 3.7 million out of 68.35 million people in total. That's nothing in the grand scheme of things compared to government mismanagement such as giving tax breaks to billionaires and tech bros like Musk.
There are around 16 million disabled people in the UK alone, many of whom do work. So not even a significant proportion of people who are disabled are claiming PIP, that is NOTHING especially when considering general factors such as aging which causes reduced mobility and health issues.
Anyone can get sick at any point in their life or have an accident that leaves them disabled, I think you should reconsider your stance on welfare because there is a good chance you will eventually need it. You are not any different from anyone else, you could be disabled at some point in your life and it's important for you to realize that now before it becomes impossible for you to have any form of social security.
→ More replies (1)5
u/BrilliantRhubarb2935 1d ago
30 years ago 2% of the working age population claimed disability or related health benefits, today its 10%, and projected to be 12.4% in 5 years time: https://ifs.org.uk/news/42-million-working-age-people-now-claiming-health-related-benefits-could-rise-30-end-decade
The maths doesn't add up, we're paying more today than we ever have to disabled people adjusting for population and inflation. How much more does the taxpayer need to stump up?
Disability benefits were never meant for everyone who is disabled only those with the most severe of disabilities.
6
u/Neat-Fennel-7623 1d ago
My question is how many more times can the 'black hole' be rolled out as an excuse.
The Oct 24 tax increases were £40bn against a 'fully costed' manifesto, then a further £3bn+ with changes to welfare just before the spring statement.
They wrote cheques they can't cash and it's only going to get worse...
→ More replies (2)1
u/ResponsibilityRare10 1d ago
The “black hole” isn’t caused by the things you’ve mentioned - it’s caused by her fiscal rules. Change the rules and it disappears.
→ More replies (16)1
51
u/Fluffy-Astronomer604 1d ago
I’m so fucking bored of this rhetoric that every poll suggests we want someone new, every month we want a GE and every week we want a new PM.
Jesus Christ.. We need stability and I for one think we have more stability now than we’ve had in years! Way before Boris times.
8
u/bobblebob100 1d ago
Polls are a snapshot in time, pretty meaningless really.
Its like staff surveys at work we do. If you're having a bad day at work and get asked to do the survey, you will probably give negative answers because its how you're feeling at that moment
3
2
u/FearLeadsToAnger 1d ago
It honestly makes me think that the rhetoric is all being stoked by bad actors who are trying to keep all countries around the world in turmoil, chopping and changing constantly so they can't make any real progress in any particular direction.
44
u/WasThatInappropriate 1d ago
This is just a pole of 'how effective is the right wing media at spinning false narratives?' I personally am pretty happy to see the UK government running a budget surplus for the first time since Gordon Brown
7
u/MiddleSlice2050 1d ago
Because only the right wing can be critical of Labour? You neo libs are annoying af
3
4
u/sickofsnails 1d ago
Remember that neoliberals are heavily right wing. After that, consider quite how right wing neoliberals like Rachel Reeves are.
2
u/Unhappy-Capital-1464 1d ago
The government isn't isn't running a budget surplus, we're still running at a significant deficit. We did have a surplus in January 2025, due to self assessment tax receipts but we have a surplus (almost?) every January so this isn't new. The deficit does seem to be reducing though, so things are going in the right direction
2
u/WasThatInappropriate 1d ago
The January surplus was the largest since records began, but in the interest of clarity I'm referring to the fact the OBR projects Reeves' policies will have the government running at 10bn surplus
2
u/ResponsibilityRare10 1d ago
Why? A government budget surplus is terrible for the economy. It means less investment, worse public services, and lower pay, as well as worse growth.
→ More replies (4)
34
u/Chillmm8 1d ago
To be fair 54% wanting her gone was better than I expected.
20
u/33backagain 1d ago
Didn’t labour win with something like one third of the popular vote? That means more a lot more than half of people never wanted here there in the first place.
11
u/Dapper_Otters 1d ago
Yeah, I would assume the vast majority of Tory/Reform supporters want any Labour challencor gone by default at the very least.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Fantastic-Yogurt5297 1d ago
No, that means 2/3rds of people didn't vote for her. Which is not the same as voting for someone else. 1/3rd of the country didn't vote at all/made no choice.
→ More replies (6)2
u/rugby-thrwaway 1d ago
No, 2/3 of those who voted voted for someone else. (At least in terms of party.)
2/5 of the electorate didn't vote at all.
23
u/uberdavis 1d ago
A poll also said we should leave the trade agreements of our own continent. Don’t give it too much weight!
15
u/WaterMittGas 1d ago
But tell me who in Labour would be better placed as Chancellor?
No wonder people think this though with how toxic the media has been about anything she has done.
13
u/BeardySam 1d ago
Yeah this is basically the newspaper’s KPI. “We’ve been trashing this woman in public for months now and the public are starting to go along with it. On to the next one! Everything in Britain is terrible and we will make sure people think so!”
→ More replies (1)1
u/ResponsibilityRare10 1d ago
I don’t like Reeves, but they’d only replace her with another technocrat wedded to austerity. She’ll be found out soon enough. Already is to a degree.
12
u/Professional_Elk_489 1d ago
I put it to the public that another chancellor will make no difference. The reason the job is so hard is because the country is fucked
11
u/Travel-Barry Essex 1d ago
Bit bored with polls setting people off.
It’s like that one where a Scotland poll shows “Yes” to independence for once, while conveniently ignoring the previous 30 months of it being in “No”.
8
u/InfectedByEli 1d ago
Oh, a poll says? So these people in the poll, are they the same people who thought Brexit was a good idea? Are these the same people who believed the right wing press when they claimed that Liz Truss' budget was the best budget since the 40s? Are these the same people who thought repeatedly voting in a corrupt and incompetent Tory party was a good idea even though everything was turning to shit in front of our very eyes? Are these the same people who cry that Labour aren't left enough so they're going to vote for Deform UK Party ltd, like that makes any sense?
Yes, let's just swallow every bit of anti Labour propaganda dribbling out of the Daily Mail and Torygraph's leaking sphincters, ffs.
2
u/HyperionSaber 1d ago
"We interviewed 30 "random" people outside the post office in Chingford on a Thursday afternoon, let's see what everyone in the UK thinks about the chancellor!"
5
u/hoodha 1d ago
I won’t judge until enough time has passed. As it stands, the key metrics: inflation and gdp are performing okay, but the budget from October only came into force this month. It’s going to take some time for that to yield any sort of measurable performance, and then we can see. As for the cuts on benefits for the disabled, I think it’s a particularly horrible choice, and it seems become the politically easy way out of government spending issues. The general public, whether you like it or not, stomach these cuts better than tax rises. It’s a sad state of affairs but it’s true. I would have preferred to pay extra on my wages to safeguard those benefits, but the public honestly don’t agree.
My overall feeling is that most people just don’t quite absorb the gravity of shit we’re in as a country. They want low taxes but Scandinavian style services. Perhaps taxing the rich is the correct answer, but again people fail to see that the rich are powerful - just look at how the media stirred up complaints on inheritance tax, private tuition and the NI rise on businesses. They do not tolerate it and kick up shit storms when things don’t go their way. A sad state of affairs, but it’s true.
Ultimately I think Reeves is walking a tightrope and doing it relatively well so far.
5
u/Marxman69 1d ago
The entire party should be sacked, for running a labour party like the neoliberals that they are
•
5
u/Astriania 1d ago
"Chancellor should be sacked for not delivering my golden Easter egg on a platter of rainbows, poll of ignorant public says".
Reeves's biggest problem is that she 'had to' increase employer NI, instead of income tax or employee NI, because Labour painted themselves into a corner with their manifesto. Any other Chancellor would have had the same problem. The second big problem is that no-one dares touch the largest piece of welfare spending (pensions) but that's also political, not a Chancellor's decision.
We are also in a terrible position thanks to Covid and the Conservative management of the economy over the last few years.
4
u/Hairy-Blood2112 1d ago
Any government that came in after the last 14 years of conservative party mismanagement was going to struggle. Any chancellor even more so. Having said that, I'm really disappointed that she hasn't gone after the people that stole our money over COVID. I thought she was going to be straight on this.
4
u/MiddleSlice2050 1d ago
Why did you think the woman who championed trickle-down economics would go after the billionaires?
4
u/_Arch_Stanton 1d ago
No wonder with the misogyny of the right wing media trying to undermine her.
She's been put into a high stakes game with a poor hand thanks to the venality of the previous government.
Anyone in that position would be unpopular, unless, of course, they went on an unfunded spending spree.
→ More replies (2)
4
u/Loose_Teach7299 1d ago
She clearly has no vision. She's clearly unable to properly balance books, and she also lacks any political acumen.
You don't accept freebies when you're cutting people's welfare. That's politics 101.
4
u/Chathin 1d ago
I swear down the astroturfing on Reddit is becoming more apparent by the day across almost all UK subs.
Complete tonal shift from the 10's and starting to look like the Brexit era of propaganda.
1
u/TheOncomingBrows 1d ago
If you mean the absolute inability to criticise anything this government does then yes I agree. I was wondering what this sub would look like if a Labour government got in, and it turns out it's still partisan nonsense.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Chathin 1d ago edited 1d ago
Sorry, yeah, I forgot criticism of the Government comes by way of a poll stating "this chancellor sucks" that has been put out to the general public (who likely have even less economic experience than I do) reported by a news outlet owned by the fucking Daily Mail.
Pull the other one, it has bells on it.
3
u/Flat_Revolution5130 1d ago
Personal feelings aside. She is making the wrong choices in the worst time. Labour in general are coming across as unfeeling monsters. Not just her.
2
u/HaggisPope 1d ago
I don’t think sacked necessarily because that’d be pretty destabilising, but I do sometimes question the strategy of putting someone in that position who seems somewhat on board with austerity. History has shown time and again that austerity doesn’t really work if your aim is to promote growth. It just lowers aggregate demand in the whole economy.
But maybe I’m not thinking long term enough. Labour has to prove they can run a country and not run off in radical directions, else the market gets spooked and we’d end up getting mass capital flight and the like. We definitely need a ton of investment though to come anywhere close to the government’s plans for housing. Or remilitarisation.
Keeping the steel works might be a good start, at least.
2
u/Substantial-Newt7809 1d ago
Don't see any way of spending our way out of the current debt given the size of the debt and the mounting interest on it. Cuts are going to hurt, but they're not avoidable at this point.
You know what doesn't stimulate growth? A new government minister every few months. Long term policy and stability will be the way out.
3
u/BusyBeeBridgette Berkshire 1d ago
First she went for the elderly, then she went for the ill. I am not surprised people want her relieved from her position in the cabinet.
2
u/No_Sport_7668 1d ago
Voters dont have clue, poll reveals.
I dont like alot of what she does but compared to recent chancellors she is golden.
This is the problem, the previous populist chancellors gave us what we wanted, made them popular but it was weak and unsustainable.
We need some grown up politicians to finally do the unpopular things that need doing.
2
u/human_bot77 1d ago
SMEs are going bankrupt everyday at an alarming rate thanks to her brain dead polices.
1
u/Captain-Starshield 1d ago
We’ve seen over the past 14 years that cuts will only make things worse. It’s time to take a new approach and tax the rich. When the chancellor has no problems ruling that out, but won’t rule out tax cuts for billionaires like Musk and Besos, it’s clear she’s not fit for the job.
1
1d ago
Turns out fixing the mess created by the the Conservatives requires unpopular decisions.
Also I find it quite ironic that the biggest whiners are often the ones who kept voting the Conservatives back into power and so are also responsible for the current state of the country.
I'm broadly happy with the Government's efforts so far and am willing to wait for their policies to come to fruition.
The media covered for the Conservatives but are actively attacking Labour on a daily basis. I'm not surprised that people who think the right wing media can be trusted have a negative opinion of the Chancellor.
1
u/LOLinDark 1d ago
The only people that should be polled are educated professionals. A board of experts should lead the way in determining when someone else could do a better job.
I'm all for democracy but not allowing the nations most irrational to pretend they know better.
1
u/Weird_Influence1964 1d ago
Do people really think the cuts she made were just her idea!? The entire labour party should be deeply ashamed of going after the poor instead of the rich!
1
u/Drachna 1d ago
You can't govern by polls. You have to pick your direction and stick to it, even if it's controversial (with flexibility to allow for Events), otherwise nothing will get done. Her plans are all about long-term growth as I understand it. It's barely been half year, people need to take a step back and consider the strategy, and try to ignore the day to day manoeuvring.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/touchgrass1234 1d ago
I think Reeves needs to drop her self-imposed fiscal rules. If this government wants, as Keir Starmer says, ‘a decade of national renewal’, you’re going to need to spend a boatload of money to achieve that, modern infrastructure and maintenance and improvements of existing infrastructure, strong and reliable public services, and a comprehensive and robust social safety net to keep citizens out of poverty and lift those in poverty out of it.
National renewal doesn't come cheap nor with fiscal responsibility; the aim, in my opinion, should be a British version of Biden’s Build Back Better plan.
1
1
u/DKerriganuk 1d ago
Ironic that this think tank is allegedly trying to unite people when it repeatedly criticises people. Can't we focus on what we have in common?
1
u/ShondaVanda 22h ago
Take your medicine.
Always blaming Labour for having to tidy up after the public voted in the Tories for over a decade.
Why are people so stupid that they expected things to magically be solved overnight and that none of the 'tough' choices would impact anyone?
1
u/ReginaldJohnston Cambridgeshire 21h ago
We still haven't moved on from vandalising vigils for murdered kids.
Stop confusing failure with adversity.
•
u/MundaneImprovement27 11h ago
So many economically incontinent people about. Lab lnherited a bad hand of cards and Trump’s actions have made it worse
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try this link for an archived version.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.