I headed to Tesco for lunch and paid via self serve, so it's the first time I've really noticed - when did the 16 yr old minimum age come in for energy drinks ?
Shop driven, not law. Possibly concerns about being sued if misused by young kids. Govt have talked about a ban, but afaik not introduced such legislation.
A kid at my daughters school needed medical attention after drinking too many of some hyper-caffeinated energy drink.
Some of them have terrifying amounts of caffeine in them.
once did a Red Bull Adventure Orienteering event at Sherwood Forest which was awesome (basically a game of hide and seek in a big forest with some archery and climbing at various points) - It was even more awesome as it was free red bull all day - before , during and after the event - felt like a zombie for hours afterwards
There was so much in this budget that undid the work of George Osborne's budgets, that I found a lot to like, the centrepiece being the cut in the Universal Credit taper.
As to how it's being paid for, worth remembering the freeze to thresholds, which means anticipated inflation of 4% results in a considerable tax increase.
Lots I don't like too, of course, but special mention to the cut in alcohol duty for draught beer and cider - a change that I've suggested on here many times.
Also the annual cancellation of the fuel duty rise is beyond absurd now. It's a complete fiction at this stage that a rise is planned and then cancelled. It's become such a pointless tradition that Chancellors might continue it right up until the point that sales of fossil-sourced motor fuels are eventually banned.
Raising fuel duty only extends the hole you need to fill, which grows every year from 2030 onwards (As no new ICE cars are sold). So I think it's a long term fool's errand to raise it now.
Fuel Duty is a nightmare for Chancellors - it’s one of very few products where the price is very visible, it raises something like £30bn a year, but cars are getting more fuel-efficient and electric, so it’s going to reduce over the next few years. The government needs to find a way to deal with those reduced revenues.
Better than Labour's bloody "escalator" - that was horrendous in the early thousands.
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
Oh, and as I forecast this morning when mocking the IMF forecast that we would still be down 3% on 2019 GDP in 2024 it does appear we will be there by the end of this year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59062392
Unlike various political gurus who infamously claim to be able to play 4D chess, Rachel Reeves provably can play the game, having won the UK Under-14s Ladies Championship in her youth.
The Queen's Gambit!
very good although ironically Beth Harmen in the drama series actually played the Sicilian opening not the Queens Gambit in most of the games
That's excellent knowledge. I like a game of chess but am very poor at it and therefore can only play against fellow novices. I read that the actual gameplay in the series is superb – and brings a whole new level to the drama for those that are serious students of the game?
At least you were not put in Bill Gates position to have to play live on TV the world chess champion Magness Carlson !
Kate McCann of Sky News admits Rishi baffled us with Science.
You mean he used maths more complex than 2+2?
If your being snippy with me here's my Budget Reaction:
That 2021 6pc growth is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
I was referring to the journalist claiming to be baffled by Science - that tends to be code for "the bad person used numbers and things I don't want to know about"
Actually the mysterious Bridget Maeve Phillipson presents well on BBC News. Shadow Treasury seems to have a decent team.
Not mysterious to me, I have said her before I think she comes over very well.
She appears on local politics shows regularly and clearly outshines other labour spokespeople when they appear.
I think she is one to watch. She seems quite smart.
Indeed. I have just been looking her up. She's sitting on only a small majority in Sunderland South though, but she otherwise looks to have the credentials for success.
Actually the mysterious Bridget Maeve Phillipson presents well on BBC News. Shadow Treasury seems to have a decent team.
It's a shame some of her tweets have seemed opportunistic over the last few months. I wasn't all that keen on her until she spoke just now and I was pretty impressed.
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
You are (unintentionally) damning by faint praise there. To my mind, Rachel is now the heir apparent. Laura K has just asked Bridget Phillipson if Sir Keir might be a little bit worried about her boss...
Kate McCann of Sky News admits Rishi baffled us with Science.
You mean he used maths more complex than 2+2?
If your being snippy with me here's my Budget Reaction:
That 2021 6pc growth is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
I was referring to the journalist claiming to be baffled by Science - that tends to be code for "the bad person used numbers and things I don't want to know about"
Fair enough - I assume Rishi's calculator does add 2+2 to equal 4 but he's probably utilised some Civil Service prepared graphs as well.
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
You are (unintentionally) damning by faint praise there. To my mind, Rachel is now the heir apparent. Laura K has just asked Bridget Phillipson if Sir Keir might be a little bit worried about her boss...
Oh, and as I forecast this morning when mocking the IMF forecast that we would still be down 3% on 2019 GDP in 2024 it does appear we will be there by the end of this year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59062392
Starting without a queen would be more interesting than 30 seconds time limit.
There was so much in this budget that undid the work of George Osborne's budgets, that I found a lot to like, the centrepiece being the cut in the Universal Credit taper.
As to how it's being paid for, worth remembering the freeze to thresholds, which means anticipated inflation of 4% results in a considerable tax increase.
Lots I don't like too, of course, but special mention to the cut in alcohol duty for draught beer and cider - a change that I've suggested on here many times.
Also the annual cancellation of the fuel duty rise is beyond absurd now. It's a complete fiction at this stage that a rise is planned and then cancelled. It's become such a pointless tradition that Chancellors might continue it right up until the point that sales of fossil-sourced motor fuels are eventually banned.
Raising fuel duty only extends the hole you need to fill, which grows every year from 2030 onwards (As no new ICE cars are sold). So I think it's a long term fool's errand to raise it now.
Fuel Duty is a nightmare for Chancellors - it’s one of very few products where the price is very visible, it raises something like £30bn a year, but cars are getting more fuel-efficient and electric, so it’s going to reduce over the next few years. The government needs to find a way to deal with those reduced revenues.
So the cost of the Fuel Duty Freeze has now reached around £14-15bn a year.
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
Yes, she focused on the main weaknesses of the government’s big picture (little to help ordinary people with cost of living, and lumping the burden disproportionately on those of working age), and even when her references to Brexit or to acknowledgements of the good bits got Tory cheers, there was a sting in the tail. Given the time she had to prepare, a good performance.
Kate McCann of Sky News admits Rishi baffled us with Science.
You mean he used maths more complex than 2+2?
If your being snippy with me here's my Budget Reaction:
That 2021 6pc growth is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
I was referring to the journalist claiming to be baffled by Science - that tends to be code for "the bad person used numbers and things I don't want to know about"
Fair enough - I assume Rishi's calculator does add 2+2 to equal 4 but he's probably utilised some Civil Service prepared graphs as well.
What I would really enjoy is a demolition job such as DK Brown did after the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster.
He demolished a journalist and a strangely ignorant maths professor who'd read a book on naval architecture for 1 minute.
I still recall the plaintiff cries from the interviewer that it was a bit "complex"...
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
You are (unintentionally) damning by faint praise there. To my mind, Rachel is now the heir apparent. Laura K has just asked Bridget Phillipson if Sir Keir might be a little bit worried about her boss...
If you don’t already have money on her as next LL (I do), now is a good time to consider it.
Unlike various political gurus who infamously claim to be able to play 4D chess, Rachel Reeves provably can play the game, having won the UK Under-14s Ladies Championship in her youth.
The Queen's Gambit!
very good although ironically Beth Harmen in the drama series actually played the Sicilian opening not the Queens Gambit in most of the games
That's excellent knowledge. I like a game of chess but am very poor at it and therefore can only play against fellow novices. I read that the actual gameplay in the series is superb – and brings a whole new level to the drama for those that are serious students of the game?
At least you were not put in Bill Gates position to have to play live on TV the world chess champion Magness Carlson !
Actually the mysterious Bridget Maeve Phillipson presents well on BBC News. Shadow Treasury seems to have a decent team.
Not mysterious to me, I have said her before I think she comes over very well.
She appears on local politics shows regularly and clearly outshines other labour spokespeople when they appear.
I think she is one to watch. She seems quite smart.
Indeed. I have just been looking her up. She's sitting on only a small majority in Sunderland South though, but she otherwise looks to have the credentials for success.
Actually the mysterious Bridget Maeve Phillipson presents well on BBC News. Shadow Treasury seems to have a decent team.
Not mysterious to me, I have said her before I think she comes over very well.
She appears on local politics shows regularly and clearly outshines other labour spokespeople when they appear.
I think she is one to watch. She seems quite smart.
Indeed. I have just been looking her up. She's sitting on only a small majority in Sunderland South though, but she otherwise looks to have the credentials for success.
If the Tory vote on the North rises further, it doesn’t really matter who the leader is.
There was so much in this budget that undid the work of George Osborne's budgets, that I found a lot to like, the centrepiece being the cut in the Universal Credit taper.
As to how it's being paid for, worth remembering the freeze to thresholds, which means anticipated inflation of 4% results in a considerable tax increase.
Lots I don't like too, of course, but special mention to the cut in alcohol duty for draught beer and cider - a change that I've suggested on here many times.
Also the annual cancellation of the fuel duty rise is beyond absurd now. It's a complete fiction at this stage that a rise is planned and then cancelled. It's become such a pointless tradition that Chancellors might continue it right up until the point that sales of fossil-sourced motor fuels are eventually banned.
Raising fuel duty only extends the hole you need to fill, which grows every year from 2030 onwards (As no new ICE cars are sold). So I think it's a long term fool's errand to raise it now.
Fuel Duty is a nightmare for Chancellors - it’s one of very few products where the price is very visible, it raises something like £30bn a year, but cars are getting more fuel-efficient and electric, so it’s going to reduce over the next few years. The government needs to find a way to deal with those reduced revenues.
So the cost of the Fuel Duty Freeze has now reached around £14-15bn a year.
Not cool.
How has it "cost" anything? Taxes not going up isn't a cost, we pay a fortune on fuel duty. Fuel duty is a cost of £30bn a year, the "freeze" isn't a cost of anything, its just a tax that's not there. Not every penny of life belongs in tax.
That's up their with the logic that giving a benefit that can only be spent on rent and can't be spent on a mortgage (even if that's cheaper and lower cost) isn't a benefit to aid landlords.
Much to the annoyance of @HYUFD I have long since said that Boris and HMG have moved left and to use another one of his quotes and has put their tanks on labour's lawn
Yet still he did not raise income tax and did not raise inheritance tax and did not impose a wealth tax.
This government may be economically left of Cameron and May and even Blair's governments but it is still economically right of Brown's government and Starmer.
Culturally and on Brexit it is right of all of them
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
You are (unintentionally) damning by faint praise there. To my mind, Rachel is now the heir apparent. Laura K has just asked Bridget Phillipson if Sir Keir might be a little bit worried about her boss...
But, but, she's a girl.
Well yes, and as I have said before, this is a distinct disadvantage with the macho trade unions. Would be interesting to crunch the numbers of the selectorate to see if Reeves would be a strong runner in any leadership election.
There was so much in this budget that undid the work of George Osborne's budgets, that I found a lot to like, the centrepiece being the cut in the Universal Credit taper.
As to how it's being paid for, worth remembering the freeze to thresholds, which means anticipated inflation of 4% results in a considerable tax increase.
Lots I don't like too, of course, but special mention to the cut in alcohol duty for draught beer and cider - a change that I've suggested on here many times.
Also the annual cancellation of the fuel duty rise is beyond absurd now. It's a complete fiction at this stage that a rise is planned and then cancelled. It's become such a pointless tradition that Chancellors might continue it right up until the point that sales of fossil-sourced motor fuels are eventually banned.
Raising fuel duty only extends the hole you need to fill, which grows every year from 2030 onwards (As no new ICE cars are sold). So I think it's a long term fool's errand to raise it now.
Fuel Duty is a nightmare for Chancellors - it’s one of very few products where the price is very visible, it raises something like £30bn a year, but cars are getting more fuel-efficient and electric, so it’s going to reduce over the next few years. The government needs to find a way to deal with those reduced revenues.
So the cost of the Fuel Duty Freeze has now reached around £14-15bn a year.
Not cool.
Given that the government will, in the not too distant future, have to learn to live without it, I think it's only right that they don't milk it for any more than they already do.
Not paid huge amounts of attention, but I think Labour would do better, should Starmer step down, with Rachel Reeves than Angela 'Scum' Rayner.
Rayner’s comment - which got big cheers whenever she appeared at Labour conference - is a good example of how a throwaway comment will define her thereafter. You can probably lay her as next LL on the back of that alone.
Kate McCann of Sky News admits Rishi baffled us with Science.
You mean he used maths more complex than 2+2?
If your being snippy with me here's my Budget Reaction:
That 2021 6pc growth is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
I was referring to the journalist claiming to be baffled by Science - that tends to be code for "the bad person used numbers and things I don't want to know about"
Fair enough - I assume Rishi's calculator does add 2+2 to equal 4 but he's probably utilised some Civil Service prepared graphs as well.
What I would really enjoy is a demolition job such as DK Brown did after the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster.
He demolished a journalist and a strangely ignorant maths professor who'd read a book on naval architecture for 1 minute.
I still recall the plaintiff cries from the interviewer that it was a bit "complex"...
Oh? What was his view vs the maths prof? Presumably about the importance of free water sloshing around the car hold?
Actually the mysterious Bridget Maeve Phillipson presents well on BBC News. Shadow Treasury seems to have a decent team.
Not mysterious to me, I have said her before I think she comes over very well.
She appears on local politics shows regularly and clearly outshines other labour spokespeople when they appear.
I think she is one to watch. She seems quite smart.
Indeed. I have just been looking her up. She's sitting on only a small majority in Sunderland South though, but she otherwise looks to have the credentials for success.
If the Tory vote on the North rises further, it doesn’t really matter who the leader is.
Load of crap, so the trailed pre election tax cuts have already been pissed up the wall on spending. Whack up taxes when the OBR given bullshit low forecasts, then whack up spending when they correct them, and never actually admit you just made a free choice to whack them both up.
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
You are (unintentionally) damning by faint praise there. To my mind, Rachel is now the heir apparent. Laura K has just asked Bridget Phillipson if Sir Keir might be a little bit worried about her boss...
But, but, she's a girl.
Well yes, and as I have said before, this is a distinct disadvantage with the macho trade unions. Would be interesting to crunch the numbers of the selectorate to see if Reeves would be a strong runner in any leadership election.
There’ll come a time when the dynamic is such that the electorate feels compelled to choose a woman. Their task is to avoid being forced toward picking a dud, as were the LibDems.
There was so much in this budget that undid the work of George Osborne's budgets, that I found a lot to like, the centrepiece being the cut in the Universal Credit taper.
As to how it's being paid for, worth remembering the freeze to thresholds, which means anticipated inflation of 4% results in a considerable tax increase.
Lots I don't like too, of course, but special mention to the cut in alcohol duty for draught beer and cider - a change that I've suggested on here many times.
Also the annual cancellation of the fuel duty rise is beyond absurd now. It's a complete fiction at this stage that a rise is planned and then cancelled. It's become such a pointless tradition that Chancellors might continue it right up until the point that sales of fossil-sourced motor fuels are eventually banned.
Raising fuel duty only extends the hole you need to fill, which grows every year from 2030 onwards (As no new ICE cars are sold). So I think it's a long term fool's errand to raise it now.
Fuel Duty is a nightmare for Chancellors - it’s one of very few products where the price is very visible, it raises something like £30bn a year, but cars are getting more fuel-efficient and electric, so it’s going to reduce over the next few years. The government needs to find a way to deal with those reduced revenues.
So the cost of the Fuel Duty Freeze has now reached around £14-15bn a year.
Not cool.
How has it "cost" anything? Taxes not going up isn't a cost, we pay a fortune on fuel duty. Fuel duty is a cost of £30bn a year, the "freeze" isn't a cost of anything, its just a tax that's not there. Not every penny of life belongs in tax.
That's up their with the logic that giving a benefit that can only be spent on rent and can't be spent on a mortgage (even if that's cheaper and lower cost) isn't a benefit to aid landlords.
Lost revenue each year compared to the alternative...
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
You are (unintentionally) damning by faint praise there. To my mind, Rachel is now the heir apparent. Laura K has just asked Bridget Phillipson if Sir Keir might be a little bit worried about her boss...
If you don’t already have money on her as next LL (I do), now is a good time to consider it.
Good tip – she is available at 17/1 which seems generous to me, unless the fact that she is firmly on the right of the party and is a woman is seen as hampering her chances with the unions?
Actually the mysterious Bridget Maeve Phillipson presents well on BBC News. Shadow Treasury seems to have a decent team.
Not mysterious to me, I have said her before I think she comes over very well.
She appears on local politics shows regularly and clearly outshines other labour spokespeople when they appear.
I think she is one to watch. She seems quite smart.
She knows that the price of monthly home heating bills, refilling your car and doing the Xmas shopping is going to be rather more in the news these next few months than the cost of a bottle of Prosecco or of a BA flight to Edinburgh.
There was so much in this budget that undid the work of George Osborne's budgets, that I found a lot to like, the centrepiece being the cut in the Universal Credit taper.
As to how it's being paid for, worth remembering the freeze to thresholds, which means anticipated inflation of 4% results in a considerable tax increase.
Lots I don't like too, of course, but special mention to the cut in alcohol duty for draught beer and cider - a change that I've suggested on here many times.
Also the annual cancellation of the fuel duty rise is beyond absurd now. It's a complete fiction at this stage that a rise is planned and then cancelled. It's become such a pointless tradition that Chancellors might continue it right up until the point that sales of fossil-sourced motor fuels are eventually banned.
Raising fuel duty only extends the hole you need to fill, which grows every year from 2030 onwards (As no new ICE cars are sold). So I think it's a long term fool's errand to raise it now.
Fuel Duty is a nightmare for Chancellors - it’s one of very few products where the price is very visible, it raises something like £30bn a year, but cars are getting more fuel-efficient and electric, so it’s going to reduce over the next few years. The government needs to find a way to deal with those reduced revenues.
So the cost of the Fuel Duty Freeze has now reached around £14-15bn a year.
Not cool.
Given that the government will, in the not too distant future, have to learn to live without it, I think it's only right that they don't milk it for any more than they already do.
It will be replaced. One of the things that Osborne got right starting in 2015 (ish?) when he started pivoting VED to a new basis imo.
Spending benefits on things they were designed for seems reasonable.
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
You are (unintentionally) damning by faint praise there. To my mind, Rachel is now the heir apparent. Laura K has just asked Bridget Phillipson if Sir Keir might be a little bit worried about her boss...
If you don’t already have money on her as next LL (I do), now is a good time to consider it.
Good tip – she is available at 17/1 which seems generous to me, unless that fact that she is firmly on the right of the party and is a woman is seen as hampering her chances with the unions?
Even major unions get female leaders eventually.
Dinosaurs must drag their feet along with the times.
Kate McCann of Sky News admits Rishi baffled us with Science.
You mean he used maths more complex than 2+2?
If your being snippy with me here's my Budget Reaction:
That 2021 6pc growth is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
I was referring to the journalist claiming to be baffled by Science - that tends to be code for "the bad person used numbers and things I don't want to know about"
Fair enough - I assume Rishi's calculator does add 2+2 to equal 4 but he's probably utilised some Civil Service prepared graphs as well.
What I would really enjoy is a demolition job such as DK Brown did after the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster.
He demolished a journalist and a strangely ignorant maths professor who'd read a book on naval architecture for 1 minute.
I still recall the plaintiff cries from the interviewer that it was a bit "complex"...
Oh? What was his view vs the maths prof? Presumably about the importance of free water sloshing around the car hold?
The math prof had read one equation on stability, and claimed that 1mm of water would cause any RoRo ship to capsize. and had gone hot foot to the BBC....
DK Brown gently pointed out that this was bollocks - informed by his having designed such ships and being taught the design principles by Baker* (the chap who was *the* landing ship designer in the RN, in WWII)
EDIT: In addition Brown was a serious authority on ship stability. His books on the Royal Navy have massive chunks on the problems and successes in various classes of this.
*Who designed the landing ships to be stable even when the vehicle deck was flooded. To prove this he trialled deliberately flooding the lead craft of various classes. At sea.... As Brown pointed out - a nice idea for civilian vessels as well...
What we do seem to have seen is a budget that Ed Miliband might have been pretty proud of had things gone differently. A truly massive increase in public spending, some increases in taxes, notably for businesses through CT and ENI, and yet projected deficits which fall very rapidly as a share of GDP.
I suspect that many on the right of the Tory party will be quietly appalled but they will be nowhere near as appalled as the pretty competent Labour shadow Treasury team. Boris and Rishi are running an extremely centrist, almost fractionally left of centre, government and it does not leave Labour with much room for offering a substantive alternative.
Oh, and as I forecast this morning when mocking the IMF forecast that we would still be down 3% on 2019 GDP in 2024 it does appear we will be there by the end of this year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59062392
Starting without a queen would be more interesting than 30 seconds time limit.
This is either incredibly subtle or a reply to a different post.
0 "hard working families" 0 "climate" 0 "whatever it takes" 0 "brexit" 0 "hard choices" 0 "up and down the countries"
Didn't even mention Brexit. LOL. Focused on the important stuff then.
He mentioned the benefits of having left the EU several times when referencing how he was diverging from their way of doing things but never actually used the word Brexit. Quite intentionally I suspect.
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
You are (unintentionally) damning by faint praise there. To my mind, Rachel is now the heir apparent. Laura K has just asked Bridget Phillipson if Sir Keir might be a little bit worried about her boss...
If you don’t already have money on her as next LL (I do), now is a good time to consider it.
Good tip – she is available at 17/1 which seems generous to me, unless that fact that she is firmly on the right of the party and is a woman is seen as hampering her chances with the unions?
Even major unions get female leaders eventually.
Dinosaurs must drag their feet along with the times.
Agreed, although I don't think it's the unions that are the main obstacle to a woman being elected leader of the Labour party. But they certainly don't help.
What we do seem to have seen is a budget that Ed Miliband might have been pretty proud of had things gone differently. A truly massive increase in public spending, some increases in taxes, notably for businesses through CT and ENI, and yet projected deficits which fall very rapidly as a share of GDP.
I suspect that many on the right of the Tory party will be quietly appalled but they will be nowhere near as appalled as the pretty competent Labour shadow Treasury team. Boris and Rishi are running an extremely centrist, almost fractionally left of centre, government and it does not leave Labour with much room for offering a substantive alternative.
Bit like what Blair & Brown did to the Tories.
Setting himself fiscal tests - and presenting this as some sort of self-limiting virtue, when current data suggest they are already being comfortably met and are consequently of little real world consequence - is the sort of trickster politics that could easily unravel as financial journalists start to get their teeth into it.
Oh, and as I forecast this morning when mocking the IMF forecast that we would still be down 3% on 2019 GDP in 2024 it does appear we will be there by the end of this year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59062392
Starting without a queen would be more interesting than 30 seconds time limit.
This is either incredibly subtle or a reply to a different post.
You’re not going to get so much honey, for a start.
There was so much in this budget that undid the work of George Osborne's budgets, that I found a lot to like, the centrepiece being the cut in the Universal Credit taper.
As to how it's being paid for, worth remembering the freeze to thresholds, which means anticipated inflation of 4% results in a considerable tax increase.
Lots I don't like too, of course, but special mention to the cut in alcohol duty for draught beer and cider - a change that I've suggested on here many times.
Also the annual cancellation of the fuel duty rise is beyond absurd now. It's a complete fiction at this stage that a rise is planned and then cancelled. It's become such a pointless tradition that Chancellors might continue it right up until the point that sales of fossil-sourced motor fuels are eventually banned.
Raising fuel duty only extends the hole you need to fill, which grows every year from 2030 onwards (As no new ICE cars are sold). So I think it's a long term fool's errand to raise it now.
Fuel Duty is a nightmare for Chancellors - it’s one of very few products where the price is very visible, it raises something like £30bn a year, but cars are getting more fuel-efficient and electric, so it’s going to reduce over the next few years. The government needs to find a way to deal with those reduced revenues.
So the cost of the Fuel Duty Freeze has now reached around £14-15bn a year.
Not cool.
Given that the government will, in the not too distant future, have to learn to live without it, I think it's only right that they don't milk it for any more than they already do.
It will be replaced. One of the things that Osborne got right starting in 2015 (ish?) when he started pivoting VED to a new basis imo.
Spending benefits on things they were designed for seems reasonable.
The question is what to replace it with. It shouldn't be another tax on drivers, drivers aren't a cash cow and the environmental excuse for the tax doesn't exist in a clean electric future.
A tax on people who view the homes other people need to live in as a source of profit would be a better replacement than milking drivers.
Oh, and as I forecast this morning when mocking the IMF forecast that we would still be down 3% on 2019 GDP in 2024 it does appear we will be there by the end of this year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59062392
Starting without a queen would be more interesting than 30 seconds time limit.
This is either incredibly subtle or a reply to a different post.
I think I was responsible for starting the chess subplot to this thread.
(Rachel Reeves is a former UK girls' champion at chess, thus I labelled her performance today, The Queen's Gambit)
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Rachel Reeves was basically like John Barnes against Argentina. Came on without any real chance to change the result. But a good performance. People will be buying shares in her.
Rishi Sunak's budget will actually add to inflation causing higher prices for households for a couple of years, acc to OBR p68 - increased pressure from fiscal loosening and firms passing on employer NICs rise "outweighs downward pressure from freeze in fuel and alcohol duties" https://twitter.com/rowenamason/status/1453365706385498122
There was so much in this budget that undid the work of George Osborne's budgets, that I found a lot to like, the centrepiece being the cut in the Universal Credit taper.
As to how it's being paid for, worth remembering the freeze to thresholds, which means anticipated inflation of 4% results in a considerable tax increase.
Lots I don't like too, of course, but special mention to the cut in alcohol duty for draught beer and cider - a change that I've suggested on here many times.
Also the annual cancellation of the fuel duty rise is beyond absurd now. It's a complete fiction at this stage that a rise is planned and then cancelled. It's become such a pointless tradition that Chancellors might continue it right up until the point that sales of fossil-sourced motor fuels are eventually banned.
Raising fuel duty only extends the hole you need to fill, which grows every year from 2030 onwards (As no new ICE cars are sold). So I think it's a long term fool's errand to raise it now.
Fuel Duty is a nightmare for Chancellors - it’s one of very few products where the price is very visible, it raises something like £30bn a year, but cars are getting more fuel-efficient and electric, so it’s going to reduce over the next few years. The government needs to find a way to deal with those reduced revenues.
So the cost of the Fuel Duty Freeze has now reached around £14-15bn a year.
Not cool.
Given that the government will, in the not too distant future, have to learn to live without it, I think it's only right that they don't milk it for any more than they already do.
The question of whether it should be increased is immaterial given that we know that it won't be increased, and that the repeated theatre of announcing the cancellation of a planned rise has long since become tedious nonsense.
If it encouraged wine producers to edge down their alcohol content that would be a good thing.
I'm not persuaded that French wine producers, for example, will have been hanging on to Rishi's every word and, as we speak, trying to work out how to reduce the alcohol content of their vin rouge.
Just heard Wes Streeting on R5 talking about the Budget. He was complaining about Amazon being given a massive tax break, and said the word Amazon about ten times.
Somehow, he doesn't know how it's pronounced.
It should be æməzən with the stress on the first syllable
He was saying æməzɒn (ie rhyming with con) with the stress on the final syllable
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
Yes, she focused on the main weaknesses of the government’s big picture (little to help ordinary people with cost of living, and lumping the burden disproportionately on those of working age), and even when her references to Brexit or to acknowledgements of the good bits got Tory cheers, there was a sting in the tail. Given the time she had to prepare, a good performance.
The weaknesses come from the fact that the economic position is, well, weak. We have just paid bills for Covid that are the equivalent of a major war and haven't even seen the investment and extra production that a war would normally bring. Our expenditure has gone through the roof and there is more to come, especially on health. At the same time our tax base has taken a knock.
Extra public spending is likely to drive growth for at least the next 18 months and I suspect that the forecasts for growth will prove more than a bit conservative but the balance between public and private spending in our economy is changing in a way that is going to be a challenge for future Chancellors. Can UK plc sustain a state of this size? I am really not sure.
Actually the mysterious Bridget Maeve Phillipson presents well on BBC News. Shadow Treasury seems to have a decent team.
Not mysterious to me, I have said her before I think she comes over very well.
She appears on local politics shows regularly and clearly outshines other labour spokespeople when they appear.
I think she is one to watch. She seems quite smart.
She knows that the price of monthly home heating bills, refilling your car and doing the Xmas shopping is going to be rather more in the news these next few months than the cost of a bottle of Prosecco or of a BA flight to Edinburgh.
And the big picture (will people feel richer in 2023/4?) still looks pretty unpleasant;
Over the next 5 years real household disposable income is expected to grow by 0.8% per year, well below the historical average.
But growth had been weak in the decade before COVID, meaning average incomes are now expected to be 28% (£9,000 per capita) below the pre-2008 trend.
I don't know how we solve this, but if Rishinomics aren't the answer, we're going to be stuck in this grim game of taking a bit from Peter to give a bit to Paul.
What we do seem to have seen is a budget that Ed Miliband might have been pretty proud of had things gone differently. A truly massive increase in public spending, some increases in taxes, notably for businesses through CT and ENI, and yet projected deficits which fall very rapidly as a share of GDP.
I suspect that many on the right of the Tory party will be quietly appalled but they will be nowhere near as appalled as the pretty competent Labour shadow Treasury team. Boris and Rishi are running an extremely centrist, almost fractionally left of centre, government and it does not leave Labour with much room for offering a substantive alternative.
Bit like what Blair & Brown did to the Tories.
True I think but eventually, or maybe quite soon, what happened to the dismal Brown and Blair will happen to the only slightly less dismal Sunak and Johnson - they'll run out of other people's money.
Oh, and as I forecast this morning when mocking the IMF forecast that we would still be down 3% on 2019 GDP in 2024 it does appear we will be there by the end of this year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59062392
Starting without a queen would be more interesting than 30 seconds time limit.
This is either incredibly subtle or a reply to a different post.
Yes! Not sure what happened but was meant as a reply to the Bill Gates chess post.
Carlsen without a queen vs Gates would have been interesting, and possibly determined by how much time each player had, the more time the better the chance for Gates. Whereas Carlsen with 30 seconds and all the pieces will win over 99% of the time.
Just back in to catch up on this but seems no real screams of outrage. Just listened to Rachel Reeves reply. I honestly doubt that SKS would have done as well.
Yes, she focused on the main weaknesses of the government’s big picture (little to help ordinary people with cost of living, and lumping the burden disproportionately on those of working age), and even when her references to Brexit or to acknowledgements of the good bits got Tory cheers, there was a sting in the tail. Given the time she had to prepare, a good performance.
The weaknesses come from the fact that the economic position is, well, weak. We have just paid bills for Covid that are the equivalent of a major war and haven't even seen the investment and extra production that a war would normally bring. Our expenditure has gone through the roof and there is more to come, especially on health. At the same time our tax base has taken a knock.
Extra public spending is likely to drive growth for at least the next 18 months and I suspect that the forecasts for growth will prove more than a bit conservative but the balance between public and private spending in our economy is changing in a way that is going to be a challenge for future Chancellors. Can UK plc sustain a state of this size? I am really not sure.
The UK is gambling big time on a payback from its major investment plans and on being able to brush off the barriers to trade it has dropped on many businesses through Brexit, at the same time as the pandemic.
It makes the question of when to call the next GE particularly interesting.
If it encouraged wine producers to edge down their alcohol content that would be a good thing.
I'm not persuaded that French wine producers, for example, will have been hanging on to Rishi's every word and, as we speak, trying to work out how to reduce the alcohol content of their vin rouge.
No, probably not, but British buyers will be very conscious that they can offer wine with an alcohol level of less than 11% at a very competitive but still profitable price and they will look out for it.
... Also the annual cancellation of the fuel duty rise is beyond absurd now. It's a complete fiction at this stage that a rise is planned and then cancelled. It's become such a pointless tradition that Chancellors might continue it right up until the point that sales of fossil-sourced motor fuels are eventually banned.
Yes, the "I've saved you eleventy billion since 1897 by not raising a tax I never intended to raise" line is wearing a bit thin now.
What we do seem to have seen is a budget that Ed Miliband might have been pretty proud of had things gone differently. A truly massive increase in public spending, some increases in taxes, notably for businesses through CT and ENI, and yet projected deficits which fall very rapidly as a share of GDP.
I suspect that many on the right of the Tory party will be quietly appalled but they will be nowhere near as appalled as the pretty competent Labour shadow Treasury team. Boris and Rishi are running an extremely centrist, almost fractionally left of centre, government and it does not leave Labour with much room for offering a substantive alternative.
Bit like what Blair & Brown did to the Tories.
Setting himself fiscal tests - and presenting this as some sort of self-limiting virtue, when current data suggest they are already being comfortably met and are consequently of little real world consequence - is the sort of trickster politics that could easily unravel as financial journalists start to get their teeth into it.
Not sure about that. They can point out that they are pretty meaningless, which they are, but where do they go next? Things tend to unravel a lot more when you don't make your objectives, no matter how easy they are.
If it encouraged wine producers to edge down their alcohol content that would be a good thing.
I'm not persuaded that French wine producers, for example, will have been hanging on to Rishi's every word and, as we speak, trying to work out how to reduce the alcohol content of their vin rouge.
No, probably not, but British buyers will be very conscious that they can offer wine with an alcohol level of less than 11% at a very competitive but still profitable price and they will look out for it.
Trouble is, we've got the taste for big peppery reds now. I'd guess (but happy to be proved wrong) that reds at 11% are going to taste a bit insipid?
Unless I misheard, the changes in alcohol duty aren't going to be introduced until 2023. Everybody will have forgotten about them by then. Either way, I don't expect my pint of bitter to go down in price.
If it encouraged wine producers to edge down their alcohol content that would be a good thing.
I'm not persuaded that French wine producers, for example, will have been hanging on to Rishi's every word and, as we speak, trying to work out how to reduce the alcohol content of their vin rouge.
Easy enough to do it for the exports to les rosbifs, just dilute each bottle with a little water
If it encouraged wine producers to edge down their alcohol content that would be a good thing.
I'm not persuaded that French wine producers, for example, will have been hanging on to Rishi's every word and, as we speak, trying to work out how to reduce the alcohol content of their vin rouge.
No, probably not, but British buyers will be very conscious that they can offer wine with an alcohol level of less than 11% at a very competitive but still profitable price and they will look out for it.
Trouble is, we've got the taste for big peppery reds now. I'd guess (but happy to be proved wrong) that reds at 11% are going to taste a bit insipid?
I hesitate to generalise but I am starting to find some reds, notably Australian Shiraz and the like, just a tad on the strong side. Sometimes its a bit like drinking sherry which is not ideal to sip with a meal. I am aware of a female friend who has stopped drinking reds for the same reason.
If it encouraged wine producers to edge down their alcohol content that would be a good thing.
I'm not persuaded that French wine producers, for example, will have been hanging on to Rishi's every word and, as we speak, trying to work out how to reduce the alcohol content of their vin rouge.
Easy enough to do it for the exports to les rosbifs, just dilute each bottle with a little water
They could market it as a way to get around the Evian ban by creating a wine-water cocktail.
If it encouraged wine producers to edge down their alcohol content that would be a good thing.
I'm not persuaded that French wine producers, for example, will have been hanging on to Rishi's every word and, as we speak, trying to work out how to reduce the alcohol content of their vin rouge.
Easy enough to do it for the exports to les rosbifs, just dilute each bottle with a little water
I suspect the francophobes on here would prefer urine to water.
Maybe there's an opportunity to try to resolve the problem of untreated sewage in the sea through the dilution of our liquid exports to France?
If it encouraged wine producers to edge down their alcohol content that would be a good thing.
I'm not persuaded that French wine producers, for example, will have been hanging on to Rishi's every word and, as we speak, trying to work out how to reduce the alcohol content of their vin rouge.
No, probably not, but British buyers will be very conscious that they can offer wine with an alcohol level of less than 11% at a very competitive but still profitable price and they will look out for it.
Trouble is, we've got the taste for big peppery reds now. I'd guess (but happy to be proved wrong) that reds at 11% are going to taste a bit insipid?
I hesitate to generalise but I am starting to find some reds, notably Australian Shiraz and the like, just a tad on the strong side. Sometimes its a bit like drinking sherry which is not ideal to sip with a meal. I am aware of a female friend who has stopped drinking reds for the same reason.
We shall see.
My impression is that it's the Aussie reds that pack stupid punches and the European reds are a bit more civilised.
How do these duty changes compare with the effects of the Brilliant Trade Deal?
What we do seem to have seen is a budget that Ed Miliband might have been pretty proud of had things gone differently. A truly massive increase in public spending, some increases in taxes, notably for businesses through CT and ENI, and yet projected deficits which fall very rapidly as a share of GDP.
I suspect that many on the right of the Tory party will be quietly appalled but they will be nowhere near as appalled as the pretty competent Labour shadow Treasury team. Boris and Rishi are running an extremely centrist, almost fractionally left of centre, government and it does not leave Labour with much room for offering a substantive alternative.
Bit like what Blair & Brown did to the Tories.
True I think but eventually, or maybe quite soon, what happened to the dismal Brown and Blair will happen to the only slightly less dismal Sunak and Johnson - they'll run out of other people's money.
Can I refer my honourable friend to my earlier comment about the quietly appalled.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Rachel Reeves was basically like John Barnes against Argentina. Came on without any real chance to change the result. But a good performance. People will be buying shares in her.
Blimey. Hodges needs to update his references. Surely Mrs Thatcher was PM back then, and half his readers weren't born.
If it encouraged wine producers to edge down their alcohol content that would be a good thing.
I'm not persuaded that French wine producers, for example, will have been hanging on to Rishi's every word and, as we speak, trying to work out how to reduce the alcohol content of their vin rouge.
No, probably not, but British buyers will be very conscious that they can offer wine with an alcohol level of less than 11% at a very competitive but still profitable price and they will look out for it.
Trouble is, we've got the taste for big peppery reds now. I'd guess (but happy to be proved wrong) that reds at 11% are going to taste a bit insipid?
Oh, and as I forecast this morning when mocking the IMF forecast that we would still be down 3% on 2019 GDP in 2024 it does appear we will be there by the end of this year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59062392
Starting without a queen would be more interesting than 30 seconds time limit.
This is either incredibly subtle or a reply to a different post.
Yes! Not sure what happened but was meant as a reply to the Bill Gates chess post.
Carlsen without a queen vs Gates would have been interesting, and possibly determined by how much time each player had, the more time the better the chance for Gates. Whereas Carlsen with 30 seconds and all the pieces will win over 99% of the time.
Interesting to about three people, as Channel 4 discovered when it bought the rights to Kasparov versus Short for peak evening viewing. They even curtailed the racing to get there for the start in case they missed the first ever Foolsmate in a world championship match.
If it encouraged wine producers to edge down their alcohol content that would be a good thing.
I'm not persuaded that French wine producers, for example, will have been hanging on to Rishi's every word and, as we speak, trying to work out how to reduce the alcohol content of their vin rouge.
No, probably not, but British buyers will be very conscious that they can offer wine with an alcohol level of less than 11% at a very competitive but still profitable price and they will look out for it.
Trouble is, we've got the taste for big peppery reds now. I'd guess (but happy to be proved wrong) that reds at 11% are going to taste a bit insipid?
I hesitate to generalise but I am starting to find some reds, notably Australian Shiraz and the like, just a tad on the strong side. Sometimes its a bit like drinking sherry which is not ideal to sip with a meal. I am aware of a female friend who has stopped drinking reds for the same reason.
We shall see.
My impression is that it's the Aussie reds that pack stupid punches and the European reds are a bit more civilised.
How do these duty changes compare with the effects of the Brilliant Trade Deal?
Much if not all of Laithwaites' business model is to flog 14-15% wines which you can't really taste beyond the alcohol.
Comments
So all red wine.
🍷
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1453350019659177990
She appears on local politics shows regularly and clearly outshines other labour spokespeople when they appear.
I think she is one to watch. She seems quite smart.
That 2021 6pc growth is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFi48q7X3ac
From 14.00 in he gets talked into it by the host!
55 "billion"
45 "madam deputy speaker"
0 "hard working families"
0 "climate"
0 "whatever it takes"
0 "brexit"
0 "hard choices"
0 "up and down the countries"
You are (unintentionally) damning by faint praise there. To my mind, Rachel is now the heir apparent. Laura K has just asked Bridget Phillipson if Sir Keir might be a little bit worried about her boss...
Giving him room to play next year when growth comes in above expectations. Clever!
She did not use the phrase "baffled by science" - that was my interpretation of what she was saying.
Not cool.
He repeatedly mentioned "we can only do this because we have left the European Union" but that isn't the word "Brexit" so doesn't count.
Things people are actually worried about - Fuel prices, childcare, universal credit, tax
Things the media focusses on far more the average person - Covid, Brexit, climate change.
He demolished a journalist and a strangely ignorant maths professor who'd read a book on naval architecture for 1 minute.
I still recall the plaintiff cries from the interviewer that it was a bit "complex"...
That's up their with the logic that giving a benefit that can only be spent on rent and can't be spent on a mortgage (even if that's cheaper and lower cost) isn't a benefit to aid landlords.
This government may be economically left of Cameron and May and even Blair's governments but it is still economically right of Brown's government and Starmer.
Culturally and on Brexit it is right of all of them
Arise Lord Davie!
Spending benefits on things they were designed for seems reasonable.
Dinosaurs must drag their feet along with the times.
DK Brown gently pointed out that this was bollocks - informed by his having designed such ships and being taught the design principles by Baker* (the chap who was *the* landing ship designer in the RN, in WWII)
EDIT: In addition Brown was a serious authority on ship stability. His books on the Royal Navy have massive chunks on the problems and successes in various classes of this.
*Who designed the landing ships to be stable even when the vehicle deck was flooded. To prove this he trialled deliberately flooding the lead craft of various classes. At sea.... As Brown pointed out - a nice idea for civilian vessels as well...
Taking his March and October Budgets together, 2021 has seen the biggest tax hike the since tax increases announced after Black Wednesday in 1993. https://twitter.com/LOS_Fisher/status/1453363454203596800/photo/1
I suspect that many on the right of the Tory party will be quietly appalled but they will be nowhere near as appalled as the pretty competent Labour shadow Treasury team. Boris and Rishi are running an extremely centrist, almost fractionally left of centre, government and it does not leave Labour with much room for offering a substantive alternative.
Bit like what Blair & Brown did to the Tories.
A tax on people who view the homes other people need to live in as a source of profit would be a better replacement than milking drivers.
(Rachel Reeves is a former UK girls' champion at chess, thus I labelled her performance today, The Queen's Gambit)
(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
1h
Rachel Reeves was basically like John Barnes against Argentina. Came on without any real chance to change the result. But a good performance. People will be buying shares in her.
Better wine making + global warming -> stronger wines.
He mentioned rose as becoming cheaper in his speech. Does he really think roses typically come in under 11%?
https://twitter.com/rowenamason/status/1453365706385498122
Looks like I have saved at least a £1 if the retailers pass on the tax rise.
I'm so old I remember when increasing the price of a gentleman's port was enough to finish any career at the Treasury.
Somehow, he doesn't know how it's pronounced.
It should be æməzən with the stress on the first syllable
He was saying æməzɒn (ie rhyming with con) with the stress on the final syllable
How has he never learnt to say it properly?
Extra public spending is likely to drive growth for at least the next 18 months and I suspect that the forecasts for growth will prove more than a bit conservative but the balance between public and private spending in our economy is changing in a way that is going to be a challenge for future Chancellors. Can UK plc sustain a state of this size? I am really not sure.
Over the next 5 years real household disposable income is expected to grow by 0.8% per year, well below the historical average.
But growth had been weak in the decade before COVID, meaning average incomes are now expected to be 28% (£9,000 per capita) below the pre-2008 trend.
https://twitter.com/TheIFS/status/1453349318761533442?s=20
I don't know how we solve this, but if Rishinomics aren't the answer, we're going to be stuck in this grim game of taking a bit from Peter to give a bit to Paul.
Carlsen without a queen vs Gates would have been interesting, and possibly determined by how much time each player had, the more time the better the chance for Gates. Whereas Carlsen with 30 seconds and all the pieces will win over 99% of the time.
It makes the question of when to call the next GE particularly interesting.
So - What's Labour complaining about?
We shall see.
Maybe there's an opportunity to try to resolve the problem of untreated sewage in the sea through the dilution of our liquid exports to France?
How do these duty changes compare with the effects of the Brilliant Trade Deal?
An Italian Lambrusco, perhaps.
Weasel words though. "depiction of a young actor..."
It looks for all the world that it depicts a boy who likes dressing up with all the associated implications.
Tio Pepe = 18%.