To think Rachel Reeves patronised the public with her rhetoric on cash ISAs?!

[Hulabalu]

I paraphrase but she said she wanted to cut the ‘cash’ ISA allowance from 20k to a fraction of that but allow people to still do the 20k stocks & shares ISA. She said something like she wanted “peoples hard earned money put to work in the stock market”.
She gave ZERO thought to people’s attitude to risk, that they might not want to risk their money in stock market.
She just wanted people investing in UK companies to boost economy. Not that people would have necessarily invested in Uk stocks.
Thankfully the banks etc stepped in and stopped her stupid plan
But I now can’t stand the woman! How dare she try to “sell” her plan to us and take us for fools 😡

The problem is that many who find the idea of limiting the tax relief on people with £20k a year spare who want to keep it in cash are the same ones who think 'the rich' should be taxed more.

The only way S&S Works if you have time. If I were 60s I don't have time to see the stock price smoothens after short term turbulence to justify me putting my savings into it. Labour does really hate older people IMO. because they usually are Tories voters.

You're right of course. Anything the Tories do wrong is forgotten in the blink of an eye, but the every word, step and whisper of a thought that Labour do, or are said to have done even if they haven't actually, are etched in stone and referred to for all eternity.

Well not quite. You must have missed partygate and the last GE.

They were voted out after all. Labour are in power even if some on mn prefer to look back. That’s what happens when in power. Your policies are up for scrutiny - bar a few on mn.

And the same applies if you have a short time horizon because you’re saving hard for something specific ( house deposit) and cannot afford losses.

someone did make good point that if isa rates are low it’s better having high interest cash savings account and paying the tax. Guess it depends what the best deals are out there.

i also take peoples point that the government have to do “something” and don’t have many levers to pull… so, on reflection, I was maybe a bit harsh towards reeves in my OP.

I guess i want to avoid tax hikes and keep the triple lock, so , messing around with cash ISA seems least of all evils after all…

Glad I’m not reeves or starmer or in government!

Well inflation's up, "unexpectedly" 🙄

3.6% under Labour, 11% under the Tories....

I know what i prefer.

It’ll be ‘disappointing’ next.

Makes it harder for BoE to be certain

At election it was pretty much at bsse rate but has risen continuously since then.

Terrible numbers, aren't they? 3 years of way above target rate inflation, must have been external pressures... same as there is now.

From base rate at the election, to the highest inflation in the G7 now.

‘Unexpected’ seems to be domestic policies for negative growth and inflation

UK has consistently had higher inflation than most in the G7 for several years now.
Even when it was 2.2% last year, it was still one of the highest, same as when it shot up to 11% under the Tories, higher than anyone else.

Instead of gloating, why don't we look at the reasons? though i do believe any bad economic news is gold for a few on here....

Is it Brexit, price fixing? the effects of Truss on gilts? poor economic policies? lack of regulation in the energy market? which Labour are still doing nothing about, despite the GE promises.

I doubt Labour will look at their own policies. For inflation or higher unemployment.

The £25bn rise in national insurance for employers, announced in the autumn budget, will likely add pressure to inflation, according to Huw Pill, chief economist at the Bank of England.

One of the highest, or higher than most is not the same as the highest though is it?

Nobody is gloating or pleased about extortionate food prices, or fuel. Low income families will be struggling to afford food rn because of labour policies. The employer NI increase is the main factor here.

I have changed tack.

Any bad economic news, I now treat as good news - in fact, the worse, the better. Ditto with crime, immigration etc. Bring it on.

Why? Whether wholly or partly to blame, the incumbent Labour shower are the ones who will be blamed for it - via the backbenches, via the markets, before being dumped for at least another 14 years.

I am even beginning to enjoy myself.

Be careful what you wish for!

If Labour, with their huge majority, fail to get the economy back on track we will see a Reform victory. They can only win by being right wing on social issues and left wing (further to the Left than Labour) on economic issues.

What was that Sun headline? “Will the last person to leave Britain please turn out the lights”

Corbyn's new party is level pegging with Labour in polls. They will split the Left vote in same way Reform split the Right vote at last election.

That’s precisely my point.

Politics has become completely polarised and the electorate are tribal. The majority vote for who they believe will best serve their interests.

So, if you have a government for whom you did not vote, one should do everything in their power to ensure they fail. Small things, every day. Drip drip.

Meanwhile, let the headlines be your friend - for it is only negative at the moment, and for the foreseeable.

Not a Reeves or Labour fan, but she/they wants to drive behaviour for whatever reason into investing rather than saving. Changing ISA limits is a very sensible way to drive that behaviour. Everyone is acting like cutting cash ISA limits mean you can no longer save or the government are going to take all your savings. You would still be able to save cash in an interest bearing account with no tax relief.

ISA limits are there to encourage people to save in a tax efficient way. If the government decides it no longer wants to encourage that behaviour then they should adjust the ISA limited.

As someone who uses her full ISA allowance most years, I’m really struggling to see why people are getting so het up about paying a tiny amount more tax on an individual level on income they haven’t earned, and that five years ago they wouldn’t have even been getting anyway.

You have a point, I find it’s still bad to watch as they are hopeless but I am thinking to those who go on about driving out wealth just see what happens then.

The people who want it most will be impacted the most too.

Off topic, but some more ‘good’ news.

State schools in Kent received almost 100 enquiries in the 48 hours after a private school closed citing the VAT raid.

Taxpayers have been left to foot a £1.2m bill after the closure of Bishop Challoner School earlier this month, with around 50 pupils so far applying to join nearby state schools.

The Catholic school, which this year celebrated its 75th birthday, was forced to shut after it lost more than a third of its pupils to Labour’s VAT raid.

If only someone had tried warning about this...

The closure of that school = £100,000 less VAT revenue + more kids applying to state schools. So more pressure on local resources for an already overstretched council.

THIS is why we warned that this policy would end up costing taxpayer money!

5 x number of kids have left independent schools in the first year than government predicted.
67%+ increse in school closures Vs 'normal' year.
Only 1 mainstream indy school opened last year. 0 have opened since this policy was brought in. The ones to have opened are specialist SEND schools funded by LA through EHCPs.

But hey, we were all scaremongering, being hyperbolic and there was NO evidence this would happen cos we are all wealthy and could afford the VAT by simply cutting out Netflix!

£850,000 lost VAT revenue!

What were the reasons for our super high inflation over the last few years?

Nothing to do with low productivity, the NMW rises, higher fuel costs, increased borrowing costs caused by Truss.... nope!

...all our historical high inflation rates are down to a policy implemented a few months ago.....

Of course its gloating, you love it.