the economy.

[BrianW]

I could write a huge screed on this but you'd only be bored.
Basically, I think that due to a combination of factors, we as a country are absolutely goosed.
Apart from anything else, I have zero - that is zero - confidence in the 'leadership'. Not a party political point, as they are all equally clueless, give or take. What amazes me is that there are still some people out there who think that one side or another is doing a good job.
The good news is, if you happen to be a multi-millionaire, you should be relatively OK.

 

[The Pink Panther]

I could write a huge screed on this but you'd only be bored.
Basically, I think that due to a combination of factors, we as a country are absolutely goosed.
Apart from anything else, I have zero - that is zero - confidence in the 'leadership'. Not a party political point, as they are all equally clueless, give or take. What amazes me is that there are still some people out there who think that one side or another is doing a good job.
The good news is, if you happen to be a multi-millionaire, you should be relatively OK.

What are your thoughts on the Eurozone! Is that fucked?

 

[BrianW]

Possibly. There are massive tensions within it. It is unsustainable to have a single currency across a group of countries with widely diverging economies unless you have the equivalent of the US Federal Government shifting funds from 'rich' to 'poor' zones. This is difficult to achieve in Europe, politically, because German voters in particular would think they were being screwed. Ultimately the choice is look beyond tomorrow, or let the project collapse. If it collapses, the implications for the world economy will be similar to the USA collapsing. Not pretty.

Personally I would never have introduced a common currency except as part of the establishment of a genuine federal union, with a central government. Which is not going to happen for at least 50 years, if ever.

 

[SWP's back]

I just went on an income tax calculator to work out what my situation would be if I moved back home. Put in £24k as a salary, and worked out that taxes had gone up £80 over the year compared to last year. So I played around a bit, and found that every salary from £11k to £42k has seen the same £80 increase in their income taxes and above that, they're paying £141 more per year. So just to see, I put in an income of £1.5m. Any guesses on the increase in income tax for people earning that much?

You've got that the wrong way around mate. I've just checked.

Take home for 2016/17 will be £19,489 from a salary of £24,000

Take home for 2015/16 would have been £19,407 from The same salary.

For 2013/14, the take home on that amount was £19,137

For 2012/13 the figure was only £18,851

For 2011/11 less again at £18,681

And the last year Labour were in power for a year at 2008/09 young have only taken home £18,363

So I'm not sure where you went wrong.

But lower wage earners are paying a lot less than they were, not more as you seem to think.

This isn't going to please the lefties though though it will please people that earn £24,000 as they are £1,126 better off now then they were under Brown et al in 2009 in terms of take home pay.

---------check for yourself---------

http://tools.hmrc.gov.uk/hmrctaxcalculator/screen/Personal+Tax+Calculator/en-GB/summary?user=guest - 2016/17 calculator
http://www.itcontracting.com/calculators/dividend-tax-calculator-2015-16/ - 2015/16 calculator

Or try this one if you want to easily check every tax year for the last decade (I found this link last annoyingly but it agrees with the other two above) - https://listentotaxman.com/24000?yr=2016

-----------------

Just for fun I also looked at how much tax you paid in 2008/09 under Labour and how much tax you pay in 2016/17 under the Tories on £1,000,000 per year:

Tax paid in 2008/09 is £404,034

Tax paid in 2016/17 is £459,433

Kinda shits all over your argument really doesn't it. Lower earnings are far better off now and higher earners are paying more tax than they were. Bluemoon should traditionally love that idea. Though personally I'd brick and torch any cunts wanting to take nearly half my hard earned off me.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Possibly. There are massive tensions within it. It is unsustainable to have a single currency across a group of countries with widely diverging economies unless you have the equivalent of the US Federal Government shifting funds from 'rich' to 'poor' zones. This is difficult to achieve in Europe, politically, because German voters in particular would think they were being screwed. Ultimately the choice is look beyond tomorrow, or let the project collapse. If it collapses, the implications for the world economy will be similar to the USA collapsing. Not pretty.

Personally I would never have introduced a common currency except as part of the establishment of a genuine federal union, with a central government. Which is not going to happen for at least 50 years, if ever.

Quite agree. A government or central bank will use a number of fiscal tools and techniques to try to maintain financial stability, including interest rates, debt levels, tax rates, public spending, inflation and exchange rates.

The Euro takes away one of the key pillars of fiscal policy as it prevents small scale exchange rate adjustment or wholesale devaluation/revaluation. It's a bit like driving a car and being told you can't press your foot on or ease off the accelerator.

The only way to resolve this dilemma while maintaining the single currency is for complete financial union, which can really only come as part of political union. So the EU will allow countries to control taxation and spending but only within very tight limits. They will tell each country how much revenue it needs to raise but will give some flexibility over how it does that. It will also mandate public spending levels but with some flexibility as to where that money is spent.

 

[SWP's back]

The only way to resolve this dilemma while maintaining the single currency is for complete financial union, which can really only come as part of political union. So the EU will allow countries to control taxation and spending but only within very tight limits. They will tell each country how much revenue it needs to raise but will give some flexibility over how it does that. It will also mandate public spending levels but with some flexibility as to where that money is spent.

So thank fuck we are leaving as you've basically just described the United States of Europe.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

You've got that the wrong way around mate. I've just checked.

Take home for 2016/17 will be £19,489 from a salary of £24,000

Take home for 2015/16 would have been £19,407 from The same salary.

For 2013/14, the take home on that amount was £19,137

For 2012/13 the figure was only £18,851

For 2011/11 less again at £18,681

And the last year Labour were in power for a year at 2008/09 young have only taken home £18,363

So I'm not sure where you went wrong.

But lower wage earners are paying a lot less than they were, not more as you seem to think.

This isn't going to please the lefties though though it will please people that earn £24,000 as they are £1,126 better off now then they were under Brown et al in 2009 in terms of take home pay.

---------check for yourself---------

http://tools.hmrc.gov.uk/hmrctaxcalculator/screen/Personal+Tax+Calculator/en-GB/summary?user=guest - 2016/17 calculator
http://www.itcontracting.com/calculators/dividend-tax-calculator-2015-16/ - 2015/16 calculator

Or try this one if you want to easily check every tax year for the last decade (I found this link last annoyingly but it agrees with the other two above) - https://listentotaxman.com/24000?yr=2016

-----------------

Just for fun I also looked at how much tax you paid in 2008/09 under Labour and how much tax you pay in 2016/17 under the Tories on £1,000,000 per year:

Tax paid in 2008/09 is £404,034

Tax paid in 2016/17 is £459,433

Kinda shits all over your argument really doesn't it. Lower earnings are far better off now and higher earners are paying less tax than they were. Bluemoon should traditionally love that idea. Though personally I'd brick and torch any cunts wanting to take nearly half my hard earned off me.

What argument did you imagine I made that it shits all over?

But yeah, you're right. The website I used gave the impression that the £80 figure was extra tax paid, not extra money in your bank account (although it's worth mentioning that as a single man, I've never got things like tax credits or child benefit, so it'd be interesting to see your calculations after they are taken into account). The point I was making was that it's unusual to have to pay more tax when your public services are being slashed all over the place, which is what I thought was happening. Although personally, I'm happy to pay higher rates of income tax if we're actually getting something for it. I currently pay about 33% of all my earnings and get fuck all for it.

 

[SWP's back]

What argument did you imagine I made that it shits all over?

But yeah, you're right. The website I used gave the impression that the £80 figure was extra tax paid, not extra money in your bank account (although it's worth mentioning that as a single man, I've never got things like tax credits or child benefit, so it'd be interesting to see your calculations after they are taken into account). The point I was making was that it's unusual to have to pay more tax when your public services are being slashed all over the place, which is what I thought was happening. Although personally, I'm happy to pay higher rates of income tax if we're actually getting something for it. I currently pay about 33% of all my earnings and get fuck all for it.

A few things:

1) you're argument is that you'll pay more tax next year than you do now. That's not correct.
2) it would be unusual to pay more tax when "public services are being slashed" is taken into account but given a salary of £24,000 you're paying over £1,100 less tax than you were under the previous government and that amount has decreased ever year for nearly a decade (mainly thanks to increased personal allowances)
3) you're paying a de facto level of tax of 19.14% (NHI accounting for over 1/3rd of that), not 33% based on your figure of £24,000 and get the same services as those paying nearly 50% for it.
4) you were implying those that earn more are paying less than they were but based on £1,000,000 gross per year, those tax payers are now paying around £55,000 more in tax than they were back when we had a Labour government.

Which website did you use to give that wrong impression?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

So thank fuck we are leaving as you've basically just described the United States of Europe.

Which is exactly what the Yanks wanted after the war, when they picked up on a discredited idea and started pouring money into the project via the CIA. And that's all in the State Department archives.

Plus about a year before the referendum, the so-called five presidents (the heads of the main EU bodies) published their vision for the next stage of the EU. And you'll never guess what that involved...

 

[tiggsywiggsywoo]

It used to be a boom an bust economy, now it's just doom gloom and bust. The prospects of this improving seem poor.