[Politics] The Labour Government

[Super Steve Earle]

Not looking forward to the budget. Tax goes up (my) spending goes down.

Spending power goes down. Economy suffers.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Spending power goes down. Economy suffers.

You are Liz Truss and I claim my £5

 

[Super Steve Earle]

Pensioners need to start paying the price for their own decisions, they've lived a charmed life for a while compared to others.

Like saving, investing and actually planning their retirements when they were 'the others'?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Like saving, investing and actually planning their retirements when they were 'the others'?

It's a fair point. Maybe a means tested state pension like the means tested heating allowance?

 

[A1X]

Spending power goes down. Economy suffers.

Only if you put up taxes on the wrong people. Give money to poor people, they spend it. Give it to rich people they just send it to the Caymen Islands.

 

[BLOCK F]

Fair enough, or maybe "most". Lets face it most have voted to keep the Tories in power

Payback time then, for voting Tory?

 

[KZNSeagull]

It's a fair point. Maybe a means tested state pension like the means tested heating allowance?

Everything should be means tested but properly done, not a "you don't claim this so you cannot have this" type thing.

 

[beorhthelm]

Thanks. The problem I have getting my head round this is that the UK GDP is not performing noticeably worse than most of the world (USA excepted), and presumably it should have been streaking ahead without Brexit. What should have happened in the past decade that would have vastly improved our performance?

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn02784/

can maybe clear this simple misunderstanding. an event occurs that reduces GDP, then GDP growth (numbers you cite) is relative to that lower number. we dont lose that amount of GDP every year due to brexit, the total GDP is offset by that amount if compared to scenario it didn't happen.

 

[Tubby Mondays]

This Government have laid down their markers where wages are concerned and I have to say I’ve been shocked.

Nothing that the previous Government did has ever stressed me out as much as I am now, as a business owner in anticipation of the upcoming budget and in particular Angela Raynor’s workers rights bill.

I read an article this week where a Labour supporting CEO of big business said if the Labour Government increase the Minimum wage to £15 then it will be devastating. I couldn’t believe that was on the table…. then I thought about what’s happened in the last few weeks and realised it could be. It really could be.

Add in the proposed increase in minimum wage for under 21’s to match over 21’s and that will be game over for me I’m afraid. I have toiled relentlessly for 12 years- even took a £280k divorce settlement on the chin but I don’t think I will survive the first Labour budget. The lads I’ve got on 20% over minimum wage now will be expecting £18ph if that comes to pass. We just can’t possibly do that.

Who would have thought that after the sheer incompetence of the last Government that it would be the guy I voted in who would potentially destroy me in under 6 months.

I’ve never been so worried.

Maybe it won’t happen but let’s be honest it sounds pretty likely doesn’t it.


Anyway, I’ve enjoyed the political banter on here HWT WZ and I will still follow the Albion on here as always

If it helps, as someone that works in the NHS, and did so in 2010 when the mantra of ‘difficult decisions need to be made’ was repeated robotically as an excuse for doing what a newly political party was also always going to I.e throw public sector workers under a bus to pay for tax cuts for people that didn’t need them; give it 14 years and you might be able to stop worrying.

 

[Bodian]

Everything should be means tested but properly done, not a "you don't claim this so you cannot have this" type thing.

Quite an effective way of means-testing though, as it only needs doing once. What other way had you in mind?

 

[KZNSeagull]

Quite an effective way of means-testing though, as it only needs doing once. What other way had you in mind?

HMRC informs all government departments regarding everyone's means. I call it the "rich bastard" indicator. All they would need to give each department is name, address, NI number and "rich bastard" indicator, each department can then decide how to use that information. I would use it for pretty much everything including benefits, state pensions and the NHS (some people won't pay anything, some will pay a little, some will pay a bit more etc depending on how much of a "rich bastard" you are). It will be particularly useful the next time there is a pandemic and the government is handing out money like confetti.

 

[beorhthelm]

It's a fair point. Maybe a means tested state pension like the means tested heating allowance?

it has been floated. rather courageous politically, breaks the whole structure of NI. more obvious and fairer approach will be reducing the considerable tax relief for higher tax rate payers. still be able to save and get a decent pension, just without the full 40-45% bump from the treasury.

 

[WATFORD zero]

it has been floated. rather courageous politically, breaks the whole structure of NI. more obvious and fairer approach will be reducing the considerable tax relief for higher tax rate payers. still be able to save and get a decent pension, just without the full 40-45% bump from the treasury.

Source ?

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

I preferred the people before who told us it was all fine. They seemed fun. Who does this guy think he is trying to fix stuff. Booooooo

 

[dsr-burnley]

It's a fair point. Maybe a means tested state pension like the means tested heating allowance?

The practical difficulty is that to get an inflation proof annual pension of £12k, you need about £250k in your pension pot when you retire. If that amount is reduced by means testing, it's a hard sell persuading people to save for their pension, not because they will be better off, nut because it will save the government money.

They could start means testing state pensions at much higher levels, say a gradual reduction for people with pension pots over say £1m, but then again they already tax them (or are planning to) at 55% so it's already being "means tested" in a different way.

 

[Weststander]

How is the £100 billion worked out please?

According to Goldman Sachs, cumulative over 8 years UK GDP is 5% smaller than without Brexit.

 

[Is it PotG?]

No more illegal migration then, it's now irregular migration he's going to stop by SMASHING the gangs.

Next it will be alternative or slightly quirky.

Hell in a handcart.

 

[pocketseagull]

The term "irregular" is preferred over "illegal" because the latter has a criminal connotation. Entering a country in an irregular manner, or staying with an irregular status, is not a criminal offense, but an infraction of administrative regulations. Irregular travel in order to seek asylum is also not a crime.

Starmer is using the preferred term of the audience he's addressing. Took literally seconds to look this up. We're an outlier by criminalising asylum.

 

[Is it PotG?]

FTSE shares in banks took a mauling after the hints that Starmer & Reeves are going to enhance the autumn chill with CGT and IHT hits.
Happy days.

 

[Dibdab]

There is absolutely stacks of money floating around. The crime is that governments of both colours have allowed the mega rich to transfer it from the working and middle classes and now hoard it over the last 15-20 years. They will now have the audacity to tax us even more to cover the fact that they've let the mega rich snaffle away all the cash, leaving gaping holes in the budget whilst the mega rich will continue to suck up even more of the countries assets.