The Budget™ 2009

[Pilky01]

I'm positive about that, i've heard more negative about Labour from the British Broadcasting Conservative... Corp than anyone. Even when David Cameron started his "i'm a green choice" crap, it took a conserted effort for me to find on tinterweb the rest of the info from PMQT where Gordon Brown stood up afterwards and said "and also David Cameron cycling to work with a chauffeur driven car 10ft behind him out of view"... But we'll have to agree to disagree, we'll each see smears from each others party... human nature.

No there's nothing that can be done if thats what he's saying stop making out that he is so highly educated in the sector i've heard at least 2 news reports and read an article where he flaunts that he is so well educated in Economics... if you aren't going to put an idea on the table and cover it up that "you haven't got a clue what to do", then don't resort to the comments about a party that is at "least" making an effort to do or try something.

Worse than any other top economy? We have lower national debt than the US, we have lower national debt than France, Germany, Italy... so what top economies are you referring to? Russia if you class it as a top economy is only 60bn behind us in terms of national debt...

i will agree borrowing yet more is not a wise thing to do, and imo printing more money isn't either, Labour need to as someone said make spending cuts but in a way thats going to be productive for the Economy... for example i'd slash the cost of keeping prisoners (£50,000 per year i read) i'd make sure it was bread, water and fruit for meals, no TV, no electricity to cells... that'd shave a few tens of thousand off per con.

Our economy is likely to shrink more than any other top economy according to the IMF, I assume the other top economies they were talking about was the rest of the G20. We have a national debt of about £33,000 per head which if I remember correctly is higher than nearly all of the developed world.

Labour couldn't do that to prisoners because of the wonderful HRA that they are responsible for.

 

[scorza]

It can't be overlooked though that when it comes to fiscal policy and the economy, the Tories arguably have a better track record.

It's commonly held paradigm but I don't think it stands up to scrutiny. Everyone talks about the 1970s, inflation, militant unions and going to the IMF and blames the Labour government of the time. However what they don't remember is that many of the causes of these can be laid at the feet of the preceding conservative government, who governed during a period known as the Barber Boom (named after the chancellor of the time) who delivered a budget designed to stoke inflation, which coupled with the 1970s oil price scare brought Britain to its knees.

Granted, the Harold Wilson/James Callaghan era wasn't Labour's finest economic moment, but it's a tad naive to think that the Conservatives are any better. Besides, who was in power during the South Sea Bubble? Tories wasn't it?

 

[Posty]

Our economy is likely to shrink more than any other top economy according to the IMF, I assume the other top economies they were talking about was the rest of the G20. We have a national debt of about £33,000 per head which if I remember correctly is higher than nearly all of the developed world.

Labour couldn't do that to prisoners because of the wonderful HRA that they are responsible for.

IMF says -4.1% for UK, -6.2% for Japan, -5.6% for Germany

 

[Barks]

Don't worry about the cost of the pathetic scrapping scheme, we are all being screwed out of the cost of it + more when fuel duty goes up AGAIN in September.

So in September, in the 14 months since Brown categorically stated there would be 'no fuel duty increases' fuel duty will have increased by 6p - an unprecedented rise over such a space of time.

Just like Labour promised they would not increase income tax, not only have they done that, they've brought their proposed 45% forward by an entire year.

 

[Barks]

You're joking right? BBC seems to be labour leaning if anything.

Really? They're not doing a good job of removing some of the extremely anti-Labour remarks here:

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=6348&edition=1&ttl=20090422184442

There are some terrific points there too. Another one I missed is the scrapping scheme is another temptation for people to get into debt, which is what facilitated the crisis we're in.

 

[muon]

Only through number fiddling, just like crime rates and employing people in the public sector.

Good thing we go by ILO unemployment rate.

Whats with people making stuff up. Oh right we're on ocuk.

http://www.ilo.org/global/lang--en/index.htm

I suppose the ILO are consipring with Labour to make them look good.

As for public sector employment, I don't see any increase over the past 4 years. And before you jump to but OMG look at the ~15,000 a quarter increase the last 3 quarters, that amounts to 45,000 out of 1.92 million currently unemployment. It barely registers.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=407

 

[The Halk]

The 50% tax band means little to the very small majority of people who will have to pay it on part of their earnings. It will bring in virtually nothing to the tax coffers.

The reason why Labour have implemented it is to grab the headlines. They want to get headlines saying they're going after "the rich". Why? Because everyone left of them is saying they're cutting government spending, hence jobs. And they want everyone right of them to have to look as if they're trying to defend the rich and therefor against the poor.

Yet again Labour's numbers don't add up. They have never added up. Everything this government does is aimed at the next general election and nothing longer term.

The fact is though that there is very little Labour can (note the tense) do about the debt we currently have. They cannot realistically raise taxes now, they cannot cut expenses now or cut back on public sector jobs. All they can do now is ensure that the multiple stimulus packages already announced but not implemented, or any further packages are done in a way that spends the least money for the biggest effect.

Large corporations shrink and grow as the economic climate changes. Small businesses go pop, and they never come back. It's small businesses that the government needs to look after. They need to stop looking at tax payers and trying to help them directly. The best ways to do this are not through tax cuts directly, but through ensuring the ripple effect of unpaid invoices doesn't sink small businesses which are sound.

 

[RaohNS]

Our economy is likely to shrink more than any other top economy according to the IMF, I assume the other top economies they were talking about was the rest of the G20. We have a national debt of about £33,000 per head which if I remember correctly is higher than nearly all of the developed world.

Labour couldn't do that to prisoners because of the wonderful HRA that they are responsible for.

i remember the IMF making another statement which they later had to apologise for just a few days ago...

HRA... we only hear the bad about it but i agree i'd tear up loads of parts of it

 

[RaohNS]

You're joking right? BBC seems to be labour leaning if anything.

You are watching the BBC as in channel 601 and sometimes 101 on Virgin aren't you?

 

[muon]

Our economy is likely to shrink more than any other top economy according to the IMF, I assume the other top economies they were talking about was the rest of the G20. We have a national debt of about £33,000 per head which if I remember correctly is higher than nearly all of the developed world.

Labour couldn't do that to prisoners because of the wonderful HRA that they are responsible for.

I suggest you read the most recent projections

http://www.oecd.org/document/59/0,3343,en_2649_34109_42234619_1_1_1_37443,00.html

UK will to better than Japan, the US and the EU.


Again our national debt currently being higher than the rest of the developed world (on both absolute and per capita basis) is complete crap.

Who the hell is this guy?

edit:

Even more recent IMF figures

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2009/RES042209A.htm

Better than both the EU and Japan. Although the US looks to avoid the figure from the OECD report above.

 

[mattyfez]

The car discount thing is just insane, I mean, all it will also de-value 2nd hand cars, so your 1-2 year old ex fleet with 18k on the clock will now be even more appealing compared to a new car, only insane people buy new cars. |What are they thinking?????

 

[Killerkebab]

I've noticed people always mention these 'loopholes' and that clever accountants get the rich people out of paying tax, et cetera et cetera. What are these loopholes?

Isn't it "earn more than x and pay y%"? What kind of loophole can you come up with here? Do clever accountants decide to calculate your salary in Base20 or something?

 

[muon]

I've noticed people always mention these 'loopholes' and that clever accountants get the rich people out of paying tax, et cetera et cetera. What are these loopholes?

Isn't it "earn more than x and pay y%"? What kind of loophole can you come up with here? Do clever accountants decide to calculate your salary in Base20 or something?

There aren't very many beyond just some inconsistencies in different types of income. Which can be many for wealthier people. Some inconsistencies also with retirement income which I know of. I'm sure some proper accountants can give more examples and in detail.

The major type of avoiding tax is I think hiding money offshore which is illegal. - Very few people obviously do this. Hence the huge recent debate on offshore accounting started by the US and Germany.

 

[Glaucus]

As for public sector employment, I don't see any increase over the past 4 years. And before you jump to but OMG look at the ~15,000 a quarter increase the last 3 quarters, that amounts to 45,000 out of 1.92 million currently unemployment. It barely registers.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=407

How about the last 12 years?

Seems it hasn't gone up much. But 1 in 5 workers is in public sector that's horrendous.

 

[Vonhelmet]

I've noticed people always mention these 'loopholes' and that clever accountants get the rich people out of paying tax, et cetera et cetera. What are these loopholes?

Isn't it "earn more than x and pay y%"? What kind of loophole can you come up with here? Do clever accountants decide to calculate your salary in Base20 or something?

Come to my office and pay my boss a few thousand quid and he'll tell you all about it

 

[muon]

How about the last 12 years?

I can't be bothered to find them. But even if there was, since public sector crowds out the private sector, it doesn't mean they would be all be unemployed. Secondly, some would argue that private sector is more than 1 for 1 crowded out and therefore without the public sector, unemployment would actually be lower.

You really do not have the tools to analyse this (nor do I without adequate time and analysis). Its not a simply a task of looking at figures.

 

[Luseac]

While we're on the subjects you mention:

Cutting spending: so therefore you will be cutting taxes correct? As surely if not as much spending is needed, why the need for high(ish) tax?

Thanks to labour there isn't room to cut taxes. However, as a sensible means to pay off debt rather than raise taxes, a cut in the over sized paper-pushing sector of the public sector would be fantastic.

Unemployment: Conservatives can hardly talk about unemployment given the "iron" ladies approach throughout the 80's and Majors ignorance in the 90's. Wasn't it also Labour that in the last 11years had the lowest percentage of people unemployed since the 50's?

And labour can't talk about unemployment when they've spent the last 10 years creating £20,000 p/a jobs in the public sector which there just isn't any need for in the slightest. I remember Dolph posted a link on these very forums not to long ago for a £20,000 p/a position in the public sector for a Diversity managers PA, or something equally ridiculous

Sensible tax: flat rate allowing rich to get richer

VAT Back: stores may use this as a gimmick to just raise prices... i'm still seeking the magic .99 everywhere despite the VAT cut.

I'm not branding all Conservatives as the same, i for one support some policies they have, however i feel for me and my family i feel i'd be better under Labour

Sensible tax = not robin hood jealously system of tax. Where those who have worked hard and put in the effort have to take the brunt of the governments credit card problem.

With regards to the VAT issue, what a complete waste of £12billion. I work weekends in a medium sized business, this has caused havoc for us. Ranging from the admin side of things down to the expense of having to get twice as much change in the tills as before, due to having to give 22p back to someone who buys a £10 item. - Everyone in the real world that I have had dealings with thinks it's a complete farce.

 

[The Halk]

I've noticed people always mention these 'loopholes' and that clever accountants get the rich people out of paying tax, et cetera et cetera. What are these loopholes?

Isn't it "earn more than x and pay y%"? What kind of loophole can you come up with here? Do clever accountants decide to calculate your salary in Base20 or something?

Putting household expenses down as business expenses. "Employing" your partner to effectively double your tax allowance. Reducing your salary by pension contributions. Most of these, and there's a few more are useful really only for sole traders, or small companies or directors of medium sized companies.

 

[muon]

Putting household expenses down as business expenses. "Employing" your partner to effectively double your tax allowance. Reducing your salary by pension contributions. Most of these, and there's a few more are useful really only for sole traders, or small companies or directors of medium sized companies.

Isn't that tax fraud rather than genuine tax avoidance?

 

[elroberto]

Maybe he is one.

I doubt it. He can spell and form sentences.