AIBU to want spending cuts rather than more tax rises?

[PinkFruitbat]

The foundations are being laid for more tax rises in the October Budget.

https://www.ft.com/content/6d43b599-3d7c-471c-88c2-0f056475a840?syn-25a6b1a6=1

AIBU to ask for savings in spending to help balance the budget rather than more taxes.

With welfare spending at nearly £1bn each day, when is enough, enough?

Which ones?

Pink FruitBat for prime minister

I want to see the tax burden fall more on rich companies and rich people and less tax avoidance or evasion.

There are areas of expenditure I would happily see reduced, for example a lot of the new road building.

I also think with modern communication we could have fewer MPs, fewer councillors, so that expenditure reduction includes everyone.

Why do these discussions always focus on taxation and spend and never what the government should do to grow the economy. The latter should always be the focus rather than trying to redistribute a shrinking pot. I would suggest:

A) Making work pay and reduce very high effective marginal tax rates caused by the interaction of income tax, National Insurance and withdrawal of benefits.

But combined with the following productivity measures:

B) Reform planning by moving more towards a rules based planning system, if a development meets clear criteria, it should normally be approved. Set clear time limits for major planning decisions.

C) Build infrastructure consistently - set out a 10–15 year national infrastructure pipeline
and give businesses confidence to invest around major infrastructure projects. Use UK procurement rules to favour British companies and supply chains.

D) Raise productivity in ordinary businesses e.g. create a national SME productivity programme linked to actual investment and measurable improvements rather than simply providing grants.

E) Reform apprenticeships and adult training towards skills employers actually need.

F) reduce economic inactivity through better occupational health, retraining, childcare, flexible employment and effective back-to-work support combined with the measures in A.

G) Better support to turn more British research into high-growth companies, jobs and exports.

H) Stability - give businesses confidence that the rules will remain broadly stable to encourage long term investment.

Which roles do you suggest we chop though? I asked up thread but it seems to have been missed. I'm genuinely interested in suggestions.

HMRC probably wouldn't know how to allow you to pay more tax.

When my DH died, as instructed, I had to write to them to tell them how much income had been earned for the period after death to the date of probate being finalised. It took them 20 months to respond and let me know where to pay the tax that was due.

I'd really like to see everything simplified, at the moment there are so many different complicated rules around tax. Simplify it, make it more straightforward, fewer 'cliff edge' scenarios.

services might be struggling, but general waste are more outrageous then ever.

in the last 3 weeks I’ve spent time with several people across multiple nhs trusts and they all do things in a different way, procure differently, pay different rates, priorities differently, prioritise projects differently - even do the exact same project to achieve the same outcome separately.

the nhs non-frontline structure is an absolute joke. BILLIONS could be diverted to the front line.

I know….comment should win a prize for no one knowing what she means

Most of it goes on the national debt which rose under the Conservatives and then exploded with COVID.

We are in another post-WW2 situation.

And increasing with Labour. The first budget did tax hikes and borrowing to £70bn. And the second some more.

Of course you can. Voluntary contributions are easy.

And are you with the other %, you’d like to increase taxes?

Great post! 👍

There is also the illusion that there is a state school place available for every child with disabilities when there isn't. Policy has been to fund independent school places rather than provide state special school provision. That is hardly the parents fault.

Definitely we need spending cuts. This country is a mess. Welfare bill too high. Too many shirkers relying on us strivers.

I agree that very rich people should be paying more in the pot but I also think that the average person should be doing more too to lessen their burden on the state.

Unless benefits are for life long and genuine disabilities, we shouldn’t have a system where you can be on them for life. I appreciate someone will have done the calcs and it’s cheaper to have unemployable people on benefits than have them in prison but it sets the stage for where we are now - god knows how many millions of people working 16 hours and claiming benefits who should be working full time. There would be more jobs and opportunities if fewer people were being essentially paid by working people’s taxes to stay at home.

The country also cannot sustain the population it has, so I think caps on cb and immigration are a good thing - we need to come up with better ideas for managing a bulge in a population than simply needing more and more people.

How do you intend on cutting welfare whilst protecting people who need it? LHA rates are low enough already - LHA only covers 1.9% of rentals

Housing definitely is a huge factor. Council housing was originally built for average working families on a not for profit rental agreement. Rents were paid, repairs were done with the rental income. Working people had a home for life on a rent affordable on a single regular income.

Rents and mortgages are now higher per month than a single worker on in a full time min wage job. This gives more money to banks and landlords but far less into day to day industries meaning less jobs and less spending overall.

Do you actually know some of the jobs that civil servants do? They aren't politicians!

Totally agree with you on all of this

On the CB cap go back to two dc. That was always a sop to Labour backbenchers by Starmer. He got ousted anyway. The majority of the public didn’t agree in polling.

Both of those would also be great public health initiatives. I don't see why benefits shouldn't be linked to behaviour that is positive for society. Lets face it not being a drunk and being fit and healthy would all be helpful to get people off benefits into work and reduce the NHS costs. All with the added benefit of giving the claimant a longer healthy life expectancy. It would be win win.

This could have been an interesting debate. It’s annoying you had no sensible credible thoughts…

Well across Central and Local Government I would suggest scrapping most:

Interpreters (English, Welsh, Scots Gaelic are our official languages)

Diversity and Inclusion Specialists

Social Media Managers

Administrators and HR (from experience these roles simply invent productivity inhibiting process and rules)

They need to scrap the triple lock but it won’t happen.