Can we afford the welfare state?

[@piccalillipit9211]

*I LIVE IN BULGARIA* the poorest country in the EU. Unemployment benefit here is HIGHER than in the UK, £140 a week on average in my city 4 X as many hospital beds per capita as the UK. Mobile MRI & Health clinics visit every village in the country at least 1 time per year. ALL kids get FREE school meals - so why can the poorest country in the EU afford what the UK cant...???

[@Tensquaremetreworkshop]

Perhaps that is why it is poor?

[@piccalillipit9211]

@@Tensquaremetreworkshop Im sorry the education system failed you so badly

[@melindagallegan5093]

@@tancreddehauteville764So does this mean that it’s immigrant and foreign aid spending that needs to be cut completely then?

[@Tensquaremetreworkshop]

@@piccalillipit9211 Your reason for Bulgaria being so poor? BTW, the average UK payout to families receiving benefits (10 million of them) is £14,000 per year (£140B total last year). Still look bad?

[@Tensquaremetreworkshop]

@@tancreddehauteville764 Your point? It was not I that said they were poor.

[@user-nx6ji9tk8i]

Keep up this pace of re - education Richard J M! We all need to hear it. Very refreshing in this world of non -sense.

[@mixodorians12]

We can't afford Steve Baker and his ilk.

[@fatboydim.7037]

Is that the same Steve Baker who was sulking at that point cos he lost his seat -- Poor Me Poor Me.

[@mikeLTD-zip]

It's when are people going to wake up and understand the deceit and trickery being used against them what is money theirs is none your paid with paper your time Labour energy gifted away for food tokens you own nothing then we're told that FIAT money not backed by anything is debt paper your house you worked 30 years for and paid by debt notes is not yours who's the chump you will own nothing until you claim the Estate back from the CROWN

[@Minimmalmythicist]

It´s quite simply a lie that we can´t afford it spread by those who never liked it in the first place.

[@parallaxview6770]

We cannot afford Steve Baker

[@bakakafka4428]

We can either afford a few percent of the population to be super rich, or a welfare state for all. Take your pick.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

The super rich cannot afford to pay the welfare state so others don't. Do the maths.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

You can't have it. There aren't enough super rich to pay the welfare states debts.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@chriswills9437 So lay the numbers out. How big are the welfare state's debts? What's the projected cash flow requirements? Then from that we can work out how much the super rich have to pay, and see if they have the money.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@chriswills9437 The other question. Why haven't the workers got the wealth? Where's that 18% that the welfare state took from them? The asset stripping question.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@chriswills9437 What I notice is that those that have taken the wealth, politicians, won't talk about how much debt the welfare state has accumulated. I wonder why?

[@billB101]

“A civilization is measured by how it treats its weakest members” So yeah, we need a welfare state.

[@mikemines2931]

For those that have paid for it yes couldn't agree more.

[@billB101]

@@mikemines2931 define "paid for it"

[@mikemines2931]

@@billB101 Got off their mattress and at least attempted to get a job. Oh, I've got a degree in golf course management and you expect me to wash pots!!! It's coming just like a snowball down hill. It will be ironic if Labour removes benefits.

[@JohnPark-xf2gq]

​@@mikemines2931what about those who can't afford to pay for it because their countries were ransacked and their assets stolen by the powerful and rich countries.lf someone broke into your house and stole your property and you found out who did it you would expect some recompense no matter how long ago it happened.

[@mikemines2931]

@@JohnPark-xf2gq Another puerile argument.

[@safirahmed]

The UK cannot afford to lose the welfare state.

[@tlangdon12]

Life would become much more expensive for all if we did, so you are correct.

[@Redf322]

Can we afford Neo liberalism? Tax the super rich.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

Not enough.

[@cosmicmusicreynolds3266]

well put

[@dallassukerkin6878]

@@adenwellsmith6908 Well, that's a bit Yes-and-No. It was Bill Whittle, I think, did a piece years ago about how utterly liquidating the wealth of the super rich would not even cover the USA's 'costs' for a year. And that is true. But the problem that needs to be solved is not paying for a single years 'welfare' but rather that the economic setup we currently have is what creates the need for welfare in the first place. You see, the ultra rich are, surprisingly enough, on the whole not innately evil. They are just the beneficiaries of a couple of generations of being *asset* owners. Assets generate wealth ... for those that *own* them. The rest of us pay the asset owners for the use of what they own. On the surface that is not so bad - someone owns something and you pay them to hire it out to do what it is you want to do. Actually kind of a fair exchange. But there is a problem that grows worse over time. Asset owners rent out their assets to nearly everyone else and nearly everyone else pays the assets owners. The asset owners end up with far more money than they can 'use' in daily life; so what do they do? They seek to buy *more* assets. As more and more asset owners reach that point, the price of assets becomes higher and higher through demand and, soon enough, only the richest asset owners can afford to buy more assets i.e. everyone else is locked out and stuck paying the asset owners 'rent'. As this spiral goes on, the wealth disparity in the economy grows and grows and, in a relatively short time, it becomes dysfunctional and all the money pools, stagnantly, at the top. That's when you end up with a non-flowing circular flow of income and an 'aristocracy' in inconceivable luxury with peasants 'starving' in the streets. Taking the assets of the Aristo's won't cure the problem at that point. That will dissipate the wealth to no good effect. But taxing the assets returns, over time, will. It is a case of siphoning off sufficient of the wealth generation and putting it back into the 'machine' at the bottom that keeps things running. And maybe, over a long enough period, those lower down the wealth hierarchy will get to the stage where they can afford to buy assets too. That is the ideal aim. The asset owners will not, of course, be happy to have their incomes taxed in this fashion but, to be honest, if the rate is pegged decently enough, they will not suffer and, given that the alternative is economic collapse and probably revolution, there is actually an upside for them. Getting the rate right is the trick - after all it was too stiff an inheritance tax on non-productive assets (Stately Homes) that destroyed our previous Upper Class here in the UK.

[@dallassukerkin6878]

@@adenwellsmith6908 Well, that's a bit Yes-and-No. It was Bill Whittle, I think, did a piece years ago about how utterly liquidating the wealth of the super rich would not even cover the USA's 'costs' for a year. And that is true. But the problem that needs to be solved is not paying for a single years 'welfare' but rather that the economic setup we currently have is what creates the need for welfare in the first place. You see, the ultra rich are, surprisingly enough, on the whole not innately evil. They are just the beneficiaries of a couple of generations of being *asset* owners. Assets generate wealth ... for those that *own* them. The rest of us pay the asset owners for the use of what they own. On the surface that is not so bad - someone owns something and you pay them to hire it out to do what it is you want to do. Actually kind of a fair exchange. But there is a problem that grows worse over time. Asset owners rent out their assets to nearly everyone else and nearly everyone else pays the assets owners. The asset owners end up with far more money than they can 'use' in daily life; so what do they do? They seek to buy *more* assets. As more and more asset owners reach that point, the price of assets becomes higher and higher through demand and, soon enough, only the richest asset owners can afford to buy more assets i.e. everyone else is locked out and stuck paying the asset owners 'rent'. As this spiral goes on, the wealth disparity in the economy grows and grows and, in a relatively short time, it becomes dysfunctional and all the money pools, stagnantly, at the top. That's when you end up with a non-flowing circular flow of income and an 'aristocracy' in inconceivable luxury with peasants 'starving' in the streets. Taking the assets of the Aristo's won't cure the problem at that point. That will dissipate the wealth to no good effect. But taxing the assets returns, over time, will. It is a case of siphoning off sufficient of the wealth generation and putting it back into the 'machine' at the bottom that keeps things running. And maybe, over a long enough period, those lower down the wealth hierarchy will get to the stage where they can afford to buy assets too. That is the ideal aim. The asset owners will not, of course, be happy to have their incomes taxed in this fashion but, to be honest, if the rate is pegged decently enough, they will not suffer and, given that the alternative is economic collapse and probably revolution, there is actually an upside for them. Getting the rate right is the trick - after all it was too stiff an inheritance tax on non-productive assets (Stately Homes) that destroyed our previous Upper Class here in the UK.

[@Tensquaremetreworkshop]

And when you run out of other people's money?

[@thespecialwayne]

I think you are paying "The Hardman of Brexit" an absurdly over-generous compliment by supposing he has put any thought whatsoever into what he said. He's a loon.

[@lonevoice]

I agree. The problem as I see it is that we recognise that there is a growing wealth inequality in the UK and the wealthy have political influence. I think that the problem is political rather than economic. The wealthy will clamour for a low tax, small state with false economics and if they succeed then the UK economy may grow but the amount available to the public at large may shrink. I think we have seen this in action over the past decade or so.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

There is wealth inequality. So where are the trillions of pounds of wealth taht the welfare state has taken from the workers?

[@Redf322]

@@adenwellsmith6908ask your Tory mates where it is.

[@billB101]

Limitarianism

[@stevenwilliamson6236]

They give it to their buddies. Are you braindead? Dido Harding £38bn for only one example. Where did you get your made-up figure by the way?​@adenwellsmith6908

[@stevenwilliamson6236]

​@adenwellsmith6908 if you elect Tories, as the UK has done since 1979, you will get rampant theft, a kleptocracy.

[@lamusica1592]

A friend of mine has FND and benefits and 5 years ago met a gent who was anti- welfare etc, but they became friends. The gent got a cancer diagnosis and used to appreciate the care and companionship that my friend gave him. One thing that's overlooked is that many of those people so despised by Baker and his ilk, are doing the basic acts of kindness and care that others haven't got time for when they are doing their daily grind. Unfortunately the gent died recently, but in his last few years he had someone who gave a damn about him, and who provided some solace in his darkest hours of facing his end.

[@MaureenDunn-g1n]

Ditto in NZ; right wing coalition govt tell us they have to cut back on school lunches, well-fare benefits & health care etc. as they 'have no money' So we are all suffering punitive austerity. (Though our PM did manage to sell one of his 7 rental properties recently for nearly a mill!!)

[@mmcd256]

This is because you are paying higher interest on loans for money borrowed by the local gov and central gov without your consent. IMF.

[@takenoprisoners-u3x]

We cant afford not to have a welfare state what we also cant afford is neo right wing Conservative ideology. The wealth gap proves that beyond any argument.

[@jamesgould7373]

Running out of other people’s money my friend. No welfare in this country would mean millions of people loving under bridges!, children included! Even taxing at 70/80% it’s still not enough to pay for what goes out!

[@takenoprisoners-u3x]

@@jamesgould7373 But its not other peoples money is it? We all have to pay our way the system is set up to ensure that even when we never get any benefit from it. Its an INSURANCE POLICY for ALL OF US. We ALL PAY IT whether we want to or not so why take away the insurance in spite of the payment in advance? GET IT YET?

[@takenoprisoners-u3x]

​@@jamesgould7373 Thats a bare faced lie BTW we pay more than enough in taxation to cover every public service the problem has never been the amount of tax its been the corruption in the spending of it. The VAST bulk of our taxation is scalp by corrupt Government and handed over to the Private sector in many ways including bank bail outs PFI PPP contracts procurement contracts loans and tax breaks. Really tired of these fake accounts spewing lying shite set up by party political propaganda departments.

[@garyt123]

​@@takenoprisoners-u3xAgree. I am more than happy to pay in, I am more than happy to pay my share, and if I make more then I am _very_ happy to be _able_ to _pay_ more. Also I hope I, or my family, never have to access welfare ever!!! (as you say, its an insurance policy) That said I benefit _knowing it's there_ for me, my family, my friends and their families, _just in case._ Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional, and probably argues irrationally with their insurance company that they should _only_ pay _after_ running a pedestrian over, or only _after_ their house catches fire.... etc.

[@piccalillipit9211]

@@jamesgould7373 I LIVE IN BULGARIA the poorest country in the EU. Unemployment benefit here is HIGHER than in the UK, £140 a week on average in my city 4 X as many hospital beds per capita as the UK. Mobile MRI & Health clinics visit every village in the country at least 1 time per year. ALL kids get FREE school meals - so why can the poorest country in the EU afford what the UK cant...??? Income tax is a flat rate 10% as are all taxes. So tell me again why the UK cant afford it...???? *STOP BELIVING LIES*

[@spudinho1]

Well said Mr Murphy! Baker and his cronies are motivated to preserve British capitalism, with all the inequalities and hardships that implies for the rest of us. Do Starmer and Reeves offer a robust alternative? Probably not.

[@ivar766]

From $9K to $35K that's the minimum range of profit return every week I thinks it's not a bad one for me, now I have enough to pay bills and take care of my family

[@ivar766]

Creating multiple income streams that doesn't depend on gov't should be on every individual list. Thanks to Stacey Macken, the lady that changed my financial life.

[@KamranKhalil-br6dk]

Honestly, I'm surprised that this mrs Stacey Macken is mentioned here, came across a testimony about her from one of the beneficiaries on the CNBC news, she seems to be doing extremely well .

[@robertgreg6009]

I've seen different people talking about this Stacey Macken she must be very amazing for people to talk this good about her.

[@lea5898]

That woman has changed my life for good. I attended her investment class couple of weeks and she's the best when it comes for guidance

[@arktom7335]

Stacey Macken is a retirement manager and investment/savings expert, in ranks with Cathie woods and Warren, has demonstrated expertise in investment strategies and has been involved in managing and providing financial guidance globally .

[@pip3124]

When politicians tell us that we can't have this or we can't afford that it does not mean that it is not possible it only means that THEY don't want us to do or have it those things.

[@aficio698]

The point here is we elect these people to deliver wat we want/need and we pay for it through taxation. Not the other way round. This is not a democracy. We are lorded over by a bunch of self serving leeches.

[@pip3124]

@@aficio698 Who has the power, if it is not the people then it is not a democracy.

[@aficio698]

@@pip3124 💩

[@malcraghill7]

Outstanding debunking of greedy Tory ideology

[@davegubbins4428]

"...greedy Tory ideology" aka: incessant, systemic looting of the nation on behalf of the very wealthiest folks on Earth..

[@charlescaudell9493]

Brilliant reasoning and clarity. These short videos give a glimmer of hope.

[@safirahmed]

Nationalisation of privatised companies can generate revenue and reduce costs to government to fund public services.

[@debbiegilmour6171]

Sort of but the revenue is a healthy, productive population which pays for itself many times over.

[@safirahmed]

@@debbiegilmour6171 Water privatisation has raised £85 billion for shareholders and this money could instead have greatly lowered bills, upgraded infrastructure and improved water quality.

[@Durnyful]

Question isn't can we afford it's what effect it has on society. Currently many aspects of it are utterly abused. Almost every single mother I know is not single but gives that appearance. Want a house... have a baby. Then we have the utter inefficiency of the NHS where 10 extra pounds in is lucky to buy 1 in value. More thought needs to be given as to how such systems are run & reform them.

[@dl-vb4vm]

Its not a matter of can we afford, its a matter of whether its a moral choice, many people claim welfare for a huge amount of reasons, children sometimes become homeless for whatever reason like i did and had to claim benefits otherwise i would have died on the streets with nothing. This society promotes dysfunction and if someone had actually helped me i might have not had to claim benefits ever or be homeless but thats what happened, if society truly cares about other people we would have a stronger welfare state, in countries like norway they have a strong welfare state and it improves peoples lives no matter their circumstances they can go to college and have their housing costs covered. This country has become so hyper individuslistic, whenever the question of welfare comes up people are like" people shouldnt get money for free, i worked all my life they are such scroungers" "as soon as migrants get here they get to claim benefits have a car and a phone handed to them" people dont care about people anymore and thats just a fact, but should others that have gone through what i went through be denied support because a few individuals hate the welfare state for no reason. No. We can afford it just tax corporations and asset wealth.

[@parallaxview6770]

YES . Next question

[@paulmccarthy8869]

Can we afford not to have a welfare state is the question we should be asking.

[@grayb5103]

Poor journalism from whoever failed to ask Steve Baker what was the basis of his claim.

[@woodkiwi12]

Well said and explained!

[@ukmoshinist4595]

So good to hear that all those poor people coming here to escape poverty, war, climate change, political oppression etc. etc. are actually wealthy, well educated, hard working, economically productive citizens who will ensure that all the wealth they create will stay here.

[@Redf322]

@@ukmoshinist4595the tax they pay will.

[@JohnPark-xf2gq]

​@@ukmoshinist4595 listen to what is being said instead of making up things to suit your twisted logic.

[@greggbisgrove7499]

This is Steve Baker the man that helped give us Brexit now he wants to drag us back to the workhouse.

[@MRW515]

The two are not related

[@billB101]

@@MRW515 Brexit has been a disaster, of course it's related.

[@M2Mil7er]

​@MRW515 through Baker's ideology, they are.

[@robertprice2148]

Well said. It's all about resource management and the willingness to do so.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

OK. So post your plan. 1. How big are the debts? 2. Who has the money to pay for that debt?

[@groundhogday37]

You should be leading the country You know what your talking about ,most in Power don't have a clue !

[@adenwellsmith6908]

He doesn't have a clue. Ask him the basic questions. How much pension debt has the welfare state accumulated? Where are the trillions of pounds of wealth its taken from the masses?

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@marcopolotimetraveller Look at el Loco. Well the left won't mention him because its working. That's what reform should do as one of the items on the list. A list of quangos. Mark off which go. Now that takes changes to the law. But changes to funding can be done with a sheet of A4 and a minister signing it. Change the funding to £1 a year. The law changes can come latter. So which ones to go? Such a long list. Perhaps a list of those that don't.

[@PeaceProsperity-dv7hs]

Was listening up until the point of the unabated pro-migration narrative. Stopped after that point. The OBR has recently published data on this, and urgent substantive reform is needed to inward migration. Migration should only be permitted if it is targeted and raises the overall benefit at the local and national levels. The fact we are also losing substantial numbers of people who are more experienced than those coming in and this seems to be increase again is not good sign. There would be an idealised absorption/net benefit mark, which we unfortunately most people who are unbiased believe we have overstepped a little while back.

[@harenvisavadia3711]

The UK is the 5th largest GDP in the World and in UK there is huge economic inequality. The Tories are interested in the self-interest of class they represent.

[@MarkL-we8uk]

Can you imagine if we did not? Crime would be much worse.

[@leswatson8563]

My grandson is 30. At 18 he went to University and attended several lectures. One such lecture spoke about State Pensions. Students were told they should not guarantee getting a state pension upon retirement. So what do academics know what we're not being told? A more open honest and transparent government Blair claimed back in 1997...

[@PlanofBattle]

Most of Japan’s national is domestically held. A material fraction of UK government debt is held by external investors.

[@kim007250]

We can’t afford politicians

[@richardouvrier3078]

So it can be afforded with climate refugees, and QE.

[@plerpplerp5599]

Without social security, modern UK society will face even more poverty and inequality, similar to the Victorian period, where many relied on charity or workhouses for survival. The Victorian era was characterized by a lack of safety nets, leading to widespread hardship for those unable to work or earn sufficient income.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

Exactly. So the looting of wealth from the workers is the disaster.

[@bakakafka4428]

You've cottoned on to the plan from the capitalists. Now, unfortunately, you're one of the few. Most still remain in denial.

[@Redf322]

@@adenwellsmith6908we agree on that so tax the super rich.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@Redf322 Doesn't work red. There's a 16,000 billion pound pension debt. Off the books. The super rich in the UK [Sunday times rich list ] own 220 bn. [Anyone with over a billion]. You run out of super rich before 2 months are up.

[@mikemines2931]

@@adenwellsmith6908 We learned that in the 1970's, ended up people were wiping their backsides with pound notes.

[@robmaslen6446]

Steve Baker was not making a prediction but saying what he wants to make happen ie he wants to go back to the conditions of Victorian Britain. This has been the ambition of the Tories since Thatcher.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

You not listening. The consequence of the 16 trillion pound welfare state pension debt IS victorian britain. It's a consequence not a policy.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

It's the conseuqnce of those pension debts.

[@robmaslen6446]

​@@adenwellsmith6908No you not listen to Mr Murphy

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@robmaslen6446 You tell me where Richard Murphy , an accountant, has stated how big the socialist welfare state's debts are. It's a very simple question. Now Richard's a socialist so he won't tell you or anyone. He'll spin the story that its someone else.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@robmaslen6446 So have you found where Murphy states how much pension debt the state has run up? Thought not. The only debt Murphy will talk about is the money owed to his banker mates. That's the borrowing. The other debts, just don't pay them

[@grimbleahoy]

We can always afford massive sums on wars, a vast army of overpaid civil servants, unelected european parliaments, mass migration, overseas aid: the list is endless - all riding on the backs of those who Actually produce something

[@benjaminford9932]

As an ex-civil servant I'd like to know where these overpaid civil servants are. There are undoubtedly a few heads of government departments etc. who will earn a reasonably high salary which I suggest would be equivalent to or less than a similar role in industry. The civil service workforce, which has shrunk significantly since I left in 2008, are not earning vast sums of money and have to budget carefully like others, especially if they have a family to support. What I did see happening when Thatcher was in control and privatising everything was layers of bureaucracy caused by private companies sub-contacting functions in highly inefficient chains to do work formerly done in house and quickly. Also the rise of the grossly overpaid consultants who frequently left without achieving anything other than a trail of destruction which had to be cleared up by the civil servants.

[@nathaire]

I would love to see a debate between you and Steve Baker…

[@lv4077]

No!!!!

[@roymillsjnr5172]

It may change ,I think it may change into something like a "rite to live charter" that gives people a basic living income ,with the ability to earn further credits working in the community . It's only what I think may happen

[@sandralibeau4795]

In New Zealand everyone gets the pension ( as an election bribe). This includes people retiring with a second professional superannuation. These people live 15 years longer than the rest of us because they can afford food while the rest of us can hardly afford to eat because nearly all of New Zealand's food is exported.

[@christineoconnor155]

BTW I think you, Richard, are quite right.

[@davidmcintyre8145]

The simple but unavoidable fact is that when the most costly element of the welfare state was introduced; the state pension there were 33 working age people paying for each pensioner and each pensioner was expected to live between 2 and 10 years on the pension. Now there are 2.3 working age people paying taxes and NI to pay for pensions and pension benefits and most pensioners can expect to live 20 years plus on their pension. remember that the first pensioners had no NI payments so pensioners do not live on some mythical savings laid down when they were working(or in the case of baby boomers in the 70's and 80's on strike)they live on the NI and tax contributions of the working age population. This is before we get into the issues of the NHS where 80% of all NHS spending goes on the elderly

[@northwestcoast]

Help the aged, don't just put them in a home..one day they were just like you, laughing, drinking smoking, sniffing glue..

[@davidmcintyre8145]

@@northwestcoast The big issue is that there are more people over 70 in the UK than under 25 and as I stated there are simply not as many people of working age compared to pensioners as there were. We need migration into the UK not only to do the jobs there are no British people either available or willing to do just to keep paying taxes and NI to keep the pension system afloat;at least until the baby boomers the largest generation in human history are thinned out considerably. This of course is the same age cadre that by voting overwhelmingly for Brexit put the kybosh on any economic recovery in the UK for decades

[@davidmcintyre8145]

@@northwestcoast As to the NHS over one million NHS hospital beds are permanently"blocked"by pensioners who should be in a care home but due to government cuts cannot get a place. Finally I spent my youth completely without smoking or sniffing glue

[@Chris-wz5yd]

Unaffordable or unwanted ? It isn't prediction, it's planning.

[@mikemines2931]

Planning LOL.

[@kumasenlac5504]

The political message to pensioners is clear - the country needs you to die. Of course, it won't be put in such stark terms when the various 'corrections' are made. Can we afford a welfare state which is operated as it currently is ? Probably not. However, almost all European countries operate comparable services with a much smaller workforce being paid reasonable wages and with a minimum of bureaucracy. We need to lose the quangofluff, define realistic goals and agree an all-party model which is not used as a convenient political football.

[@mikeallison7753]

The is only 1 reason Steve Baker says anything and it has nothing to do with thought.

[@mallamal5578]

Yes - no brainer

[@54tisfaction]

I find it baffling that this is the assumption that all leading parties in Sweden has been going on about sinse the 1990:ies, that increased life expectancy explains our underfunded welfare state, not their actual underfunding of it by reallocating our wealth to industry and property owners...

[@mat900ft]

Lost me when he started banging on about immigration should be celebrated. I wonder how many of the nearly 1.7 million out of work migrants are young entrepreneurs 🤔

[@nickryder9669]

Can we afford to let the rich get away with dodging paying tax is the answer !

[@JohnPark-xf2gq]

We have be3n doing that for the last 14 years.the torys want to spend as Little as possible on the state.therefore they had the option of recruiting people to chase either benifits fraud or tax fraud or both if they put more resourcesThey made the decision to go the benifits fraud route egged on by the daily hate mail and the gammon express.this is despite the fact that chasing tax fraud brings in 4 times the receipts that the same effort on benifit fraud does. Despite the fact that would have helped the economy much more they did not do so because its the tax fraudsters who are their donors.one of the recent tory chancellors of the exchequer, the mp for Stratford upon Avon at the time was investigated for tax avoidamce(evasion or whatever the torys have made legal)and had to pay back 5 million in total including penalties.he had to resign as a minister,lost his job at the last election but is still doing alright for himself.l fact he recently on the panel of the BBC,so being dodgy is totally OK with our still dominated tory bbc management. Fiddle your taxes etc and no consequences. Ion

[@leehumphries7696]

We should just stop selling bonds and do away with the bond market. Then we'll stop people whinging on about the "national debt"

[@michaelsnelling3338]

We own the Bank of England? Therefore please explain why we need to pay interest on any money from the said BoE? or does the BIS have some share in it?

[@chaunceybutler3814]

ON DAVID AARONOVITCHS BBC R4 SHOW PAUL JOHNSON (IFS) AND ANOTHER TELEGRAPH COLLEAGE ALONG WITH MADLEEN KAHN SAY THAT INCOME INEQUALITY CONTRARY TO POPULAR BELIEF ISNT INCREASING IN THE UK.

[@dennismccarthy7032]

❤❤❤ brilliant ❤❤❤ . "Let's be blunt ..." 😂😂😂😂

[@williamrbuchanan4153]

Yes . but not the corruption it takes to be able to have no control,over ?. Greed ruins every good idea .

[@WarrenPeaceOG]

How can we afford NOT to have a welfare state?🙃

[@adenwellsmith6908]

Very simple. When the debts its accumulated are too large to pay.

[@WarrenPeaceOG]

@@adenwellsmith6908 'Oh, noooo! The state's debts are too large to pay itself. It must sacrifice some of it's weaker members to the gods of household finance'😹

[@davejohnston5158]

One major issue is that social housing has been securitised and every house or flat that isnt still owned by the council is on a balance sheet with investment income expected. There is no incentive to get social housing cost down to a level to what proportion of income was being paid in 1980.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

Look at the accounts. They make what they call a surplus because profit is a dirty word.

[@Redf322]

The money from selling off property was not allowed to be re-invested in building more. Social housing can easily pay for itself. Build it rent it build more.

[@davejohnston5158]

How things have changed since the 1980 Housing Act. 1980 average pay £140 per week. Average UK council house rent £7.50 per week. A year later unemployment rate had gone up to 10% and council rent average rose to £11.00 per week. Housing has been replaced with credit!

[@davidmcculloch8490]

Sounds like a wet dream to Steve Baker, who would love a small state transitioning to a non-existent state. The work for money model may no longer suffice in the long term as AI replaces working people. A rethink is needed.

[@Jonny-w3w]

If we can aford to give other countries billions then yes 🤷‍♂️

[@mmcd256]

Stop the chosen few controlling the money to benefit themselves. Playing games to stay on top. Money is a good and convenient tool if used correctly. We live with this financial system but there are more important things slipping away as the struggle to earn enough to live on is erroding quality of life for many people. Stress and striving; out of control ambition; unreal expectations.

[@72rmboyd]

Now? The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerated the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That in its essence is fascism: ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power. 32nd US President Franklin D Roosevelt

[@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.]

_"That in its essence is fascism: ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power."_ Wrong. That is the opposite of Fascism, known as Corporatocracy.

[@Carlin2810]

​@@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.Sorry what tf did you just say.

[@jonothonlaycock5456]

Steve Baker is 'quite absurd' he is portraying his ideological wishful thinking for forcasting the future.

[@Tensquaremetreworkshop]

The costs are rising. Not just the retired. Working age families are receiving £140B a year at the moment. That is an average of £14K per family for approx 10M families (29%). And it is rising- fast.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

You're numbers are wrong. Add on 3K per person for the NHS. THen another 3K per person for common goods. Then housing benefits, then income support, then schooling....

[@Redf322]

@@adenwellsmith6908how is a sovereign state run health insurance system not cheaper better and more cost effective than a group of private companies with shareholders? How much is an agency nurse? How much is an NHS nurse?

[@Tensquaremetreworkshop]

@@adenwellsmith6908 They are not wrong- direct quotes from IFS. I was only covering working age families universal credit (or equivalent) payments. This includes housing benefit and income support. Yes, they receive more from the state, but this can be regarded as direct wealth transfer. Twice the education budget, three times the defense budget...

[@Tensquaremetreworkshop]

@@Redf322 Your question can be generalized. Why are state run countries (Cuba etc) not better and more cost effective? The capitalist method relies on competition, and that failing companies die. It is Darwin for companies. And it is the most successful system man has come up with.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@Tensquaremetreworkshop 3,000 is common goods. Defences, legal etc. That's per head. Education of a child 8,000. NHS, 3K per head. For the rest, there's a website entitledto. You can put details in their to get direct costs. HB, income etc. Then on top for the adults, there's pensions. They aren't paying in but they get years added to their entitlement. Total it up and the costs are horrific. Paid for by others with austerity. Now in practice to get rid of that is impossible, until the money stops. Then its even worse that the victorian set up. Harsh as it sounds, there are people who have moved to the UK and are claiming. That needs to be ended. They will leave, and it mitigates the problem. Second we have to move to funded pensions. That's again going to be pain for 20 years. After 20 years yongsters will be better off. But that starts with people like Richard telling the truth about pension debt.

[@Tensquaremetreworkshop]

Centenary of the welfare state in 20 years- of the centralized welfare state, perhaps. Before that, it was done at the Parish level.

[@PM9Video]

Can welfare can be thought of government creating employers (the people on welfare) to hire local businesses to supply consumable goods on a rolling basis? As this creates demand for business activity, is it actually a liability?

[@paulschofield985]

We can afford it as long as politicians stop wasting money on nonsense vanity projects..

[@christinavuyk2026]

Keeping the welfare state going wasn’t seen as a problem because they didn’t think we’d be stupid enough to lower rich people’s level of taxation (which is exactly what we did in the 60s and it’s slowly being going bad since then) 🤨

[@JohnPark-xf2gq]

Christina you need to raise taxes to pay for the vital infrastructure of the country which in turn allows the economy to perform to generate jobs and incomes.the sensible thing to do is to tax the people with the broadest shoulders (the richest)who have benifed from having a functioning economy. Over the last 14 years the rich have been allowed to transfer large slices of wealth Into off shore tax havens at the expense of the 90% and the productivity of the uk.l understand that for the hard of thinking this might be hard

[@M2Mil7er]

think how many more businesses would thrive, or increase their profits if we lifted welfare claimants out of poverty. It would increase demand, and create more jobs, all the while improving the health and wellbeing of the poorest. Much better for the economy than letting our government borrowing leak out of the nation into tax havens.

[@tonychinnery]

I would like to ask a question. You say that a country's economy is not like that of a family (money in v. money out) because a country can create as much money as it needs (via quantitative easing). Its only limited by inflation, hense the need to reduce the money supply via taxation and government borrowing. However government borrowing has the disadvantage that should the interest rate be higher than inflation, the government has to borrow even more to cover the cost of interest payments, thus making the rich even richer at the expense of taxpayers. So could a government not have to borrow at all just by increasing taxation (in a progressive way)?

[@terriej123]

Can you please make a video about why you think that we have people like Steve Baker who say these things? I realize that you can’t get into his heart or mind, but these types of people & their ideas have been around long enough to where we must have some idea why they say these things. Do they truly believe them or are they just trying to maintain the status quo? I would really appreciate your opinion on this.

[@junehawker2364]

Remove the present government put JEREMY CORBYN in 10 and then join BRICS 😉 😊🙏🏻👍✌

[@davidevans3498]

No we can't

[@lkyuvsad]

The intuitive argument is- per-capita GDP has skyrocketed in the last 100 years. If we can't afford the welfare state any more, where has all that extra money gone?

[@Tensquaremetreworkshop]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. The per-capita GDP has not grown for at least 12 years, and has gone backwards for the last six. Wheras welfare spending has increase substantially.

[@JohnPark-xf2gq]

The money has gone to Elon musk and others like them,who will never be satisfied that they have enough and if a few billions live in poverty that's alright with them.

[@lkyuvsad]

​@@Tensquaremetreworkshop sure, but I said the last 100 years. To pick a convenient breakpoint, per-capita GDP is double what it was in 1995. Welfare spending was 7.07% of GDP in 1995. I can't be bothered to look up this year's figures, but it was 5.84% of GDP in 2022- so 17% lower, with an ageing population and a system dealing with the after-effects of covid. Why has GDP stagnated the last 12 years? What did the US do differently since 2007 that means they've seen per-capita GDP increase? Brexit is partly to blame, but we were flatlining for years before that too. Due, I would argue, mostly to austerity. The welfare state supports overall productivity and is an example of how austerity reduces our overall prosperity. If there's nobody to look after your mother with dementia, and she doesn't have enough income for food, that is a massive tax on your productivity. There are millions of these small stories playing out everywhere. Welfare is not just a good idea for reasons of decency, it's economically useful too.

[@Tensquaremetreworkshop]

@@lkyuvsad Forecast to be 11% this year. Almost 25% of government spending.(gov.uk website) GDP in 1995- £1.34T GDP in 2024- £2.67T Double- but inflation between those date is 241%. Oops. So, you are out. By a lot.

[@jamesgeorge8915]

In all honesty we are barely affording the welfare state now, have you tried it recently! It is crumbling fast. I now have to pay for private dentist and save money for private surgery in the future.

[@bigbadbith8422]

Well, we certainly cannot afford Steve Baker or anyone else of such limited, petty, mean spirited views. To mis quote Channel Four News - ‘what a cnut’.😊

[@davejohnston5158]

I think the benefits system has become too complicated and provides too many people with 'top up' funds. The general trend appears to have been removing support services and replacing with benefits cash for some.

[@Redf322]

I agree just pay everyone a universal basic income.

[@erongi233]

The state pension seems to be the main aim from these self appointed "experts". "we" cannot afford it. This is all subjective largely dependent on self interest. However there are relevant facts. There are many but just picking one,life expectancy. The UK has one of the lowest levels of life expectancy amongst advanced countries. If they die earlier they are not paid pension. For example UK women have life expectancy of 81. France has life expectancy for women of 86 paying pensions(higher anyway) for 5 extra years on average. Also the start age in France is 62,in UK is 66. Outrageous.

[@mikemines2931]

1000^

[@adenwellsmith6908]

Well start off with the basics. How big are the pension debts? What's the rate of increase? What's the per tax payer share? They are the relevant facts. But they are missing from your argument.

[@erongi233]

@@adenwellsmith6908 the basics are how much of a countries GDP is used to pay pensions.

[@erongi233]

@@adenwellsmith6908 the basics are how much of GDP is used to pay pensions

[@erongi233]

Then make a comparison between your country compared with similar economies of the per cent of GDP used to pay pensions.

[@dvosburg1966]

Not at the level you want.

[@graemejones9707]

No, we can't

[@johnburns4017]

Of course we can afford the Welfare state. It boosts the economy within itself.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

How about printing vouchers and using those for the welfare state and public sector workers. It will boost the economy and pay for itself. Remember you can never run out of vouchers.

[@johnburns4017]

@@adenwellsmith6908 We do not need gimmicks which costs to administer. Just have free medical attention at point of delivery. It works and always has done. It also cuts down on wasteful admin costs.

[@JohnPark-xf2gq]

​@@adenwellsmith6908we went from a system of bartering to using money centuries ago .

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@JohnPark-xf2gq Exactly. The state's not needed to create money as a means of exchange. The problem now is that muppets tell the left we can print money and we can have whatever we want. So create a new currency, the voucher. Pay the public sector workers in vouchers. No tax not needed. Of course when they go and spend their vouchers, no one would accept them. They are worthless. That little example shows why they are bonkers. To turn a fiat currency into something of value you need tax or fines, to extract the value out of other people. MMT is clear. In particular inflation linked debts like pensions can only be funded by imposing austerity on one section of society to transfer the wealth to the creditors. You cannot inflate your way out of inflation linked debts.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

Growth. There are two rates of growth you need to consider. 1. The rate of growth in the economy. That is one of the factors that drive tax receipts needed to pay the welfare state's debts. There is also an element of how much austerity the public will tolerate. ie. Taxation without services, because the money is going on the welfare state's debts. 2. The rate of growth of those debts. Simply. When the rate of growth of the debts exceeds the rate of growth of the tax base, you won't get a welfare state.

[@adiadi5832]

People coming in are well educated 😂....

[@mogreen19]

Problem is all the uneducated fools vote for the Tories.

[@howardosborne8647]

Britain's economy has always thrived on immigrant workers and there is no logical reason why that won't continue to so in future decades.

[@ltmund]

​@@howardosborne8647What if immigration stops as, finally, the west realises that helping the counties where immigrants are fleeing is the more ethical way of helping them, instead of brain draining those places.

[@adiadi5832]

@howardosborne8647 Britain has thrived on financial services....maybe I'm wrong, but with the rise of brics and decline of western dominance UK have grime future....I hope I'm wrong....I'm a migrant myself in this country and along this 22 years since I arrive I see a continuous decline of life quality....working more for less

[@jameswlong]

All those phd candidates riding deliveroo and grub hub bikes.

[@SarahWalker-Smith]

Hi Richard . What do you think to yesterday’s prediction by the OBR of future government debt ? Thanks

[@allsouls5997]

It comes with the central banking scam.

[@cosmicmusicreynolds3266]

we can't afford to let the welfair state go. We saw the side effects in rioting last month. Fuck the capitaliist system

[@stephenxbullock]

The UK will be significantly poorer in 20 years. Steve Baker realizes this fact.

[@haraldtheyounger5504]

The Uk won't exist in 20 years time, the Colonisation will come to an end and Scotland will be completely Independent, followed by N. Ireland. Whether the Welsh have the wherewithal is a different matter, they've been trod into the gutter forever by the English.

[@RRR4847-o9g]

No, we can't afford it. Most people accept welfare payments, disabilities, pensions all need a different solution. For example, A/S for those who want it and don't want to be a burden anymore.

[@viatonkansalainen]

Steve Baker is right. He has also many other wise views example climate change, lbgtq-agend etc. Welfare state is overrated. Richard is wrong. Person, who speaks joy of tax is cannot take seriosly. Taxation is coercive power and that can in compare to mafia. In Japan has been years stagnation.

[@karlroberts4783]

CAN WE AFFORD THE BILLIONS GIVEN TO ZELENSKY

[@stevenwilliamson6236]

They use the money to support the UK weapons industry and tie Zelensky's hands behind his back by not letting him use them. Best plan would be to conscript 17.6m morons into the Ukrainian army and use them as sandbags or something. People are very quiet about the 60 or 70 tories who were getting donations by friends of Putin not that long ago.

[@JohnPark-xf2gq]

You might not prefer the alternative. How good is your Russian.

[@Carlin2810]

​@@JohnPark-xf2gqAre you still waiting for the WMDs from Iraq aswell? Russia are the good guys in that conflict unless youre a litteral white supremist then you support Ukraine & their Banderite neo nazi government.

[@trevorloughlin1492]

Very good lecture, but KZbin already has a captions option and the captions in your video make it too irritating to look at. Who thought up that bright idea? Sack them.

[@pabloseferian2111]

The welfare state is about power, not about protecting people with scare resourses. When you take from the rich, you have the power to do it. When you give to the poor, you show them they are incompetent. This reenforses the slave metality. It is all about power.

[@Carlin2810]

Exactly,they shoukd be left to fend for themselves. NHS needs scrapping aswell.

[@fredjones7307]

Two people with very little understanding of the real world sitting in their ivory towers arguing with each other, not much to be gained from that I'm afraid..

[@OneAndOnlyMe]

Discussion and debate is how we come up with solutions that work democractically.

[@mmcd256]

​@@OneAndOnlyMeDemocracy is an illusion rather than a fact.

[@marklangley7758]

Steve Baker the Christian? He's read what he want's to, and reached the conclusion based on what his greedy ego told him.

[@alanhat5252]

Can we afford _NO_ State Welfare?

[@haraldtheyounger5504]

In a way it would be funny, what would all those keyboard pushers do then, all the Universal Credit folks. They'd be out of a job and have to do something of actual benefit to us all, like sweeping the streets.

[@JoinTheTemple]

Perhaps the better question is: should we have a welfare state (and I include corporate welfare in that)?

[@TheNobbynoonar]

If we can afford to send approximately one billion pounds abroad every month in foreign aid, fund wars abroad, pour billions into net zero, we can afford the welfare state.

[@arthurdixon5890]

My take on this is the amount of people who have paid very little in getting full benefits out. Never mind means testing there should be welfare credits testing!

[@Carlin2810]

If only people such as yourself felt so strongly about the subsidies & welfare that we shovel to corporations & weapons contractors. 40 trillion is the estimated to have siphoned drom the public purse since the EUs creation & services & infrastructure became businesses for the elites to siphon money from the tax base. But yeah the bloke claiming 75 quid a week is the problem. Youre a toad

[@arthurdixon5890]

@@Carlin2810 How nice!

[@Carlin2810]

@@arthurdixon5890 Thought you would have been with me on that.

[@tlangdon12]

While I agree that we can afford the welfare state now, I wondered about the effect of inflation, because the tax revenues don't rise as quickly as inflation pushes prices up. So as prices increase, tax rates have to increase to pay for higher wages and the goods and services used in the welfare state. If the tax rates were ever to reach 100% of GDP, then we have reached the point where we can't afford the welfare state. But, the answer is not, as Steve Baker wants to do, to start to dismantle the welfare state, but to limit borrowing and clamp down on inflation so that the welfare state remains infinitely affordable.