You are the source of misinformation and blatant lies. Your ignorance is spectacular, that comment is the exact reverse of the truth as Starmer has just pointed out at length several times. The OBR did not publish a productivity review at the close of the Tory period in office when it should have been done.Just for the record, to stop the thread being swamped with misinformation and blatant lies, the OBR reviews the economy’s supply side each year and makes changes to its assumptions as it sees appropriate.
Annual supply stocktake. The clue’s in the name.
Ah, so you're accusing me of being racistDon't you read your own posts?
In the broader sense of the economy though how does this benefit anyone? At most people's level it shouldn't even be called wealth because it isn't wealth.Within reason, passing some of you wealth onto your children is the most human thing you can do as a parent, wanting them to be secure. The question is how much is reasonable.
Some look at the likes of Bill Gates and laud him as being altruistic in "only" leaving his kids $20m each and gifting the rest away. Yet $20m buys a life that most of us couldn't ever imagine.
Whilst ever we allow the truly wealthy to pass on large chunks of their estates, complaining about the bloke wanting to ensure the best for their kids by passing on a few tens of thousand seems crazy. We seem to want to level everyone down, apart from those who have, what it seems, reached escape velocity in terms of their wealth to the extent that even paying tax/care fees etc they still remain incredibly wealthy and thats before the complex tax avoidance starts.
You clearly haven’t a clue what you’re talking about, and neither seemingly does Starmer. Ignorance is I’m afraid no excuse for the amount of nonsense and bluster you post. Starmer should know better, at least.You are the source of misinformation and blatant lies. Your ignorance is spectacular, that comment is the exact reverse of the truth as Starmer has just pointed out at length several times. The OBR did not publish a productivity review at the close of the Tory period in office when it should have been done.
It’s what they do when they know they’re wrong.Ah, so you're accusing me of being racist
20kIf anyone is lucky enough to have some savings tucked away you can gift family money. I think you can gift a certain amount annually without consequence, 3k i think, if you didn't do it the previous year you can double up to 6k.
You can give larger amounts as long as you live 7 years after.
The biggest thing though is if you have a large house that you dont really need sell the fucker, downsize and
Retire a bit earlier
Reduce your work hours
Go on those holidays you've always wanted.
Basically live a little, if you manage to avoid the dementia curse you can still leave someone a property.
The chances of one or both of a couple never needing care in their later life is not good. You're pretty much flipping a coin to see who gets your house and assets, your kids or the govt.
At the very least you're anti immigrant and anti Muslim.Ah, so you're accusing me of being racist
'They'?It’s what they do when they know they’re wrong.
I was a misogynist the other day apparently, and it seems you’re a racist today. Par for the course unfortunately.
There is no arguably about children getting a property. They most certainly have benefitted.In the broader sense of the economy though how does this benefit anyone? At most people's level it shouldn't even be called wealth because it isn't wealth.
If I buy a house for £100k and it is worth £400k when I die then was I wealthy? I'd say no because I haven't benefited, it is just numbers on a page. My children arguably benefit but they will likely lock that away in another asset so it's just dead money, it isn't wealth unless it gives you some improved standard of living.
Protecting wealth just has no productive value in the economy. Productivity is what creates value and productivity is currently on its arse because the country is drowning. You can have £500k in the bank but you still need healthcare, your children still need education. All of these things are falling apart at the seams because voters have preferred to have £500k in the bank instead of £400k.
We have shitty hospitals, education and everything else purely because over the last 15-20 years successive voters have consistently voted in a party which has promised that people can pay less tax. Voters however have just stuck their heads in the sand and refused to understand what this meant for public services and it's now clear as day. A poorly resourced exposed health system and a pandemic? What could go wrong? COVID didn't skip over the wealthy.
This is why those same parties have turned to blame immigration, it's because they're playing to prejudices and even racist elements within the population because they don't have anything else as their own track record is just bloody awful.
I wonder if they've had a change of tact after telling us for the past 18 months everything shit and we can't afford shit to do anything about it.
Acknowledging the Brexit deal ruined us and talking about building up international relationships, specifically with the EU in some areas (cue gammon explosions) to improve our lot.
20k what?
You failed to mention that you only referred to Brewster’s peroration not everything he has posted. Perhaps he needs to use a dictionary?Logic and comprehension are not your strong suits are they? Just to remind you of your absurd claim that I said
"the OBR is intent on sabotaging the current government, and that it is staffed exclusively with Tories"
I did not say all the OBR were Tories or they were all intent on sabotaging the government - capiche?
I'm not either and even if I was that does not make me a racistAt the very least you're anti immigrant and anti Muslim.
I think the majority of the Westminster bubble think we are.The country’s finances are a mess because of the Tories and Brexit. I don’t think anyone with half a brain cell could protest that. Billions squandered on their mates during Covid etc etc.
However, Labour just can’t use their inheritance as an excuse any longer because the tax rises they’ve announced are simply policy decisions to increase benefits and nothing to do with balancing the books. Reeves says she’s ‘asking those with the broadest shoulders to pay a bit more’….she makes it sound like people have a choice when she’s telling them they have to pay a lot more.
The attempt to mislead the electorate is unforgiveable and they must think we are all thick.
You can’t really have a go too much at such a loaded question.
They’d probably suggest something similar to what the “righties” would say.
The proper answer would have been something like:
“Sorry to hear your business may fail, but if you’ve exhausted all avenues of help, then try CAB if you can’t Google Universal Credit or find your local Job Centre.”
(although some regular posters might question the veracity of the story and mention Jackanory or say Cool story bro.)
"And we'll keep doing it until you get the result right!"What we need is a good ol' EU referendum
So Starmer and his government are ignorant, misinformed, don't know what they are talking about and are misleading everybody except you. Quoting a extract from the pathetic snow job OBR response in the face of widespread criticism of its intervention as evidence of your low gullibility quotient is in fact only incontrovertible evidence of your low intelligence quotient.You clearly haven’t a clue what you’re talking about, and neither seemingly does Starmer. Ignorance is I’m afraid no excuse for the amount of nonsense and bluster you post. Starmer should know better, at least.
The OBR frequently changes its productivity assumptions, and the latest revision is not especially large relative to the history of these.
To quote paragraph 1.5 of the OBR document explaining the recent change in productivity assumptions;
‘We have made several previous downward revisions to our trend productivity forecast in response to shocks and the growing period of weak productivity growth since 2008. The 0.3 percentage point revision we have made to medium-term productivity growth is significant, but not as large as the 0.5 percentage point revision we made in November 2017. Comparing the forecast change in five-year cumulative trend productivity growth, there are five other EFOs where we have made downward revisions of a similar or larger magnitude.’
Again, you are misinformed, and so is Starmer. Given that Starmer was only speaking today in an attempt to save Reeves after she’s been found to have lied again, one would have expected him to be in full knowledge of the facts surrounding the OBR’s forecast revisions, what these entailed and when the Chancellor was informed of these changes.
But sadly, he isn’t. I think this neatly illustrates the amateurish nature of this government and how they believe they’re still able to mislead the public. Thankfully, not all of us are as gullible as yourself.