Autumn Budget 2022

Its just the truth Rob. A few months ago these were evil people now they are throwing money around they are the best.
No, I was angry as all indicators at that time were pointing towards them cutting benefits in real terms, which would have been terrible at this time. Those indicators have proved to be incorrect and they’ve done the right thing.

What was it you wanted for workers in your position that would have been financially viable?
 
Last edited:
No, I was angry as all indicators at that time were pointing towards them cutting benefits in real terms, which would have been terrible at this time. Those indicators have proved to be incorrect and they’ve done the right thing.

Credit to you for recognizing it and giving credit where credit is due. You shouldn't be attacked for changing your mind, everyone has the right to and I'm tired of people trying to 'gotcha' another for doing so.

The only thing that would have made me happy is extending the £2500 energy cap to at least next Oct
 
No, I was angry as all indicators at that time were pointing towards them cutting benefits in real terms, which would have been terrible at this time. Those indicators have proved to be incorrect and they’ve done the right thing.

What was it you wanted for workers in your position that would have been financially viable?
I'd have liked to have seen the triple lock gone and benefits not rising with inflation, these extra bungs just rub salt in the wound. I dont think it is fair all the burden falls on working people.
 
Last edited:
It's ridiculous - if we both earned £99,999 we'd qualify for 30 free hours for childcare, and tax free choldcare etc... (though our youngest will be starting school so not really relevant anymore). But if 1 of you earns over 100k even if the other earns 0, you don't qualify. So apparently earning 180k+ as a household enables you to get all the benefits, but earning 101k doesn't if it's down to 1 individual. It's bonkers. It should be based on household income.

It makes my blood boil it really does. Why shouldn't you be able to use of your partner's tax allowance to allow them to bring up the children?? I actually emailed my MP on the matter, I had a (albeit copy and pasted) reply from the gov saying it's been considered many times but it'd be inefficient to implement. I'm fairly sure a high level legal challenge could be a way forward as it does seem grossly unfair
 
I'd have liked to have seen the triple lock gone and benefits not rising with inflation, these extra bungs just rub salt in the wound. I dont think it is fair all the burden falls on working people.
So basically you would have liked the poorest to suffer as it would have made you happy.

Whar a lovely world we live in.
 
So basically you would have liked the poorest to suffer as it would have made you happy.

Whar a lovely world we live in.
Not happy, but it was needed. Its a missed opportunity to ditch things like the triple lock while it made perfect sense to do so, it will be much harder to do it now in the future.
 
No, I was angry as all indicators at that time were pointing towards them cutting benefits in real terms, which would have been terrible at this time. Those indicators have proved to be incorrect and they’ve done the right thing.

What was it you wanted for workers in your position that would have been financially viable?
You've not done badly out of it though Rob, what, an increase of about £100 a month, plus £900 energy support, plus the £150 disabled payment?
Much as I don't begrudge you it, I can certainly see why others feel a bit aggreived as their tax bills go up!
 
But that’s an issue for your employer. Stop blaming the government and those on benefits for your work not giving you adequate pay rises

What makes you think all employers can afford to give inflation level payrises. The economy is in the **** so companies will look to scale back in order to survive. Was it royal mail recently that said with the X hundred million they've lost it they had to give everyone a payrise it would undoubtedly lead to mass redundancies.

It's a very narrow view of the world if you just think all employers can just dish out 10% payrises.

There's also the issue that it that did miraculously happen it would just lead to inflation increasing to 20% and you'd be back in the same position.
 
What makes you think all employers can afford to give inflation level payrises. The economy is in the **** so companies will look to scale back in order to survive. Was it royal mail recently that said with the X hundred million they've lost it they had to give everyone a payrise it would undoubtedly lead to mass redundancies.

It's a very narrow view of the world if you just think all employers can just dish out 10% payrises.

There's also the issue that it that did miraculously happen it would just lead to inflation increasing to 20% and you'd be back in the same position.
This is what I thought, I’m no economist but everything carries on increasing I.e cost and debt but relatively is still the same.

At least the taxation is opposite of what Truss had proposed
 
Last edited:
You've not done badly out of it though Rob, what, an increase of about £100 a month, plus £900 energy support, plus the £150 disabled payment?
Much as I don't begrudge you it, I can certainly see why others feel a bit aggreived as their tax bills go up!
Why would I get the £900 energy support, I’m not the billpayer
 
You've not done badly out of it though Rob, what, an increase of about £100 a month, plus £900 energy support, plus the £150 disabled payment?
Much as I don't begrudge you it, I can certainly see why others feel a bit aggreived as their tax bills go up!
Well I’ll tell you because I have nothing to hide. 10.1% on my current amount is about an extra £127 a month.

I actually thought the £900 was a cost of living payment, not energy support.
 
Last edited:
Well I’ll tell you because I have nothing to hide. 10.1% on my current amount is about an extra £127 a month.

I actually thought the £900 was a cost of living payment, not energy support.
Yes I think it might be CoL, not energy, got that wrong. You get that too then maybe.
 
Back
Top Bottom