The Budget

[COYS]

This is gonna be the budget that fixes the economy. We just all have to contribute towards it

 

[Leeds Spur]

Your personal allowance is tapered away so those earning between ?ú105K and ?ú115K pay an effective rate of 62%.

It was like that as well last year.

The rich are evil......they all made their money of the sweat of poor african children.....tax them and kill them.

The budget isn't about how much 'we give the rich' it's how much of their wealth 'we allow them to keep'

 

[Spaceman]

Too bloody right.......it's a joke people earning at that level get it at all!

couldnt agree more

 

[P.D.]

The rich are evil......they all made their money of the sweat of poor african children.....tax them and kill them.

The budget isn't about how much 'we give the rich' it's how much of their wealth 'we allow them to keep'

lol interestingly I've just been doing a quick analysis of highest individual tax rates across the world in the major economies and they are as follows:

Australia - 45%
Brazil - 27.5%
Canada - 29%
China - 45%
France - 49%
Germany - 45%
India - 30%
USA - 35%

Africa average - 26.82%
Asia average - 35.87%
Europe average - 35.87%
EU average - 38.98%
Latin America average - 31.3%
North America average -28.52%
Oceania average - 37.75%

 

[scaramanga]

same old tories, robbing the poor and elderly handing it to the rich. qunts

Same old left wing - confusing union propaganda for fact and completely failing to understand how budgets effect the economy and therefore the very people they claim to stand for.

With the new rules on tax avoidance the 'rich' will be far worse off in the coming years.

 

[scaramanga]

As long as people insist on killion themselves and others around them tax the fudgers to high heaven.

There's only ever been one long-term study on the effects of passive smoking and it showed no ill effect caused by it. It was originally sponsored by an anti-smoking charity who dropped it the moment they found out what the results would be.

It was picked up and published by Forest, at which point the charity that originally sponsored the study publicly dismissed it as dangerous propaganda.

Don't fall into the trap of all this assumed knowledge about smoking - it's not all what it seems.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

Same old left wing - confusing union propaganda for fact and completely failing to understand how budgets effect the economy and therefore the very people they claim to stand for.

With the new rules on tax avoidance the 'rich' will be far worse off in the coming years.

Guess i will put off the bid for the new 2m house. I wish we could use the budget to cut how much we give the europe union.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

There's only ever been one long-term study on the effects of passive smoking and it showed no ill effect caused by it. It was originally sponsored by an anti-smoking charity who dropped it the moment they found out what the results would be.

It was picked up and published by Forest, at which point the charity that originally sponsored the study publicly dismissed it as dangerous propaganda.

Don't fall into the trap of all this assumed knowledge about smoking - it's not all what it seems.

I thought it killed the slaphead from record breakers.

 

[Dorothy]

Obviously that temporary leader of the opposition was always going to crow about The Tories protecting the wealthy and Osborne looking after his mates but having read the budget as best I can (I struggle with the details) can someone crowing the same robbing the poor to feed the rich explain how this budget does this ?

Cigarettes I don't really care about. They are fudging ridiculous and we all know we are all better off without. Good to see that some loopholes are being closed although I would have liked to see more done about people getting paid through their own business etc etc. I would have hoped that things like Winter Fuel payments were means tested. It is absurd that we give tax credits or benefits to those that don't require them.

So we have investment in business by cutting business taxes which the economy drastically requires. We have a lot of people who can afford to, lose their child tax benefit. I don't have children so apologise if some find it offensive who are losing it but I wouldn't expect it on that sort of income anyway. Benefits should be the neediest among us.

What am I missing ? We cut the top rate of tax to allow us to be competitive ?? Is it just a case of the left wanting those with money to bale everyone out even though they already do ??

 

[Leeds Spur]

There's only ever been one long-term study on the effects of passive smoking and it showed no ill effect caused by it. It was originally sponsored by an anti-smoking charity who dropped it the moment they found out what the results would be.

It was picked up and published by Forest, at which point the charity that originally sponsored the study publicly dismissed it as dangerous propaganda.

Don't fall into the trap of all this assumed knowledge about smoking - it's not all what it seems.

Nope - not hving that at all mate

 

[monkeybarry]

Bye bye child allowance if you earn over 60k too

ah yes, the wonderful system where 50k CAN SUPPORT A FAMILY so you DONT need child tax credits

BUT

2 x 49k is NOT enough - so you CAN HAVE your child tax credits

:-k

 

[Golfball]

There's only ever been one long-term study on the effects of passive smoking and it showed no ill effect caused by it. It was originally sponsored by an anti-smoking charity who dropped it the moment they found out what the results would be.

It was picked up and published by Forest, at which point the charity that originally sponsored the study publicly dismissed it as dangerous propaganda.

Don't fall into the trap of all this assumed knowledge about smoking - it's not all what it seems.

Come on, I know we all like to defend the category we fall into, but that just sounds like a nice little story that smokers tell themselves so that they dont feel so bad about what they are doing.

Smoking is a filthy habit. But I don't mind as long as they keep it away from me. They stink as well without realising it.

 

[Golfball]

ah yes, the wonderful system where 50k CAN SUPPORT A FAMILY so you DONT need child tax credits

BUT

2 x 49k is NOT enough - so you CAN HAVE your child tax credits

:-k

An acceptable policy (withdrawing from the higher earners) implemented in a stupid way by these clowns we have running the country. There are some good policies (amongst the unacceptable) its just a shame they cant work out the finer detail.

 

[monkeybarry]

An acceptable policy (withdrawing from the higher earners) implemented in a stupid way by these clowns we have running the country. There are some good policies (amongst the unacceptable) its just a shame they cant work out the finer detail.

echo's my view exactly

the details re; the child tax credit are so poorly thought out - my scenario is the simplistic one, but if you analyse even further and take the possibility of family A having two standard tax payers with family B having one standard and one higher, family B has less cash i ntheir pocket (despite having the same salary income as family A) and are ultimately penalised for having one family member that is succesful (this is likely to be because the famiy wants their child to have a good family life - so they are also penalised for trying to create a stable family home!! crazy.

and i dont even have kids!

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

echo's my view exactly

the details re; the child tax credit are so poorly thought out - my scenario is the simplistic one, but if you analyse even further and take the possibility of family A having two standard tax payers with family B having one standard and one higher, family B has less cash i ntheir pocket (despite having the same salary income as family A) and are ultimately penalised for having one family member that is succesful (this is likely to be because the famiy wants their child to have a good family life - so they are also penalised for trying to create a stable family home!! crazy.

and i dont even have kids!

This country has been anti families for a long time and this new sunday shopping hours will make matters worse for the families where a mother or father is forced by their employer is made to work at the weekend and not be able to spend time with their children.

 

[parklane1]

If any one thinks that dropping the high rate tax band to 45% is going to encourage the better off to pay all the tax they owe, then think again it is not going to happen :-"

 

[scaramanga]

Come on, I know we all like to defend the category we fall into, but that just sounds like a nice little story that smokers tell themselves so that they dont feel so bad about what they are doing.

Smoking is a filthy habit. But I don't mind as long as they keep it away from me. They stink as well without realising it.

I quit last Christmas so I'm not making the point from a biased POV. This came up a few years ago on an old incarnation of this forum though and I spent a lot of time trudging through studies to show this.

It's an accepted but of 'science' just like the French Paradox, but they simply don't stack up when you look at real data.

 

[Sheikh Ma Nuggets]

This country has been anti families for a long time and this new sunday shopping hours will make matters worse for the families where a mother or father is forced by their employer is made to work at the weekend and not be able to spend time with their children.

Need to stick to the facts and cut out the emotional nonsense. We're talking here about barely 6 weeks over the Olympics :~

 

[Dorothy]

I've noticed that Sunday staff in many places are not the same as weekday staff anyway. Personally I'd think opening shops longer hours, where there is demand would be beneficial to the economy. If shops opening longer hours on Sunday are forced to employ more staff to cover these hours then it is surely win/win ? If they are recruiting from those currently out of work and desperate to get back to work then we have people gaining valuable experience, getting their foot in the door and taking home about ?ú50 they wouldn't have had. As long as Benefits can work around these part time hours where is the bad ? I have never liked or understood shops closing at 4 and 5pm on one of the two days in the week most people have off.

 

[camspur]

Obviously that temporary leader of the opposition was always going to crow about The Tories protecting the wealthy and Osborne looking after his mates but having read the budget as best I can (I struggle with the details) can someone crowing the same robbing the poor to feed the rich explain how this budget does this ?

Cigarettes I don't really care about. They are fudging ridiculous and we all know we are all better off without. Good to see that some loopholes are being closed although I would have liked to see more done about people getting paid through their own business etc etc. I would have hoped that things like Winter Fuel payments were means tested. It is absurd that we give tax credits or benefits to those that don't require them.

So we have investment in business by cutting business taxes which the economy drastically requires. We have a lot of people who can afford to, lose their child tax benefit. I don't have children so apologise if some find it offensive who are losing it but I wouldn't expect it on that sort of income anyway. Benefits should be the neediest among us.

What am I missing ? We cut the top rate of tax to allow us to be competitive ?? Is it just a case of the left wanting those with money to bale everyone out even though they already do ??

Ermm yes, that is exactly what they want. It's the same old left wing trash that if you've got money you can afford to give it away to feed the "poor", you know the poor it's those 18 year old single mums on ?ú26k of benefits a year.