"National Security can't come at the cost of Social Security" - WTAF?

[Binnyforthewin]

Surely our PM releases that without National Security there is no Social Security? One is entirely dependent on the other.

Sunak is known for overseeing the country's lowest growth rate since the early 19th century and a steep cost-of-living increase, the highest in 41 years!

Not my concern what taxes the government may or may not raise.

It’s a given that taxes will change and fussing about +1.2% to in labour costs when annual inflation is 3-4x that is so obviously 🙄 scapegoating.

You’re obviously not aware of any businesses that have found it hard with cost increases, not everywhere is £30m turnover or whatever.

Why is it a given ‘taxes will change’. If you and others want tax hikes it’ll be interesting to see how well it goes for Labour.

There will be more taxes on SE and middle class, via property taxation.
There is nothing left to take. Businesses won't pay more, rich individuals leaving. Higher earners who can't leave reduce their hours to avoid tax trap or retire early. I'm mid fifties, it used to be common in my environment to retire around 58-60. They now all leave at 50-51. Pension IHT triggered this.

This article is brilliant, astonishing numbers
Billionaire trader Chris Rokos to leave UK for Greece

Their only choice is SE/London home owner. Which will facilitate collapse of house prices which are already falling in this region. One would think it's a great thing. The issue is that lower housing activity has wider impact on economy, house building, homeware purchases etc.

We did have covid TBF. And the economy was improving. We were on the right track we just didnt realise. And assumed Labour couldn't do any worse (ahem).

It's more trying to understand how a poster can deny a phenomenon exists that I and many others observe as being true in the real world.

Thanks for the link. The figures supporting disability benefits are higher than I'd expected, given the efforts from some parties to push support down.
It is clear why all the parties have an issue - everyone thinks the headline costs are too high, but not much support for cuts in reality and 63% say disability benefits are a priority for EXTRA spending.

No call for ageism though.

Not all businesses can’t put their prices up by the rate of inflation. Many companies have had to hold their prices steady for the last few years. So that 1.2% is purely margin loss.

Bloody hell how many morally bankrupt people can we get on this thread!!!

STOP with the bullshit narrative that the poor and disabled in this country are the problem. Or the immigrants being the problem.

This is one of the richest countries in the world. It is full of greedy, corrupt and selfish people. It’s disgusting. For all those whinging about high taxes - how about being fucking grateful that you have the privilege that you do. Paying higher taxes is part of that privilege.

We are actually now not even in tbe top 20 for GDP/capital unfortunately. Not really such a rich country any more.

Well, your personal attacks aside, I would suggest that stagnating revenues and inflation affecting operating costs is really why you made 1 person redundant the other day rather than your weak excuse of it being 100% NI and business rates.

Very easy to blame the government than to look internally as to why your revenues are stagnating.

Good luck, you will need it.

And the 300 million for the Rwanda policy where nothing happened? Come on!

Classic mumsnet - fall back on an ism. It's not agism. She retired early. She might in her 20 for all we know. If you are out of business you will get out of date with what is happening in the real world.

Well thats rather due to Labour cancelling it the second they got in with nothing to replace it with.

Ideology rather than the national interest strikes again....

Yes it did it moved people voluntarily to ROI and that’s the most cost effective way.

Well you won’t need housing benefit if we can’t defend ourselves? His assessment of homelessness? It increased under his watch in Manchester.

It had been in place for two years by the time Labour got in. It was a total waste and everyone knows that.

That’s not the case. I have helped many enterprises navigate cost changes and worse.

Why is it a given ‘taxes will change’.
It is a given that tax rates and even the kinds of taxes change. Note that change can mean hikes or cuts, new taxes or taxes abolished. The only constant in business is change on multiple fronts. That’s just the way the world works.

Yes of course.

Do I support higher spend on disability? Cancer, double incontinent non-verbal ASD, amputation - yes, absolutely, I'm struggling to imagine who wouldn't. This is what people mean when they say they support disability payments.

Do I support any PIP for acne vulgaris or constipation? not at all.
Success rates for PIP claims by condition

sounds like you should be chancellor then!

This is the period when illegal immigration on boats was soaring. I am genuinely surprised at the defence of this policy on here.....

You were in the wrong attacking the person for ages or retirement status, and you know that really. It's 2026.

The legislation needed to be in place for it to work. Which finally it was. But Labour then got in.

As @EasternStandard said, the illegal immigrants had changed their focus to Ireland so the deterrent effect had started to work. In any event many EU countries are looking to a similar plan as Rwanda. I expect that we will end up with something similar. Shame Labout had to make decisins based on ideology rather than practicality as usual.

You've made your point. Move on.