One is we’ve just let state spending drift up too high. It’s 10 percentage points higher as a share of GDP than it was in the early Blair era. That in itself is enough to take 1% off growth, probably. Second, the markets are all gummed up. All our markets of all kinds are simply gummed up, over-regulated massively compared to where we were 20 or 30 years ago. The third bit of it, I think, is less economic and more cultural. I think it’s about the erosion of the sense of the British nation state’s political project – that we are all one country together, all pulling in the same sort of direction.
|
|||||
Samizdata quote of the day – What’s gone wrong with Britain?October 26th, 2026 |
 15 comments to Samizdata quote of the day – What’s gone wrong with Britain?Leave a Reply |
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Dear Mr de Havilland
Perhaps we are at the end game.
Chill Dude Explains – Signs Every Collapsing Society Thought Were Progress:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVXNrLYyGuI
DP
An unaccountable political class.
Education controlled by Marxists.
It is a hostile foreign invasion intent on destroying every aspect of the Britain that was; aided, abetted, and collaborated with by the entire British Nomenklatura.
Subotai Bahadur
“the markets” are dependent on the slush fund of Credit Money created by the Bank of England and the commercial entities that depend upon the Bank of England other Central Banks around the world (the Federal Reserve system in the United States) – and are made up of a few large corporations, thanks, in part, to the “Big Bang” of the 1980s – which was called “deregulation” but was really a massive, vicious, INCREASE in regulation – over-time destroying the private clubs (no one was forced to trade on the London stock exchange – there were other exchanges, and trading “off exchange” was perfectly legal), self employed stock brokers and stock “jobbers” (wholesale people) and partnership banks. Now customers, whatever they think they are doing, are really dealing with employees – people who have no loyalty to small private investors and who do not own the enterprises they work for – and are not personally liable for debts or other obligations if the enterprise goes bust.
The City of London is now not, fundamentally, different from New York City – and NYC (far from being “a symbol of capitalism”) has been one of the most statist places in the United States for a long time, a very long time.
This is why “the markets” cheer insane levels of government spending (rubber stamped by people such as Prime Ministers Johnson and Sunak and Chancellers Sunak and Hunt – astonishingly both Mr Sunak and Mr Hunt are still members of the House of Commons), but scream with outrage “this will destroy the economy!” at even talk of tax rate reductions.
For example – the proposed cuts in tax rates in the “Liz Truss mini budget” were a good idea (and still are a good idea) – but “the markets” condemned them (because they were told to condemn them – by the Bank od England and the rest of the international Corporate State) and the subsidies to energy costs were a BAD idea – and “the markets” supported that increased government spending.
Mr Hunt and Mr Sunak got rid of what was good in the “mini budget” and kept what was bad – and “the markets” approved. They condemned even talk of reducing tax rates – but approved of wild increases in government spending, just as they had approved the half a TRILLION Pounds of insane Covid spending (rubber stamped by Mr Johnson and Mr Sunak – although “Policy” was NOT thought up by these puppets) and the “lockdowns” that crippled Britain and other nations – and were NOT about “saving lives” (that was never what the Policy, capital P, was for – none of the policies followed during Covid were about “saving lives” quite the contrary).
“the markets” are not free markets – they are dependent on the slush fund of Credit Money from the Central Banks (such as the Bank of England in the United Kingdom) and they are intensely regulated – formed into de facto cartels of a handful of large enterprises (that is what the regulations are for – to keep out real competition, real choice), de facto international cartels of a handful of large enterprises – who follow a political and cultural agenda.
It is the same in just about every other market – from energy to transport, no free markets, just pretend “markets” – dominated by government regulations designed to create a situation where a handful of corporate enterprises (owned by no-one, by institutions such as Pension Funds, – corporate bureauacracies) joined at the hip with government (nationally and internationally), control most things – and follow a political and cultural agenda.
Whether one calls that agenda “Agenda 2030” or some other name – does not matter.
It is hard to decide which was the worst mistake of the mid 1980s – the “Single European Act” which allowed an endless flood of regulations to be imposed in Britain (in the name of “free trade” – always look under the cover, “free trade” may mean radically LESS freedom – just as the slogan “free the media” of the “students” in Serbia really means a massive INCREASE in regulation and control by officials and “independent experts”), or the “Big Bang” – the crushing of the voluntary clubs (again no one was forced to trade on these exchanges – there were other exchanges, and trading “off exchange” was perfectly legal) and privately owned (self employed or partnerships) business enterprises of the old City of London, which led (was designed to lead) to the endless regulations of the Financial Services Act – the creation of various regulatory bodies that did-not-use-to-exit (some “deregulation” – get rid of the “de” and you have got the truth).
The judges, even back then, were delighted with both (indeed “Big Bang” started in the courts – as a pretend attack on “restrictive practices” with the agenda of replacing them with far MORE “restrictive practices” of the Corporate State kind) – showing that, even 40 years ago, the judicial class (the judges and so on) was already compromised.
These days judges do such things as impose baby killing on Northern Ireland, under the slogan of “upholding the right to family life”, and no one bats an eyelid – “of course” judges act that way, it would be silly to think that judges should not have the power to impose their whims – in this particular case, their desire to kill people who have committed no crime.
I am told that Britain is a LESS bad place to settle commercial disputes than most other countries – in which case the legal system of other countries must be terrible indeed.
To quote Robert Downey Jr’s Sherlock Holmes, “Chronologically or alphabetically?”
The old global liberal elite has worked the wealth pump pretty much to the limit – taking money from the ordinary people and bestowing the wealth on its friends and relatives. Ask yourself if Labour (and the previous Conservatives) have found it easy to identify and raise new taxes.
What follows is a period of chaos as the extraction of wealth falters. I believe we are in that period of chaos now. The chaos typically lasts for five or ten years until a new smaller, less greedy, elite emerges. It won’t necessarily be an easy transition, and it won’t be limited to politics.
“…The chaos typically lasts for five or ten years …”
Well I certainly hope it’s only about five to ten years – I might live long enough to see an improvement; not much sign of it just now I have to say.
Discovered Joys and Peter MacFarlane.
The state has been on the rise here since the 1870s – 150 years rather than five years, however you meant full chaos – and, yes, that is a very different thing.
Britain was still more good than bad as late as 1964 – true the government, even then, was vast – but society was still basically sound (at least it looked sound – there was some corruption creeping in, from the top-down). No one really cared if you owned a firearm – a license was easy to get, let alone owned a knife (“so what?” was the attitude), there was Freedom of Speech and no race laws (not against black and brown people – and not supporting them either), most people still went to church (even if their knowledge of theology and philosophy was not very strong) and most families were strong and stable – with a positve fertility rate.
Now none of that is true – we are moving into the end game.
Some will escape and good luck to them – but those of us who are old and poor are in for hard times.
@Discovered Joys
What follows is a period of chaos as the extraction of wealth falters. I believe we are in that period of chaos now. The chaos typically lasts for five or ten years until a new smaller, less greedy, elite emerges
Can you offer some historical examples of where this has happened?
@Fraser
The concept is Cliodynamics and there is a website and various books to explain the principle. An American example is https://peterturchin.substack.com/p/america-at-250 , and the blurb for the book Ages of Discord includes this summary:
After all, how on earth can yet another murderous rampage have anything to do with polarization in Congress? And is there really a connection between too many multimillionaires and government gridlock? Historical analysis shows that long spells of equitable prosperity and internal peace are succeeded by protracted periods of inequity, increasing misery, and political instability.
You really need to browse the whole website to get the full background if you wish to appreciate the ideas or find the link to a public database. Other countries are covered too.
Since when inequity always increases misery? One of big increase inequity is when a country have growth specially if significant growth comes from one sector.
Strangely you think increasing taxes – increasing the size of political economy – do not increase inequity despite the power going to the political system that needs laws : the right to make violence to impose it. The BBC is financed by people that the BBC hates. Those people have to pay under duress.
David Frost is correct – govenment spending, already incredably high in the 1980s, has massively increased in recent years – the state is much bigger than it was in 1990 (the year Margaret Thatcher was betrayed) – although the state was already massively too big even then, and had been increasing in size (even relative to the economy) since the 1870s.
And David Frost is also correct about the culture – from seemingly minor things (which are NOT minor) – such as the Fitzwilliam museum in Cambridge saying it was founded with “profits from slavery” – it was NOT, the claim is a LIE – and it is one of a Legion of LIES one finds in museums, art galleries, and National Trust properities in this country.
And also on the fundamental existence of the nation – the fertility rate of the native population is now vastly lower than replacement level, the family, and all other cultural (societal) institutions in this nation – is in a death spiral.
And this is typical of Western nations – we are witnessing the Death of the West – it really is that serious.
As for rich people in Congress – the only industrialist (“Capitalist” in the Classical Marxist sense) in the Congress that I can think of is Senator Ron Johnson.
Senator Ron Johnson is one of the better Senators – and one of the few people in Washington who is an honest man.
Perhaps more Capitalists (more factory owners) are needed in Congress.