I'm unbelievably ill informed and stupid.

[Lola247]

Can anyone explain the budget to me in simple terms please?

For years the Tories dined out on the lie that Labour bankrupted the country (it was actually the 2008 Financial Crisis that did that). They used it to justify crippling the country and enacting a ruinous Brexit (out of right wing self-interest) so excuse me if I find your complaint ironic and disingenuous. Seems what goes around comes around after all!

But when your children inherit, it will be free money. They didn't have to work for it. If free money shouldn't be taxed, what money should?

Where's the austerity? Benefits and stste pensions have increased. Money is being invested in public services.

Labour have no regard for any self starters, business owners or entrepreneurs who already pay lots into the system, and think its OK to strip any hard earned wealth and pass it over to ne'er do wells. Basically just a standard Labour Government. Oh well, 5 years will pass.

It's this weekend isn't it that we find out if it is him or Badenoch who is going to lead the Tories? Not been following it really other than to gasp at some of the stuff that they have been coming out with. Bet Sunak won't hang around much longer, I know he will still be an MP but I don't think public service is really his thing.

Or another way of looking at it:

The government needs to raise a lot of money because the last one fucked up the economy really badly.

This means they need to raise a lot of money. Instead of passing costs onto workers through higher taxation, some of the money is being raised by extra taxes on businesses. Just like when Labour introduced the minimum wage, many businesses are making a real fuss about this, as it means less profit for them.

The other groups paying extra taxes are those who smoke, fly on private jets, and who make money that doesn't involve 'work' ie through taxes on profits made by buying and selling shares, and inheriting money.

And by removing government subsidies on private education through the imposition of VAT.

It's no surprise that the Tories called the last election early- Sunak could have gone on to next year as PM. They are like the person who is drunkenly sick at a party and then runs away without tidying up the mess, and then lies about it not being them!

The choices Labour had were:

1. not raise taxes and allow public services to get even worse
2. break their election promises about not putting up taxes on working people
3. raise taxes without breaking their election promise by finding other sources of tax.

Labour went for 3). This is why there is a lot of outrage from some business owners- but Labour had no alternative. You can thank Liz Truss for that. They will make a lot of noise, but just like with the introduction of the minimum wage, many will in reality be able to grin and bear it.

A sensible budget from a sensible former Bank of England economist that the market has reacted to well. No run on sterling or increased inflation like under the Tory mini-budget

The Newsagents are great, they explain things so well. They also do really clear analysis of the upcoming Presidential election and the American team are especially good and very entertaining to listen to.

I don't think they 'lied'.

Overall the budget doesn't seem too bad to me.

Also for @cardibach

To say again, I am not saying that Labour was wrong to give these pay rises. They were indeed based on pay review body recommendations and, given that public sector pay has been lagging behind private sector pay for the last few years, accepting these recommendations was probably the right thing to do. I am simply saying that this was Labour's choice, so including these in the alleged black hole inherited from the previous government is not entirely honest. It would be more accurate to say that they inherited at £12.5billion black hole and their decision to accept the review body recommendations has added another £9.4billion to that.

@cardibach

And austerity was the Tories,

No. Austerity was a global response to the crash of 2008 and subsequent economic downturn. Even Gordon Brown said so.

"I wish someone had explained Brexit to me as I voted with very little idea what I was actually voting for! Can’t even remember now whether I opted for In or Out!"

Oh.My.God. This is why referendums are a terrible idea.

So what would you cut then?
Schools or hospitals?
Benefits or infrastructure?
You should be aiming your anger at the last goverment who fucked off leaving both public services and public finances in such a mess.
We all pay a lot into the system- at least in the private sector you're not faced with the evidence of the appalling state of the public sector on a daily basis.

33 kids anyone with very reduced TA support, many of whom without the SEN funding to which they should be entitled due to the council not granting IEPs....?

The Tories managed to string out blaming Labour for the financial crisis for a good 16 years.

I think after ten years or so we can stop blaming the Tories for destroying the country. The effect of the previous government has been poisonous and long lasting. Brexit is the gift which keeps on giving.

We'll see about inflation, growth and the NHS.

@Lifeomars "
The Newsagents are great, they explain things so well."

I also like having some swearing with my politics-it saves me the trouble.

I agree although don't forget the odd reference as well to the 1970s which still crept in occasionally!

Nope. It was the Tories. And it was ideological. No way did Gordon Brown support austerity!

Meanwhile in other news Shell announce profits of $6billion.

Employers do not need to pay their workers less or make them unemployed. They choose to do so. To protect profit, dividends, personal wealth etc. it's not noble. It's self interest. They do this when taxes are low and take advantage of any loophole to pay workers less erode rights and extract more profit. Higher profits never result in higher pay.

There has been a huge transfer of wealth from the poorest to the richest that has increased in recent years. The impacts go beyond the economic to the political with the rise of right wing divisionist ideologies.

This is a real threat to the continued functioning of society and the recent budget merely scrapes the surface.

Blame all the champagne socialists who love to hand wring about all the social problems such as immigration, education, poverty, housing, NHS and crime etc. but pay their way out of having any of the actual real world experience and think voting labour is a moral high ground.

I thought it was a pretty fair budget under the circumstances. It does nothing for me, or my family, but it does make me grateful that DH is 68 and in the process of retiring from the small business he started 32 years ago. Forty years of de facto self-employment teaches you to be sensible with money: spend a third, save a third for retirement, and pay a third to the Exchequer. You don't achieve that every month or even every year, but it levels out across a working life.

What do you mean?

Oh it's you again, weren't you moaning at another poster for following you around the forum the other day?

I'm glad you brought up the IFS. Early this month you were rubbishing their work. What is about these findings that have assured you they're not the work of a "mid level background researcher", other than they confirm your worldview, of course?

On a side note, one alarming thing this budget has highlighted is just how many businesses out there are apparently unable to cope with a 2ish% increase in their staff costs.

@Screamingabdabz ... pay their way out of having any of the actual real world experience and think voting labour Conservative is a moral high ground

Corrected that for you. Ever think you might be living in a hall of mirrors?

It's been 4 months of Labour after what, 14 years of Tory shitshow? I think there's plenty more time to allocate blame to exactly where it belongs.

Quoting your one post doesn't quite qualify there, but you have just posted remembering a post from early in the month, that's quite the memory, I'd suggest letting other posts go over that amount of time.

And yes that researcher is not the director of the IFS if you look up the names and researcher level.