The video that Hetty Wilson provided a link to is well worth watching all the way through even if you don‘t fully understand it: it’s just as important for you to realise that UK Gov’t record keeping and accounts presentation are utterly chaotic and deliberately set out to obfuscate the real facts and to confuse anyone (expert or otherwise) attempting to make sense of the numbers.
You might well ask why do they allow this? Well some of the record-keeping goes back a very long way, pre-dating company law and accounting standards. Add in the UK’s resistance to change and its predilection with secrecy and tradition and you can see how this might happen, but not why it does. Then there’s the London factor: not just as the centre of governance, but (just as importantly) as the centre of finance. The City of London Corporation has enormous powers protected by Statute (e.g. the "Liberties and Customs" of the City of London are guaranteed in Magna Carta's clause IX, which remains in statute) and even has its own police force. Thatcher’s policy of making Finance the major contributor to UK finance has made the City of London the biggest and easily most influential factor in the UK economy. It has been THE major player in facilitating and normalising off-shore banking, which has led to massive tax evasion, as well as the creation of Special Economic Zones, which threaten to do likewise. It has also fought against many aspects of financial regulation.
In other words it suits the City of London and all who wish to profit from it to keep UK National accounting as confusing and impenetrable as possible.
As Richard Murphy states a limited company couldn’t get away with presenting such bewildering accounts and tardy accounts.
To make matters worse, we have a Scottish administration that is happy to co-operate with the Labour government's plans to ramp up the asset stripping.
According to PwC "the [City of London] financial and professional services industry contributed a record £110.2bn to the public purse in 2023. This is 12.3% of total UK tax receipts: more than the government’s annual education budget and more than half the health budget."
Centre for Cities said that "Greater London generated by far the highest amount of economy taxes, amounting to £126 billion in 2013/14. This was a quarter of the total economy tax take in Britain, and equal to the next eight highest placed areas combined.
Meanwhile, at £2.4 billion Dundee City Region generated the smallest amount."
If only the BoE would just print currency to the moon like you suggested and none of this would be a problem. I mean, it's almost like there's some massive downside to your idea. If only I could put my finger on it.
What you seem to miss is that the City isn't funding any productive investment. The UK is a rentier economy, where profits are made on existing assets. This report is a few years old, but it estimates the UK’s oversized financial sector has cost the economy £4.5 trillion in lost economic output between 1995 and 2015 – equivalent to £67,500 for every person in the UK, or 2.5 years of economic output. https://taxjustice.net/press/press-release-city-of-london-costs-uk-4-5tn-in-lost-economic-growth/
You have to ask yourself why the UK's productivity has stalled, inequality has worsened, more people live in poverty, and public services are failing. Could it have something to do with the lack of investment in the productive economy?
Unfortunately the report itself is not available, only a precis of it. The account at shef.ac.uk where it was published has been suspended. Without knowing the methodology they used it's impossible to verify their claims. However, I'm very suspicious of the conclusions in it. Misallocation of funds sounds like a centrally planned economy term and I think we're likely to disagree about the merits of that approach. That said, I do wonder at the wisdom of having a tax and financial system that requires huge numbers of people to administrate. They're very definitely not productive. But remember, middlemen always get a bad press but they are essential to a market economy. They're the people who facilitate trade between producers and consumers, even in the unremarkable but essential aspects of life like insurance or the foreign exchange markets. They paid their £100bn+ annually in tax which was money that was then not taken from manufacturing, or social workers, so they do their bit in a roundabout way.
Yes indeed, the city of London's vast oil resources and oh I dunno, whisky, fish stocks, renewables, etc etc etc, are for sure the bread basket of the UKnotOk. Yep, we are lucky to have England's money, which is why it's somewhat perplexing as to why the EngGov wants to hold onto Scotland (as if their life depended on it), is it generosity? They are not known across the globe for their generosity, so what is it...if only I could put my finger on it, hmm.
I don't really know what the details are about the relationship between Scotland and the UK in terms of resources and the flow of cash. It's just not something I've ever been interested in. I was against the independence vote when it was last put to the people but I had no vote to cast. I was only against it because it seemed better to stick together rather than be divided up, but as I say I was agnostic about it. If Scotland had voted to leave, I would have wished them all the best with it. I'm massively in favour of personal freedom and self determination and free market capitalism, so I might actually have been jealous!
The UK stole and then squandered trillions of Scotland's oil - it kept the McCrone report secret in case Scotland realised how wealthy it would be - and is now doing the same with our renewables - which have been sold off to foreign govts and multinationals.
Can you please tell me if Scotland is such a drain on the poor UK's finances, why doesn't it cut us loose? I think we'd be just fine.
The video that Hetty Wilson provided a link to is well worth watching all the way through even if you don‘t fully understand it: it’s just as important for you to realise that UK Gov’t record keeping and accounts presentation are utterly chaotic and deliberately set out to obfuscate the real facts and to confuse anyone (expert or otherwise) attempting to make sense of the numbers.
You might well ask why do they allow this? Well some of the record-keeping goes back a very long way, pre-dating company law and accounting standards. Add in the UK’s resistance to change and its predilection with secrecy and tradition and you can see how this might happen, but not why it does. Then there’s the London factor: not just as the centre of governance, but (just as importantly) as the centre of finance. The City of London Corporation has enormous powers protected by Statute (e.g. the "Liberties and Customs" of the City of London are guaranteed in Magna Carta's clause IX, which remains in statute) and even has its own police force. Thatcher’s policy of making Finance the major contributor to UK finance has made the City of London the biggest and easily most influential factor in the UK economy. It has been THE major player in facilitating and normalising off-shore banking, which has led to massive tax evasion, as well as the creation of Special Economic Zones, which threaten to do likewise. It has also fought against many aspects of financial regulation.
In other words it suits the City of London and all who wish to profit from it to keep UK National accounting as confusing and impenetrable as possible.
As Richard Murphy states a limited company couldn’t get away with presenting such bewildering accounts and tardy accounts.
To make matters worse, we have a Scottish administration that is happy to co-operate with the Labour government's plans to ramp up the asset stripping.
According to PwC "the [City of London] financial and professional services industry contributed a record £110.2bn to the public purse in 2023. This is 12.3% of total UK tax receipts: more than the government’s annual education budget and more than half the health budget."
Centre for Cities said that "Greater London generated by far the highest amount of economy taxes, amounting to £126 billion in 2013/14. This was a quarter of the total economy tax take in Britain, and equal to the next eight highest placed areas combined.
Meanwhile, at £2.4 billion Dundee City Region generated the smallest amount."
If only the BoE would just print currency to the moon like you suggested and none of this would be a problem. I mean, it's almost like there's some massive downside to your idea. If only I could put my finger on it.
--------
https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/supporting-businesses/economic-research/research-publications/total-tax-contribution-of-uk-financial-services
https://www.centreforcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/15-07-06-Mapping-Britains-Public-Finances.pdf
What you seem to miss is that the City isn't funding any productive investment. The UK is a rentier economy, where profits are made on existing assets. This report is a few years old, but it estimates the UK’s oversized financial sector has cost the economy £4.5 trillion in lost economic output between 1995 and 2015 – equivalent to £67,500 for every person in the UK, or 2.5 years of economic output. https://taxjustice.net/press/press-release-city-of-london-costs-uk-4-5tn-in-lost-economic-growth/
You have to ask yourself why the UK's productivity has stalled, inequality has worsened, more people live in poverty, and public services are failing. Could it have something to do with the lack of investment in the productive economy?
Unfortunately the report itself is not available, only a precis of it. The account at shef.ac.uk where it was published has been suspended. Without knowing the methodology they used it's impossible to verify their claims. However, I'm very suspicious of the conclusions in it. Misallocation of funds sounds like a centrally planned economy term and I think we're likely to disagree about the merits of that approach. That said, I do wonder at the wisdom of having a tax and financial system that requires huge numbers of people to administrate. They're very definitely not productive. But remember, middlemen always get a bad press but they are essential to a market economy. They're the people who facilitate trade between producers and consumers, even in the unremarkable but essential aspects of life like insurance or the foreign exchange markets. They paid their £100bn+ annually in tax which was money that was then not taken from manufacturing, or social workers, so they do their bit in a roundabout way.
Well, David, do you think the former Deputy foreign Secretary was misinformed when he said 40% of the world's dirty money is laundered by the City of London? https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/14/nearly-40-of-dirty-money-is-laundered-in-london-and-uk-crown-dependenies
Now, if the City is contributing so much good to the UK, why would it need to do this?
"According to some estimates" is a bit vague to be drawing reliable conclusions. If anyone is breaking the law there, they should be prosecuted.
Yes indeed, the city of London's vast oil resources and oh I dunno, whisky, fish stocks, renewables, etc etc etc, are for sure the bread basket of the UKnotOk. Yep, we are lucky to have England's money, which is why it's somewhat perplexing as to why the EngGov wants to hold onto Scotland (as if their life depended on it), is it generosity? They are not known across the globe for their generosity, so what is it...if only I could put my finger on it, hmm.
Here's a few pointers for you, take a wee look.
https://youtu.be/xFAqv8mndsE?si=q_hyn4pRvH-8ywUG
https://www.believeinscotland.org/the_uk_treasury_drinks_deeply_from_scotland_s_resources
https://www.believeinscotland.org/could-scotlands-natural-wealth-make-an-independent-scotland-more-prosperous
R. Murphy has the measure of things...read and learn. I, like many, trust him more than the EngGBUK chancellor.
https://youtu.be/jAvROErTk1k?si=RmLlO_cj79pIJr5P
I don't really know what the details are about the relationship between Scotland and the UK in terms of resources and the flow of cash. It's just not something I've ever been interested in. I was against the independence vote when it was last put to the people but I had no vote to cast. I was only against it because it seemed better to stick together rather than be divided up, but as I say I was agnostic about it. If Scotland had voted to leave, I would have wished them all the best with it. I'm massively in favour of personal freedom and self determination and free market capitalism, so I might actually have been jealous!
Well, David, perhaps you should try to inform yourself about this relationship between the UK and Scotland.
https://dearscotland.substack.com/p/what-the-uk-doesnt-want-scots-to
The UK stole and then squandered trillions of Scotland's oil - it kept the McCrone report secret in case Scotland realised how wealthy it would be - and is now doing the same with our renewables - which have been sold off to foreign govts and multinationals.
Can you please tell me if Scotland is such a drain on the poor UK's finances, why doesn't it cut us loose? I think we'd be just fine.