Do you want to discuss boring politics? (15 Viewers)

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I have never argued against sensible limits on immigration. A country that relies too heavily on foreign labour is not economically secure for a raft of reasons.

My argument for some time has been that to get immigration down to manageable levels, we need to commit to better working conditions and pay in the sectors where we rely heavily on foreign labour. Likewise, taking state education more seriously so we can produce more of our own skilled workers to again reduce dependency on getting them from overseas.

Bear in mind I’m replying to you and making general observations about people of the left generally (including close friends of mine).

We’re addicted to cheap labour in this country. A government has to turn around and be willing to take on the costs of ending mass migration and be open with the public.

It’s an addiction. We keep getting told, for example, we need workers for the NHS. Well, we’ve allowed ourselves to become dependent because we don’t offer enough trainee spots, nor are the university places for doctors so we rely on importing labour from poorer economies.

Of course it affects their ability to provide services as there's more people to provide services for. Therefore you need to expand those services in order to do so. How do you do that? Money.

Right, how much money would be needed to fix education, the NHS and housing?

For context, Liz Truss triggered a market crash with £45bn of tax cuts. For the NHS alone, you’d need to spend £30+ billion to get it in line with the levels France and Germany spend on their healthcare system.

Even the ‘wealth tax’ Diane Abbot and other figures on the left have mooted recently would only generate £24bn. The general rule of thumb is that taxes never raise the revenues forecasted because people change their habits.

If it was as easy as just creating the money out of thin air, the government would just do it. Instead, you have a Labour government chasing pennies on the pound on welfare cuts or scrapping VAT on private schools.

Regardless of your political persuasion, the sooner you see the state as overstretched and overburdened, you can come to terms with things and actually address the root causes.

 

---

[Sky Blue Pete]

I never really understand why people think higher taxation is a positive way of increasing the governments ability to spend on services

I didn’t ask it very well
If we are taxing so much why is everything falling apart in terms of adult social care, nhs, transport etc etc
Is it just too many new people wherever they’re from

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Bear in mind I’m replying to you and making general observations about

We’re addicted to cheap labour in this country. A government has to turn around and be willing to take on the costs of ending mass migration and be open with the public.

It’s an addiction. We keep getting told, for example, we need workers for the NHS. Well, we’ve allowed ourselves to become dependent because we don’t offer enough trainee spots, nor are the university places for doctors so we rely on importing labour from poorer economies.



Right, how much money would be needed to fix education, the NHS and housing?

For context, Liz Truss triggered a market crash with £45bn of tax cuts. For the NHS alone, you’d need to spend £30+ billion to get it in line with the levels France and Germany spend on their healthcare system.

Even the much mooted ‘wealth tax’ Diane Abbot mooted recently would only generate £24bn. The general rule of thumb is that taxes never raise the revenues forecasted because people change their habits.

If it was as easy as just creating the money out of thin air, the government would just do it. Instead, you have a Labour government chasing pennies on the pound on welfare cuts or scrapping VAT on private schools.

Regardless of your political persuasion, the sooner you see the state as overstretched and overburdened, you can come to terms with things and actually address the root causes.

That’s a good answer

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Bear in mind I’m replying to you and making general observations about

We’re addicted to cheap labour in this country. A government has to turn around and be willing to take on the costs of ending mass migration and be open with the public.

It’s an addiction. We keep getting told, for example, we need workers for the NHS. Well, we’ve allowed ourselves to become dependent because we don’t offer enough trainee spots, nor are the university places for doctors so we rely on importing labour from poorer economies.

You're preaching to the converted here my friend, welcome to the progressive left.

 

[mmttww]

World Happiness Report: Finland named as happiest country for eighth year

Access to nature and a strong welfare system are cited as factors as Nordic nations dominate the rankings.

www.bbc.co.uk

"Finland has been ranked as the world's happiest country for the eighth successive year, with experts citing access to nature and a strong welfare system as factors... Both the UK and the US slipped down the list to 23rd and 24th respectively - the lowest-ever position for the latter."

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

World Happiness Report: Finland named as happiest country for eighth year

Access to nature and a strong welfare system are cited as factors as Nordic nations dominate the rankings.

www.bbc.co.uk

I've copied and pasted two early paragraphs...

Finland has been ranked as the world's happiest country for the eighth successive year, with experts citing access to nature and a strong welfare system as factors... Both the UK and the US slipped down the list to 23rd and 24th respectively - the lowest-ever position for the latter.

Also worth noting that Mexico has entered the top 10 in no small part thanks to the policies of Sheinbaum and previously Obrador.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

You've answered your own questions there. People aren't happy to pay more taxes when they aren't seeing any improvement in services and are seeing blank cheques being passed to mates of whoever the government of the time is.

Taxes have been increasing but I don't think anyone would argue services have been improving. Therefore people aren't going to believe that simply handing over more will resolve any, let alone all, issues.

Don't think that's true at all. Most people are open to a sensible discussion on immigration and I think the position of 'the left' when its referred to as a single entity is often misrepresented. I don't see many people on the left who want a free for all on immigration or who won't have a sensible discussion on immigration policy.

What is regarded as a ‘sensible discussion’ varies massively from who talk to.

Is leaving the ECHR and amending the HRA considered sensible?

What level of net migration is sensible? The pre-1997 norm of 50k? 900k like it was last year?

You're preaching to the converted here my friend, welcome to the progressive left.

There’s plenty of good left wing arguments to end mass migration. There’s a reason Reform performs well in Labour stronghold, the FN have cannibalised the French Socialist Party base of support and the AfD is the most popular party in the old DDR (East Germany).

It’s nice to find some common ground, but I wouldn’t describe myself as progressive left…

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

There’s plenty of good left wing arguments to end mass migration. There’s a reason Reform performs well in Labour stronghold, the FN have cannibalised the French Socialist Party base of support and the AfD is the most popular party in the old DDR (East Germany).

It’s nice to find some common ground, but I wouldn’t describe myself as progressive left…

How much of our mass migration comes from students, out of interest?

 

[Captain Dart]

Bear in mind I’m replying to you and making general observations about people of the left generally (including close friends of mine).

We’re addicted to cheap labour in this country. A government has to turn around and be willing to take on the costs of ending mass migration and be open with the public.

It’s an addiction. We keep getting told, for example, we need workers for the NHS. Well, we’ve allowed ourselves to become dependent because we don’t offer enough trainee spots, nor are the university places for doctors so we rely on importing labour from poorer economies.



Right, how much money would be needed to fix education, the NHS and housing?

For context, Liz Truss triggered a market crash with £45bn of tax cuts. For the NHS alone, you’d need to spend £30+ billion to get it in line with the levels France and Germany spend on their healthcare system.

Even the ‘wealth tax’ Diane Abbot and other figures on the left have mooted recently would only generate £24bn. The general rule of thumb is that taxes never raise the revenues forecasted because people change their habits.

If it was as easy as just creating the money out of thin air, the government would just do it. Instead, you have a Labour government chasing pennies on the pound on welfare cuts or scrapping VAT on private schools.

Regardless of your political persuasion, the sooner you see the state as overstretched and overburdened, you can come to terms with things and actually address the root causes.

The Laffer curve is powerful.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The Laffer curve is powerful.

View attachment 42157

It's also a bullshit concept that was literally drawn on a tissue

 

[mmttww]

The Laffer curve is powerful.

View attachment 42157

it also looks like something from Brass Eye, tbf.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

It's also a bullshit concept that was literally drawn on a tissue

Is it? When George Osborne cut corporation tax back in the coalition government days, tax receipts went up by a third.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Is it? When George Osborne cut corporation tax back in the coalition government days, tax receipts went up by a third.

It was also used to justify Reaganomics.

 

[duffer]

Same question to you.

By any rational metric they’re the most left wing govt in most people in this threads lifetime. Being left wing is more than just increasing all departmental budgets.

By the rational metric of increasing austerity and drastically cutting welfare, which Labour government in living memory has done that?

Which one literally took on Tory financial dogma and welfare policy?

It's a really poor defence this, do you think voters who see nothing getting better are really going to give a fuck about the Overton window limiting Labour somehow - which I think is your real argument.

There's you saying hold your nose and vote for them, you need power to change things.

Well they've got power mate, and for the poor and sick, they're changing things for the worse, and for the increasingly rich they're changing fuck all or even making it better.

You've literally got Tory grandees saying that these are Tory policies, that they wanted to bring in themselves (see quotes in link below)!

This is precisely validating the "they're all the same" argument that gets people voting for the far right populists...

Labour created the welfare state. Now, it's intent on cutting it back

Labour talked about welfare reform in their manifesto, but never signalled cuts of a scale that even the Tories couldn't stomach. Keir Starmer has denied a return to austerity, but it may not feel like that for those at the sharp end of these decisions.

news.sky.com

 

[shmmeee]

By the rational metric of increasing austerity and drastically cutting welfare, which Labour government in living memory has done that?

Which one literally took on Tory financial dogma and welfare policy?

It's a really poor defence this, do you think voters who see nothing getting better are really going to give a fuck about the Overton window limiting Labour somehow - which I think is your real argument.

There's you saying hold your nose and vote for them, you need power to change things.

Well they've got power mate, and for the poor and sick, they're changing things for the worse, and for the increasingly rich they're changing fuck all or even making it better.

You've literally got Tory grandees saying that these are Tory policies, that they wanted to bring in themselves (see quotes in link below)!

This is precisely validating the "they're all the same" argument that gets people voting for the far right populists...

Labour created the welfare state. Now, it's intent on cutting it back

Labour talked about welfare reform in their manifesto, but never signalled cuts of a scale that even the Tories couldn't stomach. Keir Starmer has denied a return to austerity, but it may not feel like that for those at the sharp end of these decisions.

news.sky.com

Government budgets have gone up, that’s not austerity. I agree people will need to see change. I don’t agree that because this government isn’t deficit spending like there’s no tomorrow they’re “right wing” words mean things. Nationalised infrastructure and workers rights are by definition left wing. Blair privatised health and education, Starmer is renationalising them and undoing the Tory reforms. These are just facts and repeating far right talking points and scouring far right websites for rebuttals like FP does doesn’t convince me that a fear of the far right is what drives the criticism.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Government budgets have gone up, that’s not austerity. I agree people will need to see change. I don’t agree that because this government isn’t deficit spending like there’s no tomorrow they’re “right wing” words mean things. Nationalised infrastructure and workers rights are by definition left wing. Blair privatised health and education, Starmer is renationalising them and undoing the Tory reforms. These are just facts and repeating far right talking points and scouring far right websites for rebuttals like FP does doesn’t convince me that a fear of the far right is what drives the criticism.

‘Real term cuts’ is a blatant manipulation of statistics.

If my employer gives me 5% pay rise and inflation is at 7% (for arguments sake), I’ve not received a 2% pay cut. That’s how ‘real terms’ cuts are marketed as.

For example, the NHS budget is projected to go up by £21bn in cash in 25/26 (compared to 23/24) and this is a ‘real terms’ increase of 4%… A budget that’s increased from £171bn to £192bn is not a 4% increase at all, it’s a 12.3% increase.

In the private sector, if inflation goes up, the operating costs is not expected to automatically track with it. Yes, they can raise prices but will also look for cost saving quite aggressively. I’ve worked in two different competitive industries where COVID and the Russia/Ukraine war has had a real impact.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Labour leadership making mugs of Labour voters and MPs. F*ck the manifesto; let's demonise vulnerable people and pretend we can afford public services, pensions and the rest by saving a few quid on PIPs. Dickheads.

To be honest, the electorate need to toughen up in general and stop being so naïve.

There is no way forward by constantly switching between the two main parties as if they are going to suddenly sort everything out. They are both full of liars, and they are both doing their best to send the UK to rock bottom. It has gone beyond a fool me twice situation now, and unless people start voting in a way that is going to threaten the existence of these parties, they will just continue to take people for fools.

From my perspective what we are seeing is of absolutely zero surprise.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

To be honest, the electorate need to toughen up in general and stop being so naïve.

There is no way forward by constantly switching between the two main parties as if they are going to suddenly sort everything out. They are both full of liars, and they are both doing their best to send the UK to rock bottom. It has gone beyond a fool me twice situation now, and unless people start voting in a way that is going to threaten the existence of these parties, they will just continue to take people for fools.

From my perspective what we are seeing is of absolutely zero surprise.

Ed Davey it is then.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

To be honest, the electorate need to toughen up in general and stop being so naïve.

There is no way forward by constantly switching between the two main parties as if they are going to suddenly sort everything out. They are both full of liars, and they are both doing their best to send the UK to rock bottom. It has gone beyond a fool me twice situation now, and unless people start voting in a way that is going to threaten the existence of these parties, they will just continue to take people for fools.

From my perspective what we are seeing is of absolutely zero surprise.

I genuinely think this next election could be the collapse of the Tory party. If Labour loses power, they could be on the path to extinction themselves because many Labour voters probably see them as a Tory-lite government. Just as many people backing Reform this last election viewed the Tory party as a Labour-lite option.

Around 2019 I felt that the Greens could become the ascendant force on the British Left. In the next election, Labour won’t benefit from anti-Tory tactical voting as it did in the past.

It’s not looking good for either of them.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I genuinely think this next election could be the collapse of the Tory party. If Labour loses power, they could be on the path to extinction themselves because many Labour voters probably see them as a Tory-lite government. Just as many people backing Reform this last election viewed the Tory party as a Labour-lite option.

Around 2019 I felt that the Greens could become the ascendant force on the British Left. In the next election, Labour won’t benefit from anti-Tory tactical voting as it did in the past.

It’s not looking good for either of them.

Good grief.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

It’s not limited to the political left as a whole. There’s elements of the neoliberal right who champion mass immigration for cheap labour and ‘economic growth’.

I mentioned ‘the left’ specifically is because they tend to be much more comfortable shouting public services are systematically underfunded. Many on the left (for this purpose, let’s include One Nation Tories) haven’t come to terms that mass migration and a comprehensive welfare state aren’t particularly compatible.



You’re correct. However, the data coming out of Scandinavia, the Netherlands, and UK is that mass immigration (especially low income, low skilled) essentially hollows out a country’s welfare state. This is part of the reason why the Netherlands Denmark and Sweden in particular have swung to the right on this issue.

The OBR came out and outlined the costs of low income migration. On housing, currently 40% of social housing occupants in London were born out of the UK.

Looking at the welfare and social housing breakdowns, there are many things to hold questions over. There are a lot of people in the UK who are sponging off the state, and many of them are not from the country. There are also people there who need help and support, maybe they have a disability or are trying to get back on their feet, and the government just laughs at them. The priorities are all wrong.

I have totally given up on the UK as a country to be honest. Being back for a couple of months was an eye-opener. So many people are depressed, and many others small-minded. Nothing works, and the state of the healthcare system is actually frightening. The Nordics/Scandinavian countries are generally very nice. Lots of space, good services, etc, but Sweden is going through a lot of shit at the moment following their pretty stupid attempt at an open door policy roughly ten years ago. I would probably not move back there now unless it was somewhere a bit less built up. Norway and Finland are wonderful places for the most part.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Ed Davey it is then.

Hopefully this guy as an independent candidate.

*Edited to declare this is a joke just in case anyone takes it seriously!

 

[mmttww]

...they will just continue to take people for fools.

I voted Labour because of my local MP and their policies and positions. Now with hindsight, not a shock they got kicked out the party. Genuinely thought Starmer was a Trojan Horse for more progressive stuff in their manifesto. Turns out if it walks like a Tory, sounds like a Tory and looks like a Tory, it's probably a Tory. Feel mugged off and angry.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Hopefully this guy as an independent candidate.

*Edited to declare this is a joke just in case anyone takes it seriously!

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

I voted Labour because of my local MP and their policies and positions. Not a shock they got kicked out the party soon after. Genuinely thought Starmer was a Trojan Horse for more progressive stuff in their manifesto. Turns out if it walks like a Tory, sounds like a Tory and looks like a Tory, it's probably a Tory. Feel mugged off and angry.

Yeah, I get it and understand completely. Unfortunately I have felt disconnected with politics for a long time, so for me this just feels like another round of 'oh, what a surprise'. It isn't even about finger pointing, or right versus left or whatever. There is next to no integrity in politics here at all and it genuinely feels like a race to the bottom.

 

[chiefdave]

What is regarded as a ‘sensible discussion’ varies massively from who talk to.

Is leaving the ECHR and amending the HRA considered sensible?

What level of net migration is sensible? The pre-1997 norm of 50k? 900k like it was last year?

For me at least if you want a sensible discussion you have to be open to change but that's the way things are these days. People have entrenched views one way or the other so you end up with two extremes just shouting at each other and anyone with a more nuanced view just thinking fuck this its not worth the hassle and abuse.

Don't think you start from a point of leaving the ECHR and amending the HRA being sensible or not. But you do start with it being a valid topic for discussion. Nothing should really be off the table.

If you want to go into the discussion drawing lines and putting a number on it then the whole exercise is a non-starter. That's part of the problem. Going back to the documentary I mentioned you had former PMs, alongside the likes of Farage, quite openly admitting they'd hijacked the debate for their own gains and putting numbers on things was purely done as a vote winner. At the same time you had government ministers pursuing that line in public behind the scenes they were lobbying for whatever department they worked for to be exempt from any cap!

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Wee Krankie gets let off the hook

Nicola Sturgeon says she is 'completely in the clear' following police investigation

Former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon is no longer a suspect in the Police Scotland investigation into SNP finances.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[chiefdave]

Looking at the welfare and social housing breakdowns, there are many things to hold questions over. There are a lot of people in the UK who are sponging off the state, and many of them are not from the country. There are also people there who need help and support, maybe they have a disability or are trying to get back on their feet, and the government just laughs at them. The priorities are all wrong.

I have totally given up on the UK as a country to be honest. Being back for a couple of months was an eye-opener. So many people are depressed, and many others small-minded. Nothing works, and the state of the healthcare system is actually frightening. The Nordics/Scandinavian countries are generally very nice. Lots of space, good services, etc, but Sweden is going through a lot of shit at the moment following their pretty stupid attempt at an open door policy roughly ten years ago. I would probably not move back there now unless it was somewhere a bit less built up. Norway and Finland are wonderful places for the most part.

Who do you think is sponging off the state?

There definitely isn't help for people in genuine need, although I guess genuine need is subjective. When I thought I might end up unemployed during covid I looked at what I was entitled to and it was fuck all. Similarly when its been suggested that I give up work for health reasons looking at what I would get it would be nowhere near enough to survive on. Makes me struggle to believe there's people happily living lives of luxury on benefits.

I'm with you on the UK tbh, we're going backwards. Or at the very worst stagnating while other countries overtake us. I've had the chance to move away a couple of times and didn't take it, largely as I'm an only child with ageing parents to look after, but I increasingly regret it. And I think that will become an ever increasing problem in the next couple of decades unless we do something to halt it. Those of the younger generation who can will leave and we'll be fucked.

 

[Captain Dart]

Wee Krankie gets let off the hook

Nicola Sturgeon says she is 'completely in the clear' following police investigation

Former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon is no longer a suspect in the Police Scotland investigation into SNP finances.

www.bbc.co.uk

How about her hubby?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

How about her hubby?

On bail.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

‘Real term cuts’ is a blatant manipulation of statistics.

If my employer gives me 5% pay rise and inflation is at 7% (for arguments sake), I’ve not received a 2% pay cut. That’s how ‘real terms’ cuts are marketed as.

For example, the NHS budget is projected to go up by £21bn in cash in 25/26 (compared to 23/24) and this is a ‘real terms’ increase of 4%… A budget that’s increased from £171bn to £192bn is not a 4% increase at all, it’s a 12.3% increase.

In the private sector, if inflation goes up, the operating costs is not expected to automatically track with it. Yes, they can raise prices but will also look for cost saving quite aggressively. I’ve worked in two different competitive industries where COVID and the Russia/Ukraine war has had a real impact.

Well it's not, because it's about purchasing power. If you get more money but can buy less than you used to with it then it's effectively a cut.

I assume therefore that during the period of inflation over 10% if you'd been offered a 1-2% pay rise you'd have been happy, because you'd have still been getting a pay rise? The cost of everything going up doesn't matter.

Nominal value is a manipulation of reality.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Bear in mind I’m replying to you and making general observations about people of the left generally (including close friends of mine).

We’re addicted to cheap labour in this country. A government has to turn around and be willing to take on the costs of ending mass migration and be open with the public.

It’s an addiction. We keep getting told, for example, we need workers for the NHS. Well, we’ve allowed ourselves to become dependent because we don’t offer enough trainee spots, nor are the university places for doctors so we rely on importing labour from poorer economies.



Right, how much money would be needed to fix education, the NHS and housing?

For context, Liz Truss triggered a market crash with £45bn of tax cuts. For the NHS alone, you’d need to spend £30+ billion to get it in line with the levels France and Germany spend on their healthcare system.

Even the ‘wealth tax’ Diane Abbot and other figures on the left have mooted recently would only generate £24bn. The general rule of thumb is that taxes never raise the revenues forecasted because people change their habits.

If it was as easy as just creating the money out of thin air, the government would just do it. Instead, you have a Labour government chasing pennies on the pound on welfare cuts or scrapping VAT on private schools.

Regardless of your political persuasion, the sooner you see the state as overstretched and overburdened, you can come to terms with things and actually address the root causes.

I'd love it if we started paying people properly. But we won't because businesses will always look for the cheapest labour to increase shareholder return. Doesn't matter where those people come from, or the costs to society that will ultimately end up costing them as well, because they aren't represented on their financial statements.

So how do you fix that considering the businesses won't do it themselves because it's not in their financial interests to do so? Through government and legislation, and then by having to uphold that legislation through checks and the law, increasing the burden on the state even further. And that's before we even get into stuff that is good for society overall but either difficult to charge anyone for (such as street lighting) as well as stuff that at the very least needs to be provided at cost or subsidised for the good of everyone (utilities, public transport, health and social care) which for-profit organisations are not going to want to provide.

So yes, public bodies are overstretched and overburdened. But if you want them to be open with the public then the fact is you've got to tell people it's not benefit and migrant fraud that is the problem, as it's a tiny drop in the ocean compared to the costs (both tangible and intangible) caused by the greed of corporations and the mega-rich.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I'd love it if we started paying people properly. But we won't because businesses will always look for the cheapest labour to increase shareholder return. Doesn't matter where those people come from, or the costs to society that will ultimately end up costing them as well, because they aren't represented on their financial statements.

So how do you fix that considering the businesses won't do it themselves because it's not in their financial interests to do so? Through government and legislation, and then by having to uphold that legislation through checks and the law, increasing the burden on the state even further. And that's before we even get into stuff that is good for society overall but either difficult to charge anyone for (such as street lighting) as well as stuff that at the very least needs to be provided at cost or subsidised for the good of everyone (utilities, public transport, health and social care) which for-profit organisations are not going to want to provide.

So yes, public bodies are overstretched and overburdened. But if you want them to be open with the public then the fact is you've got to tell people it's not benefit and migrant fraud that is the problem, as it's a tiny drop in the ocean compared to the costs (both tangible and intangible) caused by the greed of corporations and the mega-rich.

This is all well meaning stuff… how is it being funded?

Again, if 45bn in unfunded tax cuts can bring down a government, it really limits a government’s ability to spend without making cuts elsewhere.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

You end up spending that and more later on anyway just to paper over the cracks because you let things get into such a state not funding it in the first place, as you pointed out re: the NHS. So what do you think the cost will be to get it up to scratch in another 10-20 years time when we haven't bothered yet again now?

Or the other option is just to let society disintegrate and let in turn into a free-for-all where everyone grabs what they can for themselves while everything around them crumbles.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

You end up spending that and more later on anyway just to paper over the cracks because you let things get into such a state not funding it in the first place, as you pointed out re: the NHS. So what do you think the cost will be to get it up to scratch in another 10-20 years time when we haven't bothered yet again now?

Or the other option is just to let society disintegrate and let in turn into a free-for-all where everyone grabs what they can for themselves while everything around them crumbles.

Your assumption is faulty because it assumes that if inflation goes up, the entire operating costs must go up in line that. Which ignores things like long term contracts and so. Ironically, this is actually an argument for a monetarist fiscal policy which prioritises inflation as the most important thing for the government.

In its current format, the existing model of the welfare state is unlikely to survive the dual population trap of an aging society and mass migration.