The private sector is fundamentally unproductive in the UK, compared to the rest of the world; that’s the truth that we have to face.
We face massive underemployment in this country as a consequence, and that’s the truth that we have to face.
Low productivity requires more labour to perform the same set of tasks. That’s what it actually means. Higher productivity means using less labour to perform that same set of tasks.
And there are whole communities starved of investment in the UK as a consequence of the private sector withdrawing from them, in effect, and that’s the truth that we have to face.
More investment means higher productivity and the employment of less labour to achieve the same tasks.
you can put your head in the sand and you can say, I’m talking nonsense,
Yes, yes, you are.
“And there are whole communities starved of investment in the UK”
Indeed. The fat ranting grifter community faces particular challenges.
“The private sector is fundamentally unproductive in the UK”
Gosh, wait until he hears about the public sector
The man’s a loon!
“And there are whole communities starved of investment in the UK as a consequence of the private sector withdrawing from them, in effect, and that’s the truth that we have to face.”
This might actually be true. Now the logical question to ask would be “why?”. The correct answer is not to try to force private sector to invest in a given geographical area
And to not tax them out of business, or out of the country at least.
“We’re told the UK is living beyond its means. But who exactly is living beyond them? It’s not schools, libraries, or the NHS. It’s not people in poverty. It’s the private monopolies and unchecked corporate profits.”
Libraries are overwhelmingly a huge waste of money. They made sense when books were scarce and expensive back in the 1930s. But today, it’s cheap to make books. It’s so cheap, it’s cheaper than administering rentals. There is now a glut of books. Second-hand bookshops rarely exist. Charity shops are stuffed with them, little libraries in villages. And that’s just considering paper books. And not even counting travel costs. I buy these British Library Crime Classics on Kindle for about £3 each. It would cost me £8 to go to the library by bus to get it, and then to return it. Before we get into the cost of the library. And that sucks, because I have to return it in 2 weeks.
“It’s pushing up the price on things like mobile phone contracts”
Good God. I pay £18/month for 100GB of 5G, including 30GB of roaming. I switched from to one of the cheaper companies on the same backbones. No idea if they have been increasing prices but compared to 20 years ago, that’s an utter bargain.
“If we are living beyond our means, it’s because we are fueling the excess profits of these businesses”
Fucking hell. Vodafone make the square root of fuck all in profit. Last time I checked, their P/E was something like 7. The only company making fat profits in telecoms is Apple, and well, if you’re buying iPhones then you were lucky to ever get together with that much money.
“And there are whole communities starved of investment in the UK as a consequence of the private sector withdrawing from them, in effect, and that’s the truth that we have to face.”
And as ever you have to ask yourself – why? Why does the private sector refuse to make money out of these people? Is it because if someone comes and builds something nice in their area they probably try and destroy it?
Its the age old question – why does nobody like me ? Well if everybody you meet dislikes you, perhaps you are the problem…..
Hazlitt was right.
There’s a few places where private directly competes against public for income.
e.g. Lumo/Grand Central/Hull trains versus LNER
The Pentland Ferry versus the nationalised CalMac one
It’s pretty obvious which of the pairings are more productive.
Perhaps the problem is that the private sector is free not to waste its money on unproductive cunts? Just a thought…
We face massive underemployment in this country
Does he ask why our government continues to import millions of unskilled third-worlders every year then?
It would be an interesting thought experiment to work out how much private sector labour is devoted to unproductive activity not directy related to their output
For example
Legal compliance with government directives and legal requirements
Administering schemes on behalf of government (eg salary sacrifice for cars/bikes)Charges on emplyment (NI/Pensions etc)
Negotiating a byzantine tax system
Litigation
Planning and replanning as government priorities/policy change
And there are whole communities starved of investment in the UK
And woe betide any investor who has the temerity to make a profit let alone get wealthy on the back of the investments, for they shall have the ire of a retired accountant in Ely to deal with, as well as a green eyed monster in the form of the state gobbling up those profits in the form of high taxes as well as potentially windfall and wealth taxes.
@Starfish
This was back in the noughties, though I doubt things have improved since…
I had a second job running a startup. Most evenings, some weekends. Nearly all my labour was dealing with government crap, this form, that form, this tax, that tax, employees being chased by this dept or that dept for unpaid tax or child support bills (well, the scum of the state chase the employer instead, easier target). Keeping the public sector parasites off the other owners’ backs so they could try to run a new company became pretty much my entire job there.
The lesson I took from the whole experience was to never bother trying to create a company or be an employer again.
Starfish, you’ve forgotten PowerPoint. And perhaps Slack.
“The lesson I took from the whole experience was to never bother trying to create a company or be an employer again.”
Indeed, and your reward for any success is punitive taxation on income, assets and any other wealth you dare to accumulate
I am rapidly approaching a forced retirement, many others also resent working to pay for the welfare-addicted
“The lesson I took from the whole experience was to never bother trying to create a company or be an employer again.”
Atlas shrugging.
Fuck me does this turkey know ANYTHING about economics? It would appear not from this (and countless other examples to be fair).
Bongo,
Lumo adopted airline-style pricing. You can only get £20 for a seat? Charge £19. Fill trains.
The commies are all “they’re profiting off rails. No. They aren’t. They’re adding value. Because the commies don’t care about trains being full. Passengers are a nuisance.
It’s why coach travel is greener than trains per passenger mile. National Express fill coaches. They shouldn’t be. A full train is more efficient. But lots of trains aren’t full. Many are almost empty. Worse than every person being put in a taxi.
Is the UK living beyond its means?
I read an article in the Financial Times recently that boldly declared that we were living way beyond our means, and I profoundly disagree with it, because what it was saying was that the thing that we had to cut was the size of the UK government.
The state is larger than it has ever been outside wartime and it needs to be bigger?
It’s always schools, the NHS, support for the disabled, social care and those profligate librarians who are the cause of our national distress, according to those who claim that we are living beyond our means.
Actually a lot of library expenditure could be examined (things relating to LGBT Alphabet soup or disabled arguably are excessive) but I think people know it’s the non productive public sector and the universities, alongside the quangoes that need to be cut
They always say it’s the state that’s inefficient and which must be cut, but when doing so, they ignore some absolutely fundamental truths.
The private sector is fundamentally unproductive in the UK, compared to the rest of the world; that’s the truth that we have to face.
Goebbels lives.
We face massive underemployment in this country as a consequence, and that’s the truth that we have to face.
And there are whole communities starved of investment in the UK as a consequence of the private sector withdrawing from them, in effect, and that’s the truth that we have to face.
Yes – because of course crowding out isn’t real and if we simply spend more money that will mean greater output.
But it isn’t the state that is causing our problems.
Really – immigration, crime, foreign relations – these are down to the private sector?
Nor are states pushing people into situations where they can’t afford to live. The private sector is doing that.
By bringing over excessive numbers of people without the wherewithal to support themselves and allowing them to remain the state is directly responsible for the housing crisis, also by blocking planning applications and making building housing difficult. All comes back to the state.
It’s pushing up rents.
Wrong – almost all the excessive costs are caused by regulation. Increase in tenants’ rights. Making it harder to move people on. Environmental regs. Restrictions after Grenfell on Cladding. Myriad other regulatory burdens. All caused by the state.
It’s pushing up property costs.
What logic is this? Excessive demand is caused by the Private sector
It’s pushing up interest charges on mortgages and car loans, and everything else.
Due to the excessive costs caused by the dead succubus of state pensions and excessive National insurance charges prices are having to rise. The state costs a fortune and because in many cases it provides nothing for its output it is entirely deadweight cost.
It’s pushing up the price on things like mobile phone contracts, electricity, gas prices, and water, too; all of those things are pushed up because they are supplied by private monopolies.
Really – the electricity price cap is driven by ‘private monopolies?’ Net Zero which is causing us to have the
most expensive electricity anywhere in the world is caused by the Private sector?
If we are living beyond our means, it’s because we are fueling the excess profits of these businesses and not because we’re over-consuming the NHS and schools.
What we are actually seeing is a world of unchecked excess, which those who argue that we must cut the state want to continue. You never see those who argue that we must cut the size of the NHS say that we must cut the number of weight loss drugs that are being prscribed to deal with the problems created by addictive food, sold by the private sector.
It’s not my fault I am a fat bastard – must be the ‘food companies’
You never hear those who claim that we can’t afford to support those with disabilities say we also can’t afford SUVs and giant cars, which are bigger every year, because that’s just not their own priority.
The government should take over the distribution and manufacture of motor vehicles?
And you never hear those who say that we can’t afford to tackle climate change, saying that we must cut the number of cheap flights we take for holidays in the sun, which are 92% of all the flights taken out of the UK each year, which are helping to burn our planet.
There is an excess in this country. We do consume too much for the planetary constraints that now exist.
He’s running on a platform of outlawing foreign holidays for the majority of the population. Interesting tactics.
We are getting excess heat as a result. We are getting droughts. And we’re also getting more rain as a consequence. It’s clear that something is wrong, but those who claim we are living beyond our means, say, and I’ve said it before, “It’s those profligate librarians who are putting too many books on the shelves in Wolverhampton who are bringing the state down.”
Not so much a straw man as a thatched roof man
Not once do they say it is banks and big business that are contributing to this.
Numerous people condemn the banks and big business on many issues. But that in no way exculpates the state from failing catastrophically on almost every measure
We must change the way we live, is the point.
We have to look at how we manage the climate crisis.
We have to look at how we change our food supply so that people are not made ill by it in the future, as they very clearly are now.
Ambitious plans – not just the motor sector but all aspects of agriculture and food distribution
We have to change the way in which we manage our overseas relations and the way we support countries to also manage the climate crisis, or migration is going to get worse.
Yes – the way to manage these issue is to give more money away to other countries
We have to manage our shortsightedness, which ignores these issues.
We have to manage the self-interest that says the state is too big, but private profits must always come first.
We must challenge the poor judgment that lets people get away with claiming we can’t afford to support children with special needs, but we can afford private excess.
Let’s just look at Maslow’s hierarchy of needs for a moment.
We’re under-consuming clean water, nutritious food, and decent housing; we are under-consuming education, social care, and secure communities, those are levels one and two on that hierarchy of need. That’s why we are so stressed
I’m not even sure I can be bothered to fisk this – it’s so patently at odds with reality that it’s scarcely worth the candle
But we are over-consuming things that try to reinforce our status and tell the world that they must respect us. Those are levels three and four in that hierarchy.
We’ve got everything the wrong way round. We are consuming to excess where we don’t have need, but only have want, and we’re consuming too little where we have need and people are left in poverty.
So we’ll give over our entire economy to the deranged witterings of an academic in Ely who was considered so out of touch with the real world he was asked to leave a UK university?
We must now change our direction.
We do need investment in basic needs.
We need stronger public services, and we must regulate those industries that fuel over-consumption and climate harm.
The UK is living beyond its means, but the means it’s living beyond are its environmental means, and you can put your head in the sand and you can say, I’m talking nonsense, and this doesn’t matter, but it does if you’re going to be alive after 2050, and most people who are watching this video will want to be in that situation because, by then, the reality of the climate crisis will become all too clear.
Our current excess will then become our current crisis.
I’ll be quite annoyed if this guy is still around in 2050
We have to build a state that guarantees security, dignity, and sustainability for the long term.
And we’re failing to do.. And the consequence is we are going to need to change our excess consumption. But it isn’t the state that’s going to have to give way. It’s the excess consumption of the wealthy that is going to need to give.
I think Steve’s comments yesterday sum up the challenge facing Reform. People like this guy need to be facing real suffering and an existential threat as soon as they gain power. The time for the Queensbury rules is long past
V_P, I think Reform understands the challenge: Trump and Millei led the way. Obviously the constitutional and legal environment is different here – we don’t have a President issuing executive orders – but there will be other ways to short-circuit the Blob.
I think the major problem to overcome isn’t necessarily the Blob, though. It’s the little whisper of “you fuck up my income stream, pal, and you can forget about nice cushy non-exec directorships and speaking-tour income when you leave politics.” This is going to be the Somme.
I’m rapidly approaching enforced retirement, but the entire tax situation makes it financially crippling to sell up.
Under-consuming education? When it’s practically compulsary to stay at school until 18, and near compulsarly to remain in further education until past 22?
@V_P
I think Queeensberry rules would be just fine for dealing with the likes of Murphy and Millionaireband. Gloves to stop you breaking your fingers, no biting or gouging, but rounds continue until someone goes down, one minute break and then you start again until the loser cannot be got back onto his feet within the minute. It can last for hours.
A lot of people seem to think Queensberry means the *Amended Queensberry Rules* used by the likes of Tyson Fury and Oleksandr Usyk
Van_Patten,
“I think Steve’s comments yesterday sum up the challenge facing Reform. People like this guy need to be facing real suffering and an existential threat as soon as they gain power”
I really think that Reform (or whoever) needs a plan: people, functions, laws to remove. Pay for lawyers to explain why it can’t be done. If it’s some treaty, first leave that treaty. Stop funding all the commie sockpuppets like the BBC, Guardian, UN, fake charities, “public health”. If an individual wants stricter anti-smoking laws, he can rattle a tin for the money. These are the supportive pillars of the leftie state and as well as removing what is operational, they also have to be removed, so it’s easier to remove more of the leftie state.
Western Bloke
Completely agree. Something along the lines of the so-called ‘Black Books’ that were apparently drawn up in Germany in the 1930s. So Murphy, Soapy Joe, Most of the Labour , SNP, Libdem, Green and Muslim Block MPs. And contingency plans of what to do with them. Owen Jones, most of the Novara Media lot – for sure. And setting up parallel courts would definitely be helpful, along the lines of the ‘Diplock’ courts used in Northern Ireland.
@WB: I think the first law I would pass if the Farmer’s Party (run by Glorious Leader Jim naturally) were to win an election would be to ban political activity by all charities. Charities should be solely for the monetary or physical benefit of other persons, animals or inanimate objects. That would immediately close down huge swathes of the charity sector, and reduce the usual orchestrated political ‘backlash’ to any slightly right wing policy proposed by any government.
@ Jim
Charities are banned from political activity. But the law isn’t enforced properly with lots of shady lawyers saying XYZ isn’t a political activity
“Charities are banned from political activity”
Thats not true. Charities are specifically allowed to campaign on political matters, as long as they are related to their charitable aims, and don’t specifically favour one political party over another. Other than that they are free to do as they please. They can campaign for law changes, oppose Government policy etc etc.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/political-activity-and-campaigning-by-charities#:~:text=For%20example%2C%20a%20charity%20for,or%20opposition%20for%20a%20change
That would all go on Day 1 of the rule of Generalissimo Jim.
I’d simply make it illegal for charities to pay staff. That would put paid to Third Sector careers, and not before time. Charity is supposed to be voluntary.
@ Jim
Can you cite a single instance when this has been true?
Political activity that does not favour one party over another?
[Howard League for Penal Reform campaigns for improving prisons but I don’t view that as political]
‘I’d simply make it illegal for charities to pay staff. That would put paid to Third Sector careers, and not before time. Charity is supposed to be voluntary.’
Thank you Norman. I love these simple, direct, brutal, obvious solutions.
Unless they’re applied to me, of course!!
@John77: “Can you cite a single instance when this has been true?
Political activity that does not favour one party over another?”
Of course it favours one party over others(or targets one specific party’s policies), but in a plausibly deniable way. If I campaign for more immigration then I’m hardly promoting Reform am I? But as long as I only campaign for more immigration and don’t mention any specific parties (and my charity aims are for the benefit of immigrants) then I get away with it. And no one investigates too hard anyway because the Charity Commission is a bunch of Lefties to a man(and blue haired women).
Thats not the point however. You said political activity was banned, and it specifically isn’t. So you were wrong. Go on admit it, it’ll be good for your soul.
OK, Jim I admit it, *certain types* of “political activity” are not banned, although blatant campaigning for the Labour Party is banned and some so-called charities do so with the police turning a double-thickness blindfold