“Tax the wealthy” (RR budget) what does this even mean?

[gggddjkki]

I don’t remember anxiously waiting for budgets like we have the last few years earlier on in my adulthood. But when you read statements like this (as I have seen in the headlines today) what do you interpret it to mean? What does taxing the wealthy look like to you? Taxing higher earners more? From what point? Higher taxes on industry?

Not everyone wages were paid. They excluded self employed people

In short, they are doing the exact opposite of what they should be doing.

Cut tax, stimulate the market and get more revenue instead of hitting everybody in the pockets and crashing the housing and the labour markets.

It's utter madness.

Labour’s spin worked for you then.

Tbf she did promise at the last budget that that was the last time she'd go for people. She seems to have changed her mind and bearing in mind it was only a year ago I'm not sure we can rely on many of her "promises".

Silly post

Agree.

The "black hole" was just spin. And all information was available to RR before the election.

And if there were such a black hole she's made it significantly worse by counter productive policies and by turning on the spending taps as soon as they got in by giving very well paid public sector workers like train drivers a huge payrise.

Dislike away.

Look at the data - let that guide you.

Keir Starmer favourability, October 2025
Opinion towards Keir Starmer is largely unchanged since last month’s favourability ratings, with just 21% of Britons holding a favourable opinion of the prime minister and 72% seeing him unfavourably.
This leaves Starmer with a net a favourability rating of -51, which is the lowest recorded by YouGov so far.
**
Labour polling
Reform UK’s runaway lead in opinion polls is being translated into real votes while support for Labour is overestimated, an analysis of local elections has shown.
In the 108 local council by-elections held since May, Reform has secured 30 per cent of the votes cast, with Labour and the Conservatives getting 17 per cent each.
It means that recent opinion polls putting Reform on 30 per cent or higher are a true reflection of the real-world support for Nigel Farage’s party, while polls that give Labour an average of around 21 per cent are overestimating support for the governing party.

A major seat-by-seat poll of Westminster voting intention previously estimated that without tactical voting, Reform would win a supermajority in Parliament with 445 seats if a general election were held now, with Labour on 73 seats and the Tories almost wiped out with seven seats.

100%

It’s all bullshit - most of what spews from Starmer, Reeves and co is total effluent.

Yes, but again — they have only been in power a short while. To turn this country around, it’s going to take much longer. That is what I’m saying. I don’t dislike you personally, I dislike how short-sighted people are being. Are you able to comment on this?

In response to your comment, I could also share many, many stats about atrocities that were caused by the Tories e.g. Brexshit, which in my opinion has truly obliterated our economy.

I’d also like to highlight that I am not a die hard Labour supporter. I am also critical and skeptical of some of what they’ve done. For example, I hate how reactive they have been with some of their decision-making and the U-turns they have made. However, I am also acutely aware that to improve this country, it’s going to take time.

I am also conscious that people are turning to Reform as an option out of backlash to Labour without truly understanding what Reform is like as a party and what that means for this country. It’s like the Brexit vote — many people who voted in favour of this did so out of potential xenophobia or not really knowing what the impact would mean. That’s not a reason to vote Reform. They are a new, unestablished party. They don’t have their ducks in a row. If I wasn’t to vote Labour (and I didn’t last time) next GE, I certainly wouldn’t be voting for such an amateur party. That would be even more of an absolute shit show in my opinion.

I’m not voting for them so no, but the OBR confirmed it was true - not to the tune of £22b - but there was significant undeclared spending by the Tories - alongside some political grandstanding from Labour https://fullfact.org/economy/22-billion-black-hole/

See previous answer

I suspect wealthy to RR is anyone earning a full-time minimum wage and above.

Maybe pensioners as well, with them traditionally more likely to vote Tory RR won't care about them.

I doubt wealthy means millionaires.

Not really - if you vote for a fundamentally racist party you are surely in favour of their policies - you are either a racist or a racist sympathiser.

I think wealth means assets not related to income!

Her definitions are elastic, as is her relationship with the truth and reality.

’Working people’
’These tax increases are a one-off’
’I was upset because of a personal issue’
’I was a senior economist at the BOE’
’Every single penny” of the £1.5billion generated by slapping VAT on private school fees would go towards state education’

Reeves is pathological.

A yes then. There’s not many left supporting those lies, it’s a decreasing group every week.

Why does

I was upset because of a personal issue’

make her pathological?

Supporting the IFS view that there was undeclared spending?

Because she inferred it was a domestic issue - it wasn’t - it was political.

Because anyone who doesn’t agree with the viewpoint that rich people are being hard done by is pathological?

Congrats.

You just labelled millions of people.

Re-read my post.

Yeah, I don’t agree that anyone in support of Reform is a racist — that’s a MASSIVE generalisation.

Some? Sure. The majority? Maybe. All of them? No.

@Enterthewolves doesnt agree with you.