[News] The official match day thread - The Autumn Budget

[Denis]

I’m on the pre 2016 pension, about £8200 per year. I have a works pension of £4,585 per year and another tiny pension of £480p.a. I‘m already paying tax, so a 10.1% increase will definitely mean more tax off my pension.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I think I that says more about your recruitment skills than the general attitude of young working people.

Perhaps if you paid more than the absolute minimum you can legally get away with, you might attract some higher calibre staff.

My father said never take a job for minimum wage. It’s a sure sign the boss doesn’t give a shit about employees.

“I pay dogshit and can’t understand why I can’t get good staff”

You don’t see the possible connection?

Agreed. And the same goes for holiday entitlement - always makes me laugh when I see job adverts saying "20 days holiday plus Bank Holidays" when in fact they should really put "We give you the legal minimum holiday allowance". I avoid those employers like the plague.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Freezing tax free allowances till 2028 is going to hit the poor particularly hard, hopefully they will be rescued in a couple of years.

I don't think that they are worried about a couple of years hence. Their problem is right now.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I’m on the pre 2016 pension, about £8200 per year. I have a works pension of £4,585 per year and another tiny pension of £480p.a. I‘m already paying tax, so a 10.1% increase will definitely mean more tax off my pension.

I'm about the same as you without the second tiny pension. When income tax was introduced by Robert Peel, only those who earned £150 per annum were taxed.

 

[WATFORD zero]

they'll tax non-doms was about the only thing i picked up. it was long party political broadcast, indicative they dont really object to anything announced.

You think the shadow chancellor should have made up a speech, on the fly, addressing each of the points that had been confidential and only publicly announced minutes earlier. This 'statement' being the result of some significant number of weeks of very intensive work by thousands of people, throughout the treasury and OBR most of which would be civil servants very highly skilled in their areas of expertise

As ever, a perfectly balanced observation

 

[TomandJerry]

Average incomes to fall £1,700 in living standard squeeze
UK households face a £1,700 fall in disposable incomes over the next two years, the Resolution Foundation has calculated.

That’s the conseqences of the record-breaking 7% drop in living standards which will hit the economy in 2023 and 2024.

Such a drastic squeeze will push average incomes fallen back to 2014 levels, wiping out eight years of income growth.

 

[Cornwallboy]

Is it? How is it paid? If it goes to the energy company it’ll be okay. If it goes into people’s personal accounts, it’ll get spunked up the wall.

Wow!! Are you a Daily Mail reader?

 

[The Clamp]

Wow!! Are you a Daily Mail reader?

Nope. I’m a realist.

 

[Randy McNob]

That's not true, is it? Rachel Reeves specifically mentioned that Non-Dom tax status has STILL not changed and that Labour would make everyone resident here pay tax on worldwide income here in UK. That's £3 billion right there.

Labour would still apply windfall tax on energy companies more aggressively than the Tories, no getting rid of cap on banker's bonuses / private equity. Labour have also supported onshore wind, solar and home insulation for a decade while the Tories have dragged their heels with disastrous consequences.

At least Labour are reasonably consistent. Rishi campaigned in August on a platform of lower taxes, yet today his Chancellor has just raised the tax burden to its highest level since the end of WW2.

It's these attitudes which is largely responsible for the Tories getting re-elected, as long as they can convince enough of the elctorate that there is no real alternative, they still have the full weight of the right wing press to smear the left, people end up voting Tory by default or not voting at all as the Tories are big benficiaries of voter apathy.

 

[Cornwallboy]

Nope. I’m a realist.

And a hypocrite. If a Conservative MP / Daily Mail was to say those in receipt of additional help will 'spunk it up the wall' you'd be frothing at the mouth with indignation.

 

[sparkie]

Is it? How is it paid? If it goes to the energy company it’ll be okay. If it goes into people’s personal accounts, it’ll get spunked up the wall.

By "spunked up the wall" you mean used to keep the debt chasers at the council tax offices and the utility companies at bay.

 

[WATFORD zero]

And a hypocrite. If a Conservative MP / Daily Mail was to say those in receipt of additional help will 'spunk it up the wall' you'd be frothing at the mouth with indignation.

It was pleasant to have a grown up forum while it lasted

 

[The Clamp]

And a hypocrite. If a Conservative MP / Daily Mail was to say those in receipt of additional help will 'spunk it up the wall' you'd be frothing at the mouth with indignation.

You aren’t aware of the concept of having political beliefs while also acknowledging there are exceptions and that any doctrine or political manifesto, while holding both broad and specific beliefs and suades is also subject to the vagaries and foibles of people?

It’s a complicated brew but what it basically means is while I don’t judge anyone for being on benefits in itself, I also recognise that in giving people cash handouts, there’s a real risk a significant amount of people will not spend it on the energy bills it’s meant for .

Perhaps “spunking it” was a poor choice of words. But professional experience tells me that people with bad debt, if so woken has coercive control of someone else’s funds. substance abuse issues, mental health issues, learning difficulties or people who are simply not able to prioritise and budget effectively will not allocate a cash handout to its intended destination.

But I also don’t like the funds going to energy companies because it’s just the f***ing Tory’s making sure the energy giants they have interests in, make huge profit. It’s tough to reconcile.

 

[Cornwallboy]

It was pleasant while it lasted

Why does what amounted to a very reasonable post from myself warrant this?

 

[Cornwallboy]

You aren’t aware of the concept of having political beliefs while also acknowledging there are exceptions and that any doctrine or political manifesto, while holding both broad and specific beliefs and suades is also subject to the vagaries and foibles of people?

It’s a complicated brew but what it basically means is while I don’t judge anyone for being on benefits in itself, I also recognise that in giving people cash handouts, there’s a real risk a significant amount of people will not spend it on the energy bills it’s meant for .

Perhaps “spunking it” was a poor choice of words. But professional experience tells me that people with bad debt, substance issues, mental health issues or who are simply not able to prioritise and budget effectively will not allocate a cash handout to its intended destination.

All fair points and well made. Yes I agree 'spunking' was a poor choice of words, I agree that also some people will indeed waste the money on 'fags and booze' but I guess many will see it as a financial lifeline in difficult times and spend the money appropriately.

 

[Barnet Seagull]

With at least £5bn in job retention scheme fraud alone, I would argue that whatever they based the risk on was shit! It was incompetence.

On SEISS, there was no requirement (in the first two tranches) for the SE to have lost a single days work through covid in order to claim. That was incompetence too. Not fraud because the way the scheme was drafted and the lack of any kind of thought meant that the claims were perfectly lawful. Estimated that bounceback loan fraud will easily exceed £1bn.

An HMRC unit set up to tackle Covid fraud is set to leave £3.3bn outstanding when it winds down in March 2023, campaigners have warned.

The Taxpayer Protection Taskforce, which was set up by Chancellor Rishi Sunak in March 2021, will be phased out, despite having collected less than 25 per cent of the money lost through misallocation of Covid funds.

HMRC's Covid fraud taskforce to leave billions unaccounted for - City AM

An HMRC unit set up to tackle Covid fraud is set to leave £3.3bn outstanding when it winds down in March 2023, campaigners have warned. The Taxpayer An HMRC unit set up to tackle Covid fraud is set to leave £3.3bn outstanding when it winds down in March 2023, campaigners have warned.

www.cityam.com

Conversely bail out of Bulb... £6.5bn...

Bulb bailout costs every UK Household £230

Conservative's free market fetishism once again costs country dear

www.gmb.org.uk

 

[The Clamp]

What cost of living crisis? It’s all so unashamedly “f*** you, plebs”

Boris Johnson received £276,130 plus expenses for US speech

Register also shows former PM travelled to Montana at Rupert Murdoch’s expense last month

www.theguardian.com

 

[Randy McNob]

You aren’t aware of the concept of having political beliefs while also acknowledging there are exceptions and that any doctrine or political manifesto, while holding both broad and specific beliefs and suades is also subject to the vagaries and foibles of people?

It’s a complicated brew but what it basically means is while I don’t judge anyone for being on benefits in itself, I also recognise that in giving people cash handouts, there’s a real risk a significant amount of people will not spend it on the energy bills it’s meant for .

Perhaps “spunking it” was a poor choice of words. But professional experience tells me that people with bad debt, if so woken has coercive control of someone else’s funds. substance abuse issues, mental health issues, learning difficulties or people who are simply not able to prioritise and budget effectively will not allocate a cash handout to its intended destination.

But I also don’t like the funds going to energy companies because it’s just the f***ing Tory’s making sure the energy giants they have interests in, make huge profit. It’s tough to reconcile.

with respect you are kind of leaning towards lazy stereotyping of benefit claimants, most people receiving benfits / tax credits are in full time work. In any case, I am all for it since giving money to the ordinary folk will all go back into the economy which is much better than the Trussenomics of tax breaks for the wealthy who pug it away rather than spend it

 

[WATFORD zero]

Why does what amounted to a very reasonable post from myself warrant this?

Because you're so obviously desperate to be allowed back on here

Dinner calls

 

[Weststander]

I’m on the pre 2016 pension, about £8200 per year. I have a works pension of £4,585 per year and another tiny pension of £480p.a. I‘m already paying tax, so a 10.1% increase will definitely mean more tax off my pension.

Based on that your monthly income tax is £58.

The state pension increasing by £820 next April will give you £68 a month more income, but £14 of that will go in tax.

Hopefully the £4,585 company pension has some sort of index linking too?