Spring Budget 2023

ci_newman · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:38

Tom_ed1987 said:
Did I miss the bit where the proposed free hours extension to 1/2yr olds is only for people on UC? I thought it was for all.

Budget 2023: Chancellor to promise 30 hours of childcare a week for one and two-year-olds

Jeremy Hunt is expected to make the announcement of a £4bn expansion of childcare for one and two-year-olds, funding a plan that would provide 30 hours a week to parents, Sky News understands.

news.sky.com

Mr Hunt is expected to announce a package of measures to help parents, including changing the rules so that those on Universal Credit are given more childcare and provided with the funding upfront.

Mr Jack · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:39

adam cool dude said:
Some do yes but the vast majority do not.

On average, across the country, a bit over 40% of people on UC are in work, in some places it's as high as two thirds.

Hodders · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:41

I'm surprised this government hasn't come up with a policy of simply taxing all foreigners that live abroad.

Richie · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:41

200sols said:
Bonus though, those rich consultants back in work will be treating those poor smokers drowning in their own lungs.

I'm with @Freefaller though... The current LTA is enough for a very comfortable retirement so why would I want to continue to work even if they did increase it....

It wouldn't encourage me back into work or continue to work if I can afford to retire... Why deal with unneeded hassle?

Rilot · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:42

ci_newman said:
Budget 2023: Chancellor to promise 30 hours of childcare a week for one and two-year-olds

Jeremy Hunt is expected to make the announcement of a £4bn expansion of childcare for one and two-year-olds, funding a plan that would provide 30 hours a week to parents, Sky News understands.

news.sky.com

This is good news. However, nursery and EYE providers can't cope with the demand at the moment, so unless they plan to massively invest in this area it's not going to solve anything.

robj20 · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:43

Mr Jack said:
On average, across the country, a bit over 40% of people on UC are in work, in some places it's as high as two thirds.

So not the vast majority, closer to half.
Doesn't surprise me, were only on it because my wife is my son's carer. She tried working but they soon let her go for needing so much time off, I doubt anywhere would take her on. Crazy how being a carer can be harder than a full time job.

ci_newman · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:44

Richie said:
I'm with @Freefaller though... The current LTA is enough for a very comfortable retirement so why would I want to continue to work even if they did increase it....

It wouldn't encourage me back into work or continue to work if I can afford to retire... Why deal with unneeded hassle?

Because 60 is the new 50

In my limited exposure to those able to take early retirement, they actually don't want to stop working but financially because of the LTA it is the more sensible choice.

Freefaller · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:49

Rilot said:
This is good news. However, nursery and EYE providers can't cope with the demand at the moment, so unless they plan to massively invest in this area it's not going to solve anything.

Yes that's going to be an issue, not that we are in this position anymore, but for many there are long waiting lists already for childminders, nurseries etc...

Freakbro · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:51

It's almost like years of under investment by the Torys can't be fixed easily

Martini1991 · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:54

ci_newman said:
Because 60 is the new 50 In my limited exposure to those able to take early retirement, they actually don't want to stop working but financially because of the LTA it is the more sensible choice.

Do they not need money month to month?

It's a clearly very targeted policy.
The vast majority aren't in a position they can retire at 60 let alone 50.

malachi · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:55

Freakbro said:
It's almost like years of under investment by the Torys can't be fixed easily

If at all

ci_newman · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:56

Martini1991 said:
Do they not need money month to month?

It's a clearly very targeted policy.
The vast majority aren't in a position they can retire at 60 let alone 50.

Of course they need money month to month, that's what pensions are for :confused:

Yes it's very evidently a targeted policy for traditionally Conservative voters - high earners and likely highly skilled to go along with it.

Mr Jack · 15 Mar 2023 at 10:59

ci_newman said:
Because 60 is the new 50 In my limited exposure to those able to take early retirement, they actually don't want to stop working but financially because of the LTA it is the more sensible choice.

It's literally impossible for the LTA to make early retirement the financially better choice. You'd have to have a rabid case of taxphobia to think that.

Rilot · 15 Mar 2023 at 11:03

Freefaller said:
Yes that's going to be an issue, not that we are in this position anymore, but for many there are long waiting lists already for childminders, nurseries etc...

Yeah, us too. Even 5 years ago when we were in the nursery system there were years-long waiting lists around here.
I remember paying over £1400 per month for nursery for our son. God knows what the prices must be like now.

skipper847 · 15 Mar 2023 at 11:04

The rich get richer the poor get poorer all you need to know.

Stumble Bum · 15 Mar 2023 at 11:05

adidan said:
Nobody needs to drink but they do.

also not a tax on the poor, what's your point?

adidan · 15 Mar 2023 at 11:13

Stumble Bum said:
also not a tax on the poor, what's your point?

You said it was a tax on the stupid and nobody needs to smoke.

We can all easily judge people who do things we don't.

Stumble Bum · 15 Mar 2023 at 11:16

adidan said:
You said it was a tax on the stupid and nobody needs to smoke.

We can all easily judge people who do things we don't.

You can smoke if you want, I don't care, just people who then try and claim as though it's some sort of tax aimed at the poor is nonsense. This isn't some unavoidable expense that is primarily effecting those who are less well off, it is purely a personal choice to smoke therefore it can never be claimed to be a tax on the poor.

Freefaller · 15 Mar 2023 at 11:18

Rilot said:
Yeah, us too. Even 5 years ago when we were in the nursery system there were years-long waiting lists around here.
I remember paying over £1400 per month for nursery for our son. God knows what the prices must be like now.

We never seem to pay that much but we didn't do it full time either. Can't rely on our parents as they don't live locally - we muddled through, however money was tight. Whilst I don't wish my life away the kids going to school does resolve a lot of issues... although it introduces new ones, like holidays becoming more expensive and food and utility bills increasing!

Freefaller · 15 Mar 2023 at 11:20

adidan said:
You said it was a tax on the stupid and nobody needs to smoke.

We can all easily judge people who do things we don't.

Smoking and alcohol isn't something that needs to be done and if you want to save money, those 2 things can easily be done. No one is willing to sacrifice things and would rather play the victim.