Why Are Taxes So High?
2024 ж. 9 Нау.
160 628 Рет қаралды
Taxes are set to reach all time highs. But if this is the case, why is the government so bankrupt? And why are public services collapsing? In this video I explain why.
UNDERSTAND, SHARE & PUSH BACK
BOOK - www.penguin.co.uk/books/45580...
WEBSITE - www.garyseconomics.org
TWITTER - / garyseconomics
FACEBOOK - / garyseconomics
INSTAGRAM - / garyseconomics
TIKTOK - / garyseconomics
KZhead - / garyseconomics
PATREON - / garyseconomics
DISCORD - / discord
BLUESKY - bsky.app/profile/garyseconomi...
SUBSCRIBE, SHARE & START A CONVERSATION
Performed by Gary Stevenson
@garyseconomics
Don't worry. A bloke who did PPE at Oxford will soon be replaced as Chancellor by a woman who did PPE at Oxford. Nothing can go wrong.
Well, she did get an MSc-Econ from a proper university (LSE of course!) afterwards! But I get the point - PPE is media studies from Oxford - a non-degree!
HAHAHAHAHAH very true...!!!
@@andrewgraeme8429 media studies is a non degree? Maybe if more people did media studies, the media literacy in the UK wouldn't be so pathetic. Rupert murdochs empire wouldn't exist and Gary and his colleagues would have a fighting chance.
we should be getting in people who have got no degrees! These degrees and universities aren't making the country run well. They need to replace all the top jobs and give them to normal people, bank of England, NHS, prime minister, chancellor should all be people who never been to university so we all get a fair chance of doing these jobs
@@andrewgraeme8429 its for those who aren't clever enough to do Classics, which they for Oxford reasons call Greats.
Have you ever been to Treasury, Gary? I’ve been watching you a lot and heard what you’ve said about the out of touch privately educated rich kids in the banks, who have no idea how our economy is actually doing. I’m an economist in the civil service and my experience of Treasury is exactly the same. You don’t find it so much in other departments but Treasury is rammed full of these privately educated rich kids with no clue. Paradoxically, I think it’s because pay in Treasury is so low. The best don’t go there because they can’t afford to, yet it’s such a prestigious job. So it attracts a certain type of power hungry person with enough family money behind them to support them. I walk through the offices and the canteen and everyone is wearing their Saville Row suits and talking about their skiing holidays. It’s night and day with the real world! It makes me wonder how we’re supposed to make change when those working for the most important department in the country, advising the government on our economy and our future, are so out of touch.
You find it in ever dept wtf are you talking about, that is gov entirely
I've known a fair few SPADs in my time. Some of them are my dear friends, but honestly most of them just went to elite unis. They didn't even study subjects that are relevant to the jobs they're currently doing. One of my uni mates did the "diversity internship" scheme with the civil service. Bar one person, all the people on it were Russell Group educated with middle class professional parents.
Fascinating comment
When this country finally implodes will those private schools take responsibility for the idiots they churn out?
Are there any MMT economists in the Treasury?
If I say there's wealth inequality, I'm a bitter loser who doesn't work hard enough. To have someone like Gary say it destroys that false narrative, and I really appreciate it.
Indeed haha Gary is the kind of guy all these fuckers would want to be
Very true. Underrated comment.
Because he’s an ex trader doesn’t make him not a socialist.
@@thehammer9599 het is a social democrat. Not a communist, or anarchist Its moderate leftism, he stands for
And therein lies the problem. I have never heard him say he was or believed in Socialism, though clearly by what he says, he does, whether that is subconsciously or not. For someone to say they are moderate left is a cop out , just to exonerate themselves from that dirty word Socialism. They are only words, what he really stands for, like a lot of people, including myself ( though I have no problem been known as a Socialist, I'm proud of it) is fairness, equality, justice and the needs of the community before the individual, which is fundamentally what Socialism is, but for some strange reason, people these days, with these views/beliefs no longer want to be known as being a Socialist, Democratic Socialist, moderate leftism, anything but the real thing. I suppose the media have demonised the word and those who still hold true to their Socialist beliefs. My dad always used to say, in relation to them and us, rich and poor, you are either being f**ked or doing the f**king, there is no in between.
So privatisation and the selling off of assets has left us at the mercy of corporations to maintain the daily running of our country. This has to be a huge argument for nationalising basic services.
No, because they would be so inefficient it would end up costing even more.
@@schonnyruleswhy does it work in France, Sweden, Japan? The French national railway owns much of ours...
@@RichardEnglander Honestly couldn't say. It seems the quality of public services in the UK is across the board poor, while our tax receipts are just as high as the aforementioned. Why do you think it works elsewhere? Culture?
@@schonnyrules I don't know why, but I suspect it is linked to red tape, entrenched attitudes, and badly created/written contracts.
@@RichardEnglanderbecause the Japanese have an excellent work ethic compared to us.
*Why are taxes so high... on the poor.* And not nearly high enough on the rich. The trouble is, we all know why, we know it in our bones. We don't know the fancy terminology for it, but we know the country is run by and for a vanishingly small minority of people seeking to expand their own money and power at quite literally, the cost of our wellbeing and the planet itself. Trouble is, that the vanishingly small minority have convinced juuuuust enough of the riff-raff, that they might one day, make it, to prevent change. They won't. And none of us will, without solidarity and collective action.
Too high taxes on the middle class, to high benefits for do-nothings or to cash-in-hand workers. We must cut all benefits and work to cheapen private healthcare
@@davidcooks2379so says the brainwashed
@@davidcooks2379Every advanced economy has a welfare state. It's actually been around in various forms for centuries. Bismark created the modern version in 1872 (Germany). What do you think happens to benefits? I can assure you it ends up in the hands of the rich.
@@davidcooks2379 We need to get rid of private healthcare full stop and invest in the NHS so that there is no difference in medical care between the NHS and the private health sector. Also a majority of those on benefit’s are permanently impaired, can no longer work due to failing health or mentally ill. Only a small proportion are as you claiming benefit’s illegally. Those who work cash in hand have no employment rights and are working within the black economy, they are also underpaid and have access to benefit’s, this work is usually done by those immigrants who have no uk status but it’s them who are propping up a failing Tory economy. They are also usually part of a gang who is controlled by a gang boss who takes the majority of their earnings. So a lot of the failing economy is being propped up by these vulnerable people.
@@davidcooks2379 We need to get rid of private healthcare full stop and invest in the NHS so that there is no difference in medical care between the NHS and the private health sector. Also a majority of those on benefit’s are permanently impaired, can no longer work due to failing health or mentally ill. Only a small proportion are claiming benefit’s illegally. Those who work cash in hand have no employment rights and are working within the black economy, they are also underpaid and have No access to benefit’s, this work is usually done by those immigrants who have no uk status but it’s them who are propping up a failing Tory economy. They are also usually part of a gang who is controlled by a gang boss who takes the majority of their earnings. So a lot of the failing economy is being propped up by these vulnerable people.
One of the other ways Gov lost our assets was privatisation. Water companies are a great example. Investors from outside the UK have loaded the water companies with debt, lowered short term costs by not investing in the infrastructure assets, and extracted money in the form of dividends. The game is already lost. Now huge investment is required to bring the service back to a good standard, but who pays?
Foreign govts are asset-stripping our basic infrastructure. National govt has financial super powers that Neoliberals like to pretend don't exist. But we can easily finance society in such a manner that it pays for itself. We can also nationalise natural monopolies and critical infrastructure. It will save a fortune. You should see Yanis Varoufakis explain the UK electricity 'market' scam. Prices are set based on which member of the cartel produces electricity the LEAST efficiently. We are being robbed, individually and nationally
Demand for clean water has gone up since they were privatised too.
Literally no one has to pay. The company should go into foreclosure and sell the assets to the highest bidder who can then start essentially the same business. It's the bank that produced the loan that made a mistake, which they should not repeat.
The government can take it back in house any time it wants as water is a needed natural resources.
@@nomadblthe loans are secured on the assets. If the company went into liquidation and was sold off to the highest bidder, those priority debts would have to be paid first. The liquidator would probably have to split the thing into different components to get the best prices. Water is a vital service and selling a company to an asset stripper, which is in essence what has already happened, is not going to solve the problems for consumers. Some of these water companies are now technically bankrupt. The government needs to step in and renationalise them or they need to be taken into local ownership and the debts need to be written off. After all, capitalism is supposed to run on competition (gambling) and if the gamble fails, these bandits lose. We shouldn't be paying to service debt and pay bonuses and dividends. A further twist in this complex tale is that, no doubt, some pension funds will be investing in these water/sewage companies and will probably need to be bailed out too. It's the sticky web of capitalism full of the flies of greed.
As a country in 1979 we were cash poor & asset rich, after nearly 50 years of trickle down economics we are now cash poor & asset poor, who would have thought.
There's never been more cash, they just keep on printing more
True, but rather than invest in infrastructure to benefit the country, for example, they give it to rich people to let it trickle down.
@@mark-wu7sy wealth doesn't trickle down
That was my original point
Correct and if we cash poor & asset poor, it means Britain as be sold off, effectively Britain exist in name only,
In a word Privatisation... Gary you've a great way of explaining massive subjects very eloquently and clearly 🙂keep up the great work.
I am the living proof of this government's absurd financial strategy. I live currently in a primary school in East Sussex with a property guardianship company which was closed down a few years ago due to "cost" issues. It's actually a nice place to live, and the rent is relatively cheap considering the location and building's aesthetics. I couldn't afford to rent in the private sector, most landlords are asking for £750 PCM+ around this area for a small box room! This site is due to be auctioned off at some point this year, which just doesn't make any financial sense as the remaining local schools are already grotesquely over subscribed, and with a growing population will only get much, much worse. The local council will inevitably end up having to rent another building to become a School, eight people will also become homeless, and no doubt an out of place block of unaffordable flats will replace a historic building to feather the nest of another faceless investor. Utter, utter short term insanity.
How come you live in a primary school?
@@alexmarsh1839 When the school was closed, instead of leaving it to dereliction/ vandalism the council gave management of the site to a property guardianship company. They turned it into a HMO with the pretext that we are not tenants, but "guardians" ; We basically exist to deter kids with bricks and copper hunters from gutting the place. The upside for us is that your personal space can be a school's sports hall/ classroom for a few hundred pounds per month.
@@alexmarsh1839Property guardian scheme.
@alexmarsh1839 check out the uk "property guardian scheme". Cheap rent in exchange for looking after unused commercial properties
@@alexmarsh1839Owners/managers of empty commercial buildings, such as offices, retail space, and even old cinemas and school buildings, sometimes use ‘guardian’ services which helps them find people willing to live there for cheap rents. By having someone living there officially, they reduce the risk of vandalism and remove the risk of squatters moving in, as it can take lots of time and money to get squatters out.
Governments losing wealth wasnt even on my radar! Makes total sense and of course makes the richer much richer! Your points are not being thought about or talked about in politics or by media. These messages need to go to the masses.
Privatisation, selling of council houses... government transferring wealth to the already rich... aka Tory economics
like obr said this week both parties silence is deafening
Tory and Labour economics sadly - Labour is completely on the same page as the Tories on this.@@gordondavies7773
But the government, at least the American government, creates the currency we use and sets the interest rates which keeps most hopping. I'm referencing MMT of course. The government doesn't need our tax money to fund anything. They could buy the properties, means of production to provide housing, health care, etc. for the people.
In other words, asset stripping.
Gary just finished reading the book, good for you, you got out, before they devoured you, took your soul, sucked out your bone marrow, those bastards know what they are doing with you, they trawl the world, looking for rare people like you, knowing full well you're going to be creative and make more money for the bank, they can't do that you see! ....you made them a lot of money, you deserved every penny. And most importantly you got out at the top, and kept you're sanity, well done I salute you mate!
I've always wondered about this from a historical perspective: university was free, every town and even village seemed to have a fire station, police station, and post office. The NHS wasn't overburdened etc etc. They were also paying less tax but somehow they could afford all this without the economies of scale you'd expect to see today. You perfectly describe the problem and answer all the questions I've always wondered. Thanks Gary.
There's stuff most didn't notice that disappeared like the civil defence network. A huge network that no longer exists.
It's almost like importing 15 million people would put pressure on servies built decades ago...
My counter to Thatcher's "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" has always been "The problem with conservatism is you run out of public assets to sell". Always thought this was a problem as I never understood how in the long term selling off public assets is going to help. They sell them off to make a quick few quid to make themselves look economically competent, but then they run out of things to sell. You talking about this asset-stripping of the UK by conservatives, and Grace Blakely talking about the problems with individualism are problems I've thought about for quite a while and astonished that it's not a bigger conversation. It's great to see it happening with you both though, but the word needs to get out there more. Thank you for doing your bit! Awesome Spirited Away hoodie btw!
Your conundrum about conservatism is valid. However, what if the goal was not to fund government services by selling assets, but rather sell assets as a way to enable entrepreneurs to take the place of government in providing those services?
Privatisation was giving away "other people's money." It was always at a discount (to ensure a buyer). And the largest one was council house sales - the main beneficiary being the buyer. The usual arguments against public ownership are ongoing costs and opportunity costs - what you could otherwise do with the money. And let's not forget (though everyone does!) that recently house prices rose over 20% across just two years. Even as folks were already bleating about "cost of living". What, we're supposed to ignore capital gains of £70k in two years for the average homeowner? Yes, I know, it isn't income but folks don't even want to pay inheritance tax (on £400k+!!!!) when they do inherit. People talk out of both sides of their mouth. Whilst folks have been seeing their house price gain £40k a year the taxpayer has been bailing them out for lost income (covid) and high energy price (Ukraine) -- at levels far exceeding those offered to the actual sick and destitute in regular times. And then these folks don't want to pay inheritance either! Sheesh.
@@nomadbl that's certainly the line they spin it as for sure, but the problems with that are that 1: companies have no obligation to the public interest and 2: it lines the pockets of individuals rather than serving the overall good of communities.
That quote just shows that Thatcher (like most zombies living under capitalism to this day) didn't know what socialism is. Socialism is a very broad term and covers a vast array of systems, from anarchism to communism to social democracy, etc. With many different forms within those. Ultimately, capitalism turned out to just be the growing merchant class being jealous of the aristocracy and overthrowing them in the French Revolution, only so that they could take their place. Instead of kings/dukes/counts/earls we have primary share holders/boards of directors/CEOs/etc. I would recommend listening to the Joti Brar interviews on the *Garland Nixon* channel.
@@robinlloyd1121 I don't know if spin is the right term for it, but yes I agree they probably never intended to eliminate government and taxes to begin with, but rather to give favors to their friends. I have to ask though, what do you mean by "public interest" and "good of communities"? If there is competition and free entry to some business venture (i.e. government doesn't forbid it or requires it's permission) than any purchase on that market is necessarily a case of someone getting their money's worth. It's not just the provider that's benefiting. In that sense the good of all individuals - i.e. the community - is served.
Start with the basics, if governments want people to work so they can tax them, then a taxpayer needs affordable healthcare, rent, utilities and basic food. When all of a government's assets have been sold off to private investors, there is this continual requirement for increased revenues yearly for shareholders. I have worked with many CEO's GM's who were an utter disgrace. Sacking people to increase margin so you can get your bonus is simplistic at the very least. Buying back these assets is a must. In Australia for forty years we have had to listen to the BS about balance the books and not having a deficit, so they would sell off assets, gas and electric "don't worry people, you will benefit in the long run from cheaper prices through competition" utter BS, Australia is in the top two for exporting gas, and we pay more than anyone else for this privilege! and why the sell off's really? to stay in power!!!! it was never about the voters, its always been about those in power, oh and forgot to mention congrats on this video, you simplified a complicated issue, and no swearing! 😜
100%
Spot on , just need to add they have raped and pillaged our country’s assets , infrastructure and any chance of being self sufficient. And for who’s benefit 🙄🤔 World wide asset stripping by men in suits.
In my country the state enterprise is infamously wasteful, corrupt, bloated and loss making, and must be subsidized by the government. No matter that the salary structure for the workers and management is the highest in its sector. The militant communist unions still constantly agitate for higher salaries for their workers, the government buys their votes and the tax payers must pay. This is unworkable and insane. This is why government’s privatize. They can still tax it but can keep their sanity and pass the operation onto someone who is actually competent.
Wrong. You have the cause and effect a**e about face. Its productive workers that create the economic wealth that provide those services. More and more Government providing services will just incentivize people to sit on their a**e and hold their hands out. The bloated socialism services they have in the UK will never be "fixed" now. Enjoy the Decline UK.
Staying in power? Only by winning votes. People love to blame politicians, never the voters. And yet the causation is voters voting.
There’s another factor on top of straightforward transfer of assets from the public to the private sector. The assets that remain in public ownership have not been maintained and therefore are turning into liabilities. If you keep your car maintained properly it can run almost indefinitely with relatively manageable maintenance costs but if you allow it to become a rusting hulk it will cost a fortune to get it back to a state where it can give you a decent level of service
It's about time we taught the younger generation what money is, what is good debt, what is bad debt, assets, isas, pension etc etc. The government don't want people to know about money because they want the ordinary person to be in debt, have no assets so they have to keep working and pay their taxes.
Spot on Gary. Introduce a 1% tax on all net assets above £5M held by wealthy families, trusts, offshore trusts and corporations. Currently most of the best property in the centre of London is owned by offshore trusts. Also, tax foreign corporations that sell goods or services in the UK and don't pay any corporation tax I.E Amazon. Then massively increase quality of services for poor and middle-class people and massively decrease tax for the poor and middle-class people. People need to wake up and vote for a new political party that represent the poor and middle class. The Tories and Labour do not represent the poor and middle class.
Even better, 1% tax on all transactions. The rich will pay proportionally more due to their million/ billion dollar transactions.
I think you shouldnt tax American companies. Its bad for UK
nearly there.Your correct about Con&Lab-2 Party Politics is the "confidence" trick as is QE which accelerated that transfer of wealth.&If they all done what Mone done the FIAT was in assets before the weekend.PR is way foward.Also if we educate the masses how to register a vote of no confidence in any GE candidates on ballot paper.To do this one needs to draw a diagonal line from bottom lh corner to top rh corner of the candidates boxes where 1 wud usually put a "X" simultaneously write the word"NONE" diagonally bottom lh corner to top rh corner of all candidates names.This is a legal vote of No Confidence in any of the candidates nor their Policies.The returning Officer has to register& declare these.If enough ppl do it no 1's elected as MP and an alternative SYSTEM will have 2b devised.PR?
The rich will just leave whilst continuing to have their businesses here. Very easy to do as a wealthy person.
@MrSpiderman1321 the wealthy are only wealthy because they need ordinary people to pay rent, interest and buy things.
Huge penny drop moment for me watching this. All makes so much more sense now! Great video Gary.
Except the same situation is true in countries where the government owns the stuff. It is just marxist propaganda, nothing more.
Brilliant explanation Gary, this has been such an eye opener, makes me quite annoyed that we are all working longer for less and to have crap services as well. Keep up this great work
I have been baffled for years by the utter cluelessness of British governments to understand how economies function. Thanks for making this abundantly clear.
This is possibly the most important video you have made gary! That graph you showed is horrifying! How the hell did nobody see this (or at least nobody highlight it) in stark simple terms like you just did when that situation was getting close to 0...but well played gary for at least coming up with a solution (and yep its the same solution as you have in all your videos) to resolve this!! Lets keep getting more people on board and spreading the message! The irish people proved yesterday that they can push back on a tyrranical government (there is a lot more to do..), so its about time us Brits do the same with our government!!
How the hell did nobody point it out? Well, because today's so-called Left has traded economically literate doctrines for obsession over perceived cultural injustices and hysteria over climate change. The more moderate lot (including the Corbynites, believe it or not) think borrowing/printing money to renationalise public services is the answer - completely ignoring the implications of increased government debt and an exacerbation of already rampant inflation. Meanwhile, the real extremists still believe we're on the cusp of Marxist revolution à la 1848 and the collapse of capitalism. Madness! It's okay though, because apparently declaration of gender and sexual identity and other forms of narcissistic individualism are more important issues. Not to mention stopping climate change, which again is something only the acutely arrogant middle class could conceive to be in their control as moral overlords. If things continue as they are, there will be no solutions for the latter issues anyway. There will be no notion of collective identity remaining and we will all be scratching at the old slag heaps for waste coal to burn when the economy collapses and it's freezing outside. The Left has been asleep at the wheel for 40 years now and I fear it's too late to mount any credible comeback.
Gary you are a genius! The way you are able to make each video a revelation, an epiphany is so amazing. I love your sincerity and authenticity coupled at the same time with a humility and lack of vanity which is so refreshing. You come across so frugal, almost ascetic - you are a prophet for our times. Please stay safe because people like you who are intent on true change always end up being attacked by the powers that be and end up either being destroyed or corrupted.
I've just finished your book Gary. Brilliant read and so well written. I hope it leads lots of new people to this channel. Congratulations 🎊
Thank you Gary! Education is so vitally needed! There is such an incredible lack of understanding in the area of economics and wealth! Your work is much appreciated!
A certain person on the Sunday morning show at 9 said that if taxes on rich went up that they would just leave and that seems to be there default position every time it’s mentioned
Even if they leave they can still be taxed on the assets they hold in the UK. Tax them enough and they'll sell them off to reinvest in a lower tax territory. Yes we lose the tax on their income but that is a very small part of their contribution. On the plus side we profit from buying back all of the UK assets they hold on the cheap. Someone smarter do the math and tell me if that's a net gain plz :)
@@MrTanukiD it's easy to calculate. if they sell them, we tax the new owner. Forget incomes, we could drop all income tax and still be better off by taxing actual assets, because at the end of the day all money is either itself an asset (financial instruments/ savings) or ends up buying an asset. You can think of everything else like income, consumer spending etc as money in motion, it will eventually come to rest in an asset
Good riddance!
The Russian oligarchs were screwed over in the blink of an eye when the authorities wanted to.
A start would be plugging the loophole that allows global corporations to pay taxes on profits on transactions with UK citizens and paid from UK bank accounts in other countries. Like Google, Amazon, eBay and the like paying corporation tax in Ireland or Luxembourg.
Finished your book in 2 days, loved it. Keep up the great work.
Honestly love your videos, you're brilliant at explaining these complex issues in a way that everyday people can understand them. I hadn't even considered Government wealth/debt in this context before!
Bravo ……have just stumbled on your channel and I have to say I love your message here. Your delivery is warm….despite the cold truth in it. Thankyou …..subscribed 💥💪🏻
the question should be why are so many TENS of TRILLIONS hidden off shore and NOTHING is done about it?
Offshore havens have been setup by the bank of england. Why would they do anything about it?
Because hiding it is the only remaining UK industry
The problem is that a government is a monopoly on violence. Once that money is moved, the government can't do squat about it. It was set up this way by design hundreds of years ago.
Seems smart to me. Why would someone want the government pilfering their money and wasting it on a multitude of follies? Garys "solution" of effectively taxing the UK in to prosperity is laughable. It's rooted in statism and big government. It also falls foul of so many incentive structures that govern money and capital allocation that you could write a book about its lunacy. In fact it was Winston Churchill who succinctly said "you cannot tax a nation in to prosperity". Garys whole crafted image/personality and his simplistic words appeal emotionally to cretins who want an easy fix presented to their easily satisfied limbic systems.
"You can't tax a nation to prosperity" But you can let the banks blow a massive financial bubble and when it implodes force ordinary people to bail it out with their taxes. In other words the paper wealth of the 1% is propped up by our labour and taxes while they get to hide from the tax man. You have the mentality of a serf In order for there to be economic activity in a capitalist economy there has to be investment. If the super rich won't invest, the government has to and to do that it needs money
So the NHS paying private companies to build units and then paying to use them is just gping to make the NHS worse and worse. Selling the housing stock was the worst and privatising all assets, who was that? Oh yes Mrs T the Tory hero!!!!
And Keir the Zionbie hero buddy 😅
This is all about getting it off the books not about what's the best value. We all know that government can borrow money cheaper than private companies so it makes logical sense for the government to borrow the money and pay someone to build it. However they'd rather pay extortionate yearly fees and end up paying vastly more in the end than increase government debt.
We see a consistent pattern that privatization can be a short term benefit, but at the long term it always means trouble. But if you only have eye for one or two election cycles, who cares? Besides that, even if on a cost level it's the same (it's not), the moment you privatize a service, governments lose the ability to effectively regulate it as investors demand (and get granted) stability assertions, where they can sue the government if they change regulation in a way that cuts in their profits, which means the government has to constantly compensate private businesses for lost profits, out of tax money.
Thatcher was elected. Repeatedly.
That's what happens when you sell off the family silver!
Gary, Your explanation about the ways in which public resources have been appropriated by oligarchs is so clear and so compelling. Heard you last night on Loose Ends. Please stand as an MP. We need you!!!!!!!!
Put simply, in the 80s the UK government sold off the family silver. Had a huge party, exported it's 'success story' to the world, and is now experiencing a huge Hangover. But Who should pay for the clean up?
I will be sharing this video to everyone. I have been trying to say this for years, but I get so wound up and mad, I sometimes lose the point.. You said it calmly and more effective. Thanks so much
Government is a skint renter who could rewrite the rental contract to say that they own the house if they wanted to. Imagine.
You don't have to imagine. Just go take a look at countries like Venezuela to see how that goes.
@@Big_Johnson_Long venezuela's economy has been destroyed by the americans not the venezuelans
@@Big_Johnson_Longbecause mafia capitalism/corporatism dictates that you're going to suffer the consequences of trying to go against their system.
@Big_Johnson_Long US sanctions
@@Big_Johnson_LongVenezuela has the mighty west bearing down on it economically. It has been held up in parlement as a lesson many times. Our problem in the UK and most advanced sovereigns is capitalists neoliberal doctrine. Wealth exstraction on a global scale. Also part of globalisum. Look into it.
Just finished your book Gary, absolutely loved it!
Great video, love the way you're able to break stuff down to be understandable by anyone.
This is one of Gary's best videos. Nice explanation and I loved that it includes the solution.
Gary. What a whirlwind two weeks it must have been! This is creepy but it feels like I’ve chatted with you every day of that 😂 the content is amazing. The exposure is needed. Incredible work. I bet you’ve got a nice summer holiday booked to recover 😂 and if you haven’t - then make sure you get one booked! ❤
Gary, I've been following your videos and interviews for a while. I think this is your best one to date. Not so much because it breaks new ground --- all of your videos reinforce the basic lesson of how wealth inequality happens. But this is such a clear explanation, and it really covers all the bases. And I like that you cite Piketty and also allude to how the left describes inequality as a moral or social issue, but you simply explain the facts of how wealth inequality is so pervasively destructive. I'm grateful that you have dedicated your life to sharing this message, and I hope that I can do my small part to help amplify that message -- a message that applies just as much on this side of the pond.
Interesting. I think you may have been at the same Piketty talk that I went to also at the Oxford Union. Before that I've read his book "Capital in the Twenty-first century", and so was aware of the growing raise in inequality. Highly rail Piketty's work. Your talk was very intersting and thought-provoking. What you didn't cover - perhaps another day - was why governments gave away all of their assets and who they gave them to. I mean, why make yourself poor in the first place by giving away your house? Tax is one way of dealing with the issue. War, and the total destruction of wealth is another. The latter was the great leveller after WW I and II and led to progressive taxation in UK and US, and also the establishment of the Welfare State with better and more affordable education, and council hosuing for millions too.
Jesus. Thank you, Gary. It all just clicked for me and I'm so mad right now. We are living in the end stage of the game Monopoly where that one player has most of the assets by far and is just raking in money as we all (normal people and the government) slowly bleed to death. It's game over but we don't see it yet. Is it time for revolution yet?
Another outstanding video, simple and to the point and as someone else has commented, that graph just makes another part of the equation so crystal clear. Congrats on the book, I had it on pre-order and read in two sessions over 48 hours. I don't recall the last time I read something that was such a page turner. I read a lot but can go years between being so compelled to turn the page. Highly readable, engaging, exciting, concerning. I hope someone has optioned the film rights!
If the main problem is property accumulation, then logically put limits on property accumulation. This won't directly hurt the rich as much as taxes, but it will eventually restore balance. Gary, really need some solid figures on high wealth taxation, plus how tax avoidance will be handled.
Gary this was a great video keep up the great work you are doing We need to get your message out to as many people as possible they really don’t know what’s at stake Hopefully your book will be a great success, huge respect to you ❤
That was a Very Good one, Gary! You've absolutely got to the root of the problem - now we know where we're going, and we have a basis to work out what we need to do!
WE???? Who are we?
Well... it's an approximation for a brief comment. Sorry for being imprecise... Maybe, then, the commonality - those who live on a week to week basis, have no asset wealth, and only minimal savings. Me, and, perhaps, you?
Just finished your book. Learnt lots, Thanks Gary.
New subscriber here. Really like you plain speaking and you clearly have a deep understanding of how our and similar economies are broken.
Thank you for being so clear and helping us think differently!
Who would uave thought it, but Gary, your ability to get a point accross has improved since the covid times! The structure of your argument is real nice and clean, and im not sure what its worth given the larger picture we're talking about here - but I respect this increase in oratory skill. Good stuff G 👍
I work as an analyst for one of the last ALMO’s that manage the Local Council’s housing stock. We are a profitable and effective business providing way more than just a roof over peoples heads. Money advice, tenancy support, an amazing responsive repairs system. All profits are put into investment in those services and into new build or brown field site development. How has this government got Social Housing SO wrong?
As with everything they only see services through the lens of potential profits for the private sector. I work for a privatised NHS service. It's been proven that for every £ invested in my service the NHS saves £4 (probably more like £8 now) but instead of managing the service to maximise the savings, They're reducing budgets, contracting the cheapest contractor who then put pressure on clinical staff to not spend any money. Staff leave the service and re train to be lawyers, accountants or IT specialists. Services are then further compromised.
You tell us Clearly this is an effective and profitable business model. It must cover its cost, it must make a profit so it can invest in new growth which is itself a cost. So this can only go wrong in a few ways, poor cost control, poor revenue control or corruption/incompetence ?
Why dont local government officers manage the housing stock.? They are paid salaries to do this.
I don't believe they have got it wrong. They have achieved exactly what they intended to achieve, and that is all assets in the hands of private people/companies. And therefore everything is done or used on a for profit basis. Ultimately the owning class will own everything.. Remember the slogan that came from the meeting of the super rich on Davos a couple of years ago. "You will own nothing but be happy". What is happening is not an economic mistake it is planned. Your children's future will be in the hands of a benevolent ruling class. Or a return to feudalism...
@@elwynjones763 an ALMO like ours receive a fee to manage the stock on behalf of the council. Areas such as housing planning, right to buy, housing benefit etc are all still managed by the council. It’s one model of many. But it works for us broadly. Although if the political complexities were put aside we’d be boosting the stock in the city to the max. But we’re “not allowed to” basically.
What you described is privatisation of public services. Which, arguably is driven by government corruption. Individual interests of minsters are tied up in the private companies to which the services are outsourced, rather than the society they are supposed to serve.
This is your best video yet, superbly explained and very clear!
In think there is an even bigger underlying problem. This transfer of ownership to the super rich, who by and large don't produce, generally move far less money back into the economy, and often transfer the wealth outside the country, drives even higher operating costs for provision of services (simple maths: the underlying costs are still there, but private owners also want to cut profit on top, and economies of scale and large scale bargaining are lost) and keeps lowering the spending power of ordinary people, which in turns shrinks the economy even further. Basically rich people are bad for the economy because they accumulate and extract wealth, they don't inject it back into the economy, it's that simple.
One of your best videos to date, Gary, brilliant exposition: the argument is in-depth, and the inference is very clear for your simple conclusion. Best I've ever heard it spelled out, this should be seen by millions.
Hi Gary - thanks for the video. I think referencing recent inflation and inheritance tax might have added to the broader picture. Congrats on the book!
Thanks for another great video Gary! Addressing our impoverishment is the most important challenge of our generation. Please look after yourself. We need your voice!
Gary, if Britain is going bankrupt and they don't increase asset taxes, will Bank Of England ramp up interest rates even higher due to British government bankruptcy? Looks like we need emergency legislation to increase taxes on assets and put them higher than taxes on work. And maybe have asset tax bands, the more value in assets someone has then the higher tax rate they pay. Gary, this is a very good video especially with that graph showing clearly that the government has almost bankrupted the country. Politicians and their funders should to be held accountable for the damage they cause.
Just finished the audiobook. Really enjoyed it, great narration also. The bit with the flying phone had me pissing myself 🤣
Why throw the phone? Why not just give the phone like a normal human? And why did it effectively completely resolve the situation. Nothing makes sense!!!
Thanks for the content Mr Stevenson. Charismatic and smart. The message is simple and clear. It's also nice to see MC Gaz of Cadaverous Crew fighting his way to the surface occasionally.
Thank you for all the information I find everything you talk about so interesting and insightful. Love the No Face hoodie! 🙂
Gary I’ve listened to quite a few of your videos. I’m an estate agent not an economist and I grew up on a council estate and I now meet normal people every day in the course of my work so I see things from a practical point of view. Normal people are struggling to make ends meet at the moment and most people have fairly basic needs to make them happy. I’d say what we need is the following; 1. An ability to live in a home that you can afford 2. The ability to pay your energy and food bills 3. The ability to raise a family 4. The ability to buy your own home if you want to in the future I think this all starts with government/councils to build affordable well-built homes with a garden in nice environments which younger people can afford to live in. In my area each home would have to cost around £100pw in rent to achieve this on current wage levels locally. The ready available homes would also mean that private rents would be poor value in comparison and would therefore be less attractive as investments and the reduction in private rented property would happen naturally as council provided homes increased. With a clear strategy in place to do this we could then start to look at other ways of levelling up which would be more complicated. Locally, I think my council has recently sold its headquarters (the civic centre) and has moved into a new town hall which it now rents from a private company so, in effect, the local labour government has sold its asset and is now renting. I’m sure they must have weighed up the pros and cons of doing so and arrived at the best financial decision for doing so so but I don’t know the reason. I think to really understand why decisions like this are being made we should examine the detail of specific cases and see what it is that’s driving these decisions so that you can get to the cause of the problem. I would genuinely like to know.
I think we have to wean ourselves off home ownership
There’s an easy answer to that one. The government is underfunding councils and imposing cuts in services so at times the councils either sell assets or go bust which we see happening now.
Spot on! I currently work for the council but have also worked as an estate agent & the state of council finances are truly shocking. All of Gary’s points hit the nail on the head as government assets are being sold off to plug funding gaps for one year and once they are sold they cannot be sold again.
@@keithparker1346assets are wealth not money in bank. Cooperative perhaps may work
I think we're very close to a tipping point. The cost of housing is ruining our world.
Gary, you're a breath of fresh air.
This guy is awesome. Well done Gary. Your commentaries are a breath of fresh air and your channel deserves a high profile 👍
Thanks Gary, Conservative Ethos ‘Take Everything , Leave Nothing.’
So no different than labour? Got it, we are dealing with a uni party hell bent on pillaging this country 👍
Not just the Conservatives. I understand it is a common stance for those in the UK to take after so long under Tory rule, but the entire Western world is witnessing the same thing. The State is abusing the people.
Every party is establishment approved now unfortunately not just the tories
Taxes collected are where they need to be and seem low to be honest. The issue is they are taxing income/production rather than rent seeking/wealth.
Exactly this watch what economics explained says about Denmark. One of highest tax burdens in the world and yet lower inequality, better public services and consistent economic growth even during COVID. The difference is more of the tax revenue is from capital gains and consumption and less is from income. They don't penalise actually working to earn money. In the UK capital gains is far lower than income tax unlike other countries. Should be the other way round.
That is probably the case for most people, but the very poor are paying their taxes on consumption (VAT, road tax, fuel tax,TV license etc) for a higher percentage of income than those wealthier. Reducing consumption taxes and increasing asset and wealth taxes is the answer and where I totally agree with Gary
Try being middle class...
a land value tax would be an awesome start
Tax Wealth not work! I think this is the angle which would sell taxing the rich to the working people and middle class who have been persuaded otherwise...
Got an A for A Level in Economics now im getting knowledge at the Masters level for free!!! 😂😂😂 keep it up Gary
Brilliant analogy Gary. ‘Economics for the people’. Well done.👍
Thanks for making this video, this has always been one thing I haven’t understood. It’s clear now. 😅
Loved the talk in Bath last night Gary, thanks for everything that you're doing.
Completely agree Gary. Huge fan of yours. You are absolutely right. I am a rich person (not super rich). The only problem with your solution is that the super rich are super amazing at dodging any kind of tax. From off shore, non-dom to incorporation structures and trusts. They have an answer for all sorts of tax liability. So how do you effectively claw back tax from the super rich?
I do have a concern about what is considered “normal” or “ordinary”. It used to be the working and middle class. I’m not sure that is what we would call normal now. It would be helpful if you were to be more specific in defining normal. I think a larger + larger proportion of the population is going to agree with the points you make. Yes, watching and growing your KZhead channel is one way of spreading the message. Your book may have some impact. But, we need real and tangible ways for voices to be heard. Voting at the polls does not seem the solution. I, and I’m sure others who watch your content, would like to hear more on what can actually be done to change this mess. Thank you for the work you do.
There is often the argument that low corporate tax attract volume investment. Higher volume at lower % can give more money to governments. But if you then decentivise investment by putting barrier to trade with huge trading block, the level of tax is meaningless. Money goes elsewhere. Suspending Eu laws about fair employment doesn’t help if you can’t export. I have never supported the tories, but I used to be able to at least kinda understand their arguments. I have no idea anymore, it looks like asset stripping. They talk of growth and then in next breath say we won’t align standards. What will grow? Russian money laundering?
This makes sense.very well articulated gary .thanks
Utterly brilliant insight. Thank you!
Please do a video on tax assets not work. I watched an accountancy forum where an accountant actually said this was the best and fairest system of taxation.
I make some money from working, and some from owning assets (I'm a landlord). What's INSANE is the misery and difficulty I encounter in earning money from WORKING, versus getting money from rent. Everything is against me as a worker, the wind is at my back as a rentseeker.
@@lllordllloyd you wouldn't be taxed on your work. The tax burden would be more evenly distributed.
By 1990 Thatcher had sold off 1.5 million council houses. In 1992 the UK crashed out of the ERM, interest rates peaked at 15%, and unemployment rose rapidly. A good percentage of those on the lowest wages who had bought their council houses would have had their properties repossessed. There were 75,000 repossessions in 1992 and over 400,000 in the decade. These houses became part of the landlord rental economy. We now see underfunded local councils being forced to sell off their assets to the private sector and load up on debt as they rent back their assets. This will see further tax burdens placed on the public as we see our public services disappear or incur price hikes to maintain.
National govt is creating this situation by refusing to fund local govt. A currency issuing govt has financial super powers. A local govt has none. It is critical that national govt use its financial powers to invest in local govt and local development. Failing to do so is a tragic waste of human potential, for no good reason. Neoliberals also ignore the insurance super powers of a nation. The command of a group of 60 million people's needs necessarily creates economies of scale, efficiencies, discounts, etc. but also the ability to spread risk, in healthcare, for example. Individually we almost never need a hospital, but every moment of every day, thousands do
@@WarrenPeaceOG Excellent, spot on.
@@maria8809ttt Ta
@@maria8809ttt Actually, spot off.
Er, no. 1. The council house sales - at a substantial discount - were the greatest transfer of wealth in UK history. 2. We tied ourselves into the CRM at the wrong rate interest rose to 15% briefly to try and keep ourselves in it. Once out of it and we cut interest rates the UK recovered quickly. The ERM was the problem not the solution. 3. No they didn't. Discounted council house buyers did not suffer huge swathes of repossessions. The repossessions occurred mainly in private property sales. It was the fault of the Lawson boom. 4. No. This was before mass BtL. A lot of those houses and other dwellings were bought by owner occupiers. 4. Eh. Sell off assets AND load up on debt. Wot!? nonsensical. 5. That last sentence is nonsense.
One minute in and I'm hooked, this is a question I've been asking myself for years now.
Yep, very clear explanation and as usual involves the usual suspects.
Bought 'the trading game' two days ago, nearly finished it already. Really enjoying it! Thanks for taking the risk to tell the story.
Occam’s razor theory, the simpliest explanation is the best one. We pay more and more taxes, public services are still declining while a lot of them are outsourced during these many years. Where did the money go? You tell me.
You don't pay higher taxes. It's lower. The better-off are paying more taxes, regular folks less. FACT. Regular folks are worse off - or at least have stopped getting better off. That's why you might feel more highly taxed. But you're not more highly taxed. In fact, the better-off are taking a bigger proportion of the benefits for themselves (and paying more taxes because of it). Regular folks are not paying "high taxes". Regular folks (average income) are £14k a year worse off than they would have been had wages risen as they did before 2008. And they pay significantly less tax than they would have in 2008.
Thanks for what you are doing Gary. And thanks for always keeping it short and low on jargon.
That completely makes sense 👏 and great to see a graph used 😊 more please
Make sure you look after yourself mate. You’re carrying the weight of the world on your shoulders. Your passion is incredible just please make sure you look after yourself.
Oh and also, starving public services despite high taxes is the whole point. Its to justify privitisation and we need to stop falling for this textbook tactic.
Exactly, we should just privatise them but with a system where everyone can afford them. E.g. private healthcare in Germany and France is good quality and affordable
And cut all benefits. People should work for a living, not live on giveaways
I’m less focused on the why. They could be corrupt. They could be incompetent. Gary is talking about the solution here. Something commenters moaned about in previous videos
@@davidcooks2379 nice try trolling buddy.
@@davidcooks2379the germans and french dont have such corrupt conservatives that would deregulate in exchange for backhanders and leave us with an american style system. and to your second point we do not live in a world where full employment is even talked about anymore let alone a possibility
Gary - you’re right of course, but ffs, calling for higher taxes in a system where the lawmakers are either billionaires themselves or they are owned by billionaires isn’t going to work. WE really need to think about how to “back-door” an economic revolution.
The issue is that in the Western political/economic system (perhaps all others too?) the wealthy use their money to gain political power to help them accumulate yet more wealth so they can use their money to more gain political power to help them accumulate yet more wealth so they can....... So it becomes a positive feedback loop leading inevitably to a plutocracy such as we have now.
@@Andre_XX yep, aka 'turbocharged wealth inequality'.
So many commies in these comments whose entire philosophy amounts to envy.
You can try. Many have. They find the rentiers come knocking and raise land prices around it and force the community local institutions to go under.
This is one of the best videos yet. You're a good, good man, Gary Stevenson. 😘 I'm reading your book and am blown away so far. It is such an eye-opening read. You write so well! Once I've finished with the book, I will donate it to my local library to ensure others have the chance to read it too. I wish the world contained a billion Gary Stevensons! 😄❤️
This is a great video because it gives simple and yet very insightful messages. I liked it.
It’s not just the very rich though, it’s the fact that a lot of the debt and services such as Thames water is owned by entities outside of Britain which means that the money is flowing out and not back into the hands of the middle/working class
This, to me, is the much bigger problem. Globalization has provided many benefits to us, but it's also destroyed any semblance of governments being able to run correctly when significant portions of their countries are being syphoned off to other locations (particularly US, China, and global megacorps).
I assumed that these services were included in the assets being talked about but it does definitely I think need to be mentioned
That's because in a log of instances, those assets are now owned by other nations.
Gary is talking about these companies when he says "the rich" because they own them too.
Think about the whole chain. Who owns those company entities and debts? The very rich. The money always leads to someone's hands, and it's them. The companies are just a front for them. Plus, this is happening to every country. So it's not just that we're being drained by everyone else in the world. The people draining us are the rich both in the UK AND outside the UK. And they're all draining everywhere else too. Also, Thames Water is an asset physically locked to the UK, and it can easily be taken back into public hands to stop monetary outflow to the rich. If only the political will was there.
Privatisation is a large part of it as well. I work in social care and my Council has to pay huge amounts to accommodate children in care. It is shocking the amount that some of these companies charge
Of all the great videos you've put out I found this one fascinating. A real eye opener. I never realised we as a country owned very little. Makes sense.
You are brilliant!! Keep up the good work!!
The funny thing is we brought up this point when Thatcher wanted to sell it off.
So if I understand correctly, basically over the years various UK governments have sold off all our publicly owned assets and now there's nothing left to sell and because of that the ordinary person is being taxed more because of this short-sighted approach?
Yep that's pretty much it!
We need more people like Gary!!! Does anyone know where we can access statistics and graphs like the one in this video to help spread awareness?
One of the best of your explanations! Probably on purpose you left out (so it will not get burden by some "negativity") the fact that when Government loses its assets to the rich (which in itself is an act of corruption - of which THEY complain hardest) and then the government has to tax more to pay for the services provided with those lost assets (and taxes come from middle-low as you explained - the rich don't pay) the situation creates yet another pump of wealth extraction from people to the rich.
Government is the biggest it’s ever been, the systems are so complicated that nobody understands them. The accountants are able to navigate this complexity to benefit the rich. The budget always benefits the rich ( eg latest stamp duty on multiple houses and capital gains on second homes) And the government has sold off everything it possibly could. Government has increased its own perks. Ex prime ministers have rest of life expense claim of £130, 000 per year and final salary pensions. All the MPs have expense claims, second homes, etc that is way out of proportion for the job they do Also they have sold off anything that could have generated income, so they could invest in the privatised companies to once again line their own pockets
"Government is the biggest it’s ever been" "And the government has sold off everything it possibly could." Hang on, how are you measuring government size now? Since they've sold off their property you're not measuring government size as property. And since they now have less passive income and replaced that with high rents, they don't have a lot of income, so you're not measuring government size as income flow. If they're spending more than their income they're unstable, or if they're spending roughly matches their income you must be measuring something else. Number of government employees maybe, but in that case, spending isn't high, so they're not paying these employees enough. Have government wages lagged behind other wages? Or are they just being vulture capitalists?
Contradictions and confusion here.
One problem is that, while government budgets might be big, government is not actually delivering, but paying private agents to do so. The loss of government property is not just in the physical wealth that Gary mentioned in the video, but also in the intellectual property represented by skills and knowledge of the workforce, which is now generally locked away in the private sector - at least those aspects that are valuable due to specialisation and/or scarcity. This means that governments are increasingly paying high premiums for consultants and in areas such as IT, rather than analysing and solving problems using its own workforce. Then, when a solution is developed by a private agent, the government is locked into paying continuous fees as the ownership tends to remain with the private actor. Hence, the government ends up on the hook for indefinite “subscriptions”, further encouraging rent seeking by the private sector, while the public sector has no alternative because it simply doesn’t have the in-house skills anymore. Essentially, everything that is profitable is being pushed off to private companies which is then used in the propaganda war on the public sector as an example that the public sector is ineffective, inefficient and can’t do anything right. An egregious example is the huge public subsidies to research while the profits all end up in the private sector (most grotesquely in case of the COVID-19 vaccines).
Gary, do you think that the problem could be solved if we re-established consumer power? If we had a way to collectively boycott / 'buycott' big business to incentivize pro-social policy of the asset holding class? What if we build an App which analyses our individual opinion and advises us on spending / working / voting, so we stop enabling for our own destruction?
Thanks so much for this upload, Gary. I'm learning easier because of you.
Beautifully put my friend.
Is the hat glued on
There is a complicated system of magnets
@@garyseconomics 🤣