Mini Budget aka Fiscal Statement

[Whorty]

such an open gaol, I'll leave it otherwise Warty will get fantasies about me wanting him.

Not an open goal ..... totally true. I couldn't let the irony of me not knowing what it meant pass by

And I'm totally fine you responding to my posts, it's the mentioning me when I'm not part of the discussion that is a bit stalker-like!

[Whorty]

Not sure how talking about what mess Labour might make in future is denying the mess the Tories have made of it now. Both are very likely true. At the moment, I don't think Labour could do any worse so maybe we should give them a go so they can have all the blame for the following 15 years.

Because deflecting from the Tory tulipshow by using the same old argument that ... it would be worse under labour ... when we don't know that for sure as they aren't in power and haven't been for 12 years, is rather pathetic.

Like when Labour use the argument that everything is Maggie's fault.

Thankfully I've never voted Labour, and didn't vote for this tulipshow, so I have a clean conscience.

[malvolio]

Because deflecting from the Tory tulipshow by using the same old argument that ... it would be worse under labour ... when we don't know that for sure as they aren't in power and haven't been for 12 years, is rather pathetic.

Like when Labour use the argument that everything is Maggie's fault.

Thankfully I've never voted Labour, and didn't vote for this tulipshow, so I have a clean conscience.

To be fair Labour did leave us in a seriously weakened position when Brown got kicked out, so while a lot of our problems are down to the current government (compounded by a few other trivia like Covid and Ukraine) they did start from a weak position. And also to be fair, not one Labour government since the early 1900s has left the economy in a a better state than when they took office. So there is a little bit of substance to the accusation, and justification for the fear that they would take us backwards again.

We haven't seen a coherent manifesto from them yet. Perhaps we should reserve judgement till we do. It might be both marvellous and affordable. Certainly it couldn't be any worse than their last attempt.

Then again, the biggest problem we face is there are 650 MPs and probably 50 across all the parties have any real world experience. The rest are either full time politicians since university days or financiers who still think they are important and representative.

[AtW]

Because deflecting from the Tory tulipshow by using the same old argument that ... it would be worse under labour ... when we don't know that for sure as they aren't in power and haven't been for 12 years, is rather pathetic.

Taxes will be higher under Labour, that is to be expected, what is fooking unexpected and totally unacceptable that taxes go up under Tory Scum also

[AtW]

Oh dear -

“Traders are betting it will take a bigger UK government policy U-turn to restore credibility with markets.

Wagers against the pound over the next year have climbed to a record high in the options market, even after Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng said he will scrap a proposed tax cut for the country’s highest earners. That only removes £2 billion ($2.3 billion) from a tax-cut package costing £45 billion.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...&sref=o1Dqf087

[AtW]

«Climbdown on 45pc tax doesn’t change ‘negative’ outlook for UK, warns S&P

The Government’s U-turn on tax cuts may not protect the UK from a credit rating downgrade, S&P Global has warned.

Maxim Rybnikov, an analyst at the rating agency, said the move wouldn’t materially affect fiscal and economic projections made last week.

S&P downgraded its outlook on the UK’s AA credit rating from stable to negative in the wake of Kwasi Kwarteng’s tax-cutting fiscal plans.»

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...euro-ftse-100/


Oh wow, what a shocker - stupid S&P did not get the memo clearly

[d000hg]

Liz says government have to be "fiscally responsible" when asked about whether benefits would follow inflation... so they can afford to ditch the 45% tax rate (even though they were forced to ditch that) but not give people on benefits an extra fiver a week.

[jamesbrown]

Liz says government have to be "fiscally responsible" when asked about whether benefits would follow inflation... so they can afford to ditch the 45% tax rate (even though they were forced to ditch that) but not give people on benefits an extra fiver a week.

I wouldn't worry, she'll have to row back on that one too.

[Whorty]

I wouldn't worry, she'll have to row back on that one too.

Her and Kwasi are together repainting that blue wall back to red!

[_V_]

Liz says government have to be "fiscally responsible" when asked about whether benefits would follow inflation... so they can afford to ditch the 45% tax rate (even though they were forced to ditch that) but not give people on benefits an extra fiver a week.

Should benefits increases match price inflation (say approx 10% increase) or working people's wages (probably nearer to 5% increase)?

Just asking for a Tory friend.