Politics Today

tavyred

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
10,649
As I tried to explain to art the other day, part of the issue here (maybe the main part) is how these tax cuts stack up against the huge cost of the energy freeze. This winter (6 months) is costing £60bn and the government has committed to the freeze for two years. If the cost of energy comes down and inflation does likewise then the lower level of borrowing might very well save Mad Lizzie’s sorry ar$e.
 

Mr Jinx

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
12,300
Your figure is the annual cost and as the Government collects over £700 billion in taxes it is a tiny part of the overall take.

The reversal of the Corporation Tax increase and NIC increases had been widely trailed. The support for energy bills was also known and supported by all parties.

The furore seems to have been unleashed only by the abolition of the 45% rate.

Where Miz Liz has slipped up here can best be described as “bad politics” as it is easily criticised as benefiting the better off.
Yes, I think we all agree it's a tough sell. But I'd argue this - New Labour for 10 of its 13 years in power had no top rate of tax and therefore saw no need for it. Tony Blair knew the consequences of bashing the top end. Once a tax goes in or gets raised, it's exceedingly difficult to bring it down again or removed. Remember being told that the upping of VAT from 17.5% to 20% was a short term thing? Lol. It takes balls and I'm glad someone now has some.
 

arthur

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 18, 2004
Messages
8,255
Tax is at an eye watering level here. It simply needs to be brought down.
No it isnt. As a percentage of GDP we are 17th in the list of OECD countries.

It is eye watering for you and Liz Truss because, as the New Statesman put it, "Ms Truss has no vision of the good society or of collective flourishing,. She unashamedly subscribes to an arid view of individuals as utility maximisers rather than fellow citizens"
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
45,100
Location
Hunkered down
Yes, I think we all agree it's a tough sell. But I'd argue this - New Labour for 10 of its 13 years in power had no top rate of tax and therefore saw no need for it. Tony Blair knew the consequences of bashing the top end. Once a tax goes in or gets raised, it's exceedingly difficult to bring it down again or removed. Remember being told that the upping of VAT from 17.5% to 20% was a short term thing? Lol. It takes balls and I'm glad someone now has some.
Plus as you have posted if tax cuts are delivered for the Great Unwashed the 45% thing will get forgotten other than by the Will Hutton types. Best timing for this type of "hard to sell politically" policy is straight after an election win as in 1979 when Sir Geoffrey Howe reduced the top rate of tax on earned income from a ludicrous 83% imposed by the disastrous Labour government of 1974/1979 to 60%. Interestingly Mrs Thatcher being a dangerous socialist kept that 60% top rate for 9 years until 1988 when it went down to 40%.
 

Mr Jinx

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
12,300
No it isnt. As a percentage of GDP we are 17th in the list of OECD countries.

It is eye watering for you and Liz Truss because, as the New Statesman put it, "Ms Truss has no vision of the good society or of collective flourishing,. She unashamedly subscribes to an arid view of individuals as utility maximisers rather than fellow citizens"
Is it time to pull out the 10-men-in-a-pub analogy?

I have friends that were the bloke that buggered off (to Singapore mainly). Removing the top rate will help bring their like back.
 
Last edited:

arthur

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 18, 2004
Messages
8,255
Plus as you have posted if tax cuts are delivered for the Great Unwashed the 45% thing will get forgotten other than by the Will Hutton types.
As I said yesterday, the Great Unwashed are far more exercised by their mortgage payments than their tax bills
 

Banksy

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
11,314
Location
Mersham Kent
Agree, I've long disliked low interest rates. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks it may be a plan to keep the FTSE artificially high and savings low as it's largely pointless saving and relying on interest rates. After all, The FTSE is laden with legacy or soon to be legacy companies. This needs to be addressed by govt and business asap, in my humble.
I quite agree AU. Goodness knows though what you do when you get to a certain age and rely on interest to support your pension. Not everyone wants to stick money in shares ( or some investment plan designed to give the characters who run it as much commission as possible)at a late(ish) stage of their life and speaking personally I’ve had a few horror stories with them.
Btw , do you mean heritage companies rather than legacy?
 
Top