UK Politics

4347 readers

91 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

tom@feddit.uk

GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk

flamingos@feddit.uk

frankPodmore@slrpnk.net

Is the Labour government over? (www.youtube.com)

submitted 1 week ago by okwithmydecay@leminal.space to c/uk_politics@feddit.uk

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Labour government refuse to acknowledge and deal with the rising tide of inequality in the UK. Will this doom them to fail, or can we get through to them?

top 10 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Funny to see this in the sub just as I dropped in to post this:

Labour has already delivered or making progress towards two-thirds of its manifesto pledges.

Is the government 'over' according to vague rhetorical positions or is it... very much on track to achieve its manifesto pledges? Is there a 'rising tide' of inequality? Or is it actually the case, as the ONS puts it, in slightly more sober language that, 'Disposable income inequality in the UK, as measured by the Gini coefficient, did not statistically significantly change'?

[+] druk@feddit.uk -11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Gary Stevenson is a populist grifter, who mainly just wants attention so that he can boast about how he went to the best unis, how he's a genius at investing and complain about how tired he is. It's a shame, because some of the problems he brings up are very real, but he's not the way to solve them. Maybe he should just be sipping on pina coladas and rest a bit as he always keeps saying he could be doing instead.

[–] hairyfeet@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Obviously not true. Like you say, the problems he brings up are very real yet he has presented one main solution. A wealth tax.

Would love to know how you're supposed to raise awareness about a really important issue without being "populist".

[–] druk@feddit.uk -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I'm all for an increased wealth tax, and raising awareness is good, but saying that it would be the simple, complete solution as he implies is misleading. Gary also refuses to engage with the research, talk about specifics, show graphs and explain how wealth inequality is a complex issue in his videos. He simplifies things to the extreme and defines society in terms of he and his audience as the pure, non-elite people on one side and all economists and the corrupt elite on the other. This, along with the way he presents himself is why I believe that unfortunately his style is somewhat similar to that of populists on the right, even if their aims are very very different. I'll provide some sources for high quality critique on Gary's work as a reply to the other comment.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I’m all for an increased wealth tax

There is none now, so any wealth tax would be an increase.

[–] druk@feddit.uk 1 points 1 week ago

You're right, apologies, I should have just said a wealth tax, I was also thinking about increased income taxes for high brackets too, so got the two mixed up.

[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Gonna need some proof on this one.

[–] druk@feddit.uk -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Some proof, or more accurately some valuable critique of Gary Stevenson's output:

Fact check video: Economist fact-checks Gary's Economics

Interview with Gary: Despolariza #89 GARY STEVENSON

Podcast on analysing Gary as a secular guru: Decoding the Gurus: Gary Stevenson: The People's Economist

[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Appreciate the sources. I watched the first two and honestly... my opinion hasn't really changed. It's people who can't see the forest for the trees. I think he's doing a good thing, I agree with his message. I think if wealth was taxed more heavily and billionaires didn't exist the world would be so much better.

[–] druk@feddit.uk 1 points 1 week ago

I agree with his message too for the most part, and fully with you on your last statement. I just don't think watching Gary and subscribing to his patreon and all that is the right step in making a change. Especially because for some people he might be dissuading from actually delving into the topic deeper or seeking other sources of information and ways to better the situation. When he says stuff along the lines of 'All graphs are bullshit.', 'I know how the sausage is made, all economists are incompetent/liars.', 'There's gonna be total collapse unless you listen to me specifically.' might end up being harmful in the long run unfortunately. I feel like actual research groups, NGOs and activist groups probably have a lot better chance at influencing policies on this issue than an youtube personality. And if getting a ton of subscribers really was equal to political change, we's already be fucked, because a ton of people who want the opposite or way worse have heaps more followers than Gary ever will.