If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
And the basic tax rate payers who DO earn more than 7 grand will now be £170 a year better off, which is a lot when you consider the amount those people are earning!
Of course VAT is a regressive tax and Lib Dem would not have raised it, but would the Tory's have INCREASED the personal threshold whilst at the same time DECREASED the upper earnings limit? Not without the Lib Dem coalition! You can bet your life on that one.
Would you prefer they didn't increase VAT and left the tax threshold where it was? Aiming to get the tax free threshold to 10K is a fantastic aim and will make a huge difference to the poorest in the country. I am in full support. Another point to note is that when the VAT rate was reduced by 2.5% to 15% during the "recession" (which I still think we're in), everyone moaned that it was a waste of money and you couldn't notice the difference in your pocket. Now the 2.5% has swung the other way, no doubt the sheep in the country will be up in arms.
Like I said, it's a compromise. Of course you will have liberals coming out being shell shocked and right wing tories coming out in disgust, that is natural in any party.
But I would personally like to think the center of both parties is comfortable with the fact that labour are out and both parties are influencing what I view as a reasonable balance in the policy shaping in this country.
A lot of other countries operate coalition government, and compromise is how it goes.
Nice one, I'm glad I'm not alone in my views! :d
The bigger picture is ....every country in the western world is in hock to the international bankers ...right wing left wing and centre governments throughout the western world.
Did they all suddenly behave stupidly ...follow the U.K's Labour party?
Nope ...there's the fingerprint of design on the whole situation.
Then VAT at 20% ...your having a larff!
No they didn't. You were an advocate of 'weak government' during the election - so here's your 'weak government'. And this type of government survives on COMPROMISE.
Neither side is getting everything it wants but the Lib Dems now have, amongst other things, a commitment from the Conservatives to hold a referendum for changing the voting system. It will result in giving you the 'weak government' that you seek and once again, those future governments will need to COMPROMISE.
The Lib Dems have taken a judgement to yield the influence required to change the voting system forever in this country. And I admire them for doing that.
To be honest mate this is not my idea of weak government!
But we know that Labour didn't have the money to implement a lot of their pre-election policies. The policies were just honey traps.
And the recovery is debatable. There are real fears at the moment that this recession could double-dip ... so it is still far too early to say that we are safely in recovery.
I respect that you have strong views on this but I don't agree - and I don't want to debate this, if you don't mind.
The recovery was real TEAG but yes only fragile.
I've half got an ear on the telly at the mo and it was just said that one in every seven pounds taken in VAT comes from the poorer people in society while only one in every twenty five pounds comes from the better off ...does that make sense?
If I understand you correctly, any government that was much weaker than this - especially if a coalition was made up of more than a couple of parties - one might find that NOTHING was accomplished.
We have to face these cuts. Even Alastair Darling said his cuts would be as bad or worse than the Thatcher era. I know his time scales were different but we also have to ensure our financial standing stands up ... because a good financial rating gives us the credit to spend on the people and infrastructures which require investment. The quicker you overpay your overdraft, the quicker you can start borrowing again.
Yes, I agree that it doesn't make sense. It needs changing. But going back to your statement that the Lib Dems had 'sold out', what would the situation have been like if the Conservatives were in full power on this occasion? The Lib Dems have at least negotiated a tax break for the very poor, for instance. We're not going to change society overnight but thank god there are some Lib Dems in there ensuring that at least their are some checks and balances on Tory policy and they can get a few of their own in, while they're at it.
Another +1 for this.
As I see it, there's no point even considering what the last government would have done, because we know that they were writing cheques that the economy could not cash. The cuts HAD to be made, and for the most part, they seem to be relatively fair, with some amount of protection for those on the very lowest incomes - incidentally the same people that Labour fucked over with the whole 10p tax rate thing.
As for VAT, I didn't notice myself any better off when it was 15%, so I doubt I'll notice too much of a sting now. It's not ideal, but I would much sooner be taxed on the goods I buy (which I at least have some control over) than have income tax raised, and have less money in my pocket to even make those decisions with.
They had their own cuts lined up where the top would have paid more than the bottom.
The Tories are making sure it's the other way round.
Senior Liberal Democrat warns concessions are a 'fig leaf'
A senior Liberal Democrat raised doubts about the coalition budget , saying that policy concessions his party appeared to have won were "fig leaves", describing his own party as being "led" by the centre-right, and warning colleagues that they had "no electoral mandate" for the cuts they were helping to introduce. ....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/22/lib-dem-leadership-cuts
It's not as bad as I thought, though I think that if they want to incentivise people on benefits to get in to work, they could always make a higher minimum wage.
Unfortunately that would also incentivse companies not to hire.
They're not going to mention job cuts directly, but previously we've been instructed to take a percentage cut in operating costs - we're doing some of that by reducing travel costs, reducing marketing etc, and the bosses are reckoning we can hold off on involuntary redundancy, but if we have to make much further cuts jobs will go.
I'm loving the way Guardianistas and other rent-a-shites are tonight wanking themselves into a state of utter despair about this very timid Budget. The Boy George has barely dipped his toe into the pool of debt that we've currently got if this is the best he can do. Wonder how much the Limp Dems influenced him.
As for hiking VAT, is the man completely stupid? Doesn't he remember a certain Alistair Darling tried to cut the VAT for about a year to stimulate the economy and fuck all good it did? Raising it isn't going to make enough of a difference to be worthwhile and is simply a pain in the arse for the retail sector who are going to have to re-price a whole tonne of shit after Christmas. What a bellend.
In a nutshell, my opinion on the budget - Absolutely fucking pathetic.
UPDATE: Oh yes. To those people talking about the LibDems allegedly "selling out" and the like, you're bang on the money. But it's no different to what they've always done. I wrote a few weeks ago that Nick Clegg would soon be exposed as an "opportunistic cunt" and I think I've been proved right today. The Limps were promising that they wouldn't want to raise VAT after the election. Today's decision shows them to be not only unprincipled, but a bunch of fucking liars.
The same applies to you, Call Me Dave. You also ran your campaign saying a VAT increase wasn't on the cards. Tony Blair would be very proud of you, you shameless bastard.
Just curious.
I think minimum wage should be higher... Granted companies may recruit less people, but surely individuals having more money to spend would benefit the economy too.
Unfortunately in a recession, a lot of the jobs aren't even there to start. People who already have barriers to work are going to be locked in worse poverty than before. I am concerned this will make child poverty worse.
I don't think the benefit system is perfect, I think there's a mixture of reasons you get some who dick around... But there are normally a few factors in long term unemployment.
A lot of the budget changes don't worry me tbh... But then I am not getting a pay freeze because I don't earn enough and my current accommodation is quite cheap for where I live. My own circumstances won't change beyond losing a few quid.
I disagree with the pundits in the media saying it would hurt the economy. It may do so but only indirectly. If people's income goes down, then there is less demand for goods and services. This leads to less production of products, and less needs for workers, etc.
But then again, only a fraction of people work in the public sector, so the effect may not be that marked.
I think the economy for the next few years though will be flat, and not because of the budget or the need to cut the deficit. It will take time for confidence to come back in the economy after the recession, and for the banks to lend again.
You won't on such a big stage, nor will they ever talk about the number of jobs affected. However, look at policy coming out now.
NHS Operating Framework revision was published this week. The press focussed on the targets which were "abolished" (even though none actually were when you read the document, sloppy journos) but part of that policy shift included a reduction in "Management Costs" of 46%.
Subtle way of announcing job losses over the next 3 years...
Phone bills gas electric fuel etc ...all up by a fifth ...that's a lot of money.
Those who think it is entirely the last governments fault ...can you explain to me how and why the entire western world is in the same boat?
Right wing left centre ...all of them have ended up in the same boat at the same time.
So ...if we'd had a Tory government that last ten years ...we'd still be in this shit.
would be in worse shit
Surely you mean 1/20th? It's gone up by 5% not 20%
It's now 20% ...that's a fifth of what your spending.
Haven't you got that the wrong way around? VAT was 17.5% but Labour put it down to 15% last year for a number of months before reverting back to 17.5% in January. So the hike isn't 5%, but 3.5% - not that this would make anyone feel better.
D'oh!
Doh from me too!!!!!!!