The Labour Government

Superb from Reeves - set the date for rollout of free breakfasts clubs, industrial strategy to be set out, Covid corruption commissioner to be set up and 'no return to austerity' - very positive despite the mess the tories have left her and the country in and also the 22 billion blackhole they have inherited.
No return to austerity?

She’s only been in power for a couple of months and she’s already reduced spending and signalled additional tax rises for the coming months. She also has the same fiscal framework as the previous government, which could in fact become more restrictive if she commits to balancing the current budget.

How do spending cuts and rising taxation not amount to austerity?
 
No return to austerity?

She’s only been in power for a couple of months and she’s already reduced spending and signalled additional tax rises for the coming months. She also has the same fiscal framework as the previous government, which could in fact become more restrictive if she commits to balancing the current budget.

How do spending cuts and rising taxation not amount to austerity?
Which tax rises exactly?
 
No return to austerity?

She’s only been in power for a couple of months and she’s already reduced spending and signalled additional tax rises for the coming months. She also has the same fiscal framework as the previous government, which could in fact become more restrictive if she commits to balancing the current budget.

How do spending cuts and rising taxation not amount to austerity?


Strange how those that think the economy should be run the same as a household budget get all upset when its proposed that the economy is run as a household budget.
 
With Johnson I wasn’t aware he was known as a pathological liar until he was PM. It may have been muted in the public domain but I don’t recall seeing it. It was certainly well understood by the media.

You weren't aware that someone sacked by the Times and Michael Howard both times for lying, was a pathological liar?

Did you see the Eddie Mair interview in 2013?

Regarding the freebies. This isn’t a Labour problem. It’s a politics problem. I’m pleased a light is being shone on it - this cuts across all parties and they need to clean their act up. No ifs or buts. As I say it’s not a Labour problem and if they sort it out then it’ll be a tick in the good job column.

That said I’m enjoying seeing Starmer squirm because I don’t like the character of the man and how they’ve managed this is a car crash.

But we've already established you're a poor judge of character.
 
Which tax rises exactly?
There were a number in the manifesto, weren’t there? And that’s on top of the rise tax burden already baked-in from the previous government.

So if the tax burden is rising, and Reeves has already implemented a number of spending cuts, how does that not equate to austerity?

I’m afraid that just saying ‘it’s not austerity’ doesn’t mean that it isn’t.
 
Strange how those that think the economy should be run the same as a household budget get all upset when its proposed that the economy is run as a household budget.
Think you’re getting yourself a little confused here with all this household budget stuff, which is irrelevant to the point I raised. And in this instance, I’m neither supporting or denouncing austerity.

I’m simply asking why a combination of tax rises and spending cuts, which is exactly what Reeves has implemented, shouldn’t be viewed as austerity.
 
There were a number in the manifesto, weren’t there? And that’s on top of the rise tax burden already baked-in from the previous government.

So if the tax burden is rising, and Reeves has already implemented a number of spending cuts, how does that not equate to austerity?

I’m afraid that just saying ‘it’s not austerity’ doesn’t mean that it isn’t.
Not that I recall. They said they would not raise personal taxes iirc
 
You weren't aware that someone sacked by the Times and Michael Howard both times for lying, was a pathological liar?

Did you see the Eddie Mair interview in 2013?



But we've already established you're a poor judge of character.

He was sacked in 1988 ffs and was binned off as a shadow minister in the mid 2000s for shagging about. They didn’t really factor in to my decision. For someone who won’t hold Starmer’s many many lies to account you aren’t half coming across as a hypocrite.
 
fair enough, although that doesn't impact many I suspect
It’s still a tax rise, however minor, and that’s on top of the more significant rise in the tax burden already baked-in.

So we know that taxes are rising, and Reeves has already implemented spending cuts worth £8.1bn for the next fiscal year. That’s a pretty much textbook definition of austerity.
 
Which tax rises exactly?
You will have to wait till the budget but they have said its going to be tough so its kind of obvious it's coming. They said they wouldn't raise income, NI or Vat taxes.

That being the case I can only presume there will be

Tax rises elsewhere
Borrowing
Spending cuts

expect everyone to get hit in some way or another, I was hoping low income workers and pensioners along with people needing disability benefits would be spared but I'm not hopeful tbh.
 
I've really never got my head around why anyone would think that, other than that they are just horrible bitter individuals, resentful of anyone doing better than them. I hope that is not you.

The vast majority of people sending their kids to private school are not multi-millionaires, they are normal people, often 2 working parents who are making big personal sacrifices for the good of their children. And now thousands upon thousands just won't be able to afford it.

Is that really something to be proud of? Every kid NOT in state education is 1 less person for the state to fund educating. 1 less person in a crowded classroom. Sometimes 1 less kid with special needs that needs to be accommodated. More money per pupil for those in state schools, so they can have smaller classes and better education.

Other than bitter resentment, I can think of no reason why anyone would want to discourage this, with the aim of raising a few quid. Labour's own figures suggest that 65% of the VAT revenue will be lost on increased state education costs. The Treasury's own figures suggest it will actually COST more money than it saves.

BTW, I went to a state school, just for the record.

John O’Connell, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said:

“VAT on private schools is a clear cut case of a policy gimmick that will do grievous harm to families with potentially pathetic results for revenues.

“Politicians may talk of a level-playing field, but taxpayers won’t be fooled by proposals that simply punish ambition without even achieving its own objectives.

“Labour should abandon this disastrous policy.”
 
It’s still a tax rise, however minor, and that’s on top of the more significant rise in the tax burden already baked-in.

So we know that taxes are rising, and Reeves has already implemented spending cuts worth £8.1bn for the next fiscal year. That’s a pretty much textbook definition of austerity.
Not being funny, but which significant tax rises are already baked in?
 
You will have to wait till the budget but they have said its going to be tough so its kind of obvious it's coming. They said they wouldn't raise income, NI or Vat taxes.

That being the case I can only presume there will be

Tax rises elsewhere
Borrowing
Spending cuts

expect everyone to get hit in some way or another, I was hoping low income workers and pensioners along with people needing disability benefits would be spared but I'm not hopeful tbh.
Brewster was adamant tax rises were already known, hence my question.

I suspect we will all “ feel a pinch” in one way or another and my bet would be fuel.

It was said though that investment would be a key driver to get things moving.

As you say, have to wait for the budget
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top