Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How the U.K. broke its own economy

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 784 posts

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#121

Post by notahacker »

necubi wrote: post #56
reverendsteveii wrote: post #4

Everyone who bought into neoliberalism in the 80s is now experiencing economies that are mysteriously failing to thrive. Correlation isn't cause, except when it is.

The article is about how bad land and energy policies (essentially central planning)—dating from the post-war period—are holding back the British economy. Is that neoliberalism?

In fairness, whilst the article isn't without merit, it's authored by some of the only people in the UK that actually describe themselves as neoliberal. Which is why it's focusing on "green belt" planning policy and ignoring the fact that local government built 150k houses per annum back when we actually built enough houses, something which "neoliberal" policy introduced by Thatcher essentially made impossible, and why the article treats rail privatization as a success story rather than a service British citizens use in increasing numbers despite sky-high prices (and the government subsidising it more than when they owned it!) not least because markets have moved the jobs into London and the affordable housing out of London.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#122

Post by giantg2 »

cr__ wrote: post #115
giantg2 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate the large scale turbines. I'm sure small scale or other designs are OK. But screw the large turbines. Where I grew up they outsourced the jobs and then we were left with ugly giants ruining the once beautiful mountains. It's on par with strip mining (aesthetically).

I like em.

[flagged]

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#123

Post by nxm »

rounce wrote: post #112
kmeisthax wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brexit is a symptom, not the cause. The people who were most screwed by Britain's prior mistakes voted for it in a vain attempt at fixing the problem by throwing misguided nostalgia at it.

What were those prior mistakes?

[flagged]

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#124

Post by orangecat »

sjducb wrote: post #10
pipes wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what was the alternative? Continue with the disaster of central planning. Which is the actual thing that destroyed British industry.

Go back to what the western world was doing in the 50’s. High tax and high public spending. In 1950 the US had a top marginal tax rate of 91%. The 50s were great, let’s do that again. https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2021/04/26/taxing...

High tax and high public spending.

Government spending was a slightly lower percentage of GDP than today (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYONGDA188S), and a whole lot of that was defense (https://econofact.org/u-s-defense-spending-in-historical-and...).

The 50s were great, let’s do that again.

Assuming you're not a non-white person, or a woman who wants a career. Although getting rid of Medicare would certainly help the budget.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#125

Post by thinkingtoilet »

giantg2 wrote: post #122
cr__ wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like em.

[flagged]

Where do you think coal and oil comes from? It's ok as long as other people's environment is destroyed for non-renewable energy but not your environment for renewable energy?

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#126

Post by laurencerowe »

lsllc wrote: post #60

I have some friends over there and they (or their employers) are cutting back on their business expenditures, staffing and overall outlook. The new payroll taxes (unemployment insurance?) are going to bite both employers and employees alike. Taxes are too high, there's too much red tape for businesses and successive governments have failed to invest in anything outside of the "south" (e.g. Greater London). I was (hal…

> The new payroll taxes (unemployment insurance?) are going to bite both employers and employees alike.

Increases to employers' National Insurance contributions. It's the equivalent to Social Security in the US. Mostly goes to pensions.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#127

Post by dmoy »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #94
mistrial9 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you are an employee and that is direct compensation (not deferred capital gains) then your taxes are lower than California

Is this including the use of tax advantaged accounts like HSAs/401Ks/IRAs/etc? In the US, it should be possible to get a 95th percentile household income ($300k, married filing joint) effective federal income tax rate down to 10% to 15%. Including total health insurance costs (employer + employee) plus some amount of deductible/out of pocket maximum for a family of 4 would bump it up to 20% to 25%. And then on top of…

If this is MFJ two similar incomes, then Social security and Medicare is another ~14% (it'll say 7.65% on the tin, but really your wage is lowered to compensate for the 7.65% employer portion, working out to about 14% total). Effective federal income tax on $300k income is 20%+, not including healthcare. State tax is another 8%..

So that's 42%, not including healthcare costs. Which is gonna be easily another 5%+.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#128

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

thrance wrote: post #117
dmix wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I googled the transportation privatization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatisation_of_British_Rail So the UK rail network was privatized in the 1990s with tracks and stations remaining under government control and private companies bid for a 'franchise' running train services for whole regions. So basically franchises operate as regional monopolies and meaning passengers don't have any real choice of providers? T…

You can't have competing companies on rails. Each companies having their own networks would be prohibitively expensive, or they have to share rails between each other which poses significant issues. You're also left with the issue of unprofitable stations, which is a lot of them. If you want an example of what a really privatized, deregulated rail system would look like, read about France in the early 20th century. B…

> You can't have competing companies on rails.

Just to be a pedant, you can. However, the coordination problems are so immense that it is just a totally stupid thing to do.

So yes, rail should be a public service.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#129

Post by alabastervlog »

cr__ wrote: post #115
giantg2 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate the large scale turbines. I'm sure small scale or other designs are OK. But screw the large turbines. Where I grew up they outsourced the jobs and then we were left with ugly giants ruining the once beautiful mountains. It's on par with strip mining (aesthetically).

I like em.

They're one of the only pieces of technology that I think often (not always) improve the appearance of a landscape.

Maybe also lighthouses. Sometimes.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#130

Post by gosub100 »

monkeycantype wrote: post #97

I want to see more discussion from the perspective that the economy and government is not just a process, an institution, but a contest, an arena. Outcomes which are presented as a failure, are not merely a failure, but like a punch in a boxing match that misses its mark, occurs in a wider context, and against deliberate opposition. A failed project might be a failure for most, but for opponents it may be a victory,…

Exactly. I think there's an entire political party that capitalizes on suffering, offering to jump in and rescue the poor victims. Like racketeering: create the problem and sell you the solution "if you just vote for us, we'll fix the devastating problems caused by $BADGUYS". but an absence of problems means you lose your voter base.
Post reply on HN