JohnfromUK Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 1 hour ago, oldypigeonpopper said: Hello, It is front page news but not sure of details ? The details aren't out until the budget, but Starmer and Reeves are having their bit of fun 'winding people up' over hints and weasel words like 'won't affect ordinary working people' to worry people. It's likely a case of the reality won't be as bad as the rumours, but who knows? Lots of things being 'rumoured' won't be good for the majority of pensioners, people with savings, people with average and above earnings, shareholders, businesses (self employed, small, medium and large employers), those with mortgages (if the 'changes to the rules' to allow more Gov't borrowing happen, interest rates will be higher for longer as more borrowing is seen as being at higher risk). Changes (to be outlined today) to employment legislation will make business think twice before employing new staff as it looks like it will be harder to part company if things don't go well. All employers think that they will recruit less, so employment will be adversely affected - and so will growth. There is also (rumoured) a possibility that employers NI contributions will be raised -0 and that won't help business, employment or growth. Overall is a grim picture for a great many people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldypigeonpopper Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said: The details aren't out until the budget, but Starmer and Reeves are having their bit of fun 'winding people up' over hints and weasel words like 'won't affect ordinary working people' to worry people. It's likely a case of the reality won't be as bad as the rumours, but who knows? Lots of things being 'rumoured' won't be good for the majority of pensioners, people with savings, people with average and above earnings, shareholders, businesses (self employed, small, medium and large employers), those with mortgages (if the 'changes to the rules' to allow more Gov't borrowing happen, interest rates will be higher for longer as more borrowing is seen as being at higher risk). Changes (to be outlined today) to employment legislation will make business think twice before employing new staff as it looks like it will be harder to part company if things don't go well. All employers think that they will recruit less, so employment will be adversely affected - and so will growth. There is also (rumoured) a possibility that employers NI contributions will be raised -0 and that won't help business, employment or growth. Overall is a grim picture for a great many people. Hello, I see the Pension age might go up to 70 , what with that and this forecast legislation it is go to be a grim prospect for our younger generation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 3 minutes ago, oldypigeonpopper said: Hello, I see the Pension age might go up to 70 , what with that and this forecast legislation it is go to be a grim prospect for our younger generation It was amongst the younger generation that there was so much enthusiasm for Labour. They will now learn what it really means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 On 25/09/2024 at 16:27, oowee said: Its not the government that pays for the WFP it's tax payers. Why should tax payers pay to heat the homes of those that have incomes above the threshold for pension credit? Why should the tax payer pay to feed , house, clothe and put money in the pockets of people who came here illegally without being invited? Why should the tax payer support people who are able to work but can't be bothered? Why should the Taxpayer give money in foreign aid to countries rich enough to have their own space programmes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 45 minutes ago, oldypigeonpopper said: Hello, I see the Pension age might go up to 70 , what with that and this forecast legislation it is go to be a grim prospect for our younger generation Express news? 😁 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 1 minute ago, Vince Green said: Why should the tax payer pay to feed , house, clothe and put money in the pockets of people who came here illegally without being invited? Why should the tax payer support people who are able to work but can't be bothered? Why should the Taxpayer give money in foreign aid to countries rich enough to have their own space programmes? Answer to all; the taxpayer shouldn't. We are told there is a 'black hole' in the Gov't finances. Today's radio and press (e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/10/labour-needs-25bn-a-year-in-tax-rises-to-rebuild-public-services-warns-ifs) suggests that the IFS have determined that Starmer needs an additional £25 Billion to meet his election promised (that he told us ion canvassing were all fully costed - and would be paid for by 'taxing non-doms'). We are now told that nothing much can be raised from taxing non doms. It is suggested that borrowing more is the answer, but the rules need to be changed so that it doesn't 'look like' borrowing more. This is SO traditional Labour and will push ip interest rates, inflation, unemployment etc.- as it always does eventually. Any 'normal' person when he/she finds a big black hole in finances immediately looks to cutting out non essential spending, not to just borrow more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 Just now, JohnfromUK said: Answer to all; the taxpayer shouldn't. We are told there is a 'black hole' in the Gov't finances. Today's radio and press (e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/10/labour-needs-25bn-a-year-in-tax-rises-to-rebuild-public-services-warns-ifs) suggests that the IFS have determined that Starmer needs an additional £25 Billion to meet his election promised (that he told us ion canvassing were all fully costed - and would be paid for by 'taxing non-doms'). We are now told that nothing much can be raised from taxing non doms. It is suggested that borrowing more is the answer, but the rules need to be changed so that it doesn't 'look like' borrowing more. This is SO traditional Labour and will push ip interest rates, inflation, unemployment etc.- as it always does eventually. Any 'normal' person when he/she finds a big black hole in finances immediately looks to cutting out non essential spending, not to just borrow more. He doesn't have to borrow more, he could always try raiding the pension funds or seling off our gold reserves Oh wait! The idea they were going to raise anything by taxing non doms was always ridiculous. By definition non doms don't earn money in this country Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 37 minutes ago, Vince Green said: Why should the tax payer pay to feed , house, clothe and put money in the pockets of people who came here illegally without being invited? Why should the tax payer support people who are able to work but can't be bothered? Why should the Taxpayer give money in foreign aid to countries rich enough to have their own space programmes? because half wit cabbage tax payers lacking minerals to force or demand change took the easy path of apathy and denial so now have no more power than a pathetic vote so can do nothing about the above now but whine! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 Just now, clangerman said: because half wit cabbage tax payers lacking minerals to force or demand change took the easy path of apathy and denial so now have no more power than a pathetic vote so can do nothing about the above now but whine! Sorry I didn't understand one word of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old'un Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 6 minutes ago, Vince Green said: Sorry I didn't understand one word of that. That's because you are a half wit cabbage tax payer lacking minerals. I was also a little perhaps the above also applies to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 2 hours ago, JohnfromUK said: Answer to all; the taxpayer shouldn't. We are told there is a 'black hole' in the Gov't finances. Today's radio and press (e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/10/labour-needs-25bn-a-year-in-tax-rises-to-rebuild-public-services-warns-ifs) suggests that the IFS have determined that Starmer needs an additional £25 Billion to meet his election promised (that he told us ion canvassing were all fully costed - and would be paid for by 'taxing non-doms'). We are now told that nothing much can be raised from taxing non doms. Strange then that Hunt brought in the changes to non dom tax status in March to take effect in April 2025. If it was good enough for the Tories it's surely a starter for ten for Labour to deliver on it? Forecasts vary from £2.7bn (Hunt) to costing a £1bn. It should not be seen in isolation. Changes to off shore tax rules will also come into effect. II'Forbes':- it is arguably the biggest change to UK personal tax in 200 years. In March 2024 Chancellor Jeremy Hunt announced the abolition, with effect from 6 April 2025, of the ‘non-dom’ regime and its replacement with a tax system based purely on residence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 (edited) 4 hours ago, oldypigeonpopper said: Hello, I see the Pension age might go up to 70 , what with that and this forecast legislation it is go to be a grim prospect for our younger generation To be fair many late 60 + years old people are living longer because of modern expensive NHS treatments, meds and living conditions. I know I'd not be here without some of the very expensive meds and treatment I'm on/had, just yesterday I cost the taxpayer over 2K for a cataract removal. Age 72. Edited October 10 by Dave-G Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 26 minutes ago, Dave-G said: just yesterday I cost the taxpayer over 2K for a cataract removal. Age 72. I hope the recovery is quick. I have had both of mine done (elected). Well worth the discomfort. Get well soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 5 hours ago, JohnfromUK said: The details aren't out until the budget, but Starmer and Reeves are having their bit of fun 'winding people up' over hints and weasel words like 'won't affect ordinary working people' to worry people. It's likely a case of the reality won't be as bad as the rumours, but who knows? Lots of things being 'rumoured' won't be good for the majority of pensioners, people with savings, people with average and above earnings, shareholders, businesses (self employed, small, medium and large employers), those with mortgages (if the 'changes to the rules' to allow more Gov't borrowing happen, interest rates will be higher for longer as more borrowing is seen as being at higher risk). Changes (to be outlined today) to employment legislation will make business think twice before employing new staff as it looks like it will be harder to part company if things don't go well. All employers think that they will recruit less, so employment will be adversely affected - and so will growth. There is also (rumoured) a possibility that employers NI contributions will be raised -0 and that won't help business, employment or growth. Overall is a grim picture for a great many people. That's how they work John, use fear and uncertainty to control? I'm fairly sure they are not thinking beyond this parliament knowing there will be no return but sucking everything dry in the meantime? 4 hours ago, Vince Green said: Why should the tax payer pay to feed , house, clothe and put money in the pockets of people who came here illegally without being invited? Why should the tax payer support people who are able to work but can't be bothered? Why should the Taxpayer give money in foreign aid to countries rich enough to have their own space programmes? Simply because they can and enjoy the thrill of the playground? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 1 hour ago, oowee said: Strange then that Hunt brought in the changes to non dom tax status in March to take effect in April 2025. Some changes to the non dom rules were inevitable - for political reasons rather than economic. What the value would have been is indeed open to 'speculation'. But they were never going to raise anything like the £25 Bn that Starmer apparently needs (see Guardian column referenced above). As I said above - when there is a black hole, the proper answer is to spend less - not borrow more. The major cause is the profligate pay rises already sprayed liberally around by Labour to the unions who fund them. With the new 'employment rights', inflation busting pay rises for the public/state controlled sectors, threats of increased borrowing and general 'incompetence', we will see rising inflation again soon, falling employment, increasing interest rates and falling productivity and no growth. All as direct results of Labour policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 Good to see that Two Tier is being as successful here as he was at the CPS? What an asset? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 25 minutes ago, oowee said: I hope the recovery is quick. I have had both of mine done (elected). Well worth the discomfort. Get well soon. Getting there already thanks - the TV screen is brighter in the new lens eye than the other - and looking outside in sunlight is slightly painful till I get accustomed i suspect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 2 hours ago, oowee said: Strange then that Hunt brought in the changes to non dom tax status in March to take effect in April 2025. If it was good enough for the Tories it's surely a starter for ten for Labour to deliver on it? Forecasts vary from £2.7bn (Hunt) to costing a £1bn. It should not be seen in isolation. Changes to off shore tax rules will also come into effect. II'Forbes':- it is arguably the biggest change to UK personal tax in 200 years. In March 2024 Chancellor Jeremy Hunt announced the abolition, with effect from 6 April 2025, of the ‘non-dom’ regime and its replacement with a tax system based purely on residence. It doesn't matter a jot who introduced it. It won't work and it can never be made to. The whole definition of a non dom is somebody who is not a British subject and has money somewhere else in the world. Try and tax them and they will just leave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 Let's not forget the Renters Rights Bill had its second reading in the House of Commons yesterday. This single piece of totally misguided legislation has already resulted in thousands of private landlords giving up and evicting their tenants before it becomes law. Supposedly intended to 'protect' tenants it will do exactly the opposite. Already being referred to as Raynors Folly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted October 10 Report Share Posted October 10 9 minutes ago, Vince Green said: Already being referred to as Raynors Folly Perhaps we will need a numbering system; Raynor's Folly No 1 - Renters rights Raynor's Folly No 2 - Employment rights (she pioneered it even though not now business secretary) Raynor's Folly No 3 - to be advised, but may be 'planning' related? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.