• 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!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Brown re-jigs rules to help budget"

Collapse

  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by wendigo100
    When will they do this?
    As soon as they go to elections with:
    a) charismatic leader who is not an old fart
    b) go with a manifesto that is not shadow of what Labour do anyway

    If Cons want to play Labours game of "tax and spend", then why should people vote for them?

    Leave a comment:


  • hyperD
    replied
    Originally posted by wendigo100
    When will they do this?
    2018 at the current rate....

    Leave a comment:


  • wendigo100
    replied
    Originally posted by hyperD
    Hopefully Alex, the Cons will reduce public spending, cull the public servants and their demons and maybe not raise taxes at all.
    When will they do this?

    Leave a comment:


  • hyperD
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW
    Under NL - yes, but Cons will have to embark on a more serious cost-cutting program that will hopefully get rid of major tax money wasters like EDS.
    Hopefully Alex, the Cons will reduce public spending, cull the public servants and their demons and maybe not raise taxes at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by wendigo100
    Taxes will have to rise anyway.
    Under NL - yes, but Cons will have to embark on a more serious cost-cutting program that will hopefully get rid of major tax money wasters like EDS.

    Brown's biggest sin in my view is that he kept public borrowing stable, but he induced people into taking on loads of debt against inflated house prices.

    Leave a comment:


  • wendigo100
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW
    Why are you complaining people -- this cheat will allow Brown to avoid having to raise taxes next year, or at least raise them by not as much. If anything you should be happy
    Taxes will have to rise anyway.

    The Chancellor can fiddle the figures all he likes but we are still left with one simple fact - UK plc is losing money hand over fist, which has to be paid back.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Why are you complaining people -- this cheat will allow Brown to avoid having to raise taxes next year, or at least raise them by not as much. If anything you should be happy

    Leave a comment:


  • wendigo100
    replied


    I have now decided that the current cycle is seven years after all - from 1987 to 1989, then 1997 to 2001, then 2006.

    Leave a comment:


  • allanh1
    replied
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4699407.stm

    todays brown woes...

    here come the tax hikes, followed by recession!!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • wendigo100
    replied
    The Chancellor's Golden Rule of balancing the books over the cycle 1999 to 2006 has no chance, so he is changing the cycle to make it look better.

    Extending to 2008 is too risky, because likely deficits in those extra two years would make the balance even worse.

    So he has extended it the other way, by saying that it actually started in 1997. This beefs up the balance of the current cycle with surplus nicked off the end of a previous cycle.

    It is a complete fiddle, and I would expect nothing less from New Labour in general, and the Chancellor in particular.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rebecca Loos
    replied
    because the definition of "hunky dory" depends on the spec. If the test fails the acceptance criteria, change the acceptance criteria.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lucifer Box
    replied
    Originally posted by hyperD
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4695823.stm

    Oh well, when it doesn't work, just move the goalposts. Bastard.
    The markets may punish that decision, at least in the short term. After all, if everything in hunky-dory why move the goalposts?

    Leave a comment:


  • hyperD
    started a topic Brown re-jigs rules to help budget

    Brown re-jigs rules to help budget

    Changing the rules may be easier than more civil service job cuts
    Chancellor Gordon Brown is planning to change the definition of the economic cycle to ensure avoiding breaching his "Golden Rule" on balancing the budget.
    The Treasury now says that the budget gap should be measured over a nine-year period rather than over seven years.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4695823.stm

    Oh well, when it doesn't work, just move the goalposts. Bastard.

Working...
X