UK Population Growth is Way Too High

The ONS has forecast that the UK population will rise by 5 million people to 73 million by 2032. This is being driven by immigration which in my opinion is way too high. The only positive aspect is that it will increase the working population which might help to cut the need to raise taxes. But it will place a heavy burden on social services, doctors, schools, etc, which are already over-stretched.

The transport network is a major problem with insufficient capacity to cope with the number of houses being built to house the increased population. I live in the London suburbs and traffic congestion has already increased substantially in the last few years and it is obviously going to get a lot worse as there are no plans to improve the road network. Don’t expect Sadiq Khan to do anything about it.

Where are the additional 5 million people going to be housed? We need another few cities the size of Birmingham so where are they going to go? England’s green and pleasant land will soon disappear.

There is also a looming problem with the capacity of the electricity network which faces increased demand from electrification to meet irrational net-zero carbon emissions.

But the current Government seems to have no clear plan to curb population growth. They may be attacking “illegal migration” but most of the inward migration is people on work visas or family relatives. There are also many “asylum” seekers who are really economic migrants.  There are no clear targets or plans for how to stop the population growth which we desperately need. I have said this before and the scenario does not change.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://x.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can obtain notifications of new posts in future by following me on Twitter (now “X”) – see https://x.com/RogerWLawson where new blog posts are usually mentioned.

Trump Inauguration – What Might it Mean?

On Monday Donald Trump will be inaugurated as US President – for the second time. It was interesting watching a repeat of an episode of “Through the Keyhole” yesterday. This was a popular game programme from about 20 years ago where a panel of three people had to guess the owner of a house after a video tour of the interior.

In the episode I watched (which is available on BBC iPlayer) the guest was a young Donald Trump and the house was his villa at Mar-a-Lago in Florida. It was somewhat garish in the decorations. Let us hope that he does not revamp the White House in the same fashion.

What other impacts might he have on the economy and UK relations? Mainly positive on the US economy I would think as he believes in deregulation and may ignore concerns about global warming and greenhouse gas emissions. But he may increase tariffs against foreign imports which might damage the UK economy. But the impact on the UK stock market may not be great.

He may make it plain that the US can dictate foreign policy to the UK. We may find that out quickly if he blocks the Chagos deal and rejects Mandelson as UK ambassador. He will probably encourage a peace settlement in Ukraine which is well overdue and he did get the USA out of Afghanistan which was surely a wise move when he was last in office.

I look forward to Trump as US President as I consider it is likely to be an improvement over the senile and weak Biden.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://x.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can obtain notifications of new posts in future by following me on Twitter (now “X”) – see https://x.com/RogerWLawson where new blog posts are usually mentioned.

Climate and Nature Bill – More Political Lunacy

I happened to run across the Climate and Nature Bill that is currently going through Parliament. It’s a private member’s bill so may go nowhere as most don’t. but it is getting a lot of signatories in support.

The Bill aims to force the Secretary of State to achieve net zero GHG, limit global mean temperature (as if any government can do that) and reverse the “loss of nature in the UK….”. Is there any evidence of that? In essence no.

If any nature has been lost it is where the countryside has been built over to provide more housing to meet the demands of population growth and immigration, which the government persists in doing nothing about.

It also aims to establish an “expert independent body” to create a “Climate and Nature Assembly” which would appear to be an unelected body of individuals who will determine future strategy. In other words, this is yet another attempt to bypass parliament and democratic elections by establishing an unelected body of “experts” who might just happen to have a certain political leaning.

You can read more about this Bill here:

I shall be writing to my M.P. to ask him to vote against this Bill and I suggest you do the same. You can do so easily via this web site:   https://www.writetothem.com/

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://x.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can obtain notifications of new posts in future by following me on Twitter (now “X”) – see https://x.com/RogerWLawson where new blog posts are usually mentioned.

Paul Scott’s Podcast, SRT Marine Systems, Gelion, Ilika and Politics

The Christmas break gave me time to listen to Paul Scott’s latest podcast. As usual he has good words of wisdom to say about the UK small cap market.

He covers SRT Marine Systems (SRT) which I have held in the past. Forecasts regularly not met and a CEO who is always too optimistic. Good technology but the business model is the problem. Reliant on one-off big projects instead of recurring revenue. Paul is not optimistic about the company, and neither am I.

He also mentions IIika (IKA) and Gelion (GELN) negatively. They are both into battery technology. Ilika has been listed for longer but has yet to turn a profit. Paul argues such pre-profits, or lacking substantial revenue, companies should not be listed on the stock market and I agree. These are the kind of companies to avoid.

Such companies tend to list with optimistic stories about the ability of their technology to conquer the world, but it’s mainly bullshit in reality.

It’s time to reflect on the world of politics and our current leaders. I was sad to see that Bill Clinton has spent some time to hospital, probably with flu. He is aged 78 like me and has had major heart problems in the past. I also happened to watch a past speech by Ronald Reagen. Both Presidents were people who you could both trust and believe in. Convincing in what they said and providing good leadership. Donald Trump is not yet up to the same standard so I can only rate him as being the least worse choice. But the prospect for the US economy are still good.

In the UK our political leaders are second-rate in comparison. Keir Starmer is not someone I can trust and the economic decisions made by the Labour Government to date are poor in my opinion. Raising taxes on false claims about black holes in the budget are disgraceful. The UK is too highly taxed with a horrendously complex tax code. Confidence in the UK economy is rapidly evaporating. So on that depressing thought I will wish all readers a Happy New Year. Thankfully economic forecasts are generally wrong so don’t make any decisions based on my comments.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://x.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can obtain notifications of new posts in future by following me on Twitter (now “X”) – see https://x.com/RogerWLawson where new blog posts are usually mentioned.

Assisted Dying and Transport News

 I was very pleased to see the Assisted Dying Bill passed in the House of Commons. I have supported the Dignity in Dying organisation (formerly VES) and their campaigns for over 30 years  – see https://www.dignityindying.org.uk/ . When I want to leave this world I want to go quickly and without judges or doctors interfering in my decision, or the necessity to go to Switzerland.  

I don’t want to live to 100 as my mother did. 85 years is long enough for anyone to complete their life’s ambitions as quality of life declines rapidly thereafter. I am ready to go anytime now but the Assisted Dying Bill might frustrate that ambition. There is no need for anyone to die in pain. The Assisted Dying Bill may not be perfect as it stands but there is plenty of time to improve it.

Opposition to the Bill is irrational and based on lack of knowledge of how such legislation works, and well, in other countries.

New Transport Secretary

The other big political news was the resignation of Louise Haigh as Transport Secretary. This arose because she had failed to disclose a past conviction for fraud over the loss of a mobile phone. This seems to have arisen because of a simple mistake and subsequent bad legal advice where she plead guilty.

Her replacement as Transport Secretary is Heidi Alexander, who previously served as Deputy Mayor for Transport in London. During her tenure, from 2018 to 2021, she oversaw the introduction and expansion of the ULEZ scheme, which was unnecessary, and the rollout of 20mph speed limits in London. TfL became a financial basket case during her tenancy. She may have a malign influence on national transport policy. In 2019, she candidly confessed, “I may not have qualifications in transport.” A frank admission given her track record in the role but it is convention to appoint people with no knowledge or experience of the subject to senior government positions. It’s traditional in the UK that amateurs are thought to be better than professionals to take responsibility for major policy and associated budgets. That’s a very silly approach.

Before she left Louise Haigh announced a new National Transport Strategy  – see  https://www.gov.uk/government/news/transport-secretary-unveils-her-vision-for-integrated-transport-across-england . It included a commitment to a ‘people first approach’ to getting people around the country. Recognising that different passengers have different needs, and the quality of transport varies across the country, it will set out how government can support local areas to make all forms of transport work together better. All this is political bullshit in essence which we have seen many times before to no great effect.

It is still unclear what diesel/petrol or hybrid vehicles will be allowed to be sold after 2030, although the media have reported that the Government is having a rethink and is consulting car manufacturers. But it is obvious that UK car and van manufacturing is already facing a cliff edge. Stellantis last week announced it was closing van manufacturing in Luton. Jaguar is suspending production of all cars because their product range is now all-electric and there is simply insufficient demand for such cars.

The requirement for all vehicle manufacturers to have a certain proportion of sales from all-electric vehicles is proving impossible to meet economically. One can see that many people will be keeping petrol vehicles for as long as 20 years so will frustrate this Government policy. Old cars could become quite valuable!

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can obtain notifications of new posts in future by following me on Twitter (now “X”) – see https://x.com/RogerWLawson where new blog posts are usually mentioned.

IHT Changes, Farmers’ Fury, Shell Legal Win and Freedom of Speech.

The proposed change announced in the budget to impose IHT on unspent pension funds has received a lot of media coverage. I covered it in my previous blog post, and I encourage all people affected to respond to the public consultation – see https://roliscon.blog/2024/11/12/iht-on-pensions-its-iniquitous/ .

One particular group who are incensed by the proposed change is farmers who will no longer be able to pass on a farm to their offspring free of IHT, unless it is a very small (and hence probably financially unviable). As many people have pointed out, farming is a multi-generational business as it takes many years to improve the quality of land or to rear improved livestock. I am not personally a farmer and this proposal seems to be a typically socialist prejudice against the landed gentry – or what they imagine farmers to be which is far from the truth in most cases. They may own valuable land but the profits of farming businesses are usually a poor return on capital.

To suggest people buy farms to avoid Inheritance Tax may be true in a few cases but the risks in doing so are high so I suggest there are other motivations.

The good news for Shell shareholders is that the company has won an appeal in the Hague against an order to slash its greenhouse gas emissions. This was a case brought by Friends of the Earth and others which may have severely damaged Shell and set a very bad precedent for other oil companies. Trying to stop the use of oil and gas is simply irrational. We will need those products for many years into the future as there is no viable alternative for some applications.

The world is becoming less and less rational. Recent legal cases in the UK where people are being accused of “Non Crime Hate Incidents” and hence get a criminal record – see the Alison Pearson case for example – are truly irrational. Free speech is being lost to a world where the prejudice of the thought police is becoming paramount.

I agree with Elon Musk. The UK is losing free speech and you could end up with legal prejudice because you dare to express an opinion on Twitter (“X”) or Facebook on any matter under the sun. We need a new “Bill of Rights” to stop all of this nonsense.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can obtain notifications of new posts in future by following me on Twitter (now “X”) – see https://x.com/RogerWLawson where new blog posts are usually mentioned.

Trump’s Policies  

 For those who can get past their personal dislike of Donald Trump, let’s have a quick look at his likely policies that might affect us in the UK.

He clearly does not believe in the global warming hypothesis. He has supported an increase in fossil fuel production – vowing to “drill, drill, drill” on day one. Biden’s subsidies for renewable energy sources such as wind power will go. So that means all three major world economies (the USA, Russia and China) will not be limiting CO2 production. Ed Milliband in the UK is pissing in the wind by supporting Net Zero policies which is imposing enormous costs on British industries and on our population while making us uncompetitive in world trade.

Trump has also threatened to impose tariffs on US imports – perhaps 10% from most countries which would include the UK, but even more on Chinese goods.

He wants to stop the war in the Ukraine by brokering a peace settlement. He might just be able to get that done by limiting military and financial support to the Ukraine. In my view they have been fighting an unwinnable war for some time.   

He is likely to encourage Europe to pay more for their own defence rather than rely on the USA. That’s surely about time. That might help some UK businesses in the defence sector where we have a big presence.

Of course all this might be subject to a lot of horse-trading once Trump’s actually in power and has taken some advice from his cabinet. But if UK politicians are expecting much from the claimed “special relationship” then I think they should reconsider. Trump has no natural affinity to Labour Party socialists.

Taking all things into account, I suggest the election of Trump is not a negative for the UK. He should help to maintain a buoyant US economy and stock market which is good for the UK.

Time will tell whether Trump makes a good President but his last stint in the job did not go too badly.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can obtain notifications of new posts in future by following me on Twitter (now “X”) – see https://x.com/RogerWLawson where new blog posts are usually mentioned.

What’s Not to Like? Trump Elected and Markets Rise

 With Donald Trump elected as US President, it’s clearly time for us 78 year olds to make a come-back. In terms of candidates both had their weaknesses but the beauty of the US constitution is that there are several checks on the power of the President. The House of Representatives and the Senate have some control and there is also the US Supreme Court who can veto legislation. That is unlike in the UK where the Prime Minister can act like a dictator. The US system is better than the UK’s for that reason but it also helps to have a written constitution.

In England laws can be made by lawyers and a recent example is the decision by the Court of Appeal that it was unlawful for car dealers to receive commission on car finance deals. Why should car buyers need to know about commissions paid? If they are happy with the finance deal why should it be allowed to be challenged retrospectively? Caveat Emptor is the relevant phrase that should apply (the principle that the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made).

The election of Trump has had a definite positive effect on stock markets. Even my share portfolio is up about 1% this morning. Big tech stocks have particularly risen, presumably because folks perceive that might mean less regulatory interference or perhaps that the prospect of Leon Musk taking a role in managing the US economy is viewed positively (he wants to shrink the bureaucracy in the same way he cut staff at Twitter (“X)).

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can obtain notifications of new posts in future by following me on Twitter (now “X”) – see https://x.com/RogerWLawson where new blog posts are usually mentioned.

Book Review – Scared to Death   

One of the books I have been reading lately is “Scared to Death” by Christopher Booker and Richard North. First published some years ago but more recently updated it covers the public scares from BSE to Global Warming including speeding on our roads and why scares are costing us the earth.

To quote from the Introduction: “In the past twenty years, Western society in general and Britain in particular has been in the grip of a remarkable and very dangerous psychological phenomenon. Again and again since the 1980s we have seen the rise of some great fear, centred on a mysterious new threat to human health and wellbeing. As a result, we are told, large numbers of people will suffer or die. Salmonella in eggs; listeria in cheese; BSE in beef; dioxins in poultry; the ‘Millennium Bug’;DDT; nitrate in water; vitamin B6; ‘Satanic’ child abuse; lead in petrol and computers; passive smoking; asbestos; SARS; Asian bird flu – the list is seemingly endless.

Indeed, we are currently in the grip of the greatest such fear of all: that of a warming of the world’s climate which, we are officially told, could well put an end to much of civilized life as we know it. The price we have paid for such panics has been immense; most notably the colossal financial costs arising from the means society has chosen to defend itself from these threats. Yet, again and again, we have seen how it eventually emerged that the fear was largely or wholly misplaced. The threat of disaster came to be seen as having been no more than what we call a ‘scare’”.

The book certainly covers the ground well and shows how these scares arise and are promoted by the ignorant. Popular media and even the supposedly responsible press love a “bad news” story that helps their circulation (or their on-line media “hits” that helps their advertising income).

But the financial cost to the public can be enormous with no cost/benefit justification for the chosen solutions to the perceived problems. Indeed in the case of road safety the chosen measures (speed cameras) have not only been financially damaging but have diverted funds from effective road safety measures and meant that the UK no longer has a lead in reducing accidents and deaths (KSIs).

Some of the scares, such as that for AIDS, did turn into a serious problem only the worst outcomes being averted by advances in medical science and simple contrary public health measures. But other scares just disappeared because they turned out to be unreal – such as the Millenium Computer bug. However many millions of dollars and pounds were spent on curing imaginary problems.

One issue I was personally involved with was the “speed kills” issue which has resulted in the proliferation of speed cameras and speed humps. It is covered in Chapter 10 of the book.

As the book says, during the early years of the last century the death rate from road accidents in the UK consistently fell. By 1993 it was below 4,000. Britain’s roads were the safest in Europe. In France and Germany, the annual death toll was over 9,000. In Portugal the death rate was well over three times as high. Then the rate of decline suddenly slowed. Over the next decade the total fall was smaller than in any of the years between 1990 and 1993. On five occasions the yearly figure actually rose. So what had changed? Road safety policy as promoted by the Government changed.

The book says: “Undoubtedly one important factor in the steady fall in the fatal accident rate in earlier decades, despite a doubling in the number of vehicles on Britain’s roads – from 12 million in 1966 to 25 million in 1994 – had been the technical advances that made vehicles themselves much safer. But this could not have explained the slowing in the fall of accidents in the 1990s, when new regulations had made vehicles safer still”.

In reality the automated speed enforcement and reduction in speed limits created a financial incentive for the police to invest in speed cameras, speed awareness courses and enforcement when they had very little impact on road casualties. Over 2 million people are now issued with speeding fines every year in the UK at enormous cost to themselves and a whole industry has been created to support this mistaken policy due to the scare that “speed kills” when excessive speed is one of the less common factors in the cause of road accidents.

Expenditure on road policing and other effective measures to reduce accidents such as local road engineering were reduced in favour of more enforcement by cameras in the hope that would cut accidents when it did not.

See this web page for some of the articles I have written on this subject: https://www.freedomfordrivers.org/road-safety

As regards the book “Scared to Death” although the authors have documented well how such scares arise and are promoted by the misinformed they unfortunately have not tackled the issue of how to stop us wasting money on false solutions. But the book should be essential reading for all politicians.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can obtain notifications of new posts in future by following me on Twitter (now “X”) – see https://x.com/RogerWLawson where new blog posts are usually mentioned.

Am I a Working Person?

 Am I a working person? That is a question that has suddenly sprung into prominence because the Labour Government apparently believes that anyone who isn’t is fair game to be soaked by high taxes so as to reduce their wealth in the interest of social equality.

Already there are capital gains taxes which are likely to be increased in tomorrow’s Budget and Inheritance Tax is already at 40% if you want to pass wealth on to your offspring. Admittedly there are a number of ways to avoid or reduce these taxes if you take expensive legal advice. But it is simply wrong to characterise those with personal wealth as those who have not or do not work for it.

If you take my personal wealth I am a multimillionaire but I did not inherit anything from my parents or anyone else. I have gradually built up my wealth from judicious investment in the stock market out of earnings and after founding a small software company 40 years ago which was subsequently sold.

I have had to spend a lot of time keeping track of my stock market investments and managing my portfolios even though I had to retire from a proper job at the age of 50 on health grounds.

I object to being viewed as a capitalist who has not “earned” my wealth. That is a gross distortion of the facts. I have worked hard at growing and keeping my wealth and staying up to date on financial matters. A lot of my expenses to do so are not tax deductible and certainly not the many hours I spend most days in following the financial news.

I am also sure that many buy-to-let investors feel the same way (I am not one of them). They have to keep up with the ever-tougher regulation of that sector and it’s not even a very profitable investment of late. Similarly those who have tried to make a living out of farming, when few manage to do so, or running a small business which may no longer qualify for IHT relief. They are “workers” in my view.

The Labour Party is as usual pursuing the politics of envy to keep their supporters happy. They blame us capitalists for their own woes when in reality they could have done what I have done. They have been lazy or never learned the financial skills needed to make a success of their lives.

They think the world owes them a living when it does not!

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.