Health Secretary Wes Streeting, Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer at the launch of the government’s 10-year health plan, July 3, 2025
The electorate see no evidence of the government’s promises of change, and the good jobs and decent pay that people are crying out for. Bold action is needed right now, warns SHARON GRAHAM
IT IS true that Labour have taken over an economy ravaged by 14 years of Tory austerity. But that should mean a profound opportunity to deliver change. Britain is broken, yes. But they cannot keep making everyday people pay.
Today MPs will be voting on the government’s despicable plan to cut disability benefits. Just as with every other wrong decision, such as scrapping the winter fuel allowance, rowing back on investment in British industry or failing to ensure proper local authority funding, the excuse will be the same — “we have no choice.” And again it will be absolute rubbish. Of course they have choices.
We are the sixth-richest economy in the world. But the way that wealth is divided is increasingly unequal. The richest 50 families are worth about £500 billion, the same as half the entire UK population. In 1990 there were just 15 billionaires in the UK, but since then their number has jumped to 156.
So, there is a choice. If we taxed the richest 1 per cent just 1 per cent, that would generate about £25 billion. That is a choice. We need a wealth tax now.
Yougov: Would you support or oppose introducing a wealth tax of 2% on wealth above £10 million?Keir Starmer says that the Labour Party under his leadership all feel a small part of Scunthorpe.
… KEIR STARMER rallied to the support of the rich today as he came under pressure to solve the budget crisis with a wealth tax.
The Prime Minister told MPs that “we can’t just tax your way to growth” after calls from within and without Labour to get the rich to pay more.
Green Party co-Leader Adrian Ramsay told him that he should stand by his pledge that “those with the broadest shoulders must bear the heaviest burden” and make it clear that meant the “ultra-wealthy.”
…
Former Welsh First Minister Mark Drakeford was also pressing the case for a wealth tax, joining former Labour leader Neil Kinnock, who had said at the weekend that the government should explore the idea.
Mr Drakeford told the BBC that Ms Reeves should look at taxing the online gambling industry and banking profits. “I think wealth taxes absolutely need to be looked at,” he added.
“We’re a sharply unequal society. We’ve become more and more unequal. The root of that inequality is the way that wealth is distributed across the population.”
Yougov: Would you support or oppose introducing a wealth tax of 2% on wealth above £10 million?Keir Starmer confirms that he’s proud to be a red Tory continuing austerity and targeting poor and disabled scum.Keir Starmer warns against following the https://onaquietday.org blog.
A healthcare worker turns on an operating light in the emergency operation room in the labor and delivery unit at the medical complex in Hondo, Texas on February 26, 2025. (Photo: Kaylee Greenlee for The Washington Post via Getty Images)
“When thousands more people die from not getting care, we know who to blame,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Monday that the American public “needs to know” that the blame will lie squarely at the feet of President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers if and when hospitals across the country are forced to shut their doors due to the unprecedented Medicaid cuts included in the new budget law.
“Every single American needs to know what Donald Trump and Republicans did in the ‘Big Beautiful Bill,'” Warren (D-Mass.) wrote on social media, referring to the budget reconciliation package that the president signed late last week.
“When hospitals close their doors, we know who to blame,” Warren continued. “When thousands more people die from not getting care, we know who to blame. When kids go hungry, we know who to blame.”
The nation’s rural hospitals, which rely heavily on Medicaid reimbursements, are expected to bear the brunt of the pain from the Republican law, which includes more than $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts as well as destructive changes to federal nutrition assistance and other programs. Nursing homes, community health centers, Planned Parenthood clinics, and other facilities are also at risk, and states are now scrambling to prevent catastrophe.
An analysis published by the Center for Healthcare Quality and Payment Reform prior to passage of the GOP legislation estimated that more than 700 rural hospitals across the U.S. are at risk of closing due to “serious financial problems.”
“Republicans will try to ignore the devastation their disastrous reconciliation bill will cause. We won’t.”
The health policy organization KFF notes that federal Medicaid spending in rural areas is projected to fall by $155 billion under the GOP law over the next decade—an amount that far exceeds the $50 billion that Republicans allocated to a “Rural Health Transformation Program” over the next five years.
Alan Morgan, CEO of the National Rural Health Association, warned in a statement following the Senate’s passage of the legislation earlier this month that the bill would “limit access to care for all rural patients by ending healthcare coverage for rural residents nationwide and putting financial strain on rural facilities who care for them.”
Already, as Common Dreamsreported last week, a healthcare clinic in rural Nebraska has announced it is shutting its doors in part due to the expected impacts of the GOP Medicaid cuts. The closure is predicted to be the first of many.
A recent analysis by the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill warned that more than 330 rural hospitals are at risk of closing or reducing services due to the Trump-GOP assault on Medicaid.
Over the weekend, Trump administration officials defended the budget law in talk show appearances by attempting to downplay its impact on Medicaid and other healthcare programs.
Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, said Sunday that he believes “nobody is gonna lose their insurance”—a claim that dramatically conflicts with the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s estimate that around 17 million people will lose health coverage under the Trump-GOP law.
“He is only off by 17,000,000,” quipped Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) in response to Hassett’s comments.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote over the weekend that “Republicans will try to ignore the devastation their disastrous reconciliation bill will cause.”
“We won’t,” Sanders added. “We’re going to make them explain what happens when 16 million lose their healthcare and nursing homes and hospitals are forced to shut down or limit services.”
Private jets were seen on the tarmac at Friedman Memorial Airport ahead of a business conference on July 5, 2022 in Sun Valley, Idaho. (Photo: Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
A provision of the budget law that President Donald Trump signed last week will leave taxpayers to “pick up the tab for the private jet industry and billionaire high flyers.”
The Republican budget measure that U.S. President Donald Trump signed into law late last week contains a provision that analysts say will allow private jet owners to write off the full cost of their aircraft in the first year of purchase, a boon to the ultra-rich that comes as millions of people are set to lose healthcare under the same legislation.
FlyUSA, a private aviation provider, gushed in a blog post that with final passage of the unpopular budget reconciliation package, “business jet ownership has never looked more fiscally attractive or more fun to explain to your accountant.”
The law, crafted by congressional Republicans and approved with only GOP support, permanently restores a major corporate tax break known as 100% bonus depreciation, which allows businesses to deduct the costs of certain assets in the first year of purchase rather than writing them off over time.
Forbesnoted that the bonus depreciation policy “applies to a slew of qualified, physical business expenses which depreciate over time, such as machinery and company cars, but the policy is often associated with big-ticket luxury items, such as private aircraft, and its institution last decade led to a boom in jet sales.”
“Trump and congressional Republicans have certainly delivered for the billionaire class.”
Chuck Collins, director of the Program on Inequality at the Institute for Policy Studies, called bonus depreciation “a massive tax break for billionaires and centi-millionaires that use the most polluting form of transportation on the planet.”
“A corporation purchasing a $50 million private jet could potentially deduct the entire $50 million from their taxes in the year of the purchase, rather than spreading the deduction over many years,” Collins wrote. “This amounts to a massive taxpayer subsidy, as ordinary taxpayers pick up the tab for the private jet industry and billionaire high flyers.”
“Subsidizing more private jets on a warming planet is reckless and indefensible,” he added.
The National Business Aviation Association, a lobbying group for the private aviation industry, celebrated passage of the Republican legislation, specifically welcoming the bonus depreciation policy as “effective for incentivizing aircraft purchase.” (The Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy argues that “depreciation tax breaks have never been shown to encourage more capital investment.”)
Meanwhile, communities across the United States are bracing for the law’s deep cuts to Medicaid and federal nutrition assistance, which are expected to impose damaging strains on state budgets and strip food benefits and health coverage from millions of low-income Americans.
“Trump and congressional Republicans have certainly delivered for the billionaire class,” said Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen. “This is certainly one of the cruelest bills in American history, backtracking on the country’s painfully slow history of expanding healthcare coverage and, equally remarkably, taking food away from the hungry.”
“That’s a lot of needless suffering just to make the richest Americans richer,” he added.
Donald Trump urges you to be a Climate Science denier like him. He says that he makes millions and millions for destroying the planet, Burn, Baby, Burn and Flood, Baby, Flood.Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him. He says that Reform UK has received millions and millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
Protesters hold placards, including one featuring French businessman and CEO of LVMH Bernard Arnault (C), during a protest in front of the Senate in Paris on June 12, 2025. (Photo: Emma da Silva/AFP via Getty Images
“Not only is it necessary to impose a stronger burden of justice on billionaires, but more importantly, it is possible.”
Seven Nobel laureates on Monday published an op-ed advocating for “a minimum tax for the ultrarich, expressed as a percentage of their wealth,” in the French newspaper Le Monde.
“They have never been so wealthy and yet contribute very little to the public coffers: From Bernard Arnault to Elon Musk, billionaires have significantly lower tax rates than the average taxpayer,” wrote Daron Acemoglu, George Akerlof, Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo, Simon Johnson, Paul Krugman, and Joseph Stiglitz.
Citing pioneering research from the E.U. Tax Observatory, the renowned economists noted that “ultrawealthy individuals pay around 0% to 0.6% of their wealth in income tax. In a country like the United States, their effective tax rate is around 0.6%, while in a country like France, it is closer to 0.1%.”
Although the “ultrawealthy can easily structure their wealth to avoid income tax, which is supposed to be the cornerstone of tax justice,” the strategies for doing so differ by region, the experts detailed. Europeans often use family holding companies that are banned in the United States, “which explains why the wealthy are more heavily taxed there than in Europe—though some have still managed to find workarounds.”
The good news is that “there is no inevitability here. Not only is it necessary to impose a stronger burden of justice on billionaires, but more importantly, it is possible,” argued the economists, who say that taxing the overall wealth of the ultrarich, not just income, is the key.
The wealth tax approach, they wrote, “is effective because it targets all forms of tax optimization, whatever their nature. It is targeted, as it applies only to the wealthiest taxpayers, and only to those among them who engage in tax avoidance.”
💡 "One of the most promising avenues is to introduce a minimum tax for the ultra-rich, expressed as a percentage of their wealth."Seven Nobel laureates in economics advocate for the Zucman tax in their latest op-ed.Read the full @lemonde.fr article 👇www.lemonde.fr/idees/articl…
The anticipated impact would be significant. As the op-ed highlights: “Globally, a 2% minimum tax on billionaire wealth would generate about $250 billion in tax revenue—from just 3,000 individuals. In Europe, around $50 billion could be raised. And by extending this minimum rate to individuals with wealth over $100 million, these sums would increase significantly.”
That’s according to a June 2024 report that French economist and E.U. Tax Observatory director Gabriel Zucman prepared for the Group of 20’s Brazilian presidency—which was followed by G20 leaders’ November commitment to taxing the rich and last month’s related proposal from the governments of Brazil, South Africa, and Spain.
“The international movement is underway,” the economists declared Monday, also pointing to recent developments on the “Zucman tax” in France. The French National Assembly voted in favor of a 2% minimum tax on wealth exceeding €100 million, or $117 million, in February—but the Senate rejected the measure last month.
The economists urged the European country to keep working at it, writing that “at a time of ballooning public deficits and exploding extreme wealth, the French government must seize the initiative approved by the National Assembly. There is no reason to wait for an international agreement to be finalized—on the contrary, France should lead by example, as it has done in the past,” when it was the first country to introduce a value-added tax (VAT).
“As for the risk of tax exile, the bill passed by the National Assembly provides that taxpayers would remain subject to the minimum tax for five years after leaving the country,” they wrote. “The government could go further and propose extending this period to 10 years, which would likely reduce the risk of expatriation even more.”
Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an insane, xenophobic Fascist.Donald Trump warns against following the Onaquietday.org blog, says that he’s heard that she’s a witch with a black cat and a dangerous kitchen.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting, Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer at the launch of the government’s 10-year health plan, July 3, 2025
