marshallschunkychicken Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 NI increase, and a damn good attempt at alienating the public sector workforce it seems. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8402769.stm Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Lyon Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 It's usually Geoff Kilpatrick who is first with his views on the UK economy and the current government! He must still be sleeping down under. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyprus Jambo Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Happy if he gets rid of some Civil Servants but has to be Top first, too many chiefs who are the ones getting big bonuses etc. They like to try and compare us with the private sector but get no where near the money they earn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 This government is an absolute joke. The NI increase will act as a disincentive to firms to employ people. It will also hit the lowest paid hardest, as will the VAT increase back to 17.5%. They've also reacted to the tabloid press and public misconception by introducing the windfall tax on all banks who pay bonuses of more than ?25k to someone. This is wholy inappropriate as it targets all bankers irrespective of whether the bank had to go cap in hand to the government. To acertain extent the banks have been hoist by their own petard by positioning such payments as bonuses rather than what they are - a part of normal pay - but the government's action is discriminatory and well over the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malinga the Swinga Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 The taxing of the larger bonuses will be seen as a good point amongst the masses, but unless they are blinded by envy, they should ask if this is a good thing. The type of banker who gets this bonus is not your average joe who works in a branch or department, but is either an investment banker or a top executive. They will simply have their wages increased or be awarded some other type of bonus. Tax avoidance experts will also be used to make sure taxes are kept to a minimum. Where I work, the bosses normally give themselves about 40% which is well over the top, but this year, they have asked for 80%, as they knew full well that this tax was coming. They have simply made sure they will get the same amount regardless, but to pay for this 80%, they will penalise the normal worker. Added to the 20% VAT, and the NI increase, workers are getting hammered, whilst the MP's, patting themselves on the back for this move, will continue to manipulate expenses and costs as much as they ever did. If the goverment are bowing to public pressure, how about a referendum on europe and hanging? After all, a majority of the public are pto hanging and anti Europe. Come to think ofit, what about a referendum on continuing the war in Afghanistan, or would the goverment lose that as well. The sooner this lot get punted, the better. Party of the people my a**e. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Spot on Andy. Brown/Darling's action is spiteful victimisation, nothing else. Why tax banks who did not have to go to the government? Why just tax banks? Many of the dodgy products they were created were due to demand from the fund management industry, and those people earn much bigger bonuses that your average banker. Surely, if this is a "fair" tax it would be applied to every firm that pays someone more than ?25k in bonus not just the banks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Reekin' Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 The taxing of the larger bonuses will be seen as a good point amongst the masses, but unless they are blinded by envy, they should ask if this is a good thing.The type of banker who gets this bonus is not your average joe who works in a branch or department, but is either an investment banker or a top executive. They will simply have their wages increased or be awarded some other type of bonus. Tax avoidance experts will also be used to make sure taxes are kept to a minimum. Where I work, the bosses normally give themselves about 40% which is well over the top, but this year, they have asked for 80%, as they knew full well that this tax was coming. They have simply made sure they will get the same amount regardless, but to pay for this 80%, they will penalise the normal worker. Added to the 20% VAT, and the NI increase, workers are getting hammered, whilst the MP's, patting themselves on the back for this move, will continue to manipulate expenses and costs as much as they ever did. If the goverment are bowing to public pressure, how about a referendum on europe and hanging? After all, a majority of the public are pto hanging and anti Europe. Come to think ofit, what about a referendum on continuing the war in Afghanistan, or would the goverment lose that as well. The sooner this lot get punted, the better. Party of the people my a**e. According to what? The latest polls in The Sun or the News of the World? Regarding your other points, would you rather the government did nothing regarding bonuses for the top banking executives? Business as usual, even for HBoS / RBS / Northern Rock / anyone-else-who-was-bailed-out-to-the-hilt-by-the-British-taxpayer? I do agree with you and previous posters that it's the ordinary worker who will receive the brunt of these measures, but what else is new? When was it ever different? I'd have been happier if they'd clamped down considerably harder on these bonuses and on the probable avenues for the banks getting around this. I'm away for another shower now: I feel dirty for putting forward even the slightest defence of this feckin' awful Labour government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Business as usual, even for HBoS / RBS / Northern Rock / anyone-else-who-was-bailed-out-to-the-hilt-by-the-British-taxpayer? Senior people at those organisations should be creamed, but it is spiteful amd misguided to hit all banks. Maybe this will persuade the banks to pay proper salaries rather than pretend the "bonuses" are anything other than basic pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 i think there's one or two decent measures there to be fair. 1% pay rise cap for the public sector? right on missus. by and large public sector employees do very well for themselves compared to equivalent jobs in the private sector. it's about time their pay was rationalised. 0.5% additional increase on NIC. it's only going to affect earnings above ?20,000 so at least it doesn't target the lowest paid. the rest looks like the usual tinkering at the margins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Good to see the government has its priorities right and reduced bingo duty. Cretins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosewood Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Good to see the government has its priorities right and reduced bingo duty. Cretins. That one stands out for me as just being bizarre. Why reduce the government's revenue by reducing a duty that nobody really cares about in the first place - just bizarre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Does the boiler scrappage apply in Scotland as well? Mine could do with being renewed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Does the boiler scrappage apply in Scotland as well? Mine could do with being renewed. Yet another ground breaking initiative from the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Sorry to disappoint Stuart. I'm sure it was good comedy! Anyway, no one has mentioned the key point about the deficit level, which is now forecast to reach ?178bn and is why the markets are getting twitchy over sterling's AAA rating. Lose that and interest rates shoot up. Labour have talked about halving the deficit in four years but they are still sticking to the comic book value of predicting 3.5% growth in 2011 and 2012! (Of course, they might, if inflation heads north of 5% ). The fundamental problems which appear to have been glossed over are: - The structural deficit of circa ?100M (i.e. the deficit the government needs just to stand still) The engines for growth now that the City has been stymied and the property bubble has burst Britain's reliance on importing energy and the rundown of existing power stations by the middle of the decade The tax rises are froth around the edges although increasing NI is madness if the idea is to try and keep people in jobs. Raising income tax or VAT are better ideas. It strikes me that Labour are going for a scorched earth policy so that the Tories have a horrendous mess to clean up if they win. No wonder Cameron seems to want to throw it away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Yet another ground breaking initiative from the government. Small acorns and all that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deek Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Labour are pretty sure they are getting voted out next year and are showing how important the working man is to them. They are leaving the Tories with a pile of problems and will hound them in opposition as they try and sort it out. Back in 1997 the Tories left Labour with the country in an extremely strong financial position which they have subsequently destroyed due to Browns handling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Labour are pretty sure they are getting voted out next year and are showing how important the working man is to them. They are leaving the Tories with a pile of problems and will hound them in opposition as they try and sort it out. Back in 1997 the Tories left Labour with the country in an extremely strong financial position which they have subsequently destroyed due to Browns handling. Correct. As I say, any wonder the commentators keep going on about Cameron not "sealing the deal". Who would want to clear up the mess? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitster Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Labour are pretty sure they are getting voted out next year and are showing how important the working man is to them. They are leaving the Tories with a pile of problems and will hound them in opposition as they try and sort it out. Back in 1997 the Tories left Labour with the country in an extremely strong financial position which they have subsequently destroyed due to Browns handling. Goes against every political grain in my body to admit this but it can't be argued against. Well said Deek. Labour are a joke and 2 men in particular stand out..as this is an economical thread...Gordy you've been as useful as a chocolate teapot. You'll no doubt still believe you saved the world when your boat comes in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Does the boiler scrappage apply in Scotland as well? Mine could do with being renewed. Ah well, not in Scotland it would seem. Looks like I'll need to keep the current wife a bit longer. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/how-budget-affect-me/6771217/400-off-a-new-boiler-under-new-scrappage-scheme.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deek Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Ah well, not in Scotland it would seem. Looks like I'll need to keep the current wife a bit longer. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/how-budget-affect-me/6771217/400-off-a-new-boiler-under-new-scrappage-scheme.html Dave you really shouldn't answer your own questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Dave you really shouldn't answer your own questions. Even if no-one else will? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Anyway, no one has mentioned the key point about the deficit level, which is now forecast to reach ?178bn and is why the markets are getting twitchy over sterling's AAA rating. Lose that and interest rates shoot up. . Not according to this chap... BBC business editor Robert Peston said there was little cause for alarm: "The UK is neither closer or further from losing its AAA credit rating, or suffering a sterling crisis, or being unable to borrow from international investors." But then, Capitalism is all a bit of a punt at the best of times anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brow Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Slightly perturbed that child benfit is going up 1.5%. If you cant afford kids, dont bloody have any. Therapist is totally spot on with the bankers bonuses though. I dont see why ALL banks should be punished. Plus, they folk that earn these salaries know exactly what they're doing so they either a) get bigger bonuses in the first place or they'll swap into some sort of share scheme etc. The bingo think is mental though. Who thought that one up? Worse still, why werent they laughed at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwull22 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Slightly perturbed that child benfit is going up 1.5%. If you cant afford kids, dont bloody have any. Therapist is totally spot on with the bankers bonuses though. I dont see why ALL banks should be punished. Plus, they folk that earn these salaries know exactly what they're doing so they either a) get bigger bonuses in the first place or they'll swap into some sort of share scheme etc. The bingo think is mental though. Who thought that one up? Worse still, why werent they laughed at? I think all banks are included because there would be no banks at all if the governments worldwide did not bail out these institutions, the tax on bonuses should remain until the money is repaid with interest, also why do those earning more than ?800 per week only pay 1% National Insurance above ?800 instead of 11% that most others have to pay, surely this should have been the target, also all tax loopholes should have been closed to ensure the rich pay their share before any tax increases are introduced on the majority. Afterall we are all in it together, aye right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Not according to this chap... But then, Capitalism is all a bit of a punt at the best of times anyway. Peston is fed his lines by the Treasury. Let's see what happens when QE is finished as the Bank of England has been buying gilts. All the other players have been net sellers of UK government debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wibble Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Slightly perturbed that child benfit is going up 1.5%. If you cant afford kids, dont bloody have any. One of the biggest problems facing Britain right now is the ageing population. In the not too distant future there are going to be millions more pensioners than there are workers. There will not be enough taxes to fund the pensioners and there will be no workers to do the jobs that need done. The fascist knobs on here don't realise that their wonderful British lifestyle will fall in a hole without lots of new babies and loads of immigration. Immigrants come from cultures that still value larger families and so they are the saving of Britain. British people have to realise that they need immigrants as much as immigrants need them. Time to wake up you ****wits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 One of the biggest problems facing Britain right now is the ageing population. In the not too distant future there are going to be millions more pensioners than there are workers. There will not be enough taxes to fund the pensioners and there will be no workers to do the jobs that need done. The fascist knobs on here don't realise that their wonderful British lifestyle will fall in a hole without lots of new babies and loads of immigration. Immigrants come from cultures that still value larger families and so they are the saving of Britain. British people have to realise that they need immigrants as much as immigrants need them. Time to wake up you ****wits. Not quite true. The pension age will be going up but it is a fact that the dependency ratio is going in the wrong way. In addition, the UK's demographic timebomb is much less marked than other countries. Italy's population is falling and Russia's demographic pyramid spells disaster, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wibble Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Not quite true. The pension age will be going up but it is a fact that the dependency ratio is going in the wrong way. In addition, the UK's demographic timebomb is much less marked than other countries. Italy's population is falling and Russia's demographic pyramid spells disaster, for example. Just because 2 other countries are worse off, doesn't make my statement "not quite true". If the pension age is going up it confirms that what I said is true. Sometimes you like to tell people they are wrong for the sake of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Just because 2 other countries are worse off, doesn't make my statement "not quite true". If the pension age is going up it confirms that what I said is true. Sometimes you like to tell people they are wrong for the sake of it. Apologies. I didn't come across well in that last comment. What was in my head was the shift in economic power eastwards, which is being driven by younger populations. The UK isn't as badly off as other developed countries with its fertility rate and by increasing the pension age, the dependency ratio moves in the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wibble Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Apologies. I didn't come across well in that last comment. What was in my head was the shift in economic power eastwards, which is being driven by younger populations. The UK isn't as badly off as other developed countries with its fertility rate and by increasing the pension age, the dependency ratio moves in the right direction. I wasn't too upset People (especially on this board) need to look at immigration and child benefit as tools to help tackle the ageing population problems. If the British would get with the program and welcome immigrant families then instead of a divided nation, they might end up with a sustainable nation that has a future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 I wasn't too upset People (especially on this board) need to look at immigration and child benefit as tools to help tackle the ageing population problems. If the British would get with the program and welcome immigrant families then instead of a divided nation, they might end up with a sustainable nation that has a future. Totally agree. The more workers we get in to fund my retirement the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blairdin Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Spot on Andy. Brown/Darling's action is spiteful victimisation, nothing else. Why tax banks who did not have to go to the government? Why just tax banks? Many of the dodgy products they were created were due to demand from the fund management industry, and those people earn much bigger bonuses that your average banker. Surely, if this is a "fair" tax it would be applied to every firm that pays someone more than ?25k in bonus not just the banks? Completely agree. Labour's only chance at the next election is to deflect blame for the current economic fiasco to the door of someone other than them and hope the traditional labour voter buys it. I suspect this is the first step of the banking industry being properly portrayed as that scapegoat. As for todays pre-budget statement. It creates more problems than it solves. But I think that's what they want to do, they're more interested in ****ing things up for the next government than they are fixing the country. Tax rises were inevitable, but at a time when unemployment is rising why raise NI? It's not just us that pay NI, our employers pay that for us too. An NI rise ain't going to encourage small to medium sized firms to recruit, so unemployment will get worse, surely? I'm no economist, but I think raising VAT to 18.5% or 19% from April 2011 would have been a more sensible tax rise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 I wasn't too upset People (especially on this board) need to look at immigration and child benefit as tools to help tackle the ageing population problems. If the British would get with the program and welcome immigrant families then instead of a divided nation, they might end up with a sustainable nation that has a future. The thing is, that is what happened in the past decade, particularly with EU enlargement. Then the cries of "they're stealing our jobs" started, except the immigrants were quite happy to flip burgers whilst the Jeremy Kyle watchers making the cries pigged out on the credit card offers and benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 I think all banks are included because there would be no banks at all if the governments worldwide did not bail out these institutions Incorrect Wull. There were many many banks around the world that remained healthy and did not have to go to their respective governments for a bail out. Why should these well run banks be penalised? I'll tell you why; because Labour are desperate and will do anything they believe as being populist in order to keep themselves in power. It's absolutely shameful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling Archer Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 The thing is, that is what happened in the past decade, particularly with EU enlargement. Then the cries of "they're stealing our jobs" started, except the immigrants were quite happy to flip burgers whilst the Jeremy Kyle watchers making the cries pigged out on the credit card offers and benefits. THIS. This is one of the main reasons I despise the uninformed masses who don't understand that they can't expect everything to just be given to them. Do they also not realise that millions of Britons work in other countries, what if everyone took the protectionist approach and they all got laid off and had to come home. What I don't eunderstand is why it was only bankers bonuses being taxed, it's blatant discrimination. Why not tax footballer's bonuses etc, atleast bankers are performing a function that helps the country in some way. (yes I'm sure you could argue they've not been too much help lately) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclojambo Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Bring back Her Majesty Maggie Thatcher...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwull22 Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Incorrect Wull. There were many many banks around the world that remained healthy and did not have to go to their respective governments for a bail out. Why should these well run banks be penalised? I'll tell you why; because Labour are desperate and will do anything they believe as being populist in order to keep themselves in power. It's absolutely shameful. Who's to say these so called healthy banks didn't have money tied up in the RBS or HBOS or many of the others if they was allowed to go bust they would have dragged these so called healthy banks with them, the whole banking system has been artificially propped up to protect the system and in particular London Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Who's to say these so called healthy banks didn't have money tied up in the RBS or HBOS or many of the others Me. Labour's spiteful vendetta against all those employed by banks is disgusting. Mind you, no surprise to see how low they'll go in order to gather a few more votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Me. Labour's spiteful vendetta against all those employed by banks is disgusting. Mind you, no surprise to see how low they'll go in order to gather a few more votes. It's guilt by association. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwull22 Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Me. Labour's spiteful vendetta against all those employed by banks is disgusting. Mind you, no surprise to see how low they'll go in order to gather a few more votes. Not as low as a Tory will go though eh? PS its the Banks not the bankers that will have to pay this fee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 It's guilt by association. Disappointed to see you gloating over an ill-conceived, vindictive and small minded policy. I thought you were better than that..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Disappointed to see you gloating over an ill-conceived, vindictive and small minded policy. I thought you were better than that..... I'm not gloating. It's just a fact that it's easy for politicians to target banks. You just need to live with it I'm afraid and not spend as much on door-to-door goods this Xmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 I'm not gloating. It's just a fact that it's easy for politicians to target banks. You just need to live with it I'm afraid and not spend as much on door-to-door goods this Xmas. I would have bought something from the tinker if the government hadn't ripped my hard earned and well deserved dosh away from me. One can never have enough clothes pegs and dish cloths. They need to think about the knock-on effect of their ridiculous policies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Seems like the IFS have roasted the Government. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/100002631/pre-budget-report-the-ifss-verdict/ Still, the 'bash the bankers' headline was sufficient for the sheeple... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
63,495
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.