Gareth Hughes’ Post

Why are self-described political pragmatists so incurious about using the immense pool of income and wealth held by the super-rich to raise living standards by distributing it a bit more evenly? A blog for 'Labour Hub' noting that mechanisms to re-direct money and assets flowing to those at the top to everybody else instead have been a common feature of socio-economic progress throughout history. In the face of demographic, environmental and political challenges, increasing aggregate wealth is going to become more difficult, so how existing resources are divided becomes more important. Despite this, people raising concerns about extreme concentrations of income and wealth and proposing a more even balance are treated as extremist or utopian. Meanwhile, asinine promises to solve inequality by making all the poor people as rich as the rich ones are hailed as a hallmark of sober and serious policymaking.

Without diverse mainstream media, no meaningful democracy is possible. If even progressive space continues to perpetuate Fantasy of “economic growth “ as solution to social and physical realities of our world, it is clear progressive/conservative rhetoric has little to concern as actual well-being of lives of broad population. Top- down, status quo party politics will not alter our course. We have to be, and create, the leaders who promote and nurture diverse, collective energy of civil society. New Citizen Project DemocracyNext https://lnkd.in/eUnfzWuJ

Fascinating article by George Monbiot on why capitalism seemed to work (at least for some) 1945-75 - https://lnkd.in/ezEW72_x. I knew that after the war the allies pretty much imposed the 'mitbestimmung' system (worker participation in management) on German industry - because it was clear that inequality, exploitation and social division had led to fascism, war, holocaust - but bizarrely failed to adopt it themselves, even when it became clear it was working better than their own systems. What I didn't know is that the US had also imposed “the democratization of Japanese economic institutions” to ensure “a wide distribution of income and ownership of the means of production and trade”. "To this end, it imposed high property taxes, with a top marginal rate of 90%; broke up business conglomerates; demanded a labour union law enabling the right to organise and strike, and higher wages for workers; organised comprehensive land reform, which dissolved large holdings and distributed them to peasants; and introduced fiscal reform that led eventually to taxes on the highest incomes of 75% and an inheritance tax on the largest estates of 70%." How bizarre is it - when it is known that unrestrained capitalism leads to social breakdown, fascism, war, holocaust - and that the proven answer to this is strict regulation of capital, strong organised labour, and very high rates of redistributive taxation - that the anglosphere economies have increasingly done just the opposite?

https://lnkd.in/etJVE-DR Just finished reading this. If you are interested in public policy, better government, improving the economy and addressing inequality, it feels like an important read. I confess to having been a fan of #WillHutton for many years. As the title suggests though, this feels particularly timely, with the Election fast approaching. A few key takeaways. The historical dimension is especially insightful. I was taken by the failure previously – despite some near misses - to deliver a coalition that would have reformed the voting system. We remain an outlier in terms of retaining a “first past the post” voting system. The next message is the sense of urgency for change; the need for a new sense of direction. Clearly, for any next government, this is likely to be about policy and organizational reform rather than about just more money, even if that money can be distributed differently. I can’t help wondering how that pressing need for change fits with the cautious approach – at lease pre-election - of the Labour Party. It seems clear that major change is coming after the inertia and shadow boxing as this Parliament runs its course. So, I started to contemplate what a changed, radical approach might mean for the themes of my consultancy business world: for the delivery and funding of public services; for driving economic growth; for the health and physical development of towns and cities; for university and college education; and for delivery of health services. I am convinced it won't just be more of the same. I may share some further thoughts on these themes later – hoping there is some interest. Is it only me that thinks that the “professional community” does too little to drive these future, essential debates?

George Monbiot - If we want the kind of fair, functioning state Britain saw post-1945, we need to take on the economic powers that wrecked it. The history of many centuries shows that the default state of politics is not redistribution and general welfare, but a spiral of accumulation by the very rich, the extreme exploitation of labour, the seizure of common resources and exaction of rent for their use, extortion, coercion and violence. Normal is a society in which might is right. Normal is  #oligarchy. Walter Scheidel explains that only four forces have ever significantly reversed inequality: mass-mobilisation warfare (such as the two world wars), total and violent revolution, state collapse and devastating plagues.  He doesn't mention #socialmobilisation around #inequality like in Norway in the 1930s, which helped to create the more equal societies in Scandinavia.  Well we now have the #climatecrisis and #extinctioncrisis. Can we use this to transform to a #regenerative society? If we don't the result will be devastation. Julia Steinberger Jennifer Wilkins https://lnkd.in/dUBN_dYr

“Our archaic and patriarchal traditions need to be replaced with best workplace practices. Whipping and Punch-and-Judy style debates need to be consigned to the past, where they belong. “ Brilliant piece from Jennifer Nadel FRSA at Compassion in Politics in the #bylinetimes Completely agree that small, low or no cost tweaks to Parliamentary practices could have a huge ripple effect. At 50:50 Parliament we are interested in seeing a Parliament that appeals to the brightest and best women in this Country - in all of their diversity. When we #AskHerToStand, we want it to be in and for world-class politics and conduct. So pleased to be working with Compassion in Politics and the Apolitical Foundation on a piece of work that underscores what needs to change to make Parliament fit for purpose for women (and men!) in the future. There’s a chance to shape that future very soon. I hope people are listening Jennifer! #womeninpolitics #equalrepresentation #change #civility #GeneralElection #womeninleadership #pmqs #conservatives #labour #libdems #greenparty #letslead

https://lnkd.in/d7Kk5Bs4 Breaking down the South’s economic underperformance Rooted in Racism and Economic Exploitation: Part Two

What’s the Government’s “better story”? A bunch of rehashed policy targets to be announced on Thursday - according to this article. That’s patently not a story let alone a better one. This is a story: “things are really bad but they used to be good until the out-of-touch political elite let all the foreign things in, particularly immigrants. Especially immigrants. So, vote for us to replace the elite and kick out all the foreign stuff - particularly immigrants - and make things good again. Did I mention immigrants?” It’s malignant nonsense, and basically cover to enact policies that shore up the power and wealth of the super-rich, but it’s a clear story and one rapidly growing in resonance. The obvious question is what is an equally resonant but left-leaning story that can counter the far-right narrative. The Government seems unable to come up with one. And the traditional radical left story that things are bad because of inequality of wealth, accurate or not, no longer seems to cut through with enough voters. So, what is that alternative story? Or should we even be playing the Westminster game at all given it demands simplistic stories when what we actually need is a sophisticated radicalism to meet the existential challenges facing humanity? #ukpolitics #Labour #democracy #populism James Meadway Clifford Singer https://lnkd.in/eSpPF_CR

It's always interesting- and informative - to see how other societies see what we are doing Here's a UK conservative view- and endorsement- of what is happening here in NZ... are we actually experiencing a version of 'right-wing progressivisim'? Once labelled 'the social laboratory of the world', is NZ now the political laboratory? Having tried left wing progressivism under Arden have we now swung to right wing progressivism under Luxon? And what and where next?

So well said. "Meanwhile, to take just one agency as an example, the Treasury Department—whose core jobs include managing the nation’s finances in the public interest, enforcing tax laws, ensuring that our banking system is well regulated, and combating international money laundering—will likely be run by the sorts of financiers who believe in deregulation and reducing funding for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). This would make banks even less safe than they were before the financial crisis of 2008 and could well risk another crisis like the 2023 failure of Silicon Valley Bank and two other institutions. We would see the IRS regress from its improved 2023 and 2024 filing seasons, when the agency launched a successful Direct File pilot program and collected $1.3 billion in additional revenues, mostly from tax evaders." #economicjustice #financialinclusion #wealthgap #politicaleconomy