You are reading a single comment by @Dramatic_Hammer and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
13% more tax or an increase from 20% to 33%?
Austerity appears to be a conveniently ‘common sense’ lie rather than a valid financial tactic, when applied to a country in control of its own currency.
I don’t think nationalisation even needs to be accounted for in terms of expenditure, as you’re essentially buying a business which generates money, using money you’ve loaned to yourself.
Edit: Everything else I agree on, just interested in the theoretical numbers there.
Dramatic_Hammer
Without freedom of movement of labour this country is going to be fucked, as we don’t have enough natives with the skills and motivation to be, for e.g. doctors, nurses, engineers, builders and so forth.
So it may be a redline, but it’s a redline built on prejudice rather than anything rational- so rather than be pandered to it needs to be resolved, although that’s likely impossible given the press and narrative from all political parties.
Given that every single free trade deal we’ve made inquiries about includes (essentially) FOM for that countries citizens to the UK we’ll end up there anyway.
So- what is enough for remainders? Remaining. All other options are shit.
How shit? Best case scenario (government figures) is equivalent to a 13% increase in tax on the lowest income workers, which they can’t pay, so mega-austerity would be required. Corbyn might well get in, but he’d have £0 to pay for anything, re-nationalising railways, the NHS, infrastructure etc.