Labour £2000 extra working class families

[Hopebridge]

I have just been watching the news and saw this as a headline. Does anyone know more about what this will be made up of if they come into power? Starmer didn't seem to answer the question. I did google the policies but couldn't see this. Thank you!

Labour will play this down but their plans to reverse the fortunes of the company need to be paid somehow . Anyone working will be paying higher tax either directly or indirectly.
Putting VAT on private healthcare is a drop in the ocean of what they need to raise .

People scream and shout about this is broken that is broken but in reality you can have whatever you want , you just have to pay for it .

Country not company

This article discusses it, but essentially says it’s been calculated by political party appointees who aren’t held to the same standards on impartiality as civil servants and contains a lot of assumptions. It will become clearer when the labour manifesto is out, but I think it’s a fair guess the labour will use the more generous assumptions and the Tory analysis will use the most critical.

Its also adding up the cumulative anticipated cost of policies over the parliament into one figure, but the way Sunak is discussing it feels like it’s implying it’s a yearly cost

Conservative claim that Labour would cost families £2,094 fact-checked https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy9x4n9gjz4o

You hit the nail on the head. Starmer didn't answer the question. Which means yes taxes will increase. Even for working class families. He also blatenly lies clearly. As apparently a man worth over 7 million pounds wouldn't pay for private treatment if his family really needed it, I find that hard to believe!

Historically labour do increase taxes and screw over those working hard. If you watched the debate he was very evasive in answering this. At least for all his negarives sunak can say he has reduced NI. I've noticed a small change in take home pay due to this. I mean its not loads. But at least it's not reduced my take home.

If you actually look back at what labour historically do, if you care about the overall financial health of the country, and therefore your own financial wellbeing you'll be cautious of voting labour and ask a lot of questions of their plans. If they had clear plans and were transparent I might get behind them. I remember in 1997 being scared of the change. I'm scared now. We are middle high earners, but not hugely wealthy. We shop in aldi, budget etc. Under labour we're the ones that will be screwed. The tories aren't exactly a good choice either, i'm no fan. But when the alternative is as hypocritical and evasive as starmer, it doesn't help!

I was really interested the other night when Aaron Bastani a real Labour left supporter/ political commentator even said Keir Starmer is a committed liar and wouldn't want him as PM. Very strange to hear a left winger not supporting the Labour candidate.

Basically the Tory politicians made some assumptions that included stuff that isn't in Labour policies and was deliberately unfavourable and got civil servants to do the calcs based on those assumptions. Surprise, surprise they got an answer that suits them.

1. The Tories have just been on R4 saying that it is a totally £500 yearly, not £2000
2. The treasury Civil servants have written a letter to say that the numbers are misleading and inaccurate.
3. Both parties pledged not to raise VAT or income-tax or one other tax, so it wouldn't becoming from 'families pockets'

Annoys me that the can make soundbites like that which are so misleading. They don't care about the accuracy, but got all the headlines any way. Dishonest.

This article is really helpful for understanding the limitations with these types of costings.

www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/opposition-policies-OBR

If you look at the news today:

The chief Treasury civil servant wrote to Labour two days ago saying that the £38 billion/£2,000 tax attack “should not be presented as having been produced by the civil service”.

Basically it is just another Tory scaremongering tactics and not based on facts/an independent analysis.

Even the Civil Service does not want to be associated with them and their lies...

The civil service have come out and said that this claim has nothing to do with them so I think it can very much be taken with a pinch of salt!

It's a lie

The letter is in the tweet

x.com/hzeffman/status/1798252445321343456

EXCLUSIVE

The chief Treasury civil servant wrote to Labour two days ago saying that the £38 billion/£2,000 tax attack “should not be presented as having been produced by the civil service”

He said he had reminded ministers of this

So why didn't Starmer immediately shut that down?

It's because he knows they are going to raise taxes on hardworking people who have no more to give.

This and Tories never said anything about their own policies no idea what they plan to do (except national service) because Sunack was so rude shouting over Stammer too busy saying what Labour were supposedly going to do he never said what Tories would do. I thought Labour were trying more to be more grown up/debate but Sunsck may have well just been shouting "you smell nanananana" it was so immature all that shouting over Labour (bullying behaviour). But agree with this comment above:
• The Tories have just been on R4 saying that it is a totally £500 yearly, not £2000
• The treasury Civil servants have written a letter to say that the numbers are misleading and inaccurate.
• Both parties pledged not to raise VAT or income-tax or one other tax, so it wouldn't becoming from 'families pockets'

Annoys me that the can make soundbites like that which are so misleading. They don't care about the accuracy, but got all the headlines any way. Dishonest.

This is all the Tories have now. Lies to scare the electorate.

The lie about gas boilers is worring people too. And the misrepresentation of tax on State Pensions.

Not really because Starmer is a centrist and labour left have never been good at supporting labour centre.

It’s all very scary.
Like last time, it’s a choice between bad or worse.

Starmer saying he wouldn’t use private healthcare if a loved one was on a long waiting list was scary. You do what you have to. I recently called my GP with a cancer symptom. “No appointments”. I’ve just had the operation privately (not cancer thankfully, but needed doing) - thank God we had work insurance.

An extra cost of £500 a year to get a functioning NHS, including dentists, is a steal I think. I've paid £700 this year for dental costs alone as we can't get an NHS dentist. Dd has missed so much uni she's having to resit a year as GPs haven't diagnosed a lifelong condition despite repeated appointments where she gets 2 mins to describe complicated symptoms if she even gets an appointment. DH lost 4 days at work at a cost of about £800 as couldn't get a GP appointment and needed antibiotics.

£500 or even 2k is a small cost really.

This is what a sebior civil servant had to say https://x.com/hzeffman/status/1798252445321343456?s=46&t=Uw4lJNwxFZFnX0Xs3doHYg

Because they were asked to wait to talk about taxes until that question came up, unlike Sunak Starmer didn’t talk over others.

when it got to that he did discuss his proposals to raise more money through specific taxes.

I don’t trust either as far as I can throw them but the £2000 from Sunak was a blatant lie.

Last night’s debate just left me so depressed, if someone had designed it to undermine trust in politics and spread misinformation they could hardly have done better. The format combined with Starmer’s incompetence in dealing with it meant that Sunak was able to imply families would be paying £2000 a year - totally untrue - repeatedly and almost unchallenged.
In fact nothing either of them said was properly challenged, it was just about shouting soundbites over each other, and Sunak in particular was allowed to continually interrupt and wouldn’t shut up. Just appalling, the worst kind of dumbed down, post-truth politics.

Last night's debate just proved that Sunak is happy to lie, lie and lie again. Read that link. The civil service weren't happy with the £2000 claim and had said it should not be used but Sunak claimed over and over again that these were Treasury numbers to give them validation.

He did. He said it wasn't true and that a report had come out yesterday to say so.

@HighlandCowbag

"An extra cost of £500 a year to get a functioning NHS, including dentists, is a steal I think."

£500 would be a steal if it did indeed genuinely deliver a functioning NHS including dentists. Except it won't

Gordon Brown has exactly the same policy back in 2002 of raising NI to bring the NHS into the 22st century:

amp.theguardian.com/politics/2002/apr/18/uk.nhs

The NHS needs structural reform not just more and more cash.

Some helpful information. Thank you. I personally felt Sunak came across well and just wanted answers. Starmer seemed very evasive. I like to research before voting but Labour don't fill me with a lot of confidence at present. I appreciate the responses.

Not really. Many on the left dislike Starmer, especially given his hatchet job on the socialists in the party. Given that it’s a democratic socialist party, it’s galling that members have been expelled for being socialists. I’m a lifelong Labour supporter. I’ll vote for Starmer but I’ll do it through gritted teeth. I don’t like him, and I don’t trust him. I just hope that he’ll be better than this shower.