Absolutely rinsed in this budget - almost £1k a year worse off.

[Mushroo]

Honestly in despair at this government. On a very high level calc, we are so much worse off!

We both pay a lot into pensions, so the NI change is about £700 a year worse off.

We have an EV car, so based on our 4k a year mileage, it’s about £120 a year. (Although how it will be enforced I have no idea).

Stagnating tax thresholds, probably about £100 a year between us.

Council tax F house (4 bed end terrace, not a mansion, needs renovating). So risk of revaluation after having paid a fortune in stamp duty. We didn’t get first time buyer stamp duty relief because we bought about 2 years too early, and we moved before Covid so no relief there either. So overall we’ve paid about £30k in stamp duty already over our lifetime.

Weve already had the private school hit (which is a separate debate and we’ve accepted that) but wow, we are just being kicked on all sides.

We are classic ‘middle earners’ - earn about £70k each, but have mahoosive mortgage and pay over £2k a month in nursery fees already.

Every measure just seems to have a negative effect on our lifestyle, which is ‘comfortable’ but increasingly squeezed.

Do you actually believe what you’ve written there?

ETA: as in, do you actually believe it to be that black and white, that she ‘lied’ so she could raise taxes? Or is it possibly a bit more woolly, and that those who will see a cost they resent from this budget will choose to see it as such? We’ll see from investigations but imo bigger headroom feels sensible, and the markets seem to agree.

Markets don’t vote people do, so we’ll see how the budget goes down in the next local elections.

None of which really responds to whether she ‘lied’ or not. Raising taxes is a calculated risk, there’s a good chance that these measures as well as the immigration changes will be popular in Reform areas. We’ll see.

She did lie whether or not it’s about the black hole.

After the last budget there were to be no more tax rises. Not another £26bn.

Do you actually know what’s in the budget? Or are you just repeating the government line?

Billions of pound worth of increases in benefits. From lifting the two child benefit cap and abandoning welfare reform.

The tax rise were not needed. She lied so she could go for the tax rises to mist for benefits. She could have created the headroom without the tax rises based on the OBR forecast. The tax is for paying more in benefits.

So if you believe she ‘lied’, for what purpose? To trick people into paying more for benefits? There’s no need to ‘lie’ to do that. I think you’re making it very cut and dried, when in fact politics is always messier - regardless of whether you agree with it. Obviously you don’t agree with the decisions and therefore you choose the worst possible interpretation.

To be honest I don’t know what the government line is, but I’d guess it’s ‘I didn’t lie’.

It’s semantics though isn’t it - yes she did something she said she wouldn’t, whether you consider that a lie is up to you, but I wouldn’t. Things change, she’s not the first chancellor to change her mind on something.

She lied so she could go appease Labour MPs who are at odds with the general public. The public is in favour of two child benefit cap, the public is also in favour of cutting the scandalous benefits bill. Labour MPs, most of whom are just glorified activists and not the most fiscally aware people ever having run anything in real life, are for unlimited spending.

Labour MPs are looking to kick out Starmer and Reeves, which is well publicised. She did it to save her job. What she did is corruption.

No it isn't, is 100% true - the OBR have told her lots of things, over the last 16months, as have the IFS etc etc.

All can be true.

The 22bn black hole was a OBR forecast too!

In your hurry to get her kicked out, this is what you re missing.

Having looked at it all, whoever was in power would have had to have a far bigger fiscal headroom than 4bn, especially given the OBR and their totally inaccurate forecasting.

On the lying, i listened to her speech in the commons, did she say the BH was 22bn?

Tax rises were 100% needed.

The lifting of the 2 cap limit (btw i don't agree with that) is a 3bn increase in spending.

Reeves needs a fiscal buffer of a great deal more than 4bn, that was her trouble last year, hence borrowing costs shot up.

£1000 a year is necessary to be able to afford to fix the roads, educate SEN children inclusively, take care of the elderly and all the other nice things we demand from our government. We've been demanding these services improve for decades and they haven't- so of course there will be some extra expenses to make this happen.

We're focusing solely on things like benefit cap (which no, I actually dont think should have been blanket lifted to be honest) but its about so much more than than.

What will take the piss is if the government get all this extra cash - then in 5 years time we dont see improvements made.

Im over the whole argument of national debt at this point - the Conservatives borrowed a tonne more money than Labor ever did.

That would make it a lie then wouldn’t it

Isn't there a 6bn black hole in the SENs budget alone?

Then there is prisons/justice system, so bad that we will lose the jury system for most trials.
Roads crumbling, another 7bn raised for that.

10s of billions more for defence required.

Yet for some posters, its all about "No tax rises needed, Reeves had 4bn..."

Yes it was to save their jobs with their MPs

I presume that’s why they have a lower rate, they’ll apply the lower rate to the whole mileage I imagine.

It pretty much unworkable at the moment, what happens if you use the car abroad?

The only way it could be done is a app on a phone & then self reporting, a bit like the driving apps car ins companies offer.

With fines for mis reporting..... in other words, a mess & highly unpopular, i hear the screeching of tyres before 2029

I think you’re focusing on the politics and not the facts. Public services are in the toilet and need investment. You seem fixated on the 2 child cap/welfare in general, when there are so many other things that need fixing.

’the public’ is not one homogenous mass,, and to say the nation js at odds with all MPs is meaningless, its so broad brush. Added to that, governments sometimes have to make unpopular decisions and do so with far more information than is in the public domain. And sometimes they make popular choice which, with hindsight, were disastrous. I don’t want a populist government I want one that is technocratic and competent. I’m not saying this government are perfect - they’re not very good at what should be manageable optics imo - but I’d rather they make tough decisions than keep presenting everything is fine, like their predecessors.

@Allisnotlost1 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 I agree wholeheartedly.

Of course some will want ever higher taxes and welfare but the manifesto and GE line was clearly “fully funded, fully costed” and for the last budget ‘one tax hike then done’ so yes the public sentiment will respond to that.

It’ll be interesting to see how the local elections go post budget.

“middle earner” 😂

There’s a lot of talk from Labour that these increased taxes are required to safeguard services. What I would actually like them to tell me what percentage of these taxes will go to these services and what is the percentage going toward the welfare state?

Lifting the 2 cap limit is costing 3bn, 26bn raised in taxes.

But isn't the idea to create significant fiscal headroom? she announced no significant new spend on ed or health, some extra for roads - much needed, partner trashed a tyre yesterday in a pot hole.

OBR apparently saying that there is a 41% chance the amount she has given herself wont be enough.

Who is running the economy? the Govt or the OBR ?

Do you understand how chronology and sequencing works?

Like B comes after A and 2 comes after 1.

OBR has issues hundred of forecasts in the last 15 years. The chancellor has to use the latest one. They can’t just pick and choose a forecast from previous weeks, months, years and say ‘oh well, you have me this forecast even though it’s not latest one’.

The latest forecast said that she had a £4b surplus so you are factually incorrect.

UK welfare spending is due to increase by £73b per year in the next 5 years.

She could have could cut welfare by £73b, or less, instead of raising taxes. So no, it’s not just a £3b increase.

And no, she did not need to raise taxes.

Looks like you’ve swallowed the government line, hook, line and sinker.

There is no reason to spend £400b a year on welfare. There is no reason to tax an ever decreasing number of productive people to pay an ever increasing number of working age unproductive people.

10 million people of working age on benefits and not working is a joke. Except it’s not funny.

These are the facts.