Anyone else irritated by the media coverage of budget?

[flymetothemoo]

Clearly, if it was at all possible then Labour would want to spend billions / on public services, fixing everything. The fact that they are having to be so frugal is NOT what they would choose, politically or materially!

Clearly it's the last government's fault we are in this position. And yet Labour are the bad guys, according to the press, and even the BBC and the Guardian are contributing to this stoking of negativity and fear.

What are they supposed to do in terms of the budget?

They must find the money from somewhere. They've promised to protect working people, employees NI, income tax etc. So they have to find it from somewhere. It might be employers, or inheritance tax loopholes, or benefit loopholes.

They are damned if they do and if they don't aren't they?

What I find concerning here is that a lot of pro-Labour posters demonstrate cult-like behavior, they are unable to engage with rational discussion about facts. This level of almost religious convictions always worries me, no matter if left or right wing

That’s it.

I am happy to look at the Tories failures but it’s Labour in power now...

The old adage is that "if you vote right wing then you have no heart, if you vote left wing then you have no brain ".

That said equally many of Reforms committed supporters exhibited similar tendencies especially when it was pointed out that their policies simply didn't add up financially or were impossible to implement.

Basically everyone wants better public services but wants someone else that is not them to pay

This is all nonsense.

Ahead of the election, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) had said that a new government would likely see a shortfall of £10-£20 billion by 2028/29. After the chancellor’s statement, IFS Director Paul Johnson said many of the challenges Labour outlined in July were “entirely predictable”, but that the in-year financial pressures did “genuinely appear to be greater than could be discerned from the outside”.

There’s a huge difference between an anticipated £10-20 billion deficit four years hence and an in year £22 billion deficit.

We still come back to the old Labour ideas of taxing the rich because they won’t notice. 40% tax is now paid by 6 million working people. Set to be nearly 8 million in a few years. The idea that they are all rich is clearly ludicrous. This group includes 1 in 8 nurses, 1 in 4 teachers plus doctors, and many other professionals we need. They really don’t consider themselves wealthy. 1.7 million people will be paying even more in tax. These people might not all be working so I guess their pensions and savings will be raided. The government has a huge pensions liability for its own employees. Perhaps they should look at that instead of increasing it all the time? We always want more than we can afford.

The basic issue will be that you cannot have growth and good employment prospects if you tax heavily to deliver perceived poor services. We don’t have a sovereign wealth fund and we need to service our debts so we need a radical rethink of what the state provides. Squeezing more and more out of employers, not having a good enough workforce and being anti business success (CGT) just stops growth. We all know we need growth.

40% tax is now paid by 6 million working people.

Who only pay 2% NI.

Spot on!

Yes, they have been deeply unimpressive so far. 🤷‍♀️. Shame really.

Guardian this morning suggesting Starmer will be getting money from people “with income from assets”. Well apart from the odd MP he must be talking about retired people I guess. Not that he actually of course says that…

Like many I just don’t understand why they don’t concentrate on broad based taxes such as Income Tax or VAT. They could easily have reversed their manifesto pledge and there wouldn’t have been a thing anyone could have done about it. Instead they are determined to shoot themselves in the foot.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/24/keir-starmer-hints-at-tax-rises-on-people-with-income-from-assets

They’ve just tied themselves up in knots with this mad definition of what a working person is and how it can’t involve getting interest on your savings. Anybody earning enough to put money into savings is apparently not a working person.

Not sure what that makes me. Maybe I just needed to get some free gear instead

It's stupid, majority of people will have worked to earn money and then invested it so their money is working harder for them through buy to lets or savings or shares. Cos why wouldn't you?

They have lost the plot

And possibly go private for health care because of scandalously long waiting lists

Pensioners who saved hard for old age are going to be targeted. Looking forward bang goes the private nursing home because labour have already had the money. So it'll be council care. But hang on councils say they're already on the edge of bankruptcy.

There’s no suggestion that primary residences will be subject to taxation so there’ll still be plenty to fund the care home. Most people needing residential care need to sell their house to pay for it and have done for decades.

Tenants don't have that to fall back on so it's savings only for them.

Then they’re unlikely to have taxable assets. It would take a high level of financial illiteracy to pay rent if you have significant assets.

Well that took my breath away.

They maybe inherited late on in life.

Does age prevent one from buying a house thereby circumventing paying rent?

Try getting a mortgage in late middle age

I rented for a year after I sold my house while I decided where I wanted to live and found the right property for me. interest on my savings went towards the cost of my rent and house prices were dropping back during that period anyway so ended up working out well for me. We’re not all financially illiterate

Some of us also remember that NICs were originally on earnings below the upper earnings limit before Mr Blair saw fit to start charging us extra percentage points on all of our income for precisely fuck all in return

WFA cuts has already targeted many not that well off pensioners. Of course they will go after pensions and savings. However, we need savings! They fund loans to others. If anything we don’t save enough. Now it’s war on savings. It’s utterly ludicrous and anti growth. Many have saved all their working lives for pensions and savings.

Lots of council tenants have savings and they don’t all buy property with inheritances. Dsis could have bought 4 with hers. Still renting. Others do all the maintenance, so win win apparently. I would actually make rich people move out and free up council homes.

Lots of people actually prefer some sort of rental property when they are older especially if it’s a social landlord. Secure tenancy, relatively cheap rent, no maintenance. So you could have been in social housing a long time and built up significant savings and investments and then have a secure retirement not having to worry about finding tradesmen to maintain a property. Not financially illiterate at all. Actually very sensible.

Yes, agree massively, the last administration were awful, all the mismanagement which now has to be put right.

It's like the adults have taken back control but they have screaming children in the back seat.

DS rents, he lives in a city centre flat but would never buy a flat, he doesn't want to be tied to a house on the edge of town and likes to be free to move when he wants. Not everyone wants to buy a house as you are more tied to it.