The Budget 2024 thread

Caporegime
Joined
22 Nov 2005
Posts
45,531
Labour hinting at austerity already - you couldnt make it up..
erm they are inheriting a massively bankrupt and asset stripped company.

what do you expect anyone to do?

about 10% of government spending disappears to service national debts interest... just imagine what could be done with that money

also sunaks a moron, especially when he was in control of the money

Last year, when the official rate was still 0.1%, the NIESR urged the government to insure the cost of servicing this debt against the risk of rising interest rates by converting it into government bonds with longer maturity.

Chadha said the institute had now calculated that Sunak’s failure to heed its advice – despite having regularly warned about the risks of higher inflation and interest rates on the costs of servicing the government’s debt – had cost taxpayers £11bn.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
31 Jul 2008
Posts
7,875
Location
N/A
erm they are inheriting a massively bankrupt and asset stripped company.

what do you expect anyone to do?

about 10% of government spending disappears to service national debts interest... just imagine what could be done with that money

also sunaks a moron


Spend, spend, spend - cut benefits - increase taxes.

Not cut public services.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Nov 2014
Posts
7,639
Location
The Cronx
Recover Covid fraud
Remove tax loopholes (the ones you wish you could use but never will) and chase down "the gap"
Soveriegn Wealth Fund
Join the Single Market

Et voila...100bn one off and at least 50bn a year thereon.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
5 Apr 2009
Posts
25,119
So the Conservatives (the supposed party of fiscal responsibility and competence) have pretty much run the budget into the ground to dish out cheap quick 'wins' to various people and predictably enough the die hard supporters are gleefully pointing out that if Labour win the next election, they're going to be up **** creek with half a paddle having to decide whether to cut spending or increase taxes to balance the books again, as if it'll all be their fault.
 
Caporegime
Joined
13 Jan 2010
Posts
32,738
Location
Llaneirwg
Very little detail yet that I've seen. Cynically, I expect part of the "it's going to take two years to figure it out" is actually a bit of realpolitik in action. If they suddenly said, "We're going to base it on household income from 6th April", then all of those couples on £49k each would instantly lose the benefit. This way, the Tories might gain a small bit of extra support from the individuals who will no longer lose their child benefit for earning £60k, and they don't lose support from the households whose joint income would see them go above the threshold.



Good spot. I think payroll might have screwed up. All I did to get that figure was check a couple of payslips from the end of last year with January and February. My net pay increased by ~£112.50, so I doubled it to include my wife, who's on a similar salary.

Crunching the numbers, it looks like payroll reduced my NI by the correct amount, but they have also reduced my tax by that amount again. So unless there's something else at play that accounts for the reduction in tax as well as NI, I'm now underpaying tax…

So it's not £600 per month better off as a household, more like ~£330 (this is with the two NI reductions and the full child benefit allowance).

Still, as others have said in this thread and the other one, it just about accounts for the increase in CoL.

Yeah for us one of the 2pc goes to CoL and the other is extra. But that's because we are insulated from elec/gas still and mortgage is still 1.9.

But yeah for most people it's probably just covering Inflation
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Nov 2005
Posts
45,531
The poorest paid couldn’t afford to live without in work benefits
or companies would have to be real wages. it's ridiculous that they try not to pay taxes, negotiate special rates etc.
but then also expect the tax payer to subsidise their labour costs.

probably mostly owned by a US pension fund to top it off
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
16 Aug 2022
Posts
209
Location
Sunny Hampshire
We will be a fair bit better off. According to the Guardian calculator, £3,330 a year better off. Through NI and Child Benefit High Income charge threshold increase.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Posts
6,585
He's been on Sky news this morning:
''Jeremy Hunt is speaking to Kay Burley this morning, and is asked about his party's newly stated goal of scrapping national insurance.

The chancellor says this not "going to happen any time soon".

One idea he floats is that "you can merge income tax and national insurance".

He claims that national insurance equates to a secondary tax on work, sitting on top of income tax.

According to Labour, scrapping national insurance would cost £46bn a year - and £230bn across a five-year parliament.

According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, income tax brought in £251bn in 2022-23, and national insurance brought in £177bn.

Merging the two could see income tax come up to bring in the extra money national insurance currently raises.

This could have a knock impact in a number of areas - including for pensioners, who do not pay national insurance but do pay income tax.''

I guess it depends, philosophically if not necessarily in reality, on where you stand on whether you should still pay into the 'support of the elderly' pot when you are the elderly but don't need the support.

There are some very easy ways to stop it happening though if you choose to do so.

FWIW I haven't seen, nor looked TBF, into the negatives of rolling up NI and income tax into one, aside from where the burden lies? But even that should be relatively easy to overcome with a mandated pay adjustment factor to ensure the net pay is still the same.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Posts
18,862
Location
Aberdeen
How can you cut benefits? They’re **** poor already compared to a lot of Europe

If the state benefits are that poor, why are people coming here? Anyway the easy way to cut benefits is to time-limit them. For example they could limit unemployment benefit to 12 months. Another way would be to severely limit benefits paid to non-citizens (e.g. illegal immigrants). Another way would be to put the responsibility on relatives. And so on.

More positively they could cut benefits by needing to pay out fewer benefits. For example, if parents could use the personal allowances of their children then there would be less need for child benefit. If you allow children to use the remainders of their parents' personal allowances then you encourage elderly parents to move in with their children.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom