Broken Britain

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


Michael Roberts

Resize text-+=

The homeless and the working poor can be seen all over Britain, the EU, and the US. The disease is capitalism.


Broken Britain

UK citizens vote in a general election on 4 July.  The opinion polls currently forecast that the incumbent Conservative party will be heavily defeated after 14 years in government.  The opposition Labour party is expected to gain a majority of over 250 seats, a record landslide, with the Conservatives getting less than 100 seats.

But ahead of the election, 75% of Britons have a negative view of politics in Britain.  And Labour and the Conservatives are set to record their lowest combined share of the vote in a century.  Instead, smaller parties such as Reform, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens have all made advances.

This result is a consequence of the disastrous decline in the British economy and living standards for most Britons alongside a decimation of public services and welfare.  British capital is broken.

The UK economy is now the ninth-largest world economy in terms of output at prices adjusted for purchasing power and sixth when output is calculated at exchange rates.  But British imperialism has been in steady decline since the end of WW1, giving way to US imperialism as the hegemonic power.  And after WW2, the UK increasingly became a subservient ‘junior partner’ to America.  The relative decline in the UK economy is revealed by its long-term fall in productivity growth compared to other imperialist economies, particularly in the 21st century.

In his recent book, Vassal State – how America runs Britain, Angus Hanton shows the dominant role that US companies and finance play in owning and controlling large sections of what remains of British industries.  This US takeover was accepted and even encouraged by successive British governments from Tory Thatcher to Labour’s Blair. 

Hanton shows that in Thatcher’s second full year in office, 1981, only 3.6 per cent of UK shares were owned overseas. By 2020 that number was more than 56 per cent. Of all the assets held by US corporations in Europe, over half of them are in the UK.  US corporations have more employees in the UK than the number they have in Germany, France, Italy, Portugal and Sweden combined. The largest US companies sell more than $700 billion of goods and services to the UK, which amounts to over a quarter of the UK’s total GDP.

From the 1980s, Britain has increasingly become what we could call a ‘rentier economy’, ending most of its manufacturing base and relying mostly on the City of London financial sector and accompanying business services, providing a conduit for the redistribution of capital from the Middle East oil sheikhs, Russian oligarchs, Indian entrepreneurs and American techs.


Rough sleeper in London, 2015 (Alan Warren/ WIKI)


Throughout this period, British capitalism declined relative to its peers among the G7 economies and other larger European states.  But particularly after the Great Recession, and after the decision to leave the EU and the COVID pandemics, the British economy went into a downward spiral that so far it has not been able to stop.  Real GDP growth is still more than 20% below its pre-2008 trend – although that fallback applies to all G7 economies, if at a lesser rate.

The UK economy was the hardest hit of the top G7 economies in the year of the COVID. Real GDP fell 9.9%, which the then finance minister and now PM Rishi Sunak admitted was the worst contraction in national income in 300 years!  The economic think-tank, the Resolution Foundation, reckons that the UK economy may not have had “a technical recession but we are experiencing the weakest growth for 65 years outside of one (a recession).”

What is also forgotten is that population growth is at its fastest rate in a century (three-quarters driven by immigration of 6m people since 2010).  If population growth is excluded, the UK has barely seen any economic growth, with GDP per person only just above the level of 2007 and real consumer purchasing power still lower than in 2007. 

Indeed, productivity growth (that’s output per worker per hour) has been terrible.  Productivity has slowed to under 1% a year. Before the 2008-09 economic crisis, Britain’s output per hour worked grew steadily at an annual pace of 2.2% a year. In the decade since 2007, that rate has dropped to 0.2%. If the previous trend had continued, the UK’s national income would be 20% higher than it is today.

Only Italy’s productivity growth record is worse within the G7.

And it is estimated that the post-Brexit trading relationship between the UK and EU, as set out in the ‘Trade and Cooperation Agreement’ (TCA) that came into effect on 1 January 2021, will reduce long-run productivity by 4 per cent relative to remaining in the EU.

Long-run effect on productivity of trading with EU on FTA terms

In effect, UK productivity has flat-lined for a decade. So now productivity levels are as much as one-third below those in the US, Germany and France: “the average French worker achieves by Thursday lunchtime what the average British worker achieves only by close of business on a Friday. Indeed, excluding London the UK’s average productivity level is below that of the poorest state in the US, Mississippi.

The productivity gap between the top- and bottom-performing companies is materially larger in the UK than in France, Germany or the US. This productivity gap has also widened by far more since the crisis – around 2-3 times more – in the UK than elsewhere. This long and lengthening tail of ‘stationary’ companies explains why the UK has a one-third productivity gap with international competitors and a one-fifth productivity gap relative to the past. 

Why is productivity growth so poor, especially among the key big British multi-nationals? The answer is clear: reduced business investment growth. Business investment growth has been on a steady trend downwards since the end of the Great Recession. Total UK investment to GDP has been lower than most comparable capitalist economies and has been declining for the last 30 years. The UK’s investment performance is worse than every other G7 country.  Compared to Japan, the USA, Germany, France, Italy and Canada, the UK languished in last place for business investment in 2022, a spot now held for three years in a row and for 24 out of the last 30 years.

Businesses aren’t choosing to invest in the UK. The UK ranks a lowly 28th for business investment out of 31 OECD countries. Countries like Slovenia, Latvia and Hungary all attract higher levels of private sector investment than the UK as a per cent of GDP.

Nothing more confirms the decline of UK capitalism and its failure to invest and raise productivity than the profitability of British capital.  It is a story of long-term decline since the 1950s.  The decline was partially reversed for a while under the neoliberal policies of the Thatcher regime (at the expense of labour’s share on national income), but the decline resumed with a vengeance in the 21st century.

As a result of weak growth in national income and ensuing austerity measures to hold down wages, the UK is only one of six countries in the 30-nation OECD bloc where earnings after inflation are still below 2007 levels and the UK is the worst of the top seven G7 economies.

 

In 2022, real pay in the US and OECD was up 17 per cent and 10 per cent higher respectively than in 2007, according to OECD data. In Britain it was unchanged. UK living standards have underperformed those of most wealthy countries since the Conservatives entered government in 2010, according to research by the UK Institute for Fiscal Studies.

The callous austerity policies of the Conservatives after the Great Recession of 2009 in cutting public services and freezing wages have torn up the social safety net. Rates of basic benefits are now lower relative to wages than at any time since the inception of the Beveridge settlement, which established the welfare state in the 1940s. Basic protection against unemployment in the UK is also the lowest in the OECD.

still up around 60 per cent on three years ago. Food, meanwhile, is up by around 30 per cent over the same period.  The result is that a higher percentage of Britons live below the poverty line than in Poland!”  Tom Clark, Broke.

The UK’s wealth inequality is much more severe than income inequality, with the top fifth taking 36% of the country’s income and 63% of the country’s wealth, while the bottom fifth have only 8% of the income and only 0.5% of the wealth, according to the Office for National Statistics.

The UK has the widest regional disparities in wages in the whole of Europe. Indeed, people in north-east of England have an average standard of living less than half that of the average Londoner. Wealth is also unevenly spread across Great Britain. The South-East is the wealthiest of all regions with median household total wealth of £503,400, over twice the amount of wealth in households in the North of England.

As for poverty and health, it could hardly be worse in a so-called rich country.  Welfare cuts have caused 190,000 excess deaths from 2010 to 2019. According to the Office for National Statistics, life expectancy at birth for 2020/22 is “back to the same level as 2010 to 2012 for females” and “slightly below” that benchmark for males—a whole decade, in other words, of zero or negative progress. 

“The most deprived areas of England,” government demographers report, registered “a significant decrease” in life expectancy in the second half of the 2010s. Looking ahead to 2040 (and comparing against a 2019 baseline), analysts at Liverpool University and the Health Foundation foresee an increase of some 700,000 in the number of working-age Britons living with a major long-term illness, overwhelmingly accounted for by a further rocketing of already-heavy rates of chronic pain, diabetes and anxiety/depression in poorer communities.

Child poverty rates have rocketed.  In 2022/23, the number of children living in poverty increased by 100,000 from 4.2 million in 2021/22 to 4.3 million children. That’s 30% of children in the UK. The rate of child poverty in the North East of England increased by 9 percentage points in the seven years between 2015 and 2022. Substantial increases can also be seen in the Midlands and the North West. Tower Hamlets had the highest concentration of child poverty in the UK in 2021/22, with almost half of children living below the poverty line after accounting for housing costs. Child poverty rates are also high in other large cities like Birmingham and Manchester.

The rise of ‘food banks’ has been a feature of the last ten years.  The official tally of people whose households had turned to foodbanks in the last 12 months stands at 3m.

And families with “very low food security” now stand at 3.7m, a total that has shot up by a full two-thirds in the last year alone.

The plutocrats' vicious attack on the working class covers the entire  "neoliberal West", like a plague, and has generated the phenomenon of the "working poor." This has been going on for at least 3 or 4 decades, ever since the Soviet Union imploded. The disease is capitalism.

The NHS has privatised 60% of NHS cataract operations to private providers. Private clinics received £700m for cataracts from 2018-19 to 2022-23 and 30-40% of money vanishes in profits.  And a new analysis by We Own It reveals that £6.7 billion, or £10 million each week, has left the NHS’s budget in the form of profits on all private contracts given by the NHS in the last decade or so.  We Own It analysis shows that out of the £6.7 billion total profits that have left the NHS, £5.2 billion, or 78%, were on contracts for services. 

Britons now have access to fewer hospital beds and dentists relative to the population than in most other big economies, according to OECD data. And the waiting list for operations is at a record level.

Then there is housing.  In the 30 years from 1989, 3 million fewer houses were built than in the previous 30 years, despite a strong increase in demand. This mismatch between supply and demand has contributed to a serious affordability crisis. In 1997 the ratio of median house price to median income across England and Wales was 3.6 and in London it was 4.0. By 2023 the median house in London cost 12 times the median earnings and even in the least unaffordable region, north-east England, the ratio was 5.0. 

This rise means only younger people whose parents – even grandparents – were homeowners can now be reasonably optimistic of being able to buy.  But UK housing costs relative to income are higher than in the past and compared with other countries. Rents rose by 13 per cent in the two years to May 2024 — the fastest pace in three decades and three times the rate in France and Germany.

At the other end of the housing ‘market’ Rough sleeping in England is up by 60 per cent over the last two years, and the number of families stuck in (terrible) temporary accommodation has doubled since 2010

As for education, that is also in deep trouble. A solid education system supports the services sector: almost 60 per cent of Britons between the ages of 25 and 34 are educated to at least tertiary — or university or college — level, OECD data shows. That is the sixth highest among advanced economies.  Pupils in Britain perform better in reading, maths and science than peers in France, Germany or Italy. They also have access to 90 of the world’s top 1,500 universities, according to the annual World University Rankings, more than France and Germany combined.  But the pressure is now for cuts in school funding and UK universities have slipped in international rankings, while many face bankruptcy and closure as overseas students dwindle. As for students, Britain has gone from providing free tertiary education in the 1960s to huge fees funded by crippling loans.

Then there are the prisons.  We lock up lots of people in the UK and now jails are running out of space “within days”, say prison governors in England and Wales.  “The entire criminal justice system stands on the precipice of failure.”  Instead of putting young people in jail, maybe there should some places for them to go.  But two-thirds of council-funded youth centres in England have been closed since 2010.  That’s because local councils have suffered cuts of 20% in real terms since 2010, leaving a gap of over £6bn to be found over the next two years.

Finally, there are the utilities.  Heavily privatized under Thatcher, they have turned out to be a disaster for users and a profits bonanza for shareholders.  In Europe, only in the UK has privatised water and the private equity owners of these water companies have milked the public for billions, while destroying the quality of water and the environment. In March it was revealed that raw sewage was discharged into waterways for 3.6m hours in 2023 by England’s privatised water firms, more than double the figure in 2022. Research by the Rivers Trust found that sewage was spilled for 1,372 hours in the Guildford constituency last year, and recent water testing by local campaigners found E coli in the river last month at nearly 10 times the safe rate in government standards.  Households in various parts of the country have become ill and told not to drink the tap water.

Are there any redeeming features in this broken Britain?  Yael Selfin, chief economist at consultancy KPMG UK, said Britain had some “long enduring advantages”, such as the English language and Greenwich Mean Time, which meant the business day in London overlapped with financial markets around the world.  So Britons speak English and have a world time benchmark- wow! 

The FT came forward with another merit, a prime minister of Asian origin: “This isn’t the only country in the west that would elevate a non-white head of government. But it might be the only one where it would stir so little discussion….. A quiet miracle is still a miracle.”  The richest man in the UK parliament is a miracle?

In an interview on the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg show, PM Sunak defended his party’s record in government over the past 14 years. “It is a better place to live than it was in 2010.” When it was put to him that Britons had become poorer and sicker, and that public services had deteriorated since 2010, he said: “I just don’t accept that.”  He may not accept it but it is still the reality.

Paul Dales, economist at the research company Capital Economics, said: “More investment in housing, infrastructure, education and health would help turn some of the weaknesses into strengths.”   Well, blow me down.

I’ll be looking at the new Labour government’s economic program after the election.



News 12131
  • and Hamas is the only party rejecting it reminds me of that time they kept insisting that the real president of Venezuela was some random guy—Juan Guaido—they chose for the position.
  • They’re just trying to impose a narrative which has no factual basis whatsoever by rote repetition and sheer media power.—Caitlin Johnstone.


RSS
Follow by Email
Telegram
WhatsApp
Reddit
URL has been copied successfully!
window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });


Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License • 
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS




Indonesia: still in the shadow of Suharto

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.


Michael Roberts Blog


Resize text-+=

CIA-enabled Suharto and wife: He presided over a pyramid of runaway grift, terror, and unabashed foreign plunder of Indonesia's natural wealth.


Indonesians will elect the country’s next president tomorrow (14 February). Indonesia is the world’s fourth-most-populous nation with over 280m people living in a myriad of archipeligo islands spanning Asia to Australia. More than 204 million people are eligible to cast ballots in the world’s largest direct presidential vote, the fifth since the Southeast Asian country began democratic reforms in 1998.  More than half of those eligible to vote are aged between 17 and 40 and about a third are under 30.

The winner will succeed President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, who is constitutionally barred from seeking a third term and will step down in October after ten years in office.  Defence Minister Prabowo Subianto, 72, is the front-runner in the presidential race. Prabowo is a former general with the army’s special command and former son-in-law of the late Indonesian military dictator President Suharto.

Ganjar Pranowo, 55, is a former governor of Central Java and a senior politician with the ruling Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), to which Jokowi currently belongs. The other candidate, Anies Baswedan, 54, is the former governor of Jakarta. He is a former university rector and political scientist. During Jokowi’s first term he served as education minister. However, after being ousted in a cabinet reshuffle, he joined the opposition. Anies paints himself as an alternative to Prabowo and Ganjar as he seeks a break from Jokowi’s policies.

Final opinion polls by major pollsters show support for Prabowo exceeds 50%.  So he is the most likely winner. If no candidate gets 50% in the first round, there will be a second round run-off between the top two. All three candidates demonstrate that Indonesia’s 21st century democracy is still dominated by the political, business and military leaders who built their fortunes during thirty-two years of Suharto’s authoritarian rule.  

Indonesia gained independence from Dutch imperialism after a long hard fought war.  The nationalist Sukarno became its president, leaning on the support of the independence fighters who were mainly led by the Communist party based in the countryside.  In 1965, in the midst of an economic crisis, military chief Suharto came to power through a coup in that ousted Sukarno.  Suharto’s takeover led to a bloodbath in which up to 1 million Communists and nationalists were killed and another 1.5 million imprisoned.  [With no sense of irony, or sociopathically, given its key involvement in these massacres] the CIA described the purge as “one of the worst mass murders of the 20th century”.  Suharto’s coup was even worse than Pinochet’s military coup over Chile’s President Allende nearly a decade later in 1973.



Editor's Sidebar 1


Mar 6, 2023

Indonesia’s economy has rested on its oil and gas reserves and the produce of its land.  In the early 1980s, the Suharto government responded to a fall in oil exports during the early 1980s oil crisis by trying to shift the basis of the economy to cheap labour-intensive manufacturing.  Foreign investors came in to take advantage of Indonesia’s low wages.

It was under Suharto that the country’s modern oligarchs first emerged and his reign was littered with examples of close friends and family obtaining preferential access to loans, concessions, import licences and state bail-outs. Aafter over three decades of his dictatorship, the Asian debt crisis of 1998 brought down the Suharto regime.  In the face of growing public protests against his authoritarian rule, Suharto’s own military and political allies forced him to resign. Free elections were held within a year.

The biggest winner then was the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP), led by Megawati, daughter of Sukarno. But Suharto’s Golkar party, led by regime loyalists from business and military backgrounds, and the Muslim United Development Party had sufficient support to block Megawati.  Since then, all so-called parties of the democratic era have been led by Suharto-era businessmen and retired military generals.  As only parties with at least 20 percent of seats in the parliament can field a candidate, that has ensured the continued political control of this elite.

Current president Joko Widodo was the only outsider to breach this clique.  In 2014, voters and Megawati’s party backed him to end the control of Suharto cliques.  Widodo soundly defeated Prabowo Subianto.  But soon Widodo fitted into the existing ruling elite by bringing the oligarchs and politicians into his administration.  He appointed Subianto as his defence minister and Subianto’s party joined the governing coalition, while Jokowi closed down the anti-Corruption Commission that was investigating Suharto’s supporters.

Now in 2024, it is Subianto who looks set to become President at his fourth time of trying.  He has lined up Widodo’s eldest son to be his vice presidential running mate, while Widodo himself is planning to take up the chairmanship of Subianto’s Gerindra party, shifting from Megawati.  It‘s going to be a tight coalition of ‘business as usual’.

Jokowo’s eight years are regarded in the Western media and among mainstream economic circles as a great success, with average real GDP growth at around 5% a year.  And he appears to remain very popular with the electorate.


But Indonesia’s apparent success is superficial.  For a start, per capita income growth is much less, at under 4% a year.


As always, what matters to Indonesians (outside the elite) are living standards and decent jobs.



The elite claim that Indonesia can become a ‘high-income nation’ by 2045, when it celebrates 100 years of independence.  And all the presidential candidates are promising upwards of 15 million new jobs in the next five years, in a country where about 3 million people enter the job market annually. But most estimates reckon that Indonesia needs 7% economic growth annually to churn out enough jobs for its young population and the growth forecast for the next two years is closer to 4% a year.  Around 1,000 jobs were created for every trillion rupiah of investment in 2022, compared with 4,500 jobs in 2013.

These jobs are supposed to be generated by moving away from an economy based on mining, oil production and single crop agro exports (palm oil), which are mainly capital intensive to a more broad-based manufacturing and hi-tech economy like China or Vietnam.  There is little sign of that.  Instead, it is nickel mining for EV batteries that is the main investment.  Investment in nickel mining and refining has created only a limited number of jobs and still relies heavily on skilled foreign labour, particularly from China.


As a result, job creation has plunged.  Officially, Indonesia’s unemployment rate is 5.3%, but people are considered employed if they work just a few hours a week. Nearly 60% of workers are in the informal sector i.e. they are casual workers, with no rights, sick pay or even guaranteed wages.  Young people aged 15 to 24 made up 55% of the 7.86 million officially unemployed in 2023, up from 45% in 2020.



The lack of jobs and the emphasis on capital-intensive industries owned and controlled by the Suharto oligarchs and foreign companies has widened the inequality of wealth and income – a trend in all peripheral economies. The top 1% of income earners take 18% of all personal income in Indonesia, more than the bottom 50% who take just 12% between them.  It’s even more unequal with personal wealth, with the top 1% holding 41% of all personal wealth, the top 10% with 61% and the bottom 50% with just 12%.

In the past two decades, the gap between the richest and the rest in Indonesia has grown faster than in any other country in South-East Asia. It is now the sixth country of greatest wealth inequality in the world.  As this election takes place, the four richest men in Indonesia have more wealth than the combined total of the poorest 100 million people. The vast majority of the land is owned by big corporations.  At least 93 million (36 percent of the population) of Indonesians are below the World Bank minimum poverty level.

Inequality rose fast when Suharto switched from a development policy based on state fusion with the oligarchs to the neoclassical model of the 1980s onwards of deregulation, privatization and the abolition of subsidies on basic commodities, in order to boost the profitability of Indonesian capital that had taken a hit during the global profitability crisis of the 1970s.



But the Asian financial crisis of 1997-8 exposed this neoliberal development model and Indonesia fell back on IMF funding and its Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) that imposed austerity and more ‘flexibility’ in the labour market.  Suharto was forced out, but his successors continued to accede to this ‘structural adjustment’.

Then came the commodity boom of the early 2000s.  This time, expansion was based on less on minerals and oil and instead on palm oil exports.  Indonesia is the world’s biggest producer of palm oil, a ubiquitous ingredient in a wide range of goods ranging from processed foods to cosmetics and biodiesel. Between 2000 and 2008, the ten largest palm oil companies controlled the industry and most of the ten richest men in Indonesia have palm oil in their portfolios.   

But production of the commodity has long been associated with the wholesale clearing of tropical rainforestsburning of peatlands, destruction of endangered wildlife habitatland conflicts with Indigenous and traditional communities, and labor rights abuses. According to one analysis, rainforests spanning an area half the size of California, or 21 million hectares (52 million acres), are at risk of being cleared.  

There are still 3.1 million hectares (7.7 million acres) of plantations for which forests had been cleared for plantation.  But they are not being developed because the commodity price boom is over, for now. As a result, the profitability of Indonesian capital had fallen back in the last 10 years, which is reducing investment growth and weakening economic growth.

The Suharto elite and the Indonesian oligarchs remain firmly in control.  The rich are not taxed properly. The OECD considers Indonesia to have the worst tax administration system of any South-East Asian country and it has the second lowest tax to-GDP ratio in South-East Asia.  So the government consistently misses its already low tax revenue targets.



The IMF has calculated that the country has a potential tax take of 21.5 percent of GDP. If it were to reach this figure, it could increase the health budget nine times over.


None of these issues are being addressed by the presidential candidates, most of whom are obsessed with Jokowo’s ambitious plan to shift the nation’s capital from the congested mess that is Jakarta to a new site in Borneo at an exorbitant cost.

The Indonesian economy has yet to return to its pre-pandemic growth trajectory and it is unlikely to do so. This reflects the ‘scarring’ effects from the pandemic, including in labor markets and productivity growth. And Indonesia’s oil and gas reserves will be exhausted in the next ten years.  So even the current inadequate growth rate is threatened. 

Indonesia has got the classic formula for development in poor countries in the world of 21st century imperialism.  Its economy is founded on basic commodity production that is highly capital intensive, severely damages the environment and does not provide many good jobs for the people, while the rich pay little tax and public services are limited.  And the old Suharto elite remain in control.

Author's bio below.

RSS
Follow by Email
Telegram
WhatsApp
Reddit
URL has been copied successfully!
window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });


Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.


Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP… 
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW



 

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS