The wrath of Osborne: Winners and losers

DonDaddyD

So its that time again, budget season! The penny snatcher, Osborne, has been allowed to speak again and some will be licking their wounds. I am, I have to say, surprised. I find myself looking at this key points of the Autumn statement and am struggling to find anything to call Osborne a c*nt. In fact, the cancellation of the 3p rise, raise in income tax threshold and 40% threshold (not that I am in it - I ain't giving you lot that) has me thinking whether i should shake his hand before punching him square in the face (for... er... being him).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20606382

What say you? Thoughts? Comments? Abuse?

JamesB5446

Shale gas. Wanker.

cyclingprop

The fact that you were automatically looking for reasons to call someone a c* tells me more about your personality in one post than many of your essays have in the past.

il_principe

Cancellation of the 3p rise annoys me. Govt already subsidies motorists enough as it is.

Paul E

cyclingprop wrote:

The fact that you were automatically looking for reasons to call someone a c* tells me more about your personality in one post than many of your essays have in the past.

Seconded

tailwindhome

I thought we had an unofficial 'no politics' pact.

DonDaddyD

The Inheritance tax nil-rate increase is a moral win, if not a significant one.

Still, this could all be the feel good smokescreen for the next statement, which will be brutal and make the more economically deprived areas of London look like the landscape of Fallout 3 (that's a computer game, Gregs).

TheStone

He basically waffled for a while an announced nothing.
Balls was even worse than normal in reply, can't see him lasting much longer.

Basically, whichever govt is in power, the same things will happen. Too much tax (on those that bother paying) and too much spending (including way too much waste). There is no gilt market any more. The Bank of England has just printed the last few years like Zimbabwe.

DonDaddyD

TailWindHome wrote:

I thought we had an unofficial 'no politics' pact.

As the unofficial 'Bikeradar community lead' my first act was to make discussing politics A-OK.

DonDaddyD

TheStone wrote:

He basically waffled for a while an announced nothing.
Balls was even worse than normal in reply, can't see him lasting much longer.

Basically, whichever govt is in power, the same things will happen. Too much tax (on those that bother paying) and too much spending (including way too much waste). There is no gilt market any more. The Bank of England has just printed the last few years like Zimbabwe.

It begs the question, which party will adopt UKIP's (I said it here first) tax policy:

http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-policies
At the last election we opted to merge 20% basic income tax with 11% national insurance to create a 31% flat tax on all earned incomes over £11,500. As a tax cut for all, with a higher threshold, it would also take the poorest paid out of income tax altogether.

It would also mean abolishing the existing 40% and 50% income tax brackets, the latter actually costing the economy rather than taking in revenue.

How it could be done: http://markwadsworth.blogspot.co.uk/201 ... olicy.html

TheStone

DonDaddyD wrote:

http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-policies
At the last election we opted to merge 20% basic income tax with 11% national insurance to create a 31% flat tax on all earned incomes over £11,500. As a tax cut for all, with a higher threshold, it would also take the poorest paid out of income tax altogether.

It would also mean abolishing the existing 40% and 50% income tax brackets, the latter actually costing the economy rather than taking in revenue.

Flat tax can be done, but not at those figures. If you include ENI the lower rate is now 40% and the higher 49% (not including the 150k band).

And that's not taking into account the extra needed to make up the higher allowance, or reducing the deficit, or ever paying back any debt !!!!

tailwindhome

DonDaddyD wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

I thought we had an unofficial 'no politics' pact.

As the unofficial 'Bikeradar community lead' my first act was to make discussing politics A-OK.

RICK!

RICK!

DDD thinks he's the boss again.

Ban him!

DonDaddyD

Paul E wrote:

cyclingprop wrote:

The fact that you were automatically looking for reasons to call someone a c* tells me more about your personality in one post than many of your essays have in the past.

Seconded

The fact that both of you took that comment in complete seriousness tells me more about your being grumblebum-trolls than any of your other posts aimed at insulting me.

Kieran_Burns

DonDaddyD wrote:

It begs the question, which party will adopt UKIP's (I said it here first) tax policy:

http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-policies
At the last election we opted to merge 20% basic income tax with 11% national insurance to create a 31% flat tax on all earned incomes over £11,500. As a tax cut for all, with a higher threshold, it would also take the poorest paid out of income tax altogether.

It would also mean abolishing the existing 40% and 50% income tax brackets, the latter actually costing the economy rather than taking in revenue.

How it could be done: http://markwadsworth.blogspot.co.uk/201 ... olicy.html

CEP please.

Fair representation for all

CiB

Changes you say? I won't hold my breath. For the many years that I've been at work (as opposed to school) budgets & chancellors have come & gone, and with monotonous regularity they tweak the tax on fuel, alcohol, cigarettes, VED, income tax, VAT occasionally and various other forms of revenue generation; we all sit in the pub in days gone by or in our bigger & bigger living rooms as time & years go by and allow us to do that, and not much changes. We still drink a bit too much, carry on pouring fuel into the cars, buying stuff and on the whole life goes on once the budget headlines have died down. I don't know anyone who's life has been hugely affected by changes as a result of any budget announcement. It's a bit of tinkering, it adjusts what the govt of the day needs to bring in, then we all tut or cheer and get on with things. Osbourne is no different from the rest. Except for Brown. He was a c**t.

DonDaddyD

TheStone wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-policies
At the last election we opted to merge 20% basic income tax with 11% national insurance to create a 31% flat tax on all earned incomes over £11,500. As a tax cut for all, with a higher threshold, it would also take the poorest paid out of income tax altogether.

It would also mean abolishing the existing 40% and 50% income tax brackets, the latter actually costing the economy rather than taking in revenue.

Flat tax can be done, but not at those figures. If you include ENI the lower rate is now 40% and the higher 49% (not including the 150k band).

And that's not taking into account the extra needed to make up the higher allowance, or reducing the deficit, or ever paying back any debt !!!!

The fact that it could work has me thinking that one of the three major parties may take it up as a policy....

rjsterry

DonDaddyD wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

I thought we had an unofficial 'no politics' pact.

As the unofficial 'Bikeradar community lead' my first act was to make discussing politics A-OK.

Much as I'd love to get involved, it'll lead to a lost afternoon. That, and some already seem to be using it is a platform for sniping, before we even get into the usual cyclical repetition of arguments and name calling a few pages in. I'm with TWH on this one.

rick_chasey

Didn't think this was a budget that announced anything significant at all.

The main thing is that what Osbourne predicted would happen to the deficit and growth hasn't, and, in an ideal world, we'd be able to objectively look at why.

I'm always happy for people to make predicitions. I'm even Ok with them being wrong if we look at why a) the prediction was made, b) why the prediction is wrong and c) what we can do to make it better/ not make the mistake again.

rubertoe

CiB wrote:

Changes you say? I won't hold my breath. For the many years that I've been at work (as opposed to school) budgets & chancellors have come & gone, and with monotonous regularity they tweak the tax on fuel, alcohol, cigarettes, VED, income tax, VAT occasionally and various other forms of revenue generation; we all sit in the pub in days gone by or in our bigger & bigger living rooms as time & years go by and allow us to do that, and not much changes. We still drink a bit too much, carry on pouring fuel into the cars, buying stuff and on the whole life goes on once the budget headlines have died down. I don't know anyone who's life has been hugely affected by changes as a result of any budget announcement. It's a bit of tinkering, it adjusts what the govt of the day needs to bring in, then we all tut or cheer and get on with things. Osbourne is no different from the rest. Except for Brown. He was a c**t.

This is it, it doesn't really make major differences we still have to pay tax and we will always have to .

the last bit is especially true.

DonDaddyD

CiB wrote:

Changes you say? I won't hold my breath. For the many years that I've been at work (as opposed to school) budgets & chancellors have come & gone, and with monotonous regularity they tweak the tax on fuel, alcohol, cigarettes, VED, income tax, VAT occasionally and various other forms of revenue generation; we all sit in the pub in days gone by or in our bigger & bigger living rooms as time & years go by and allow us to do that, and not much changes. We still drink a bit too much, carry on pouring fuel into the cars, buying stuff and on the whole life goes on once the budget headlines have died down. I don't know anyone who's life has been hugely affected by changes as a result of any budget announcement. It's a bit of tinkering, it adjusts what the govt of the day needs to bring in, then we all tut or cheer and get on with things. Osbourne is no different from the rest. Except for Brown. He was a c**t.

Though not really budget related:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_prote ... ed_Kingdom

They (we) protested at a time that fuel was costing 80p a litre and would reach a pound. What fools we were, they were glorious days.

TheStone

Rick Chasey wrote:

I'm always happy for people to make predicitions. I'm even Ok with them being wrong if we look at why a) the prediction was made, b) why the prediction is wrong and c) what we can do to make it better/ not make the mistake again.

What's amazing is that they acknowledge that their and the OBR predictions were wrong, but then use a new set of predictions, from the same people, to announce that everything will be ok again.

The Bank of England inflation predictions are the worst of all, yet they're still allowed to produce that cr*p every month, unchallenged by anyone.

il_principe

Rick Chasey wrote:

The main thing is that what Osbourne...

Bzzzzzt!

Osborne.

notsoblue

TheStone wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

I'm always happy for people to make predicitions. I'm even Ok with them being wrong if we look at why a) the prediction was made, b) why the prediction is wrong and c) what we can do to make it better/ not make the mistake again.

What's amazing is that they acknowledge that their and the OBR predictions were wrong, but then use a new set of predictions, from the same people, to announce that everything will be ok again.

The Bank of England inflation predictions are the worst of all, yet they're still allowed to produce that cr*p every month, unchallenged by anyone.

It really is astonishing.

tailwindhome

Il Principe wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

The main thing is that what Osbourne...

Bzzzzzt!

Osborne.

Ozzy would make a crackin' Chancellor though wouldn't he??

TheStone

DonDaddyD wrote:

They (we) protested at a time that fuel was costing 80p a litre and would reach a pound. What fools we were, they were glorious days.

Oil (and a whole heap of assets) would be much cheaper if they hadn't printed £375bn.
Their stated aim was to support asset prices, yet again, no-one ever challenged why on earth they would do that????

bushu

Still deserves a poke in the eye just for being part of the old boys club, whether this offends you depends what side of the fence you sit on.. either way he's a snob, whether he can fix our economy is a joke as this would empower the peasants to be of free will, not struggling to pay bills/feed kids & more importantly not doing the poorly paid jobs that made them rich in the first place..

notsoblue

bushu wrote:

Still deserves a poke in the eye just for being part of the old boys club, whether this offends you depends what side of the fence you sit on.. either way he's a snob, whether he can fix our economy is a joke as this would empower the peasants to be of free will, not struggling to pay bills/feed kids & more importantly not doing the poorly paid jobs that made them rich in the first place..

I think its a bit silly to be against people like George Osborne because you feel he is only rich because of the poverty of others.

What I do think is relevant is how removed he is demographically from the average Briton. If you're going to usher in a huge period of austerity for the country, you should really be able to empathise with the people who will no doubt suffer as a result.

CiB

notsoblue wrote:

What I do think is relevant is how removed he is demographically from the average Briton. If you're going to usher in a huge period of austerity for the country, you should really be able to empathise with the people who will no doubt suffer as a result.

Not necessarily. He's there to do a job, one that some people believe he shouldn't be doing, His ability to do that job shouldn't rely on any empathy on his part with those at the sharp end of his reforms and corrections; better that he can distance himself from them and not lose his nerve out of sympathy for them - I mean us obviously. Us honest poor hard-working families [(c) All Parties] must stick together.

daxplusplus

TheStone wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

They (we) protested at a time that fuel was costing 80p a litre and would reach a pound. What fools we were, they were glorious days.

Oil (and a whole heap of assets) would be much cheaper if they hadn't printed £375bn.
Their stated aim was to support asset prices, yet again, no-one ever challenged why on earth they would do that????

No one challenged the problem with abolishing the 10% lower tax bands when Gordon announced that in his 07(?) budget (the problem being that it would hit the poorest the hardest - like duhh!). It took a year (more?) before people started to realise what was going to happen. So what chance anything as complicated as the above being challenged :evil:

.. and it's stuff like the above that means that a budget can have a bloody massive impact on people's lives.

CiB

DaxPlusPlus wrote:

No one challenged the problem with abolishing the 10% lower tax bands when Gordon announced that in his 07(?) budget (the problem being that it would hit the poorest the hardest - like duhh!). It took a year (more?) before people started to realise what was going to happen. So what chance anything as complicated as the above being challenged :evil

Not true. Within hours of the announcement, commentators from across the sepctrum had picked up on it and pointed out the effect of that change. The [then] opposition were all over him in Parliament the following day once they'd verified the figures and realised that not only was GB a fraud, he was also a crooked piece of work and a waste of oxygen.

It took a year to correct it; that's down to process, not apathy by opposition parties.

tailwindhome

CiB wrote:

Us honest poor hard-working families [(c) All Parties] must stick together.

What happens when 'right thinking people' and 'honest hard working families' collide?