I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Surely the big picture is we have a massively ageing population with fewer working people to support more retired people.
And those retired people have an ever increasing need for health services and care.
So it is a matter of basic maths that those working are going to have to pay more tax to fund those services.
It doesn't matter if you are right wing or left wing or what your political views - what has to happen is an inevitability - which is why Con and Lab are in agreement (bar tinkering at the edges).
This would have happened irrespective of Covid and Ukraine - but they've just speeded up the process a bit. The borrowing they've caused is one-off but it's increased the stock of debt and this has increased ongoing interest payments.
If people want "hope" that's fine but anyone pretending the above is not inevitable is delusional.
Or we just let the elderly pass on naturally rather than try and keep them alive well past their sell by date. Honestly hands up who wants to live 10 more years when most of them are in adult diapers. Fuck that
Later retirement seems the logical consequence of people living longer AND staying reasonably healthy longer. I'd put my hand up for another 10 years even if in diapers, though I agree that if there's dementia as well then maybe not - sorry to hear about your dad's position.
Possibly but I think the middle classes often forget just how many people do physical work.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Surely the big picture is we have a massively ageing population with fewer working people to support more retired people.
And those retired people have an ever increasing need for health services and care.
So it is a matter of basic maths that those working are going to have to pay more tax to fund those services.
It doesn't matter if you are right wing or left wing or what your political views - what has to happen is an inevitability - which is why Con and Lab are in agreement (bar tinkering at the edges).
This would have happened irrespective of Covid and Ukraine - but they've just speeded up the process a bit. The borrowing they've caused is one-off but it's increased the stock of debt and this has increased ongoing interest payments.
If people want "hope" that's fine but anyone pretending the above is not inevitable is delusional.
"A matter of basic maths". Only ceteris paribus. State spending on unnecessary stuff could be cut: nuclear weapons, the airbase on Cyprus, everything to do with NATO, the monarchy, the royal family, etc., etc., all the duplication all over the place that functions to keep bureaucrats busy doing makework.
This was an interesting comment in response to the article.
Talking to someone less than half my age on Friday I remarked on how badly things have gone over the last 20 years. It was intriguing how this sense of decline was apparent even to the young .Most people's prospects are poor apart from a well off minority and we are a significantly diminished country in economic terms. The pandemic gave us rather a lot of time to contemplate things and negativity is widespread. I struggle to understand what appears to be a breakdown in many parts of everyday life and there doesn't seem to be a economic rational to it.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Respectfully disagree in 2 ways. Being a person in the UK with enough brains to critique a government and think about future options is an immense privilege. Hope is an essentially humanist and spiritual thing, not a task of government as such.
The choices available within advanced capitalism mean that any bright individual can if they wish find a vocation in which work itself is its own profound reward, as long as you put meaning and worth ahead of self advancement and get rich quick.
If you look to government to do any of this for you, apart from their job of preserving your freedom to seek it, you will be waiting a long time.
God save us from governments who want to tell us the meaning of our lives.
Great post, even though you’re feeding the troll.
I *think* you’re to the right of me politically (apologies if I’ve got that wrong) but I entirely agree with the sentiment.
I wonder if where we differ is their job of preserving your freedom to seek it . In my view current levels of inequality (in a broad sense, not just economically) mean only the more privileged kids actually have such freedom. So I think the government have a broader job to do than a conservative might.
Regardless, your post has moved my own thinking on, so thank you.
Thank you. Much in your points; yes the government have a broader job; education and its underlying philosophy is central of course; but actually teachers rather than governments do this. Governments arrange its funding. Governments don't do life changing inspiration Teachers, parents and friends do.
But (from my northern working class industrial fortress) it is not only privileged children (there are few here) who do interesting things.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Surely the big picture is we have a massively ageing population with fewer working people to support more retired people.
And those retired people have an ever increasing need for health services and care.
So it is a matter of basic maths that those working are going to have to pay more tax to fund those services.
It doesn't matter if you are right wing or left wing or what your political views - what has to happen is an inevitability - which is why Con and Lab are in agreement (bar tinkering at the edges).
This would have happened irrespective of Covid and Ukraine - but they've just speeded up the process a bit. The borrowing they've caused is one-off but it's increased the stock of debt and this has increased ongoing interest payments.
If people want "hope" that's fine but anyone pretending the above is not inevitable is delusional.
"A matter of basic maths". Only ceteris paribus. State spending on unnecessary stuff could be cut: nuclear weapons, the airbase on Cyprus, everything to do with NATO, the monarchy, the royal family, etc., etc., all the duplication all over the place that functions to keep bureaucrats busy doing makework.
I cannot imagine why people might think NATO spending is not unnecessary. Any ideas?
Idiocy? Moving from not being able to spell "Donetsk" to being absolutely certain five minutes later - after watching something on the BBC or hearing it on Sh*tter - that Russian forces doing something about the Azov Regiment is the first step towards the Red Army marching up the Mall?
Taking your comments at face value, I don't think you've made your case.
Russians marching up the Mall may be a stretch, but everyone can see with their own eyes that there has been a significant escalation in global relations, of which this country is on the sidelines of. For all certain folk try to pass it off as some regional matter, things that happen regionally, and even globally, matter beyond their own borders. Massive instability in Eastern Europe is relevant to the UK, people have known that for hundreds and hundreds of years, including with predecessor states.
Strengthening the capability of our major military allies in the region is therefore far from idiocy. Acting like major global or regional events should have no impact on our decisions is.
This was an interesting comment in response to the article.
Talking to someone less than half my age on Friday I remarked on how badly things have gone over the last 20 years. It was intriguing how this sense of decline was apparent even to the young .Most people's prospects are poor apart from a well off minority and we are a significantly diminished country in economic terms. The pandemic gave us rather a lot of time to contemplate things and negativity is widespread. I struggle to understand what appears to be a breakdown in many parts of everyday life and there doesn't seem to be a economic rational to it.
REPLY 1
I think you'll find some of the same sentiment outside of Russia too. Probably not as bad though for obvious reasons. The likelihood of getting conscripted remains pretty low for those of us in the west.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Surely the big picture is we have a massively ageing population with fewer working people to support more retired people.
And those retired people have an ever increasing need for health services and care.
So it is a matter of basic maths that those working are going to have to pay more tax to fund those services.
It doesn't matter if you are right wing or left wing or what your political views - what has to happen is an inevitability - which is why Con and Lab are in agreement (bar tinkering at the edges).
This would have happened irrespective of Covid and Ukraine - but they've just speeded up the process a bit. The borrowing they've caused is one-off but it's increased the stock of debt and this has increased ongoing interest payments.
If people want "hope" that's fine but anyone pretending the above is not inevitable is delusional.
"A matter of basic maths". Only ceteris paribus. State spending on unnecessary stuff could be cut: nuclear weapons, the airbase on Cyprus, everything to do with NATO, the monarchy, the royal family, etc., etc., all the duplication all over the place that functions to keep bureaucrats busy doing makework.
I cannot imagine why people might think NATO spending is not unnecessary. Any ideas?
Idiocy? Moving from not being able to spell "Donetsk" to being absolutely certain five minutes later - after watching something on the BBC or hearing it on Sh*tter - that Russian forces doing something about the Azov Regiment is the first step towards the Red Army marching up the Mall?
Russian forces doing something tends to be rape and pillage they can fuck off
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Surely the big picture is we have a massively ageing population with fewer working people to support more retired people.
And those retired people have an ever increasing need for health services and care.
So it is a matter of basic maths that those working are going to have to pay more tax to fund those services.
It doesn't matter if you are right wing or left wing or what your political views - what has to happen is an inevitability - which is why Con and Lab are in agreement (bar tinkering at the edges).
This would have happened irrespective of Covid and Ukraine - but they've just speeded up the process a bit. The borrowing they've caused is one-off but it's increased the stock of debt and this has increased ongoing interest payments.
If people want "hope" that's fine but anyone pretending the above is not inevitable is delusional.
Or we just let the elderly pass on naturally rather than try and keep them alive well past their sell by date. Honestly hands up who wants to live 10 more years when most of them are in adult diapers. Fuck that
Later retirement seems the logical consequence of people living longer AND staying reasonably healthy longer. I'd put my hand up for another 10 years even if in diapers, though I agree that if there's dementia as well then maybe not - sorry to hear about your dad's position.
Possibly but I think the middle classes often forget just how many people do physical work.
I sure do, until I get made fun of for my silky soft middle class hands every time I shake hands with my working class (their perception) brethren.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
One of my direct reports is switching down to 4 days per week after she comes back from maternity leave in May to avoid the £100k cliff edge. She doesn't want to but she's worked out she only keeps 30p in the pound because she won't get the tax free childcare for both of her kids (leaving her £4k per year out of pocket). I'm sure you've made the same calculation as well. With thresholds not rising with inflation this is going to become a bigger and bigger issue for higher skilled jobs, we're going to end up with a class of professional that works a 4 day week and earns £100k and not a penny over.
The government, yet again, had a chance to fix this by getting rid of allowance and tax free childcare withdrawal at £100k by just bringing down the 45p rate to £100k. A huge missed opportunity.
How was Russia able to launch its biggest aerial attack on Ukraine, if Moscow's stockpiles suppose to be dwindling? Janes: Russia likely stockpiled microchips and other technology necessary to build precision missiles before invading Ukraine in Feb, possibly starting years ago.
Then why are they firing ancient Kh55 with dummy warheads?
Given all the apparently unanticipated losses they've suffered it is unfortuante they haven't completely run out and still retain the ability to wreak havoc, but it seems to be generally accepted no one has masses of ammo left.
The Ukrainians seem to be using HIMARs quite frequently.
It was just after the first gulf war that a Major was giving a presentation to congress . The theme - precision guided munitions are cheaper.
Yes, a dumb artillery shell vs a guide on is orders of magnitude cheaper by the round. But if your guided round has a single hit probability of 80% vs the fraction of a percent for unguided…
Officially being the most important word. If they're admitting it, things must be bad. Oil and wheat prices shot up with the start of war but they've come right down again and Russia is now having to ship its oil for the month it takes to get to China and India, who of course are getting a nice discount. The only way appears down for them (economically).
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
1) Would need Labour to support this in the Commons (which they almost certainly would), as ERG would never vote for it 2) I'm not sure Sunak has the guts to take on the ERG (as evidenced by him reappointing Braverman as Home Secretary)
I think a Swiss-style deal will happen, but not until Labour get back in.
I think so too. The ERG problem is that their "freedom to set our own rules" is attractive in principle, but lacks examples of exciting developments that are now possible and weren't before. The only one I know of that we're doing is allowing genetic engineering, which may or may not be good but doesn't affect anyone's life in the short term. In the absence of positive examples of benefits, the ERG are just being pointlessly doctrinaire.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Respectfully disagree in 2 ways. Being a person in the UK with enough brains to critique a government and think about future options is an immense privilege. Hope is an essentially humanist and spiritual thing, not a task of government as such.
The choices available within advanced capitalism mean that any bright individual can if they wish find a vocation in which work itself is its own profound reward, as long as you put meaning and worth ahead of self advancement and get rich quick.
If you look to government to do any of this for you, apart from their job of preserving your freedom to seek it, you will be waiting a long time.
God save us from governments who want to tell us the meaning of our lives.
Great post, even though you’re feeding the troll.
I *think* you’re to the right of me politically (apologies if I’ve got that wrong) but I entirely agree with the sentiment.
I wonder if where we differ is their job of preserving your freedom to seek it . In my view current levels of inequality (in a broad sense, not just economically) mean only the more privileged kids actually have such freedom. So I think the government have a broader job to do than a conservative might.
Regardless, your post has moved my own thinking on, so thank you.
Sorry there are only so many meaningful jobs and a lot of what there are now require a degree which they didn't when I grew up. So you are condemning 50% of people who didn't go to university to the mind numbing tasks because if for whatever reason they didnt go onto university they now have no chance to move up.
I didn't goto university even though I was offered a place for reasons I wont go into however despite that I still managed to better myself and raise myself to better careers as a software engineer....you are 18 now and leave school with no degree forget it you are already on life's scrapheap
There is a confusion here. There are only X number of Y jobs is true. There are only W number of widget turning jobs. True. That neither prevents nor compels me as one individual being a widget turner. This is also true when Y is 'meaningful jobs' - granting for the moment that that can be given a number.
As to the degree requirement - with respect I think that needs finessing. I can think of loads of young people who love what they do and have never passed a significant exam, and lots more who are nowhere close to degree level but have other skills. Maybe it's not so grim up north.
This was an interesting comment in response to the article.
Talking to someone less than half my age on Friday I remarked on how badly things have gone over the last 20 years. It was intriguing how this sense of decline was apparent even to the young .Most people's prospects are poor apart from a well off minority and we are a significantly diminished country in economic terms. The pandemic gave us rather a lot of time to contemplate things and negativity is widespread. I struggle to understand what appears to be a breakdown in many parts of everyday life and there doesn't seem to be a economic rational to it.
REPLY 1
I think you'll find some of the same sentiment outside of Russia too. Probably not as bad though for obvious reasons. The likelihood of getting conscripted remains pretty low for those of us in the west.
Living standards in russia actually improved significantly in the early putin years...think how many more russians travel abroad. Russias debt to gdp is only 17% as well.
Channelnewsasia.com - Former Malaysia prime minister and Gerakan Tanah Air (GTA) coalition candidate Mahathir Mohamad has failed to defend his Langkawi seat, official election results announced on Sunday (Nov 20) showed.
The 97-year-old was defeated by Perikatan Nasional’s (PN) Mohd Suhaimi Abdullah, who clinched 13,518 out of 25,463 votes.
Election Commission data showed that Dr Mahathir secured 4,566 votes and has lost his deposit. He finished fourth in a five-cornered fight.
This is Dr Mahathir’s first electoral defeat in 53 years.
In the last general election, Dr Mahathir won the Langkawi seat on the Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) ticket by defeating Barisan Nasional (BN) candidate Datuk Nawawi Ahmad and Zubir Ahmad of PAS with an 8,893-vote majority.
Launched in August, the GTA coalition comprises four political parties - the National Indian Muslim Alliance Party (Iman), Parti Bumiputera Perkasa Malaysia (Putra), Parti Barisan Jemaah Islamiah Se-Malaysia (Berjasa) and Pejuang, the party led by Dr Mahathir. It also includes NGOs, academicians and individuals.
Dr Mahathir held the world record for the oldest prime minister.
He is also Malaysia's longest-serving prime minister, having held the post for 22 years until 2003. He returned as premier after leading Pakatan Harapan (PH) to a historic win in 2018, defeating UMNO which he once led. The PH government collapsed in 2020 due to infighting.
During his political career, he was also acting education minister in 2020 and had two stints as Malaysia's finance minister.
Last month, he reportedly said that he was open to becoming prime minister for the third time if there were strong calls for him to do so.
Political analyst James Chin said that although Dr Mahathir "was widely respected for what he did in his first term as prime minister ... a lot of people are in agreement that he made a huge mistake in coming back the second term".
He said: "Because of the nature of his loss, including losing his deposit, I think the history or his legacy will be very different now compared to if he had not come back as the prime minister a second time round."
"Losing a deposit in Malaysia is the ultimate sign that you've been rejected by the people," Prof Chin added.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I am very sorry to hear this. Can I ask what you do?
Ironically, I work in politics!
Despite all the moaning, I'm sure I'll survive; it's just very frustrating as it feels like I'm constantly falling behind where I should be.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
One of my direct reports is switching down to 4 days per week after she comes back from maternity leave in May to avoid the £100k cliff edge. She doesn't want to but she's worked out she only keeps 30p in the pound because she won't get the tax free childcare for both of her kids (leaving her £4k per year out of pocket). I'm sure you've made the same calculation as well. With thresholds not rising with inflation this is going to become a bigger and bigger issue for higher skilled jobs, we're going to end up with a class of professional that works a 4 day week and earns £100k and not a penny over.
The government, yet again, had a chance to fix this by getting rid of allowance and tax free childcare withdrawal at £100k by just bringing down the 45p rate to £100k. A huge missed opportunity.
This government is useless.
Cameron had a good reform programme coming in but that petered out in 2012-2013 and the Tories haven't had a clue what to do since, except Brexit.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
That's exactly what I'm considering.
Although I'm a public sector tax person I'm actually more sympathetic to the £125k issue than you might think. However let's get this in perspective. We are only talking about a very small section of the population. Now you might say that these are people who make an outsize contribution to the economy. But I suggest the other 97% matter more in total.
This was an interesting comment in response to the article.
Talking to someone less than half my age on Friday I remarked on how badly things have gone over the last 20 years. It was intriguing how this sense of decline was apparent even to the young .Most people's prospects are poor apart from a well off minority and we are a significantly diminished country in economic terms. The pandemic gave us rather a lot of time to contemplate things and negativity is widespread. I struggle to understand what appears to be a breakdown in many parts of everyday life and there doesn't seem to be a economic rational to it.
REPLY 1
I think you'll find some of the same sentiment outside of Russia too. Probably not as bad though for obvious reasons. The likelihood of getting conscripted remains pretty low for those of us in the west.
Living standards in russia actually improved significantly in the early putin years...think how many more russians travel abroad. Russias debt to gdp is only 17% as well.
Oh, you might want to avoid the ellipsis issues…stands out a mile
is true Labour could, FWIW, lose my vote. Having two elected chambers is a recipe for permanent conflict, since both would have the legitimacy required to stop the other rather than delay and refer.
Yes, it needs reform, but not an elected second chamber. Please.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
One of my direct reports is switching down to 4 days per week after she comes back from maternity leave in May to avoid the £100k cliff edge. She doesn't want to but she's worked out she only keeps 30p in the pound because she won't get the tax free childcare for both of her kids (leaving her £4k per year out of pocket). I'm sure you've made the same calculation as well. With thresholds not rising with inflation this is going to become a bigger and bigger issue for higher skilled jobs, we're going to end up with a class of professional that works a 4 day week and earns £100k and not a penny over.
The government, yet again, had a chance to fix this by getting rid of allowance and tax free childcare withdrawal at £100k by just bringing down the 45p rate to £100k. A huge missed opportunity.
Not living in London and not needing a vast amount to get by, I cut my hours enough to avoid 40% (+ NI) tax, never mind the higher rate.
The government needs to get rid of these arbitrary cut offs.
How hard would it be to have a linear increase in tax rate instead of bands? It isn't as if it has to be calculated by hand.
This was an interesting comment in response to the article.
Talking to someone less than half my age on Friday I remarked on how badly things have gone over the last 20 years. It was intriguing how this sense of decline was apparent even to the young .Most people's prospects are poor apart from a well off minority and we are a significantly diminished country in economic terms. The pandemic gave us rather a lot of time to contemplate things and negativity is widespread. I struggle to understand what appears to be a breakdown in many parts of everyday life and there doesn't seem to be a economic rational to it.
REPLY 1
I think you'll find some of the same sentiment outside of Russia too. Probably not as bad though for obvious reasons. The likelihood of getting conscripted remains pretty low for those of us in the west.
Living standards in russia actually improved significantly in the early putin years...think how many more russians travel abroad. Russias debt to gdp is only 17% as well.
Oh, you might want to avoid the ellipsis issues…stands out a mile
Nice if you could comment on my posts at some point rather than nit pucking punctuation but hey ho.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
That's exactly what I'm considering.
Although I'm a public sector tax person I'm actually more sympathetic to the £125k issue than you might think. However let's get this in perspective. We are only talking about a very small section of the population. Now you might say that these are people who make an outsize contribution to the economy. But I suggest the other 97% matter more in total.
It's a small group of people, yet unlocking the earnings ladder again for them will in itself result in a reasonable amount of additional economic activity. The highest skilled people in the land are being disincentived to work full time. There's probably no other major country in the world that does it, usually they want highly skilled people to work more and create wealth. We've decided to penalise them with stupidly high marginal tax rates and then berate them for not wanting to pay those rates or belittle their situation as unimportant to the majority.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
That's exactly what I'm considering.
Although I'm a public sector tax person I'm actually more sympathetic to the £125k issue than you might think. However let's get this in perspective. We are only talking about a very small section of the population. Now you might say that these are people who make an outsize contribution to the economy. But I suggest the other 97% matter more in total.
What we know at this high end the total tax you get from top rate of IC being between 40-50% etc doesn't change much regardless of the actual percentage, because people who earn this level have flexibility and options. At a time when we have terrible productivity, we need growth, entrepreneurism etc, this cliff edge is the worse option in terms of negative incentives. What you want instead is to minimise cliff edges and then you get the tax take from people without disruption like your best / brightest reducing their productivity by 20%.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Respectfully disagree in 2 ways. Being a person in the UK with enough brains to critique a government and think about future options is an immense privilege. Hope is an essentially humanist and spiritual thing, not a task of government as such.
The choices available within advanced capitalism mean that any bright individual can if they wish find a vocation in which work itself is its own profound reward, as long as you put meaning and worth ahead of self advancement and get rich quick.
If you look to government to do any of this for you, apart from their job of preserving your freedom to seek it, you will be waiting a long time.
God save us from governments who want to tell us the meaning of our lives.
I know what you mean, but it's a bit optimistic to say that "advanced capitalism" (whatever that is) guarantees anyone bright a vocation, at least one that pays the bills - we're not talking about getting rich here. There have always been people with a vocation for art or acting or running a small business. but plenty of bright people don't have any real prospect of making any of those work. Moreover, people who aren't that bright need a system that works for them too.
I think the government in what is still a reasonably rich country should have as its primary responsibility (leaving aside war etc.) ensuring that everyone can get by in reasonably decent circumstances. Merely providing freedom to do it if you're bright isn't enough. You're right that it's not up to Mr Sunak to decide the meaning of your life. but giving the basic security to enable you to look for it yourself really is part of his job.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
That's exactly what I'm considering.
Although I'm a public sector tax person I'm actually more sympathetic to the £125k issue than you might think. However let's get this in perspective. We are only talking about a very small section of the population. Now you might say that these are people who make an outsize contribution to the economy. But I suggest the other 97% matter more in total.
The number of those in work who pay the 40p rate has increased from 6% to 14% over the last 12 years. It's no longer only a few who pay it.
The 100k issue is now becoming an issue for all sorts of talent, and causing premature retirement from the NHS. And we depend upon their labours and tax take - which will grind to a halt if it drives a sick and sclerotic economy.
Those who say the average person is unaffected by this are wrong.
Looks like Omnisis was an outlier at this stage. Budget hasn't really changed the underlying polling position yet
I have maintained it will be Spring 23 when the polling will be relevant post the Autumn Statement increases in pension, benefits, and the minimum wage plus where the war in Ukraine stands
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I am very sorry to hear this. Can I ask what you do?
Ironically, I work in politics!
Despite all the moaning, I'm sure I'll survive; it's just very frustrating as it feels like I'm constantly falling behind where I should be.
I had the same problem in my 20s, I solved it by working ridiculously hard to earn more money - an option for a privileged and well educated person such as myself - but closed to a lot of people.
I can't give you any advice, save to say I feel your pain. It feels like at every juncture each generation pulls the ladder up a little bit higher, making it progressively more difficult for each generation to acquire a level of economic security.
I'd absolutely vote for any political party that had a working idea of how to change things, but nobody seems to have any answers.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
That's exactly what I'm considering.
Although I'm a public sector tax person I'm actually more sympathetic to the £125k issue than you might think. However let's get this in perspective. We are only talking about a very small section of the population. Now you might say that these are people who make an outsize contribution to the economy. But I suggest the other 97% matter more in total.
The number of those in work who pay the 40p rate has increased from 6% to 14% over the last 12 years. It's no longer only a few who pay it.
The 100k issue is now becoming an issue for all sorts of talent, and causing premature retirement from the NHS. And we depend upon their labours and tax take - which will grind to a halt if it drives a sick and sclerotic economy.
Those who say the average person is unaffected by this are wrong.
I am right in thinking that the whole issue with NHS pensions is still very much in play...its bonkers again, that such a negative incentive that when we need all the doctors we can get (especially very experienced ones), the system is setup where its a no-brainer for them to pack it in.
Labour leads by 17 points over the Conservatives, compared to 18 points last week.
Con 28% (nc) Lab 45% (-1) Lib Dems 9% (+1) Green 4% (+2)
Opinium shrugs
Boring idea free Labour on the slide surely?
Elected Lords, puffy faced boring Korma twit and his ginger sidekick on the slide I can barely be bothered to dislike them any more, although Reeves/Budget Bridget (Phillipson) is up there with Gove for immensely personally irritating and TV offability
This was an interesting comment in response to the article.
Talking to someone less than half my age on Friday I remarked on how badly things have gone over the last 20 years. It was intriguing how this sense of decline was apparent even to the young .Most people's prospects are poor apart from a well off minority and we are a significantly diminished country in economic terms. The pandemic gave us rather a lot of time to contemplate things and negativity is widespread. I struggle to understand what appears to be a breakdown in many parts of everyday life and there doesn't seem to be a economic rational to it.
REPLY 1
I think you'll find some of the same sentiment outside of Russia too. Probably not as bad though for obvious reasons. The likelihood of getting conscripted remains pretty low for those of us in the west.
Living standards in russia actually improved significantly in the early putin years...think how many more russians travel abroad. Russias debt to gdp is only 17% as well.
Oh, you might want to avoid the ellipsis issues…stands out a mile
Nice if you could comment on my posts at some point rather than nit pucking punctuation but hey ho.
Why bother? You won’t be here long enough. The previous 40 didn’t last long either.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Respectfully disagree in 2 ways. Being a person in the UK with enough brains to critique a government and think about future options is an immense privilege. Hope is an essentially humanist and spiritual thing, not a task of government as such.
The choices available within advanced capitalism mean that any bright individual can if they wish find a vocation in which work itself is its own profound reward, as long as you put meaning and worth ahead of self advancement and get rich quick.
If you look to government to do any of this for you, apart from their job of preserving your freedom to seek it, you will be waiting a long time.
God save us from governments who want to tell us the meaning of our lives.
Great post, even though you’re feeding the troll.
I *think* you’re to the right of me politically (apologies if I’ve got that wrong) but I entirely agree with the sentiment.
I wonder if where we differ is their job of preserving your freedom to seek it . In my view current levels of inequality (in a broad sense, not just economically) mean only the more privileged kids actually have such freedom. So I think the government have a broader job to do than a conservative might.
Regardless, your post has moved my own thinking on, so thank you.
Sorry there are only so many meaningful jobs and a lot of what there are now require a degree which they didn't when I grew up. So you are condemning 50% of people who didn't go to university to the mind numbing tasks because if for whatever reason they didnt go onto university they now have no chance to move up.
I didn't goto university even though I was offered a place for reasons I wont go into however despite that I still managed to better myself and raise myself to better careers as a software engineer....you are 18 now and leave school with no degree forget it you are already on life's scrapheap
Winter is coming - looks like a frost tonight and talking of a bleak outlook -
Opinium have the Cons on 28% for the third straight poll. Opinium tend to avoid the lurches shown in other polls and their methodology directly seeks out the 'shy Tory'. So thats about as good as the Cons are likely to be.
Lab are 45 (-1) but Lab/LD/Green are 58 (+2). Again the methodology deflates any 'Lab' bubble but in those circumstances a Lab lead of 17% with serious potential for anti-Con tactical voting looks bleak indeed for Con Central Office.
Is this the end of the Sunak honeymoon? Maybe - or maybe 28% is the Sunak honeymoon.
The government, yet again, had a chance to fix this by getting rid of allowance and tax free childcare withdrawal at £100k by just bringing down the 45p rate to £100k. A huge missed opportunity.
Yes, I don't understand it at all. What you suggest would be revenue-neutral and obviously fairer. I can't imagine anyone objecting from any side of politics.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I am very sorry to hear this. Can I ask what you do?
Ironically, I work in politics!
Despite all the moaning, I'm sure I'll survive; it's just very frustrating as it feels like I'm constantly falling behind where I should be.
I'd consider getting out.
Politics is about slaving away for very little reward and much criticism.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
One of my direct reports is switching down to 4 days per week after she comes back from maternity leave in May to avoid the £100k cliff edge. She doesn't want to but she's worked out she only keeps 30p in the pound because she won't get the tax free childcare for both of her kids (leaving her £4k per year out of pocket). I'm sure you've made the same calculation as well. With thresholds not rising with inflation this is going to become a bigger and bigger issue for higher skilled jobs, we're going to end up with a class of professional that works a 4 day week and earns £100k and not a penny over.
The government, yet again, had a chance to fix this by getting rid of allowance and tax free childcare withdrawal at £100k by just bringing down the 45p rate to £100k. A huge missed opportunity.
Not living in London and not needing a vast amount to get by, I cut my hours enough to avoid 40% (+ NI) tax, never mind the higher rate.
The government needs to get rid of these arbitrary cut offs.
How hard would it be to have a linear increase in tax rate instead of bands? It isn't as if it has to be calculated by hand.
the lowering of the 45% threshold is fine to me, what is horrendous though is the freezing of the personal allowance at the lower end - What makes a government so arrogant that they think they can better spend a £1 of somebody earnings of just over £12K a year than that person themself?
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
One of my direct reports is switching down to 4 days per week after she comes back from maternity leave in May to avoid the £100k cliff edge. She doesn't want to but she's worked out she only keeps 30p in the pound because she won't get the tax free childcare for both of her kids (leaving her £4k per year out of pocket). I'm sure you've made the same calculation as well. With thresholds not rising with inflation this is going to become a bigger and bigger issue for higher skilled jobs, we're going to end up with a class of professional that works a 4 day week and earns £100k and not a penny over.
The government, yet again, had a chance to fix this by getting rid of allowance and tax free childcare withdrawal at £100k by just bringing down the 45p rate to £100k. A huge missed opportunity.
This government is useless.
Cameron had a good reform programme coming in but that petered out in 2012-2013 and the Tories haven't had a clue what to do since, except Brexit.
It beggars belief it hasn't been sorted.
I think since the introduction of the national living wage the government has basically done nothing domestically that has rated outside of Brexit, even that's internationally focussed. The Boris government was the most disappointing, a huge mandate and they just sat on their hands and blamed COVID for everything then proceeded to make terrible decisions and foist them on MPs while also doing nothing to improve economic conditions.
I fear that neither party has got answers on how to do it and I also fear that the British public is now endemically anti-success or too selfish to see beyond their own benefits. Recently I was accused by someone that by suggesting we remove the allowance withdrawal I didn't care about poor people. I just have no time for that kind of childish discussion but I'm pretty sure that's what the government fears if they do it, that some idiots will say that by cutting taxes for high earners they don't care about the poor so they just won't bother an they'll let that brownism exist until the end of time.
Winter is coming - looks like a frost tonight and talking of a bleak outlook -
Opinium have the Cons on 28% for the third straight poll. Opinium tend to avoid the lurches shown in other polls and their methodology directly seeks out the 'shy Tory'. So thats about as good as the Cons are likely to be.
Lab are 45 (-1) but Lab/LD/Green are 58 (+2). Again the methodology deflates any 'Lab' bubble but in those circumstances a Lab lead of 17% with serious potential for anti-Con tactical voting looks bleak indeed for Con Central Office.
Is this the end of the Sunak honeymoon? Maybe - or maybe 28% is the Sunak honeymoon.
Opinium had him ahead of Starmer and Truss ahead of Starmer - we’ve often debated if they build swingback into this part of the poll too, as on best PM measurement Opinium way too pro Tory compared to other firms who do the same measurement.
Spending a fortune on a whole new constitutional shebang will go down very well as he cuts everything to the quick. It will certainly restore my trust in him being an idiot
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
That's exactly what I'm considering.
Although I'm a public sector tax person I'm actually more sympathetic to the £125k issue than you might think. However let's get this in perspective. We are only talking about a very small section of the population. Now you might say that these are people who make an outsize contribution to the economy. But I suggest the other 97% matter more in total.
The number of those in work who pay the 40p rate has increased from 6% to 14% over the last 12 years. It's no longer only a few who pay it.
The 100k issue is now becoming an issue for all sorts of talent, and causing premature retirement from the NHS. And we depend upon their labours and tax take - which will grind to a halt if it drives a sick and sclerotic economy.
Those who say the average person is unaffected by this are wrong.
100% right. Every person who has had to wait 3 months instead of 3 weeks for a consultant to see them has paid with their health for this idiotic policy.
I rate the removal of allowance withdrawal as one of the few easy wins for breathing life into the UK economy. There aren't loads of them but this is so easy.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
One of my direct reports is switching down to 4 days per week after she comes back from maternity leave in May to avoid the £100k cliff edge. She doesn't want to but she's worked out she only keeps 30p in the pound because she won't get the tax free childcare for both of her kids (leaving her £4k per year out of pocket). I'm sure you've made the same calculation as well. With thresholds not rising with inflation this is going to become a bigger and bigger issue for higher skilled jobs, we're going to end up with a class of professional that works a 4 day week and earns £100k and not a penny over.
The government, yet again, had a chance to fix this by getting rid of allowance and tax free childcare withdrawal at £100k by just bringing down the 45p rate to £100k. A huge missed opportunity.
This government is useless.
Cameron had a good reform programme coming in but that petered out in 2012-2013 and the Tories haven't had a clue what to do since, except Brexit.
It beggars belief it hasn't been sorted.
I think since the introduction of the national living wage the government has basically done nothing domestically that has rated outside of Brexit, even that's internationally focussed. The Boris government was the most disappointing, a huge mandate and they just sat on their hands and blamed COVID for everything then proceeded to make terrible decisions and foist them on MPs while also doing nothing to improve economic conditions.
I fear that neither party has got answers on how to do it and I also fear that the British public is now endemically anti-success or too selfish to see beyond their own benefits. Recently I was accused by someone that by suggesting we remove the allowance withdrawal I didn't care about poor people. I just have no time for that kind of childish discussion but I'm pretty sure that's what the government fears if they do it, that some idiots will say that by cutting taxes for high earners they don't care about the poor so they just won't bother an they'll let that brownism exist until the end of time.
We for a long long time stuck in a cycle where if any change is made and somebody loses out it is seen as unacceptable, unless its soak the rich or it such that everybody loses out.
Need a strong leader / chancellor with a well thought out plan to follow through with proper reforms e.g. we have talked on here for 10+ years about combining IC / NI.
Winter is coming - looks like a frost tonight and talking of a bleak outlook -
Opinium have the Cons on 28% for the third straight poll. Opinium tend to avoid the lurches shown in other polls and their methodology directly seeks out the 'shy Tory'. So thats about as good as the Cons are likely to be.
Lab are 45 (-1) but Lab/LD/Green are 58 (+2). Again the methodology deflates any 'Lab' bubble but in those circumstances a Lab lead of 17% with serious potential for anti-Con tactical voting looks bleak indeed for Con Central Office.
Is this the end of the Sunak honeymoon? Maybe - or maybe 28% is the Sunak honeymoon.
The prospect of the end of Tory rule is the very antithesis of bleak.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
That's exactly what I'm considering.
Although I'm a public sector tax person I'm actually more sympathetic to the £125k issue than you might think. However let's get this in perspective. We are only talking about a very small section of the population. Now you might say that these are people who make an outsize contribution to the economy. But I suggest the other 97% matter more in total.
It's a small group of people, yet unlocking the earnings ladder again for them will in itself result in a reasonable amount of additional economic activity. The highest skilled people in the land are being disincentived to work full time. There's probably no other major country in the world that does it, usually they want highly skilled people to work more and create wealth. We've decided to penalise them with stupidly high marginal tax rates and then berate them for not wanting to pay those rates or belittle their situation as unimportant to the majority.
The expectation seems to be that I should be happy to work my arse off in a stressful job and be taxed at 62%.
One wonders how high the tax rate would have to get before anyone thought it unreasonable: 70%? 80%? 95%?
100%?
The reality is people are just grateful it's some other Joe paying and not them. But don't blame them if they conclude it simply isn't worth it, and tap out.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Respectfully disagree in 2 ways. Being a person in the UK with enough brains to critique a government and think about future options is an immense privilege. Hope is an essentially humanist and spiritual thing, not a task of government as such.
The choices available within advanced capitalism mean that any bright individual can if they wish find a vocation in which work itself is its own profound reward, as long as you put meaning and worth ahead of self advancement and get rich quick.
If you look to government to do any of this for you, apart from their job of preserving your freedom to seek it, you will be waiting a long time.
God save us from governments who want to tell us the meaning of our lives.
I know what you mean, but it's a bit optimistic to say that "advanced capitalism" (whatever that is) guarantees anyone bright a vocation, at least one that pays the bills - we're not talking about getting rich here. There have always been people with a vocation for art or acting or running a small business. but plenty of bright people don't have any real prospect of making any of those work. Moreover, people who aren't that bright need a system that works for them too.
I think the government in what is still a reasonably rich country should have as its primary responsibility (leaving aside war etc.) ensuring that everyone can get by in reasonably decent circumstances. Merely providing freedom to do it if you're bright isn't enough. You're right that it's not up to Mr Sunak to decide the meaning of your life. but giving the basic security to enable you to look for it yourself really is part of his job.
Pretty much agree with the general trend of your qualifications. There's a good deal of luck in life and all that. But it just isn't true (going to where this discussion began) that there are no chances to do stuff, no hope and no opportunities. I see young people doing all this all the time.
I live in the far north of England, industrial, agricultural, working class. I am beginning to think maybe I am very lucky to do so.
Or my definition: a capitalist society where there is a huge emphasis on getting people to buy things they don't want with money they don't have to keep the system going.
Winter is coming - looks like a frost tonight and talking of a bleak outlook -
Opinium have the Cons on 28% for the third straight poll. Opinium tend to avoid the lurches shown in other polls and their methodology directly seeks out the 'shy Tory'. So thats about as good as the Cons are likely to be.
Lab are 45 (-1) but Lab/LD/Green are 58 (+2). Again the methodology deflates any 'Lab' bubble but in those circumstances a Lab lead of 17% with serious potential for anti-Con tactical voting looks bleak indeed for Con Central Office.
Is this the end of the Sunak honeymoon? Maybe - or maybe 28% is the Sunak honeymoon.
The prospect of the end of Tory rule is the very antithesis of bleak.
Yes but the prospect of Labour taking over immediately reinstates it. There hasnt been a good Labour government, ever, with the possible exception of the first Wilson administration
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
Definitions of middle income are becoming interesting again.
Judging by Sky the other day it now starts at something like 60k-70k, which is actually roughly the 90th percentile.
Labour leader plans a new elected chamber after accusing successive Tory governments of handing peerages to ‘lackeys and donors’
It was hardly just Tory governments doing so, but them most recently, certainly.
Of course, you don't need to abolish the Lords to deal with those issues.
No one who donates more than, say, £500 in a year, or any amount above £1000 in the last five years, should be awarded a peerage until a parliamentary term has elapsed.
It's not a punishment, no one has to donate to a political party, and if you really want to do so you can wait to be rewarded for whatever cause would see you appointed.
Anyone who does not contribute sufficiently will lose their current peerage - that takes care of the Lebedevs of the world, and will trim the chamber without needing to reform it.
Starmer's own proposals do not appear clear, other than being clear it won't have parity with the Commons and be representative of the 'nations and regions' (I've never been clear on that phrasing - is that to mean that Cornwall will be specifically represented as having stronger regional identity than, say, Kent?).
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
That's exactly what I'm considering.
Although I'm a public sector tax person I'm actually more sympathetic to the £125k issue than you might think. However let's get this in perspective. We are only talking about a very small section of the population. Now you might say that these are people who make an outsize contribution to the economy. But I suggest the other 97% matter more in total.
The number of those in work who pay the 40p rate has increased from 6% to 14% over the last 12 years. It's no longer only a few who pay it.
The 100k issue is now becoming an issue for all sorts of talent, and causing premature retirement from the NHS. And we depend upon their labours and tax take - which will grind to a halt if it drives a sick and sclerotic economy.
Those who say the average person is unaffected by this are wrong.
100% right. Every person who has had to wait 3 months instead of 3 weeks for a consultant to see them has paid with their health for this idiotic policy.
I rate the removal of allowance withdrawal as one of the few easy wins for breathing life into the UK economy. There aren't loads of them but this is so easy.
I have a husband and wife in my department who managed to negotiate a job share both doing 2 days a week. Both individually would be on 6 figures but they have managed it so that they both do enough to stay on the basic rate.
Labour leads by 17 points over the Conservatives, compared to 18 points last week.
Con 28% (nc) Lab 45% (-1) Lib Dems 9% (+1) Green 4% (+2)
Opinium shrugs
Boring idea free Labour on the slide surely?
I don’t believe the polling saying the dial did it move. My hunch is stick to PB delayed reaction rule, where political events take a week or so to show in polling, making mugs of anyone who think it’s already there - though we have from evidence identified the phenomenon exists, it is still largely unexplained as to why or how. I think we will be able to say this budget moved things one way or other after about two weeks of polling.
The government, yet again, had a chance to fix this by getting rid of allowance and tax free childcare withdrawal at £100k by just bringing down the 45p rate to £100k. A huge missed opportunity.
Yes, I don't understand it at all. What you suggest would be revenue-neutral and obviously fairer. I can't imagine anyone objecting from any side of politics.
It wouldn't be revenue neutral.
Earnings from £100k to £125k are currently taxed at 60% (+NI). Changing that to 45% obviously loses revenue.
In order to make it revenue neutral they would have to start the 45% band at about £85k or £90k. Realistically, that's what they should do - as it wouldn't be politically acceptable to give people earning over £100k a tax cut.
(Some would still gain at the £125k end but overall if revenue neutral they could get away with it).
Labour leader plans a new elected chamber after accusing successive Tory governments of handing peerages to ‘lackeys and donors’
It was hardly just Tory governments doing so, but them most recently, certainly.
Of course, you don't need to abolish the Lords to deal with those issues.
No one who donates more than, say, £500 in a year, or any amount above £1000 in the last five years, should be awarded a peerage until a parliamentary term has elapsed.
It's not a punishment, no one has to donate to a political party, and if you really want to do so you can wait to be rewarded for whatever cause would see you appointed.
Anyone who does not contribute sufficiently will lose their current peerage - that takes care of the Lebedevs of the world, and will trim the chamber without needing to reform it.
Starmer's own proposals do not appear clear, other than being clear it won't have parity with the Commons and be representative of the 'nations and regions' (I've never been clear on that phrasing - is that to mean that Cornwall will be specifically represented as having stronger regional identity than, say, Kent?).
I really hate the term 'regions' its such a nothing description. I'm a Norfolk man, you can refer to that and possibly include Suffolk even if they are morons (they're still MY morons), but dont lump us in with random people just to make up some artificial division
This was an interesting comment in response to the article.
Talking to someone less than half my age on Friday I remarked on how badly things have gone over the last 20 years. It was intriguing how this sense of decline was apparent even to the young .Most people's prospects are poor apart from a well off minority and we are a significantly diminished country in economic terms. The pandemic gave us rather a lot of time to contemplate things and negativity is widespread. I struggle to understand what appears to be a breakdown in many parts of everyday life and there doesn't seem to be a economic rational to it.
REPLY 1
I think you'll find some of the same sentiment outside of Russia too. Probably not as bad though for obvious reasons. The likelihood of getting conscripted remains pretty low for those of us in the west.
Living standards in russia actually improved significantly in the early putin years...think how many more russians travel abroad. Russias debt to gdp is only 17% as well.
Have you any thoughts on respected doctor Malhotra's view on vaccines? They've been mentioned once...or twice. And I find them endlessly fascinating.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
Definitions of middle income are becoming interesting again.
Judging by Sky the other day it now starts at something like 60k-70k, which is actually roughly the 90th percentile.
The whole field of income definition is tricky. Individual or household. Gross or net. Before or after benefits. Before or after housing costs. Remarkably often even the once quality press present stuff without saying what exactly it is.
My net earned income is Y. Our gross household income including everything is about Yx3.5
Labour leads by 17 points over the Conservatives, compared to 18 points last week.
Con 28% (nc) Lab 45% (-1) Lib Dems 9% (+1) Green 4% (+2)
Opinium shrugs
Boring idea free Labour on the slide surely?
“idea free Labour”
I’m not voting Labour, but they are correct not to announce any policy until manifesto press day and, just like Dave and George did, merely dine out on the incumbents struggles.
Any good ideas between now and manifesto published day will quite fairly be knicked and lost to them as a differential.
Labour leader plans a new elected chamber after accusing successive Tory governments of handing peerages to ‘lackeys and donors’
It was hardly just Tory governments doing so, but them most recently, certainly.
Of course, you don't need to abolish the Lords to deal with those issues.
No one who donates more than, say, £500 in a year, or any amount above £1000 in the last five years, should be awarded a peerage until a parliamentary term has elapsed.
It's not a punishment, no one has to donate to a political party, and if you really want to do so you can wait to be rewarded for whatever cause would see you appointed.
Anyone who does not contribute sufficiently will lose their current peerage - that takes care of the Lebedevs of the world, and will trim the chamber without needing to reform it.
Starmer's own proposals do not appear clear, other than being clear it won't have parity with the Commons and be representative of the 'nations and regions' (I've never been clear on that phrasing - is that to mean that Cornwall will be specifically represented as having stronger regional identity than, say, Kent?).
I really hate the term 'regions' its such a nothing description. I'm a Norfolk man, you can refer to that and possibly include Suffolk even if they are morons (they're still MY morons), but dont lump us in with random people just to make up some artificial division
Labour leader plans a new elected chamber after accusing successive Tory governments of handing peerages to ‘lackeys and donors’
It was hardly just Tory governments doing so, but them most recently, certainly.
Of course, you don't need to abolish the Lords to deal with those issues.
No one who donates more than, say, £500 in a year, or any amount above £1000 in the last five years, should be awarded a peerage until a parliamentary term has elapsed.
It's not a punishment, no one has to donate to a political party, and if you really want to do so you can wait to be rewarded for whatever cause would see you appointed.
Anyone who does not contribute sufficiently will lose their current peerage - that takes care of the Lebedevs of the world, and will trim the chamber without needing to reform it.
Starmer's own proposals do not appear clear, other than being clear it won't have parity with the Commons and be representative of the 'nations and regions' (I've never been clear on that phrasing - is that to mean that Cornwall will be specifically represented as having stronger regional identity than, say, Kent?).
I really hate the term 'regions' its such a nothing description. I'm a Norfolk man, you can refer to that and possibly include Suffolk even if they are morons (they're still MY morons), but dont lump us in with random people just to make up some artificial division
What have you got against the Isle of Ely then? I'm an irredentist as I claim Holland too - the four 'regions' of East Anglia.
More to the point - I've been waiting for Starmer to move on the Lords. Targets corruption, tickles the pleasure centres of the old LD vote, is already popular with the voters. Another smart move. Not an election winner but another little brick in the wall. Only the second time I wiould ever have voted Lab but if I'm atill breathing at the GE it looks ever more likely
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
That's exactly what I'm considering.
Although I'm a public sector tax person I'm actually more sympathetic to the £125k issue than you might think. However let's get this in perspective. We are only talking about a very small section of the population. Now you might say that these are people who make an outsize contribution to the economy. But I suggest the other 97% matter more in total.
The number of those in work who pay the 40p rate has increased from 6% to 14% over the last 12 years. It's no longer only a few who pay it.
The 100k issue is now becoming an issue for all sorts of talent, and causing premature retirement from the NHS. And we depend upon their labours and tax take - which will grind to a halt if it drives a sick and sclerotic economy.
Those who say the average person is unaffected by this are wrong.
100% right. Every person who has had to wait 3 months instead of 3 weeks for a consultant to see them has paid with their health for this idiotic policy.
I rate the removal of allowance withdrawal as one of the few easy wins for breathing life into the UK economy. There aren't loads of them but this is so easy.
I tend to agree in that it is irrational and untidy.
How much revenue would be lost?
I make it 32 million taxpayers = 320,000 per percentile. 90th percentile = 60k per annum. 99th percentile = 168k per annum.
So 100k per annum = roughly 93rd percentile. 125k per annum = roughly 96th percentile.
So 1million will switch from 60% to 40% with an average tax saving of 20% of £12500 each (various assumptions about flat distribution of income levels), so that is £2500 * 1 million = £2.5 billion lost.
So restore the allowance, and perhaps whack in a 45% band at 100k, and a 50% band at 150k, or something to make it roughly revenue neutral, or somewhat revenue positive in case the "tax justice" charities start bleating.
That's back of a postage stamp numbers, so open to correction.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Respectfully disagree in 2 ways. Being a person in the UK with enough brains to critique a government and think about future options is an immense privilege. Hope is an essentially humanist and spiritual thing, not a task of government as such.
The choices available within advanced capitalism mean that any bright individual can if they wish find a vocation in which work itself is its own profound reward, as long as you put meaning and worth ahead of self advancement and get rich quick.
If you look to government to do any of this for you, apart from their job of preserving your freedom to seek it, you will be waiting a long time.
God save us from governments who want to tell us the meaning of our lives.
Great post, even though you’re feeding the troll.
I *think* you’re to the right of me politically (apologies if I’ve got that wrong) but I entirely agree with the sentiment.
I wonder if where we differ is their job of preserving your freedom to seek it . In my view current levels of inequality (in a broad sense, not just economically) mean only the more privileged kids actually have such freedom. So I think the government have a broader job to do than a conservative might.
Regardless, your post has moved my own thinking on, so thank you.
Thank you. Much in your points; yes the government have a broader job; education and its underlying philosophy is central of course; but actually teachers rather than governments do this. Governments arrange its funding. Governments don't do life changing inspiration Teachers, parents and friends do.
But (from my northern working class industrial fortress) it is not only privileged children (there are few here) who do interesting things.
Again, agreed.
One of the nicest houses I have lived in was a three-bed detached place in Conisbrough (not that far north I know, but to this Cornish lad it felt that way. The pitiful amount I spent in rent, compared to the strain our mortgage places on our finances in a (smaller) Bristol house makes me think that both our positions might be true, with the difference largely down to house prices and rental costs for young people in certain parts of the country but not others.
If the government could sort that out (I know, I know, and if pigs could fly...) I could believe a lot more in stepping back to allow (and expect) young people to find a vocation that nourishes and challenges them.
As an aside, I have no idea about Bournville's circumstances so it would feel presumptous in the extreme to suggest it directly to them, but having also lived in London I reckon many young people drawn to London early in their careers would have more rewarding and fulfilling experiences training and building a career in e.g. Sheffield.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
Definitions of middle income are becoming interesting again.
Judging by Sky the other day it now starts at something like 60k-70k, which is actually roughly the 90th percentile.
I'd say low income is now about 18-25k, "standard" income is 25-40k, middle 40-60k and high 70k+ (edit: for full-time 40 hour per week jobs)
The trouble is that the 40p rate now kicks in the middle range and the 60p rate at 100k, which would probably be about 70-75k in 2008 prices, and it will get to the point where most people who reach the top or near top of their professions in London and the South-East will end up paying it.
I suspect abolishing the House of Lords will be a massive cockup, cost billions, and the replacement will be not fit for purpose.
But it is the only way since Brexit we can fuck off Dan Hannan.
We need an unelected House of Lords with members who are appointed for particular expertise, and who have advisory and revising roles and with no power finally to prevent legislation. An elected one leads to deadlock. And the elected members would be much less use as most useful people would not stand for election.
The current HoL is a start in the right direction.
The government, yet again, had a chance to fix this by getting rid of allowance and tax free childcare withdrawal at £100k by just bringing down the 45p rate to £100k. A huge missed opportunity.
Yes, I don't understand it at all. What you suggest would be revenue-neutral and obviously fairer. I can't imagine anyone objecting from any side of politics.
It wouldn't be revenue neutral.
Earnings from £100k to £125k are currently taxed at 60% (+NI). Changing that to 45% obviously loses revenue.
In order to make it revenue neutral they would have to start the 45% band at about £85k or £90k. Realistically, that's what they should do - as it wouldn't be politically acceptable to give people earning over £100k a tax cut.
(Some would still gain at the £125k end but overall if revenue neutral they could get away with it).
It would be politically acceptable if politicians learned the art of actually making a steady argument in the court of public opinion over several years.
For some reason, they don't bother anymore. Thatcher, Howe, Joseph etc. all did from 1976 onwards.
Winter is coming - looks like a frost tonight and talking of a bleak outlook -
Opinium have the Cons on 28% for the third straight poll. Opinium tend to avoid the lurches shown in other polls and their methodology directly seeks out the 'shy Tory'. So thats about as good as the Cons are likely to be.
Lab are 45 (-1) but Lab/LD/Green are 58 (+2). Again the methodology deflates any 'Lab' bubble but in those circumstances a Lab lead of 17% with serious potential for anti-Con tactical voting looks bleak indeed for Con Central Office.
Is this the end of the Sunak honeymoon? Maybe - or maybe 28% is the Sunak honeymoon.
The prospect of the end of Tory rule is the very antithesis of bleak.
As a sometime Tory voter, I sense we may well see something like 1997 again. Of course the entrance to Downing Street through hordes of Union Jack toting well wishers was artfully stage managed. But there was a genuine sense of change, revival and a new beginning. The nation seemed, for a while, more confident, happier in its skin, and Britpop was the epitome. You can argue that the economy was doing well, and that is less likely this time, but I still think there will be a sea change after the election.
I've basically given up at this point. My rent is going up 20% (east London box room), my employer is telling me I'll probably have my hours reduced, after rent/tax/bills/food/travel I'm left with ~£6 a day of disposable income. Assuming I have no social life and save all of that, I'd have enough for a deposit in about a century. I am completely demoralised and tempted to just give up, get signed off with depression and live off benefits.
I wrote this morning that even as a leftie I am very uncomfortable with the thumping tax burden being imposed on middle income people.
Whilst, of course, many international companies, energy firms, and non doms continue to get away scot free.
I hope you can find a solution. Some people might try to live abroad?
Re tax burden a poll gives support for the increase in tax for those on £125,000 by 50%/13%
You are wrong about energy firms where the windfall tax, which has also been extended to electricity generators, has been extended by two years to 2028 raising 14 billion next year
Of course they do: most people don't pay it and it's a salary many can only dream of.
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
The other big issue is we already have a huge productivity issue in this country. And now with WFH / Hybrid working / flexi working.....you just giving a massive incentive on those on say £90k never to look for getting promoted and / or if they do, to insist on £100k for only doing 4 days a week.
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
That's exactly what I'm considering.
Although I'm a public sector tax person I'm actually more sympathetic to the £125k issue than you might think. However let's get this in perspective. We are only talking about a very small section of the population. Now you might say that these are people who make an outsize contribution to the economy. But I suggest the other 97% matter more in total.
The number of those in work who pay the 40p rate has increased from 6% to 14% over the last 12 years. It's no longer only a few who pay it.
The 100k issue is now becoming an issue for all sorts of talent, and causing premature retirement from the NHS. And we depend upon their labours and tax take - which will grind to a halt if it drives a sick and sclerotic economy.
Those who say the average person is unaffected by this are wrong.
100% right. Every person who has had to wait 3 months instead of 3 weeks for a consultant to see them has paid with their health for this idiotic policy.
I rate the removal of allowance withdrawal as one of the few easy wins for breathing life into the UK economy. There aren't loads of them but this is so easy.
And are there any politicians making this argument?
No they are pathetic cowardly custards that are led by public opinion, not the other way round.
Labour leader plans a new elected chamber after accusing successive Tory governments of handing peerages to ‘lackeys and donors’
It was hardly just Tory governments doing so, but them most recently, certainly.
Of course, you don't need to abolish the Lords to deal with those issues.
No one who donates more than, say, £500 in a year, or any amount above £1000 in the last five years, should be awarded a peerage until a parliamentary term has elapsed.
It's not a punishment, no one has to donate to a political party, and if you really want to do so you can wait to be rewarded for whatever cause would see you appointed.
Anyone who does not contribute sufficiently will lose their current peerage - that takes care of the Lebedevs of the world, and will trim the chamber without needing to reform it.
Starmer's own proposals do not appear clear, other than being clear it won't have parity with the Commons and be representative of the 'nations and regions' (I've never been clear on that phrasing - is that to mean that Cornwall will be specifically represented as having stronger regional identity than, say, Kent?).
I really hate the term 'regions' its such a nothing description. I'm a Norfolk man, you can refer to that and possibly include Suffolk even if they are morons (they're still MY morons), but dont lump us in with random people just to make up some artificial division
Labour leader plans a new elected chamber after accusing successive Tory governments of handing peerages to ‘lackeys and donors’
It was hardly just Tory governments doing so, but them most recently, certainly.
Of course, you don't need to abolish the Lords to deal with those issues.
No one who donates more than, say, £500 in a year, or any amount above £1000 in the last five years, should be awarded a peerage until a parliamentary term has elapsed.
It's not a punishment, no one has to donate to a political party, and if you really want to do so you can wait to be rewarded for whatever cause would see you appointed.
Anyone who does not contribute sufficiently will lose their current peerage - that takes care of the Lebedevs of the world, and will trim the chamber without needing to reform it.
Starmer's own proposals do not appear clear, other than being clear it won't have parity with the Commons and be representative of the 'nations and regions' (I've never been clear on that phrasing - is that to mean that Cornwall will be specifically represented as having stronger regional identity than, say, Kent?).
I really hate the term 'regions' its such a nothing description. I'm a Norfolk man, you can refer to that and possibly include Suffolk even if they are morons (they're still MY morons), but dont lump us in with random people just to make up some artificial division
What have you got against the Isle of Ely then? I'm an irredentist as I claim Holland too - the four 'regions' of East Anglia.
More to the point - I've been waiting for Starmer to move on the Lords. Targets corruption, tickles the pleasure centres of the old LD vote, is already popular with the voters. Another smart move. Not an election winner but another little brick in the wall. Only the second time I wiould ever have voted Lab but if I'm atill breathing at the GE it looks ever more likely
Nothing, if we are going with East Anglia, but the Isle of Ely is a very small addendum to the Norfolk and their thicko southern neighbours group. Holland, yes sure but i consider most of the flat land south of the Wash as Norfolk anyway, or reclaimed marsh and swamp.
Poll leads going to his head. It is a change that couldn't be done without a manifesto promise or (joy of joys) a referendum.
I wonder what the threshold would be? Remainers tell us important constitutional changes need 60%.
House of Lords reform is where politics goes to die.
They should just cap the numbers, put a term limit on, and stop the political abuse of it by PMs by restricting appointments.
Ripping it all up will take years and achieve very little, or make it worse, but maybe Starmer can't bear an unneat constitutional settlement and that's where he wants to spend all his political capital given he's a deeply boring and pedantic individual.
Listening in to a couple of young people in early 20s today. Complained of being trapped in the matrix and that you work 40 odd years with only a couple weeks holiday a year. One was looking to get into share trading, another crypto But this goes to a wider point. The conservatives offer no hope to young people. This is a technocratic govt imposed on the population similar to Draghis in Italy which has no vision and offers no hope.
Respectfully disagree in 2 ways. Being a person in the UK with enough brains to critique a government and think about future options is an immense privilege. Hope is an essentially humanist and spiritual thing, not a task of government as such.
The choices available within advanced capitalism mean that any bright individual can if they wish find a vocation in which work itself is its own profound reward, as long as you put meaning and worth ahead of self advancement and get rich quick.
If you look to government to do any of this for you, apart from their job of preserving your freedom to seek it, you will be waiting a long time.
God save us from governments who want to tell us the meaning of our lives.
Great post, even though you’re feeding the troll.
I *think* you’re to the right of me politically (apologies if I’ve got that wrong) but I entirely agree with the sentiment.
I wonder if where we differ is their job of preserving your freedom to seek it . In my view current levels of inequality (in a broad sense, not just economically) mean only the more privileged kids actually have such freedom. So I think the government have a broader job to do than a conservative might.
Regardless, your post has moved my own thinking on, so thank you.
Thank you. Much in your points; yes the government have a broader job; education and its underlying philosophy is central of course; but actually teachers rather than governments do this. Governments arrange its funding. Governments don't do life changing inspiration Teachers, parents and friends do.
But (from my northern working class industrial fortress) it is not only privileged children (there are few here) who do interesting things.
Again, agreed.
One of the nicest houses I have lived in was a three-bed detached place in Conisbrough (not that far north I know, but to this Cornish lad it felt that way. The pitiful amount I spent in rent, compared to the strain our mortgage places on our finances in a (smaller) Bristol house makes me think that both our positions might be true, with the difference largely down to house prices and rental costs for young people in certain parts of the country but not others.
If the government could sort that out (I know, I know, and if pigs could fly...) I could believe a lot more in stepping back to allow (and expect) young people to find a vocation that nourishes and challenges them.
As an aside, I have no idea about Bournville's circumstances so it would feel presumptous in the extreme to suggest it directly to them, but having also lived in London I reckon many young people drawn to London early in their careers would have more rewarding and fulfilling experiences training and building a career in e.g. Sheffield.
Yes. FWIW my children all do (IMHO) interesting things. None of them would dream of living in or near London.
Comments
But, be careful: with inflation running at 10-15%, and fiscal drag, lots of people in their careers will end up paying this at some point. And the effective marginal rate is 62% - which is obscene and socialist.
None of us are going to be any better off if all the talent and this tax base deserts us.
Lockdown turned Britain into a nation of neurotics who still cling to their homes
Could it be that the terror wrought by the pandemic is one of the causes of this growing reluctance to work?
JANET DALEY19 November 2022 • 2:21pm
As we have seen in the past on the low end, having cliff edges like this proves a large disincentive, and when you talking about people making £100k a year they have a lot more options than those on the low end.
Talking to someone less than half my age on Friday I remarked on how badly things have gone over the last 20 years. It was intriguing how this sense of decline was apparent even to the young .Most people's prospects are poor apart from a well off minority and we are a significantly diminished country in economic terms. The pandemic gave us rather a lot of time to contemplate things and negativity is widespread. I struggle to understand what appears to be a breakdown in many parts of everyday life and there doesn't seem to be a economic rational to it.
REPLY 1
But (from my northern working class industrial fortress) it is not only privileged children (there are few here) who do interesting things.
Russians marching up the Mall may be a stretch, but everyone can see with their own eyes that there has been a significant escalation in global relations, of which this country is on the sidelines of. For all certain folk try to pass it off as some regional matter, things that happen regionally, and even globally, matter beyond their own borders. Massive instability in Eastern Europe is relevant to the UK, people have known that for hundreds and hundreds of years, including with predecessor states.
Strengthening the capability of our major military allies in the region is therefore far from idiocy. Acting like major global or regional events should have no impact on our decisions is.
Sigh.
"The contraction was driven by a 22.6% plunge in wholesale trade and a 9.1% drop in retail trade."
https://twitter.com/sheltomlee/status/1594057263156670464
Edit: Test over - no need to panic it seems.
Labour leads by 17 points over the Conservatives, compared to 18 points last week.
Con 28% (nc)
Lab 45% (-1)
Lib Dems 9% (+1)
Green 4% (+2)
Opinium shrugs
The government, yet again, had a chance to fix this by getting rid of allowance and tax free childcare withdrawal at £100k by just bringing down the 45p rate to £100k. A huge missed opportunity.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11447283/Britains-prolific-sperm-donor-claims-fathered-140-children-proud-fascist.html
It was just after the first gulf war that a Major was giving a presentation to congress . The theme - precision guided munitions are cheaper.
Yes, a dumb artillery shell vs a guide on is orders of magnitude cheaper by the round. But if your guided round has a single hit probability of 80% vs the fraction of a percent for unguided…
As to the degree requirement - with respect I think that needs finessing. I can think of loads of young people who love what they do and have never passed a significant exam, and lots more who are nowhere close to degree level but have other skills. Maybe it's not so grim up north.
The 97-year-old was defeated by Perikatan Nasional’s (PN) Mohd Suhaimi Abdullah, who clinched 13,518 out of 25,463 votes.
Election Commission data showed that Dr Mahathir secured 4,566 votes and has lost his deposit. He finished fourth in a five-cornered fight.
This is Dr Mahathir’s first electoral defeat in 53 years.
In the last general election, Dr Mahathir won the Langkawi seat on the Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) ticket by defeating Barisan Nasional (BN) candidate Datuk Nawawi Ahmad and Zubir Ahmad of PAS with an 8,893-vote majority.
Launched in August, the GTA coalition comprises four political parties - the National Indian Muslim Alliance Party (Iman), Parti Bumiputera Perkasa Malaysia (Putra), Parti Barisan Jemaah Islamiah Se-Malaysia (Berjasa) and Pejuang, the party led by Dr Mahathir. It also includes NGOs, academicians and individuals.
Dr Mahathir held the world record for the oldest prime minister.
He is also Malaysia's longest-serving prime minister, having held the post for 22 years until 2003. He returned as premier after leading Pakatan Harapan (PH) to a historic win in 2018, defeating UMNO which he once led. The PH government collapsed in 2020 due to infighting.
During his political career, he was also acting education minister in 2020 and had two stints as Malaysia's finance minister.
Last month, he reportedly said that he was open to becoming prime minister for the third time if there were strong calls for him to do so.
Political analyst James Chin said that although Dr Mahathir "was widely respected for what he did in his first term as prime minister ... a lot of people are in agreement that he made a huge mistake in coming back the second term".
He said: "Because of the nature of his loss, including losing his deposit, I think the history or his legacy will be very different now compared to if he had not come back as the prime minister a second time round."
"Losing a deposit in Malaysia is the ultimate sign that you've been rejected by the people," Prof Chin added.
https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1594058680479014912?t=Yfq23cZDsnpDmNtnAMYUDg&s=19
And within 1% as best PM
https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1594060441889558529?t=TqroGt2XG0SJRLCWkSnoEQ&s=19
Despite all the moaning, I'm sure I'll survive; it's just very frustrating as it feels like I'm constantly falling behind where I should be.
Cameron had a good reform programme coming in but that petered out in 2012-2013 and the Tories haven't had a clue what to do since, except Brexit.
It beggars belief it hasn't been sorted.
(Fwiw, I though it was flawed, but quite good.)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/nov/19/keir-starmer-i-will-abolish-house-of-lords-to-restore-trust-in-politics
is true Labour could, FWIW, lose my vote. Having two elected chambers is a recipe for permanent conflict, since both would have the legitimacy required to stop the other rather than delay and refer.
Yes, it needs reform, but not an elected second chamber. Please.
The government needs to get rid of these arbitrary cut offs.
How hard would it be to have a linear increase in tax rate instead of bands? It isn't as if it has to be calculated by hand.
I think the government in what is still a reasonably rich country should have as its primary responsibility (leaving aside war etc.) ensuring that everyone can get by in reasonably decent circumstances. Merely providing freedom to do it if you're bright isn't enough. You're right that it's not up to Mr Sunak to decide the meaning of your life. but giving the basic security to enable you to look for it yourself really is part of his job.
The 100k issue is now becoming an issue for all sorts of talent, and causing premature retirement from the NHS. And we depend upon their labours and tax take - which will grind to a halt if it drives a sick and sclerotic economy.
Those who say the average person is unaffected by this are wrong.
Check them out around coronation time
I can't give you any advice, save to say I feel your pain. It feels like at every juncture each generation pulls the ladder up a little bit higher, making it progressively more difficult for each generation to acquire a level of economic security.
I'd absolutely vote for any political party that had a working idea of how to change things, but nobody seems to have any answers.
I can barely be bothered to dislike them any more, although Reeves/Budget Bridget (Phillipson) is up there with Gove for immensely personally irritating and TV offability
Opinium have the Cons on 28% for the third straight poll. Opinium tend to avoid the lurches shown in other polls and their methodology directly seeks out the 'shy Tory'. So thats about as good as the Cons are likely to be.
Lab are 45 (-1) but Lab/LD/Green are 58 (+2). Again the methodology deflates any 'Lab' bubble but in those circumstances a Lab lead of 17% with serious potential for anti-Con tactical voting looks bleak indeed for Con Central Office.
Is this the end of the Sunak honeymoon? Maybe - or maybe 28% is the Sunak honeymoon.
Politics is about slaving away for very little reward and much criticism.
I fear that neither party has got answers on how to do it and I also fear that the British public is now endemically anti-success or too selfish to see beyond their own benefits. Recently I was accused by someone that by suggesting we remove the allowance withdrawal I didn't care about poor people. I just have no time for that kind of childish discussion but I'm pretty sure that's what the government fears if they do it, that some idiots will say that by cutting taxes for high earners they don't care about the poor so they just won't bother an they'll let that brownism exist until the end of time.
The Tories should play on that with the Starmer Variant
The fiscal history and present we would have had with Sir Keir's lockdowns for an extra six months, or whatever number they want to make up
How much more in debt would we be if we'd done the Starmer Variant?
I rate the removal of allowance withdrawal as one of the few easy wins for breathing life into the UK economy. There aren't loads of them but this is so easy.
Need a strong leader / chancellor with a well thought out plan to follow through with proper reforms e.g. we have talked on here for 10+ years about combining IC / NI.
One wonders how high the tax rate would have to get before anyone thought it unreasonable: 70%? 80%? 95%?
100%?
The reality is people are just grateful it's some other Joe paying and not them. But don't blame them if they conclude it simply isn't worth it, and tap out.
I live in the far north of England, industrial, agricultural, working class. I am beginning to think maybe I am very lucky to do so.
Advanced capitalism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_capitalism
Or my definition: a capitalist society where there is a huge emphasis on getting people to buy things they don't want with money they don't have to keep the system going.
Judging by Sky the other day it now starts at something like 60k-70k, which is actually roughly the 90th percentile.
Labour leader plans a new elected chamber after accusing successive Tory governments of handing peerages to ‘lackeys and donors’
It was hardly just Tory governments doing so, but them most recently, certainly.
Of course, you don't need to abolish the Lords to deal with those issues.
No one who donates more than, say, £500 in a year, or any amount above £1000 in the last five years, should be awarded a peerage until a parliamentary term has elapsed.
It's not a punishment, no one has to donate to a political party, and if you really want to do so you can wait to be rewarded for whatever cause would see you appointed.
Anyone who does not contribute sufficiently will lose their current peerage - that takes care of the Lebedevs of the world, and will trim the chamber without needing to reform it.
Starmer's own proposals do not appear clear, other than being clear it won't have parity with the Commons and be representative of the 'nations and regions' (I've never been clear on that phrasing - is that to mean that Cornwall will be specifically represented as having stronger regional identity than, say, Kent?).
I wonder what the threshold would be? Remainers tell us important constitutional changes need 60%.
Earnings from £100k to £125k are currently taxed at 60% (+NI). Changing that to 45% obviously loses revenue.
In order to make it revenue neutral they would have to start the 45% band at about £85k or £90k. Realistically, that's what they should do - as it wouldn't be politically acceptable to give people earning over £100k a tax cut.
(Some would still gain at the £125k end but overall if revenue neutral they could get away with it).
And are you implying there’s currently any importance or added value to referendum promises after the antics of recent years?
But it is the only way since Brexit we can fuck off Dan Hannan.
My net earned income is Y. Our gross household income including everything is about Yx3.5
I’m not voting Labour, but they are correct not to announce any policy until manifesto press day and, just like Dave and George did, merely dine out on the incumbents struggles.
Any good ideas between now and manifesto published day will quite fairly be knicked and lost to them as a differential.
More to the point - I've been waiting for Starmer to move on the Lords. Targets corruption, tickles the pleasure centres of the old LD vote, is already popular with the voters. Another smart move. Not an election winner but another little brick in the wall. Only the second time I wiould ever have voted Lab but if I'm atill breathing at the GE it looks ever more likely
How much revenue would be lost?
I make it 32 million taxpayers = 320,000 per percentile.
90th percentile = 60k per annum.
99th percentile = 168k per annum.
So 100k per annum = roughly 93rd percentile.
125k per annum = roughly 96th percentile.
So 1million will switch from 60% to 40% with an average tax saving of 20% of £12500 each (various assumptions about flat distribution of income levels), so that is £2500 * 1 million = £2.5 billion lost.
So restore the allowance, and perhaps whack in a 45% band at 100k, and a 50% band at 150k, or something to make it roughly revenue neutral, or somewhat revenue positive in case the "tax justice" charities start bleating.
That's back of a postage stamp numbers, so open to correction.
One of the nicest houses I have lived in was a three-bed detached place in Conisbrough (not that far north I know, but to this Cornish lad it felt that way. The pitiful amount I spent in rent, compared to the strain our mortgage places on our finances in a (smaller) Bristol house makes me think that both our positions might be true, with the difference largely down to house prices and rental costs for young people in certain parts of the country but not others.
If the government could sort that out (I know, I know, and if pigs could fly...) I could believe a lot more in stepping back to allow (and expect) young people to find a vocation that nourishes and challenges them.
As an aside, I have no idea about Bournville's circumstances so it would feel presumptous in the extreme to suggest it directly to them, but having also lived in London I reckon many young people drawn to London early in their careers would have more rewarding and fulfilling experiences training and building a career in e.g. Sheffield.
The trouble is that the 40p rate now kicks in the middle range and the 60p rate at 100k, which would probably be about 70-75k in 2008 prices, and it will get to the point where most people who reach the top or near top of their professions in London and the South-East will end up paying it.
The current HoL is a start in the right direction.
For some reason, they don't bother anymore. Thatcher, Howe, Joseph etc. all did from 1976 onwards.
You can argue that the economy was doing well, and that is less likely this time, but I still think there will be a sea change after the election.
No they are pathetic cowardly custards that are led by public opinion, not the other way round.
They should just cap the numbers, put a term limit on, and stop the political abuse of it by PMs by restricting appointments.
Ripping it all up will take years and achieve very little, or make it worse, but maybe Starmer can't bear an unneat constitutional settlement and that's where he wants to spend all his political capital given he's a deeply boring and pedantic individual.