Labour planning to freeze tax thresholds longer

[Overthebow]

In the news today that they’re considering freezing the income tax thresholds past 2028. AIBU to think this is absolutely a tax rise for workers? I can’t believe they’d do this, they’ve been frozen for so long already.

So we need to grow the economy by, erm, making it more expensive to employ people and by making overtime worth less. Okay.

@cardibach no, I didn't miss it and I don't believe Labour did either. It was known about and several commentators (notably Tom Swarbrick on LBC) were going nuts trying to get Labour to acknowledge it and talk about their plan. Labour chose to lie instead and try to present it as new news once elected. More bollocks, but you swallow it and meekly accept your tax rises and ever-lasting austerity if you like.

Perhaps your "head in the sand" route is best actually - me getting angry about politicians lying made no difference other than to my blood pressure under the Conservatives and it'll make no difference under Labour either. They rely on apathy and they get it.

Then be upfront pre GE about it

Yes. The IFS said they had all the figures and that their pre-election maths didn't add up. They then created more of a black hole by giving public sector pay rises which need funding.

The rich don't need public services - they can pay for healthcare privately, pay for education privately, pay for a driver instead of a train, etc

those of us below that income would like to have a decent public service to look after us and we will need to pay for it somehow

These threads really do go round and round in circles.
Has anybody ever once made a convincing argument where someone on the other side said, oh right you have changed my mind, I will not vote x, I'll now vote y like you!😂

We're not going to see any improvements, any increased taxation and the budget cuts to government departments are to keep things at the pitiful level they are. That's been made clear to dept heads.

See this is nonsense, would you all prefer the strikes we have seen over the past several years from junior doctors and railway workers to keep on going? Of course they had to settle these strikes, and if the tories had got back in again, they would have had to eventually.

@Summernightsinthe21stcentury it's all going to be funded by growth, remember? I guess they're now planning on taxing and cutting their way to growth or something...

Back on planet Earth, I agree with you on the basic rate tax though. Although overall tax take is very high our tax rates at the lower end are very low relative to peers. 1% from everyone, long with sensible things like removing some of the daft IHT exemptions which only benefit very high earners would be pretty reasonable.

It's not nonsense at all. The public sector pay rises need paying for, so increased the amount of money which the government needs to raise. That's a fact, not nonsense.

You appear to think in giving factual information, I've given an opinion. There was none, just the factual situation.

There isn't one side or the other, its not a football match

There can be different points of view and to learn from others ideas and how things could be changed is important. Nothing is ever completely black or white.

I agree with means tested benefits and disagree with millionaires receiving £300 benefit just because they are over 66. I do think that means testing could be wider ranging to include more people, but understand a cut off has to come somewhere and the most vulnerable in society need help.

I agree freezing PA until 2028 and beyond is a bad thing but whilst the workers will suffer higher taxes if NMW is raised this may offset those taxes and benefits paid by govenment reducing the bill

.

They said there would need to be tough decisions. It's the responsibility of the electorate to interpret that. Do you think the Tories should have been explicit about how they were going to address the situation that had developed over the previous 14 years? Should Reform have set out in detail how they intended to pay for the tax reforms in their manifesto?

What do you mean by ‘tough decisions’?

Tax rises or no?

Sorry @NoWordForFluffy I thought you were suggesting they shouldn't have settled the strikes.

I also agree growth is central, they need to attract inward investment, as the years since brexit have been very costly for us, but of course that is another story.
I will wait and see what happens in the budget and what their fiscal plans are, hopefully it will all make sense then.

Yes. Tax rises if necessary. It's what I expected when I voted. However if they'd laid that out explicitly it would have affected their vote. Now do you think the Tories and Reform should have been transparent? Yes or no?

Funny how the OBR said they didn’t know then, don’t you think?

Ha I missed the attempt at insult at the end, not going as you wish I see. But do feel free to always avoid, I’ll be ok

Combined DH and I earn £160k. Work bloody hard but we're absolutely not in Labours definition of 'workers'. He was pressed on this during Question Time once and he confirmed it's people who rely on public services. So if you're able to save or dip into your pockets for private health etc then this Government couldn't give a flying fuck. That's the reality. They are very much keen to lower the bar.

I'm very relieved that, between the tax rises l, department cuts and benefit cuts, that this absolutely won't be an austerity budget though. Apparently it is identifying as something else.

No, because I give answers. Eastern just tries to tie everyone up in knots while pretending not to have an opinion. It’s pointless.

Just pointing out once again that HMT thought it would have to spend £7bn for p\spay rises in the event the Conservatives were reelected. That £7bn wasn't budgeted either. Absolute nonsense to suggest that they wouldn't have offered anything.

x.com/harryyorke1/status/1818280623368519864?s=46&t=Uw4lJNwxFZFnX0Xs3doHYg

What's pointless is trying to discuss this kind of thing with Labour's hardcore supporters who don't want to hear criticism.

Who's saying they wouldn't have offered anything?

ETA: all parties should have allowed for the pay rises pre-election and included them in their calculations (full costings). It appears none were honest about it.

Did you post on here pre GE you thought Labour were dishonest or just now?

Lying to this extent for votes will surely backfire

I didn’t look at Reform’s promises are they comparable to Labour?