Budget 2014

[Tangled up in Blue]

Employers NI for under 21's... the "jobs tax".

Fair point.Forgot about that.

And I saw the whole of Boy George's budget speech live.I must say I thought it was a powerful political performance.

 

[Holy Joe]

Our industry has been right ****ed over.

In fairness, doing over the bookies isn't exactly a vote loser. About £500m wiped off the shares of the biggest firms these last two days though.

You should try the annuity business - £1bn wiped off my company alone - and the annuity business isn't our biggest revenue driver. Some of the annuity only companies have halved in value. Although probably the right thing to stop the compulsory requirement for annuities for most people

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

You should try the annuity business - £1bn wiped off my company alone - and the annuity business isn't our biggest revenue driver. Some of the annuity only companies have halved in value. Although probably the right thing to stop the compulsory requirement for annuities for most people

Absolutely.Pensioners should be allowed to buy a Lamborghini if they want to.Think of all that extra tax revenue HMG gets too.:winking:

 

[OldBlueLady]

40 years ago was of course 1974.

I can remember flying to the USA in 1972 (as a student).

IIRC,my father always drove a (fairly) new car back in the 60's.

We did have a rented colour TV when they first came in but not after that.

We rented a tv when my ex and I bought our first house in 1987! From Radio Rentals, I think, or possibly Rumbelows. People expect everything these days, without waiting. I'm not the best with money, but even I recognise that the cut backs have had to be made in recent budgets because the country was flat broke. Hopefully the austerity period is over and it's time for people to get a bit back, whether it's enjoying a slightly cheaper pint or a night at bingo! I wasn't anywhere near as offended at that poster as some seem to be either, bit of an over reaction in my book.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

We rented a tv when my ex and I bought our first house in 1987! From Radio Rentals, I think, or possibly Rumbelows. People expect everything these days, without waiting. I'm not the best with money, but even I recognise that the cut backs have had to be made in recent budgets because the country was flat broke. Hopefully the austerity period is over and it's time for people to get a bit back, whether it's enjoying a slightly cheaper pint or a night at bingo! I wasn't anywhere near as offended at that poster as some seem to be either, bit of an over reaction in my book.

It was a crass advert and shows what leading Tories really think about the proles.

 

[Pubey]

We rented a tv when my ex and I bought our first house in 1987! From Radio Rentals, I think, or possibly Rumbelows. People expect everything these days, without waiting. I'm not the best with money, but even I recognise that the cut backs have had to be made in recent budgets because the country was flat broke. Hopefully the austerity period is over and it's time for people to get a bit back, whether it's enjoying a slightly cheaper pint or a night at bingo! I wasn't anywhere near as offended at that poster as some seem to be either, bit of an over reaction in my book.

The 'they' in it is the worst part - it shows the govt see themselves as different to 'hardworking' people. Bizarre

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

The 'they' in it is the worst part - it shows the govt see themselves as different to 'hardworking' people. Bizarre

Perhaps we can expect tax breaks for hard working, budgie and whippet owners next time round? :winking:

 

[Benfleet A1]

This poster seems to be a God send to the left as it gives them something to howl about as there is so little to critizise in the budget. The startled panda just went off on a tangent and hardly even mentioned anything from what Osbourne had just laid out. Balls looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights everytime he was asked to comment. All hail a crass moment eh?

 

[Pubey]

This poster seems to be a God send to the left as it gives them something to howl about as there is so little to critizise in the budget. The startled panda just went off on a tangent and hardly even mentioned anything from what Osbourne had just laid out. Balls looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights everytime he was asked to comment. All hail a crass moment eh?

Well normally the budget is released internally so people can prepare comments - however that didn't happen this time.

It isn't just the left who are annoyed by the poster.

 

[Thorpe Groyney]

It often leaves me with a wry chuckle, talk of 'the left'. Unless people are talking of the small splinter group parties who are on the extreme wings, of course. The mainstream parties have but a tiny shred of 'the left' in them. Labour are to the right of centre, Conservative to the right. You need only need to look at both parties economic plans, their relationships with unions, and other actions while in government, to see that.

The other evening there was a documentary about Spitting Image. The political climate at the time was a Godsend for a show like that. There were more divisions, and variance of opinion, in each party than there is over the whole of parliament these days.

As for an assertion elsewhere that Danny Alexander (who, if he stands for re-election in Inverness, will perhaps be the biggest casualty in the 2015 election), was very much to the left, it was interesting to note that Rob Wilson MP last month revealed that Nick Clegg had complained about Alexander "going native" in the Conservative-run Treasury.

Anyway, that was my straying off-topic. The Budget itself had unquestionably good points to it, the cosmetic pint and bingo aside. On top of the NI stopped on under 21's, there are subsidies for childcare, help for new homebuyers, and of course the tax cut for low wage earners.

What none of this has properly addressed, however, is something, which whether you like / admit it or not, Ed Miliband championed last year and has shifted the area of argument to. The cost of living. Uppermost in people's minds are things like job insecurity and low, low wages which is something that Miliband has focussed on.

It's likely that the vast, vast majority of the budget appealed to people who would vote for Cameron anyway. Which does nothing to help in the opinion polls. Whisper it quietly, but after four quarters of economic growth, Labour's lead in the opinion polls will not go away. Up against such a seemingly ineffectual opposition leader, and be in power over an economic recovery, to still be behind in the polls is something that I know is disquieting a fair few people in Tory HQ.

I said earlier that Danny Alexanader may be the biggest general election casualty of 2015. After the latest budget, which does very little either way, it could in fact mean that David Cameron himself, whom it's said is someone trying to be all things to all people without people really knowing what he stands for, is the one to go.

After a neutral budget like this, it leaves more questions unanswered than ever before.

 

[steveo]

Uppermost in people's minds are things like job insecurity and low, low wages which is something that Miliband has focussed on.
.

but where would the money come from for higher wages? its so easy to say firms should pay higher wages but if for example a firm is employing 50 people and paying £7 an hour that may be all they can afford. It's also so easy to say "they should pay £9 an hour". So on a 40 hour week they would need to find another 4 grand which they may not be able to afford. So they do that, go skint and leave 50 people without a job. Who wins?

 

[Swiss Tony]

Perhaps we can expect tax breaks for hard working, budgie and whippet owners next time round? :winking:

Don't you mean pigeons? budgies and cloth caps don't add up.:dim:

 

[* ORM *]

Could it be argued that the standard of living has been artificially raised through spending on credit and now everyone has to re-adjust to how it should have been?

Amen to that.

Firstly it is incredibly hard to debate politics when people at extremes don't want to enter into debate and agree a middle ground. At least this place is moderated unlike, seemingly, the Echo website. Very frustrating for an ex-pat. For the ovewhelming most part our mods do a great job.

My problem is I'm right of centre, sometimes extreme, but for th most part just right. It was Maggie, who I loved, that started the have want you want on credit lifestyle and the majority, whatever political persuasion, jumped on the bandwagon. If anything that only worsened under Blair with our TVs full of credit, gambling and ambulance chasing ads. I find it bizarre that the left seemingly objects to measures (AGAIN) designed to counter financial mismanagement of the economy under a coalition that has made Tories realise on a personal level spend what you have is better. I, for one, live within my means and religiously pay off credit card to the cent each month.

We are missing the important question though. Am I still tax free as long as I don't work or spend more time in the UK than the rules allow? :hilarious:

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Don't you mean pigeons? budgies and cloth caps don't add up.:dim:

My working class Nan (who was probably a Tory voter) used to have a pet budgie.

 

[Neil_F]

A question...How can the standard of living for the high earners keep growing whilst the standard of the poor keep shrinking in a supposedly democratic society?

Some interesting questions, Cricko. Here are my thoughts.

The very highest earners continue to pull away from the rest. This is a global phenomenon and it is down to globalisation. A point I make to the teaching community often (not that they listen) is that best graduate jobs in this country are no longer a competition between UK residents; you are competing against the best graduates in the world. There is now a huge global premium for talent and employers are prepared to pay for it.

Having said that, I think there is something wrong with the executive remuneration policies of multi-nationals. I have no problem with business founders making money but the mutli-national CEO junket is out of control. The problem is that remuneration committees are stuffed full of the same people who drive up the market rates so that they can get another committee gig somewhere else. It essentially works the same way as politics does. Regulation won't help (and some regulation, such as FSA requirements to have a higher percentage of fixed pay, only serves to push up "risk free" earnings i.e. they get it no matter how bad their performance). Shareholders, and especially institutional shareholders, need to take a much tougher line on this and start voting against executive pay arrangements.

What happened to love thy neighbour if they were less fortunate than you.What happened to humanity to condemn those that are not of high value to society through no choice of their own.

I have a theory on this - it is down to immigration. The most re-distributive countries in the world are the most ethnically homogenous (think Scandinavia). Whether we like it or care to admit it, I think it is easier to commit to national level re-distribution when the beneficiaries are "people like us". Mass immigration, I think, is changing attitudes to re-distribution and welfare because there is a perception, probably justified, that money is going to people that are not "like us".

I don't think this is a racial issue but a natural inclination and affinity towards the people we consider to be our kin and closest to us. The recent debate of welfare tourism and, for some time now, the overseas aid budget are reflections of this concept.

I would be interested to see data on attitudes to re-distribution and how they have changed over time relative to immigration rates.

Incidentally, the much adored/maligned (delete as appropriate) book "The Spirit Level" which asserts that greater equality leads to greater happiness within a nation I think misses point that the most equal countries are often the most ethnically homogenous.

To be clear, I am actually pro-immigration and I think the current government's restrictions on non-EU immigration are too severe. However my position is largely based on economics and not social impact.

We now live in a very selfish world where all that counts in Number 1......dark days indeed.

Perhaps, but I think this comes back to my point above. I will freely admit that my concern is only really for my family and friends. I don't know my neighbours and I feel almost no community spirit whatsoever. I live in London though.

I suspect those who live in rural communities have a very different perception to me.