Excellent article! But the reason why Starmer is not going to do any of these things is also in the article: "...does he (Starmer) want to be the Prime Minister that made a small dent in housing, like his predecessors, or actually slay the planning regulation dragon and become a reforming prime minister with a legacy for the history books?"
At the end of the day, he wants to be the Prime minister, no matter the dent kind or the slaying dragon kind. So, he is definitely not going to act against the interests of the people who are "more likely to vote, more likely to live in a swing seat, and to be highly motivated concerning changes in their immediate surrounds." Fix this, growth will follow.
Does Keir Starmer's changed Labour party still have an agenda of higher state spending? They have been saying that they will implement their plans through future savings to public spending. Sure, there is going to be pressure from within the party to improve public services, but would that pressure be enough to push back against NIMBYism?
Starmer feels like a toned down version of Boris Johnson sans partygate. He appears to give something to everyone, something that appears realistic: 'I'm a YIMBY', 'Pensions triple lock', 'HS2 B'ham to MCR leg remains axed for fiscal prudence'. But I am not quite sure if this moderation would make things different this time around. If the past is any indication of the future, he will most likely end up giving nothing to anyone.
U-turns are coming for groups least likely to protest: for instance, the U-turn on two child cap. And NIMBYs are way more vocal than YIMBYs.
The answer , with all due respect , to your very winded article is explained very simply by zero interest rates since 2008 - or very well explained in the book The Price of Time
Ok so we’ve had a spike recently but the die was cast back in 2008
All economic woes in fact lead from low/zero interest rates
The machine just stops working , it really is that simple
Excellent article! But the reason why Starmer is not going to do any of these things is also in the article: "...does he (Starmer) want to be the Prime Minister that made a small dent in housing, like his predecessors, or actually slay the planning regulation dragon and become a reforming prime minister with a legacy for the history books?"
At the end of the day, he wants to be the Prime minister, no matter the dent kind or the slaying dragon kind. So, he is definitely not going to act against the interests of the people who are "more likely to vote, more likely to live in a swing seat, and to be highly motivated concerning changes in their immediate surrounds." Fix this, growth will follow.
Our advantage is that he has no choice if he wants to implement a Labour agenda of higher state spending.
Does Keir Starmer's changed Labour party still have an agenda of higher state spending? They have been saying that they will implement their plans through future savings to public spending. Sure, there is going to be pressure from within the party to improve public services, but would that pressure be enough to push back against NIMBYism?
Starmer feels like a toned down version of Boris Johnson sans partygate. He appears to give something to everyone, something that appears realistic: 'I'm a YIMBY', 'Pensions triple lock', 'HS2 B'ham to MCR leg remains axed for fiscal prudence'. But I am not quite sure if this moderation would make things different this time around. If the past is any indication of the future, he will most likely end up giving nothing to anyone.
U-turns are coming for groups least likely to protest: for instance, the U-turn on two child cap. And NIMBYs are way more vocal than YIMBYs.
The answer , with all due respect , to your very winded article is explained very simply by zero interest rates since 2008 - or very well explained in the book The Price of Time
Ok so we’ve had a spike recently but the die was cast back in 2008
All economic woes in fact lead from low/zero interest rates
The machine just stops working , it really is that simple
Look at Japan for example