The scale of the right wing agenda that seeks to exploit the bank induced recession for the benefit of a tiny elite in society is becoming more apparent by the day.
As the IFS and TUC have shown, the cuts agenda of George Osborne is a deliberate move to increase inequality in the UK as the cost of rebuilding our banks is imposed on the poorest in our country whilst those who created the crisis bear a modest supposed tax cost whilst their incomes, alone, rise.
Today comes the news that the UK has signed a deal with Switzerland which surrenders our taxing rights to Swiss banks — and international capital that makes clear precisely where the loyalties of the ConDem government lie.
And not to be left out are the CBI, Deloitte on behalf of the Big 4 and big business. As the BBC has reported today:
Following a survey of 121 bosses of the biggest UK firms and large overseas companies operating in Britain, the CBI said the UK needed to cut regulation, and reduce both business and personal taxation.
The survey, which was co-produced by accountancy group Deloitte, said the UK scored highly for its economic stability. However, respondents said the US, Canada, China and India were now seen as more attractive countries in which to invest.
John Connolly, chief executive and senior partner of Deloitte, said: "If the UK economy is to continue its recovery, then growth and jobs will have to come from the private sector.
"One of the great challenges for policymakers is to provide the right conditions for companies to grow."
So they want reduced business tax, personal tax, regulation and more government spending on infrastructure. Of course, the demand for the first three is utterly consistent with the demands that led to the banking crisis and recession. And no doubt they will in due course lead to the next crash. The last is a demand for diversion of resources from ordinary people to meet the needs of business.
I don’t oppose investment: far from it. But I do when business demands a subsidy whilst seeking to consign ordinary people in this country to poverty.
I suspect the ConDems will concede to the demand. Any government that concedes to the Swiss can concede to the CBI.
And in all this an agenda is very, very apparent: that this whole situation is being managed for the interests of capital alone. Of course we need capital in a mixed economy: let’s not deny it. But this is not an attempt to balance needs in the way a mixed economy demands: this is a policy for imbalance, and that is what is so profoundly worrying. There is in here a recipe for massive unrest. And that’s what really worries me. Can’t they see this?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
There may be unrest but the Condems can handle a riot or two. The media will demonise the rioters and nothing will change. Osborne has no doubt gambled that even if there is a double dip recession we will have come out of it by 2015. Assuming the coalition holds for the full five years, which it almost certainly will, the Tories will be able to say they took the tough decisions necessary to clear up after Labour and it’s worked, the economy has recovered. There may still be plenty of unemployment in five years time because unemployment tends to lag on after a recession has ended but the chances are it will be concentrated in former industrial areas that vote Labour anyway. I very much fear that these people are going to get away with it. Most of the press is on their side apart from the Mirror.
There will be more people voting labour, but in fewer places.
When the changes to housing benefit and council tax benefit are rolled-out many people will have to move from areas with high property prices to areas with low property prices, or BE moved. Shades of Lady Porter again, but nationally.
Even if there are riots (and I doubt the intensity of feeling exists, just apathy) the police are equipped to meet the treat, and the government doesn’t care anyway.
By 2015 most of the money will have moved out of the country and the rich could care less about those not rich.
It’s what you get with a tax-avoider chancellor.
What you won’t get are measures to cut down tax avoidance; since turkeys do not vote for either Christmas or Thanksgiving.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11618922
@Robert
Good analysis but I don’t share your pessimism. It seems to me that the ConDems need strong growth for their strategy to have a hope of working – and I can’t see how they’re going to get it. David Cameron’s speech to the CBI yesterday made it clear that he hasn’t got a strategy for growth, he’s got a strategy for stagnation. And the lack of economic growth will mean the ConDems are unable to meet their borrowing targets, while many key public services are going to be in a dire state by 2015. In truth it’s unlikely the ConDems will have much of a record to run for reelection on. The only thing that could save them is if the boundary review turns out to be so gerrymandered as to create a huge bias to the Tories. Which is possible – we’ll have to wait and see.
Even if we do get growth, any growth, the money will go out of the country. Even if only to buy consumer products.
While others are assuming the government want growth (reasonable maybe) I question the want for strong growth.
Slow growth would suit the situation better, and even better if the slow growth lasted until the next election when stage II of social and economic re-construction can be started.
There are, after all, too many people with old skills unemployed, and even more with no skills unemployed. And a whole rake of people with no ability to attain skills or learning (and the training places and agencies being closed). Not to mention those with age-related problems, such as being old and hence almost unemployable.
The new pension plan looks interesting……£140.00 for everyone over state retirement age, irrespective of means or contributions. Good for those who have spent their lives bringing children up and have no contributions. But with housing and council tax benefit on the way out I can only see problems, and those with millions will get the money as well.
So when he retires the chancellor will have an extra £140.00/wk to go with his wedge he didn’t pay tax on.