Those whom I once upon a time referred to as the "Good People of Fareham" have gone right down in my opinion and are referred to as the racists from Fareham now. What possesses any one to vote for Braverman for goodness sack. Would you return her or JRM as your MP?
How much of that £18 a month will be swallowed up by PAYE as the minimum wage increase pushes more poorly paid workers further over their personal tax allowance, or takes them over it for the first time? Freezing the personal allowance until 2027/28 is just another tax rise.
Whilst I agree with you 100% that NI cuts make the rich richer, there are also a lot of wealthy Labour voters/members too, so doesn't just benefit the tories. What is needed is a tax cut lower down the scale - increase personal allowance and maybe drop the BR of tax whilst increasing the higher rate (BUT increasing the threshold for paying higher rate to around 60k). Yes the BR tax cut will also help the rich but proportionally will help the less well off more, and this would be offset by a higher high rate tax?
Ian, Adam, Jane and Helen discuss royal privacy, the possible resurrection of the Crooked House pub, and the return of George Galloway. https://audioboom.com/posts/8469198...3eF3klj3QcUFTWKDapAnrZaWYb9GyhbmTnEz1lusI4-d0
Maybe. I would argue that give the lower income families more of their money will get more into work potentially (so overall more tax revenue), more spending on goods (money back into tteh economy) and more taxes taken form the wealthy. This could fund society. I know it isn't as black and white as that (and I am not saying this after listening to Hunt saying similar - they are too far gone for any measures they put in to work). EDIT: What I am saying is tax reductions in the lower incomes and fairer taxation to the more wealthy.
There are arguments for this. The main thing is to increase spending to improve the economy. However, the poor are not as affected by tax as people want to think. Anyone earning 20k - which is fairly standard for low pay workers - will be taxed at 20% on £7500. Off the top of my head, that is £1500 - or £125 a month. If you take 5% whopping percent off that - which nobody will, they are now paying £1125 a year. That is £30 a month extra (less than £10 a week) in their pockets. The fact is, that they would be better off without that £30 quid a month if public services worked, they could see a dentist, doctors appointments were available and their rubbish was collected on time. The big con is making the poor think tax cuts are a good idea. We need higher rates of tax at the higher bands - and we need to be brutal in collecting it from the wealthy.
I agree with all of that except the first part of "We need higher rates of tax at the higher bands - and we need to be brutal in collecting it from the wealthy". Do the second part and the higher rates of tax can be the same IMO.
What the country needs - desperately - is significant sustained investment in our failing public services.
When growth is stagnant and national debt is high and public services are below satisfactory levels, you don't restrict your only mechanism for changing those things. Consumer spending and private sector investment is not going to do it at the present time. We all know this is pandering to Tory back benchers and gutter trash media headlines before a GE. Even the the people interviewed in Winchester on the news saw little merit in the promised tax cuts.
NI cut sounds like the next step in phasing NI out completely. Watch the state pension being the main topic of discussion when that happens, as in can the state afford it, and should we means test it?
The irony of course being that the biggest group receiving no benefit from a cut in NI are pensioners, who don’t pay NI.
And freezing the tax allowances again mean more pensioners will pay tax, so they're worse off after this budget.
Just your everyday tale of a cabinet minister wrongly accusing two academics of being radical and supporting Hamas, only for the accusation to be ruled untrue, leading the minister to face a libel suit. The ruling was that the minister HAD libelled the academics and she was ordered to pay a settlement and legal costs, which of course she hasn’t paid because it has been paid for by the taxpayer. She lied but we are paying for her lies, and the government has so far refused to reveal how much was paid.
We don’t pay tax on the State Pension, so instead the allowance is cunningly reduced, so I pay more tax on my NHS Pension.
This story is made even murkier by the evidence that in her tweet Michelle Donelan pretty much quoted tweets by Policy Exchange, a Tufton St think tank funded by **** knows who.
Reactionaries tend to feast during extended periods of economic strife, and it's been a tough 15 years for substantial segments of the populace. The grotesque irony is that many of the same people who have gotten fat off of the current economic climate are bankrolling the think tanks and 'public interest' groups etc that fund the loudest reactionary voices. Nice gig if you can get it. In related news, the candidate who won the GOP primary to become the governor of North Carolina believes that women shouldn't be allowed to vote, has an unsettling habit of quoting Hitler, and has dabbled in some light Holocaust denial. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nort...son-women-vote_n_65e7d899e4b0f9d26cacc002?hlo https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...carolina-governor-mike-robinson-b2507965.html
Dave Rountree, Blur drummer, will be the Labour candidate in Mid Sussex. Contra to the culture wars, Rountree is on record as being in favour of girls who want boys who like boys to be girls, asserting that there always should be someone you really love.
Anyone else been fortunate enough to see that video of Rishi Sunak with a whiteboard explaining to us how the budget works like we are children who need to be told why we are definitely so much better off? Best part is him starting off by writing CONTEXT *underlined. Even if you ignore everything else, he just seems so fundamentally bad at politics. ‘You know what the public really love? Condescension!’
