The Labour Government

Churchlawtonblue said:
So instead of imposing retaliatory tariffs on US goods we are negotiating by removing the very small digital services tax brought in 5 years ago.

"Chancellor Rachel Reeves has suggested the UK could change its taxes on big tech firms as part of a deal to avoid US tariffs.

The digital services tax, introduced in 2020, imposes a 2% levy on tech firms, including big US firms such as Amazon, bringing in about £800m in tax per year"

Who are these genius's we have negotiating these deals.with the US. Laurel and Hardy.
Click to expand...

To be fair, we are dealing with Trumpton and his clowns, so Laurel & Hardy is as good a shout as any.

Personally, I’d increase it to 5%, get a billion or so in the coffers and tell the Yanks to fuck off. Admittedly, this is partly an emotional response (how’s that for fucking irony) and a strategic response given that pandering to Trump never works and they will put tariffs on us at some point anyway.

The rational response is that the tax brings in peanuts compared to the loss on potential trade and has more use as a bargaining chip, but we aren’t dealing with rational people and the optics suck even if it works - which it won’t. Trump may delay imposing tariffs for concessions, but he will be back for more. At some point, a polite fuck off is the only rational, and inevitable, response.
 
BlueAnorak said:
Today is UK mass redundancy day.
6 businesses I know of have shed a stack of jobs today thanks to the NI changes.
They won't be the only ones.

Well done Reeves.
Click to expand...
It was so fucking obvious that job losses and inflation rises (still to hit the fan) would be a consequence of these infantile, not thought through polices it is a total embarrassment.... and people don't understand why I and millions of others cannot support Labour.

Nothing, absolutely nothing they have done so far places the common working person at the heart of their policies.
 
as usual threats but no action. Instead of shaming yourself Ana you should be at home packing.
She wants to dictate the rules by which she pays into the coffers of the country where she chooses to live. Simple fact is a democratically elected Govt is enacting a policy upon which they were elected. She can move - maybe to a less stable political environment - and take her cash with her. Hope she enjoys life in Italy. If its that good you have to ask why is she not there already?

 
BlueAnorak said:
Today is UK mass redundancy day.
6 businesses I know of have shed a stack of jobs today thanks to the NI changes.
They won't be the only ones.

Well done Reeves.
Click to expand...

No-one really knows what the consequences of the various tax rises or the higher minimum wage will be.

Ask two economists and you'll get three opinions.

In the news, it seems to depend on whether you'll be paying it, or receiving it. In politics, it depends on the colour of your rosette.

People *may* lose jobs, but we don't know if those are at companies that were already on the edge, or who were doing fine and are now having to cut back.
The hundreds of thousands of smaller companies who have seen their NI bill go down, may now recruit, or raise wages.
Will bigger employers really cut back, when many were struggling to recruit anyway?
Will the NI rises get passed on mostly with lower future wages, or will employers be pushed into investing to increase productivity, as the cost of employing people rises?

Of course, we've also got the big increases in the minimum wage. Do those hit employers as a double whammy, or do they encourage more people into work, or to increase their hours? Do they simply increase prices, or do they give more people the discretionary income, which boosts the economy?

Does the money saved get ploughed into the NHS and cut costs for employers having to deal with sick or injured workers?

Your anecdotes may prove to be the main story, but there's certainly a lot more going on, and it'll be some time before we have any idea what the ultimate consequences are.
 
bluethrunthru said:
as usual threats but no action. Instead of shaming yourself Ana you should be at home packing.
She wants to dictate the rules by which she pays into the coffers of the country where she chooses to live. Simple fact is a democratically elected Govt is enacting a policy upon which they were elected. She can move - maybe to a less stable political environment - and take her cash with her. Hope she enjoys life in Italy. If its that good you have to ask why is she not there already?

Click to expand...

Why have the government already watered-down their non-dom policy then, if not to reduce the numbers leaving the UK?
 
BobKowalski said:
To be fair, we are dealing with Trumpton and his clowns, so Laurel & Hardy is as good a shout as any.

Personally, I’d increase it to 5%, get a billion or so in the coffers and tell the Yanks to fuck off. Admittedly, this is partly an emotional response (how’s that for fucking irony) and a strategic response given that pandering to Trump never works and they will put tariffs on us at some point anyway.

The rational response is that the tax brings in peanuts compared to the loss on potential trade and has more use as a bargaining chip, but we aren’t dealing with rational people and the optics suck even if it works - which it won’t. Trump may delay imposing tariffs for concessions, but he will be back for more. At some point, a polite fuck off is the only rational, and inevitable, response.
Click to expand...
We agree Bob, its important to get the free trade deal, but surely you should start from a position of strength. Ie the digital services tax will go up to say 15% unless?? Not reduce it to nothing and give the septics what they want and some.
 
bluenova said:
No-one really knows what the consequences of the various tax rises or the higher minimum wage will be.

Ask two economists and you'll get three opinions.

In the news, it seems to depend on whether you'll be paying it, or receiving it. In politics, it depends on the colour of your rosette.

People *may* lose jobs, but we don't know if those are at companies that were already on the edge, or who were doing fine and are now having to cut back.
The hundreds of thousands of smaller companies who have seen their NI bill go down, may now recruit, or raise wages.
Will bigger employers really cut back, when many were struggling to recruit anyway?
Will the NI rises get passed on mostly with lower future wages, or will employers be pushed into investing to increase productivity, as the cost of employing people rises?

Of course, we've also got the big increases in the minimum wage. Do those hit employers as a double whammy, or do they encourage more people into work, or to increase their hours? Do they simply increase prices, or do they give more people the discretionary income, which boosts the economy?

Does the money saved get ploughed into the NHS and cut costs for employers having to deal with sick or injured workers?

Your anecdotes may prove to be the main story, but there's certainly a lot more going on, and it'll be some time before we have any idea what the ultimate consequences are.
Click to expand...
Most will just put up their bills, and then inflation will go up. Everyone is in the same boat, even the tax dodgers like Amazon and Starbucks can't avoid NI.
 
I appreciate that this guy is generally right leaning based on his previous posts but his review of the OBR report is a little worrying.

 
Churchlawtonblue said:
Most will just put up their bills, and then inflation will go up. Everyone is in the same boat, even the tax dodgers like Amazon and Starbucks can't avoid NI.
Click to expand...

We don't really *know* that, as it depends on the industry. Asda were one of the big complainers in November, about how much it would hit them, but just last month they were talking about reducing prices and starting a price war with the other supermarkets. They were bragging about the size of the "war chest" they could use to reduce prices, and are clearly not scared of having to take on more staff.

Amazon are likely to pushing more tech investment, but then plenty of economists argue that there's plenty of scope to move to a higher wage economy if productivity increases. Starbucks send plenty of money back to the US parent company - enough to absorb the NI/minimum wage increases many times over. They may want to push up prices, but what if their competitors don't? Or if they push up prices, and sales fall? What if minimum wage rises encourage more people to buy coffee - do they look to capitalise on that? Most companies put growth pretty high on their priorities, so what they do and don't pass on in terms of prices, isn't quite so predictable.
 
bluenova said:
We don't really *know* that, as it depends on the industry. Asda were one of the big complainers in November, about how much it would hit them, but just last month they were talking about reducing prices and starting a price war with the other supermarkets. They were bragging about the size of the "war chest" they could use to reduce prices, and are clearly not scared of having to take on more staff.

Amazon are likely to pushing more tech investment, but then plenty of economists argue that there's plenty of scope to move to a higher wage economy if productivity increases. Starbucks send plenty of money back to the US parent company - enough to absorb the NI/minimum wage increases many times over. They may want to push up prices, but what if their competitors don't? Or if they push up prices, and sales fall? What if minimum wage rises encourage more people to buy coffee - do they look to capitalise on that? Most companies put growth pretty high on their priorities, so what they do and don't pass on in terms of prices, isn't quite so predictable.
Click to expand...
I can guarantee that this move will push up inflation. You are just naive to think otherwise.
 
Kompany Car said:
I appreciate that this guy is generally right leaning based on his previous posts but his review of the OBR report is a little worrying.

Click to expand...

Watched the video and he explains stuff very clearly. I'm no economist and it was pretty easy to digest thanks to him. Depressing stuff with Reeves as chancellor.
 
bluenova said:
What if the French pick them up and drop them back in the UK?
Click to expand...
They very probably would....
How strange, considering all the skills these migrants bring with them and how much of a benefit they are to the economy, you would think the countries of Western Europe would be fighting over them wouldn't you ?
Can't think why ?
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
I can guarantee that this move will push up inflation. You are just naive to think otherwise.
Click to expand...

I'd suggest that's day 1 of Economics, when you look at some nice graphs with one line going up or down, and everyone thinks it's easy.

Day 1000 is when everyone is crying, because there are a million factors, and nobody truly knows. It's why Economics is a "social science", and not a real one ;)
 
Kompany Car said:
I appreciate that this guy is generally right leaning based on his previous posts but his review of the OBR report is a little worrying.

Click to expand...


Isn't he considered left-leaning? Unless he's changed, he was involved with Corbyn, and most of his reported views are definitely not traditionally right wing.

Someone said this week that Starmer thinks it's bonkers that they're counting pennies to hit rules, based on predictions for 4 years away. Particularly given those predictions tend to vary considerably from the last predictions, never mind the ones that are years in advance.

There was some research a while back, when the Tories were in power, which said that on average the five year predictions have been out by approx 15% of GDP, and this despite the OBR having one of the better records in world finance. It's crazy that both Tories and Labour have tied themselves to this quite so rigidly.
 
Kompany Car said:
I appreciate that this guy is generally right leaning based on his previous posts but his review of the OBR report is a little worrying.

Click to expand...

Wow, I did not know that detail.
I have seen this guy before , he is pretty good.
The OBR forecasts as they have written it here make no sense.His conclusion does seem to afford some rationale to them.
If that is how it is to pan out then on a personal level it would suit but that is not right for the country.
She needs to go but alright but to be replaced by who ? Starmer really does not have the personnel.
Very interesting , thank you for posting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top