• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

So - Good Budget or Bad Budget?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    I very much doubt we'd have seen Labour drop the tax from 50->45%.
    Labour would keep borrowing or more like printing money to make up for lack of demand for low yield gilts.

    It would have worked too but the price of loaf of bread would have been £1000+.

    Comment


      #32
      I still think they could have done more with VAT cut and in return compensate by cutting housing benefit, especially for people who are "forced" to live in the most expensive part of london.
      Happy days every day...just keep invoicing.

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by eek View Post
        There is a reason why everything is now announced in one year to follow the following year. It never used to that way but since computers have arrived it takes a year for the changes to be programmed.
        I was doing payroll back in the 80s and early 90s. I think we had until something like June/July to implement Budget changes.

        I suppose someone must have lobbied for more time since then.
        Behold the warranty -- the bold print giveth and the fine print taketh away.

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by Friday Blue View Post
          I still think they could have done more with VAT cut and in return compensate by cutting housing benefit, especially for people who are "forced" to live in the most expensive part of london.
          They already made cuts to housing benefits in the last year or so.
          Originally posted by MaryPoppins
          I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
          Originally posted by vetran
          Urine is quite nourishing

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by d000hg View Post
            They already made cuts to housing benefits in the last year or so.
            i still thikn they can go abit further. and also i think they need to bring back the old system where rent is paid directly to landlord instead of via dhss. it may cost the conucil abit more, but no where near as much as problematic down stream.
            Happy days every day...just keep invoicing.

            Comment


              #36
              In some cases they still do pay direct. However it was changed (partly at least) to help tenants learn about paying themselves, so they understand it's real money not a free house. As a landlord I would rather just get the money, but I can understand their logic.
              Originally posted by MaryPoppins
              I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
              Originally posted by vetran
              Urine is quite nourishing

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by Churchill View Post
                Ok, just to get it into your nicotine addled brain. Your addiction can be cured. No-one is forcing you to continue your pitiful existence dependent on chemicals to distort your reality!

                Oh and you smell.
                seeing as obesity is a much bigger burden on the NHS than smoking when are we going to see lardy fu<kers being taxed more?

                Comment


                  #38
                  Originally posted by AtW View Post
                  Labour would keep borrowing or more like printing money to make up for lack of demand for low yield gilts.

                  It would have worked too but the price of loaf of bread would have been £1000+.
                  So under Labour, we'd have had even more QE you reckon?

                  Comment


                    #39
                    Originally posted by original PM View Post
                    seeing as obesity is a much bigger burden on the NHS than smoking when are we going to see lardy fu<kers being taxed more?
                    Firstly, please provide a citation.

                    Secondly... I thought luxury foods were taxed more.
                    Originally posted by MaryPoppins
                    I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
                    Originally posted by vetran
                    Urine is quite nourishing

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Originally posted by d000hg View Post
                      Firstly, please provide a citation.

                      Secondly... I thought luxury foods were taxed more.
                      Since when was a pasty a luxury item, not even to a knuckle dragging chav surely ?
                      Doing the needful since 1827

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X