Rachel Reeves: Do you increase salaries across the public sector without raising taxes?

 

Just hours ago the Labour Party launched an attack against Conservative policies regarding National Service and possibly concription because of the cost of such policies. But after that, Labour Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves stated that a Labour government would increase salaries across the public sector. Well, how much will it cost to increase salaries across the public sector. I reckon that it would be a lot more than National Service or Conscription.

Right before an election the mountain of contradictions rises on a daily basis. Just before Rachel Reeves spoke about salary increases in the public sector, Keir Starmer said that he would not get rid of the two children cap when it comes to Children Benefits in spite of the fact that he would want to do so. I guess the Labor Leader was thinking about cost of getting rid of the two children cap.

Services are necessary, but services cost monies that need to be paid with higher taxes at a time when interest paid on public borrowing is extraordinarily high. Labour says that it will not implement austerity, but you cannot promise to pay high interest on public borrowing and raise salaries without increasing taxes. And if you start increasing taxes, you can guarantee that companies that pay higher taxes are going to turn those higher tax payments into higher prices to balance the books. There is also the danger that higher taxes will lower consumption thus affecting the monies that the state can collect as taxes. Higher rates and lower amount of monies coming to the Treasury. And what about companies that are struggling to make ends meet? Less customers coming through the doors and higher taxes pushing up prices are not a recipe for success.

This is the way it works. If you collect 100 Pound as taxes and suddenly prices go up, then you will collect 100 Pound as taxes but only nominally. You are going to be able to buy less with your 100 Pound. State employees will be getting salaries that are worth less money in spite of nominal increases.

If you are paying 2500 for rent and suddenly the cost of renting goes up to 3500 then your salary has actually been devalued. Nominal increases will make things a lot worse.

Jeremy Hunt: November 17th 2022 - Tax Day

 

November 17th 2022 - Tax Day

A hole in public finances of  more than 50 billion Pound will have to be plugged. Apart from the prospect of budget cuts affecting services, the alternative is a massive amount of tax increases.

Kwasi Kwarteng was slaughtered, thrown to the wolves, because he wanted to implement Liz Truss policies of tax reductions. What will happen to Jeremy Hunt when he announces a budget that contains punitive measures?

Let us remember that on the first round of the leadership election that led to the Premiership of Liz Truss the now Chancellor of the Exchequer didn't manage to progress beyond the first round. He was not popular among MPs and was not popular among the Membership of the Conservative Party. Now, the same man is going to propose a budget that goes against what is the declared ideological stance of the Conservative Party. Rising energy costs, rising interest rates plus rising taxes. If you are a business owner struggling to survive in the present financial environment, how are you going to react? Will you minimize your business to reduce fixed costs and in doing so sent your staff to the queue of the unemployed? A very harsh winter coming for those who lose their jobs when families are already struggling to pay for rental accommodation because they don't have the means to afford mortgage payments.

Wasn't Rishi Sunak the one who suggested that we should have a long term approach instead of shock therapy? Will such a budget be compatible with long term thinking? If Jeremy Hunt goes to far, this could the end of Jeremy Hunt and also the end of an already wavering Rishi Sunak? What next? Another leadership election?

Just a few months ago it was reported that recent interest rates will put more than 500,000 mortgages in jeopardy. Will more taxes and more unemployment make the situation better or worse? If the mortgage business falters, the financial system as a whole will be in serious trouble. We don't need even to explain what a wave of mortgage and load defaults will do to the economy.

Countries are people: We must not allow homelessness or housing instability

 

As somebody who has been married for more than 28 years and brought up three children, I fully understand the importance of having a set abode. Where you live, the quality of the place where you live, and the stability of accommodation is a crucial factor that should never be underestimated.

If for whatever reason you don't live in adequate accommodation or if you are constantly having to move around, your life and your family life will be dramatically affected in a very negative way.

When you look at the language of social services, there is an emphasis on stable families, suitable environment to raise children, et cetera. Such considerations should be ever present when it comes to policies that affect housing. High rental costs for people who can ill afford to buy their own accommodation are a death trap that puts families in danger and ultimately will create a very unstable society.

For most people, working means having to travel around and much time, money and health are spent travelling around. If you live far away from the places where you work, you are going to be spending a long time on the road and this is time that you are not to be spending with your family, looking after your family, and you are going to be losing many opportunities. If on top of that, you have no certainty in terms of where you are going to be living in, you are going to struggle with travelling arrangements and your children are most probably have to move from one school to another and unable to form stable social relationships. This will feel like being regularly uprooted. This is what far too many families in the United Kingdom are facing right now.

If we ignore or underestimate the aforementioned realities, as a country we are bound to pay a very high price because countries are basically people. 

KGH