2024 UK politics - now with Labour in charge
Comments
-
Go on then.
Whoever wrote that article either doesn't understand capital allowances or is being disingenuous. Par for the course for the Guardian.
It's a cash flow timing difference - under the old rules companies could get the relief on the qualifying capital expenditure over a number of years: these rules allow you claim it all in year 1. So looking looking at one year you might see a reduction in taxes but taken over the life of the assets there is no difference in the total tax benefit from the change in the rules. So time value of money aside, any extra investment that it creates is a win.
Also for context it was introduced to soften the blow of raising the headline corporate tax rate.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I see Reeves is following on the last government's tradition of knowing better than me and my employer where I am more productive.
So does Rayner apparently, but in the opposite direction.
0 -
Have to agree, it should be a matter for employers and employees.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Thanks. It seemed unlikely Labour would have kept it if it was as bad as the article made out.
0 -
It also fits in with Labour's desire to be seen to boost manufacturing type activity, given the sort of assets that are in scope of these rules.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]1 -
The danger at the moment is that by trying to offend no-one (including the Brexit right and RW press), they aren't pleasing anyone. Not incompetent, not dishonest, and fixing some of the damage done over the last 14 years will do for starters, but they are going to need something rather bolder and more eye-catching as time goes on, if they aren't going to squander their election victory. If they leave it a couple of years to be bolder, it could be too late reap the rewards for 2029.
The good news for them at the moment is that the Tory Party is still a big steaming pile of poo with no discernable policies other than attacking Labour for, well, anything.
0 -
Re your last paragraph, that's kinda what the opposition is meant to do.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Not sure Labour had m(any) discernable policies just after each of their election defeats either Brian. I don't think that's a fair criticism of any party that's just suffered a big electoral defeat and is about to change its leader.
0 -
From a 'user experience' point of view it was not an inconsequential consideration in upgrading our IT hardware. That kind of cash flow change makes a big difference for SMEs. Article is bollox.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition1 -
It's a fair point, though the difference between the two parties is that after the second defeat Labour knew they had to jettison Corbyn, Momentum and their rejected policies (despite them never having got near power), whereas now the Tory Party shows no sign of having recognised how badly they failed, or showing contrition for what they did, with all the leadership hopefuls having played central parts in the shitshow.
0 -
Labour are off to a dreadful start. Messaging is self defeating and at best disingenuous, but they are all very well dressed.
One thing the Tories did effectively is reduce the favourability of all politicians. My fear is we still have an electorate of slightly unintelligent people who will lurch gullibly towards empty promises. That might be far right populism. That far right populism might be the Tories.
0 -
Newly elected governments usually do silly things that they regret.
1 -
A well turned out politician is important.
I mean…….Boris 😯
Some people seem think the Labour Party should still be wearing donkey jackets to be proper labour. 🙄
0 -
Best to make rookie error when newly elected.
0 -
"But it wasn't a donkey jacket!"
(Also an excuse for the Thatcherphiles to get all misty-eyed.)
1 -
Who has suggested that? The PM is an ex barrister. How many dark suits does he need to do his job as PM (no more than when he was leader of the opposition, or working for the CPS)?
People do however expect their political leaders to buy their own clothes. (Borrowing a dress for a one off event (eg a state dinner, or Mansion house speech, is fine though). They also expect politicians who have claimed to be 'whiter than white' not to turn out to be a bunch of hypocrites. Rayner trying to justify her free holiday in New York was laughable.
0 -
I can remember my Dad being very disparaging about Foot's "outfit" at the cenotaph
Wilier Izoard XP0 -
Looks like Reeves and Starmer might be realising that the doom & gloom messaging is only giving Tories ammunition, even if the gloom is mostly because of what the Tories did. Starmer's rolling back on the 'austerity lite' theme, and Reeves is supposedly going to be all upbeat (as well as starting to chase the multi-million-pound bungs).
They really need to get the contentious stuff out there and ignore what the Tory press is saying, while they've got the electoral buffer and the time for things that they think are going to work to actually work.
0 -
I gave you a like for the acknowledging the reference. I’m not a misty-eyed Thatcherphile.
Just so you know…
0 -
I'd kinda picked that up, but I think we might have at least one on CS... just a hunch.
0 -
Sorry DB, comment tongue in cheek. Didn’t land properly.
Probably used the wrong emoji. 😔
1 -
There was something in the Telegraph or Graun about how Carrie Johnson 'hired' dresses/outfits from famous designers 'for the day' so she could look good and showcase British fashion on official events... sounds like a decent compromise. (It does sound unlikely that any Johnson wouldn't be milking the system for all its worth, but there you go.)
0 -
That's exactly what film stars do for walking the red carpet isn't it?
Given the pressure on women around what to wear, hiring or borrowing for one off events makes sense. It's easy for men, a dark suit, shirt and possibly a tie will see you through most events.
Not many people would go out and buy a morning suit for a wedding for example, they would probably hire one, unless they were going to lots of that type of wedding.
1 -
There is some irony that Boris looks considerably more like Michael Foot than he does any other person on earth.
0 -
Except Foot wasn't fat. It must have been all the jogging that made Johnson fat.
0 -
True. But the distinction might be between "hire" and "borrow".
Besides people expected this from the Tories, but there was possibly a naive hope that Labour wouldn't immediately gravitate towards the feeding trough.
0 -
That's why I put the 'hire' in inverted commas in my post. I don't think there would be much furore if there was an understood arrangement whereby no money changed hands for one-day loans in return for the promotion of British business. Or maybe there would if it was the Mail trying to land a punch on Mrs Starmer, while ignoring the £40m Sunak spent on helicopter flights on the taxpayers' account.
0 -
Now is the time Labour should be doing unpopular stuff if they genuinely think it is what is needed. When you have a massive majority and the best part of 5 years for the policies to take effect and, hopefully, start working for the better. Backtracking at the first sign of a negative response, often from the media that on the whole will always find fault in what a Labour Government does or doesn't do, is ridiculous. Getting some flak from the Unions is also not necessarily a bad thing for those with the narrative that the Government are in their pocket.
0 -
The trick is to do unpopular, but sensible things rather than knee-jerk popular things that are not sensible.
0 -
Sure, the other key is to just get on with it and respond to the criticism with 'we won a manadate and this is what we believe is necessary' (the so f**k off and stop whingeing can remain silent). One of my biggest annoyances of the previous Government(s) was the way they would change policy constantly to try to address criticism - it's not how to govern a country as you'll always have criticism so you need to do what you believe is needed. I guess it goes to the heart of my main issue with modern politics that none of the Parties really have an ethos that they are prepared to fight to defend.
0
