Boris has introduced a 1.25% hypothecated tax from 2023 to be shown on all pay slips for the NHS and social care
I would just pose the question that many people like the idea of a hypothecated tax, so surely it can only be arranged through NI or income tax
How could any other tax be defined as hypothecated
I am not an expert so I just put this up for debate by those who may know the answer
I understand that the reason they chose NI rather than income tax is to ensure consistency across the union. If true then another unintended consequence of devolution?
Thanks
I’m sure they could’ve gamed the devolution aspect and made a hypothecated tax on unearned as well earned income and dared Nicola to kick up a fuss over it.
But instead they chose to screw working people rather than do the right thing and have the confrontation with retirees and Scottish nationalists. Turns out Sunak is spineless. I begin to reach the point with him that I did with Starmer a year ago: “Next”.
Wasn't that - rather that the Tories made the devolution finances too complex to try and screw the SNP, partly at Slab behest. See Fraser of Allander Institute report posted a moment or two ago by me.
Man, if you're someone who get depressed by the future being Chinese, don't watch University Challenge (I assume both Chan and Zeng are both at least of Chinese descent).
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
You can't - which is why everyone tries to avoid talking about the issue
Universal Basic Income (UBI) gets round the problem. There is no disincentive to work as don't lose any UBI.
Yet house rents are so high that you would need to have a UBI of £20,000+ in London and other places - it just isn't possible
UC already is over £20,000 for a couple in London and was designed to ensure claimants did not lose all their benefits as they entered work
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
So just to confirm:
- no more taxes - More spending on stuff you like - Reduce the deficit
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Well I've just had some pretty big news, both my wife and I have had our request to work from Zurich permanently approved by our respective companies. She's going to stay employed by the UK parent company for a while and I'll switch over to the local Switzerland subsidiary. We have to wait until October 2022 to go as her company wants to staff up it's Swiss AML division before they send her there but it looks like this is a done deal as we both have agreements in principle in writing.
It's been coming for a while, the worst bit will be telling my sister and parents that we're going there. The second worst bit is telling my mother in law that we're within an hour's train journey from her house.
Congrats!
As I announced a week or so ago, I’m moving myself - to New York.
That’s quite a bit of tax the HMRC will not be collecting.
I'm still not sure I want to become a tax exile, but yes, between me and my wife the taxman will lose a pretty penny on our incomes.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Boris has introduced a 1.25% hypothecated tax from 2023 to be shown on all pay slips for the NHS and social care
I would just pose the question that many people like the idea of a hypothecated tax, so surely it can only be arranged through NI or income tax
How could any other tax be defined as hypothecated
I am not an expert so I just put this up for debate by those who may know the answer
I understand that the reason they chose NI rather than income tax is to ensure consistency across the union. If true then another unintended consequence of devolution?
Thanks
Wasn't a consequence of devolution per se. The original devolution settlement was much simpler: allow the SG only a single percentage point up or down on basic rate of income tax, IIRC.
It was a consequence, rather, of the Unionist fiddling on the Smith Commission after indyref1 to try and enmesh the Scottish Government aka SNP in a fiscal trap (for instance, deny the SG the power to vary tax oin dividends, to stop evasion of income tax by company directors and the self-employed). But when they enacted a new Scotland Act the Tories ended up screwing themselves as well.
"We are used to hearing that the devolution settlement is constraining the policy choices of the Scottish Government. The notion that the devolution settlement might potentially constrain the UK Government’s policy choices comes as something of a surprise."
The issue is that Scottish funding doesn't match Scottish taxes, and nor does Scottish expenditure.
That Scotland gains more than it raises in tax due to the Barnett formula isn't due to the Smith Commission, it has been the practice for a long time. When Scotland was raising oil revenues that kind of cancelled out, but that's long since stopped being true.
So even under the old formula if the Tories had risen tax by 1p and the Scots had cut theirs by 1p, then thanks to Barnett the Scots would still be better off.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Really silly to emphasise the SNP 59 line. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of Scottish politics knows there that simply isn't going to happen. I presume this is done on the basis of uniform swing, but we know that's just a convenient fiction.
Oh, quite, but it gives HYUFD something new to get aerated about.
He doesn't need an excuse. When exactly did he turn away from supporting Scottish independence?
Before my time on PB.
Not true. Last five years.
He advocated the morphing of the Conservatives into “the English Nationalist Party” during the summer. Then… predictably… denied all screenshots.
I was a Remainer and had a brief tantrum for a week after Leave won.
However compared to most Remainers that was pretty brief, I soon accepted the Brexit result and committed to making the best of it and returned to my normal pre EU Referendum Unionist self
Do you support the conservative mps who are going to quite rightly vote with labour against the abolition of the £20 UC uplift
If it was up to me I would be happy to see the abolition of the uplift so long as the real tax rate for poor working people should be slashed.
If the effective real tax rate was slashed to ~30% instead of 75% then absolutely remove the uplift and lets see people work more and keep more of their own money instead.
But you know that is not going to happen from any political party
I won't stop banging on about it and hopefully eventually it does get picked up by one party and dealt with.
Why should we have a real tax rate of 75%? How is that appropriate, fair or reasonable? How is it economic either as there'll be serious Laffer consequences from taxing at 75%.
Can you tell me where the peak is on the applicable Laffer curve?
I think HMRC did some work for Osborne and came out with 47-48%.
Feels instinctively about right - the government taking more than 50% in direct taxation feels wrong.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Wow. Have these remarks just been unearthed, or was someone sitting on them, waiting for the right time to go public? If the latter then who?
Who cares what someone said when they were a student in the late 80s/early 90s?
The Tories sure do when it's someone in an opposition party.
Oh really? I don't think so.
Starmer said some things then but nobody cares.
The Tories' stony indifference to past statements by Corbyn was a sight to behold.
The issue with Corbyn wasn't that he said dodgy stuff 30+ years ago but had changed.
The issue with Corbyn was that he'd consistently said dodgy stuff for over 30+ years and never changed.
He was still doing antisemitic activities and making antisemitic comments the year before he became leader after decades in the Commons. Not just as a student decades ago.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
You can't - which is why everyone tries to avoid talking about the issue
Universal Basic Income (UBI) gets round the problem. There is no disincentive to work as don't lose any UBI.
The problem with UBI is that it is so expensive, and the taxes you have to raise to pay for it create a disincentive to work even if the UBI itself doesn't. The second problem is that some people will choose not to work, figuring they can get by on UBI, and waste their life smoking dope and playing video games instead of doing something useful. Yes, work can be drudgery and exploitative, but it can also teach discipline and self-reliance. The third issue I have with it is more philosophical I suppose: why shouldn't people who are capable of working for a living go out and earn their own money instead of sponging off everyone else? Sorry for sounding like a Tory. But I think the government should be doing a lot more for children, the disabled, refugees, the environment etc not simply paying able bodied grown adults to sit on their arses all day!
Really silly to emphasise the SNP 59 line. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of Scottish politics knows there that simply isn't going to happen. I presume this is done on the basis of uniform swing, but we know that's just a convenient fiction.
Oh, quite, but it gives HYUFD something new to get aerated about.
He doesn't need an excuse. When exactly did he turn away from supporting Scottish independence?
Before my time on PB.
Not true. Last five years.
He advocated the morphing of the Conservatives into “the English Nationalist Party” during the summer. Then… predictably… denied all screenshots.
I was a Remainer and had a brief tantrum for a week after Leave won.
However compared to most Remainers that was pretty brief, I soon accepted the Brexit result and committed to making the best of it and returned to my normal pre EU Referendum Unionist self
Do you support the conservative mps who are going to quite rightly vote with labour against the abolition of the £20 UC uplift
If it was up to me I would be happy to see the abolition of the uplift so long as the real tax rate for poor working people should be slashed.
If the effective real tax rate was slashed to ~30% instead of 75% then absolutely remove the uplift and lets see people work more and keep more of their own money instead.
But you know that is not going to happen from any political party
I won't stop banging on about it and hopefully eventually it does get picked up by one party and dealt with.
Why should we have a real tax rate of 75%? How is that appropriate, fair or reasonable? How is it economic either as there'll be serious Laffer consequences from taxing at 75%.
Can you tell me where the peak is on the applicable Laffer curve?
I think HMRC did some work for Osborne and came out with 47-48%.
Feels instinctively about right - the government taking more than 50% in direct taxation feels wrong.
And yet we have a 'Manhattan skyline' of tax rates with peaks at various points of 75%, and over 60% etc
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
The 10pm exit poll (with roughly two thirds of the vote counted).
Labour 26.0% Conservatives 20.3%
The Christian People's party and Liberals both hovering on 4% but the Greens down at 3.6%. As parties move up and down through that 4% barrier, the redistribution of their seats to other parties changes the balance slightly.
The Labour-Centre-SV ticket still looking like a majority with 88 seats (projected).
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Wow. Have these remarks just been unearthed, or was someone sitting on them, waiting for the right time to go public? If the latter then who?
Who cares what someone said when they were a student in the late 80s/early 90s?
The Tories sure do when it's someone in an opposition party.
Oh really? I don't think so.
Starmer said some things then but nobody cares.
The Tories' stony indifference to past statements by Corbyn was a sight to behold.
The issue with Corbyn wasn't that he said dodgy stuff 30+ years ago but had changed.
The issue with Corbyn was that he'd consistently said dodgy stuff for over 30+ years and never changed.
He was still doing antisemitic activities and making antisemitic comments the year before he became leader after decades in the Commons. Not just as a student decades ago.
Oh, we're bringing 'but had changed' into it now. Missed that bit.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Boris has introduced a 1.25% hypothecated tax from 2023 to be shown on all pay slips for the NHS and social care
I would just pose the question that many people like the idea of a hypothecated tax, so surely it can only be arranged through NI or income tax
How could any other tax be defined as hypothecated
I am not an expert so I just put this up for debate by those who may know the answer
I understand that the reason they chose NI rather than income tax is to ensure consistency across the union. If true then another unintended consequence of devolution?
Thanks
Wasn't a consequence of devolution per se. The original devolution settlement was much simpler: allow the SG only a single percentage point up or down on basic rate of income tax, IIRC.
It was a consequence, rather, of the Unionist fiddling on the Smith Commission after indyref1 to try and enmesh the Scottish Government aka SNP in a fiscal trap (for instance, deny the SG the power to vary tax oin dividends, to stop evasion of income tax by company directors and the self-employed). But when they enacted a new Scotland Act the Tories ended up screwing themselves as well.
"We are used to hearing that the devolution settlement is constraining the policy choices of the Scottish Government. The notion that the devolution settlement might potentially constrain the UK Government’s policy choices comes as something of a surprise."
The issue is that Scottish funding doesn't match Scottish taxes, and nor does Scottish expenditure.
That Scotland gains more than it raises in tax due to the Barnett formula isn't due to the Smith Commission, it has been the practice for a long time. When Scotland was raising oil revenues that kind of cancelled out, but that's long since stopped being true.
So even under the old formula if the Tories had risen tax by 1p and the Scots had cut theirs by 1p, then thanks to Barnett the Scots would still be better off.
Its Barnett that's the issue, not Smith.
That doenst make sense. Taxes went up and down centrally for decades without that being a problem.
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
You can't - which is why everyone tries to avoid talking about the issue
Universal Basic Income (UBI) gets round the problem. There is no disincentive to work as don't lose any UBI.
The problem with UBI is that it is so expensive, and the taxes you have to raise to pay for it create a disincentive to work even if the UBI itself doesn't. The second problem is that some people will choose not to work, figuring they can get by on UBI, and waste their life smoking dope and playing video games instead of doing something useful. Yes, work can be drudgery and exploitative, but it can also teach discipline and self-reliance. The third issue I have with it is more philosophical I suppose: why shouldn't people who are capable of working for a living go out and earn their own money instead of sponging off everyone else? Sorry for sounding like a Tory. But I think the government should be doing a lot more for children, the disabled, refugees, the environment etc not simply paying able bodied grown adults to sit on their arses all day!
The first problem: Yes taxes create a disincentive but unless you're talking about 75% we're looking at a lower disincentive than what exists today.
The second and third problem: People can already do that on our existing welfare system and once doing that the barriers/disincentives for getting into work are much steeper than what would exist under the proposed system.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
You can't - which is why everyone tries to avoid talking about the issue
Universal Basic Income (UBI) gets round the problem. There is no disincentive to work as don't lose any UBI.
The problem with UBI is that it is so expensive, and the taxes you have to raise to pay for it create a disincentive to work even if the UBI itself doesn't. The second problem is that some people will choose not to work, figuring they can get by on UBI, and waste their life smoking dope and playing video games instead of doing something useful. Yes, work can be drudgery and exploitative, but it can also teach discipline and self-reliance. The third issue I have with it is more philosophical I suppose: why shouldn't people who are capable of working for a living go out and earn their own money instead of sponging off everyone else? Sorry for sounding like a Tory. But I think the government should be doing a lot more for children, the disabled, refugees, the environment etc not simply paying able bodied grown adults to sit on their arses all day!
The first problem: Yes taxes create a disincentive but unless you're talking about 75% we're looking at a lower disincentive than what exists today.
The second and third problem: People can already do that on our existing welfare system and once doing that the barriers/disincentives for getting into work are much steeper than what would exist under the proposed system.
Under our existing welfare system you have to be actively seeking work and provide evidence of that to continue to claim.
A UBI by definition would have no such requirement as everyone would get it automatically
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Wow. Have these remarks just been unearthed, or was someone sitting on them, waiting for the right time to go public? If the latter then who?
Who cares what someone said when they were a student in the late 80s/early 90s?
The Tories sure do when it's someone in an opposition party.
Oh really? I don't think so.
Starmer said some things then but nobody cares.
The Tories' stony indifference to past statements by Corbyn was a sight to behold.
The issue with Corbyn wasn't that he said dodgy stuff 30+ years ago but had changed.
The issue with Corbyn was that he'd consistently said dodgy stuff for over 30+ years and never changed.
He was still doing antisemitic activities and making antisemitic comments the year before he became leader after decades in the Commons. Not just as a student decades ago.
Oh, we're bringing 'but had changed' into it now. Missed that bit.
No shit Sherlock of course we are.
The issue isn't what anyone says as a student in the 80s/90s. The issue is that Corbyn remained just as vile, just as antisemitic, just as anti-western and just as much a friend of terrorists and dictators in recent years as he was 30-40 years ago.
Most people go through a stage as a student. Corbyn though never grew up.
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed. - Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime - Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor. - Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen. - Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too. - David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
Well I've just had some pretty big news, both my wife and I have had our request to work from Zurich permanently approved by our respective companies. She's going to stay employed by the UK parent company for a while and I'll switch over to the local Switzerland subsidiary. We have to wait until October 2022 to go as her company wants to staff up it's Swiss AML division before they send her there but it looks like this is a done deal as we both have agreements in principle in writing.
It's been coming for a while, the worst bit will be telling my sister and parents that we're going there. The second worst bit is telling my mother in law that we're within an hour's train journey from her house.
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Boris has introduced a 1.25% hypothecated tax from 2023 to be shown on all pay slips for the NHS and social care
I would just pose the question that many people like the idea of a hypothecated tax, so surely it can only be arranged through NI or income tax
How could any other tax be defined as hypothecated
I am not an expert so I just put this up for debate by those who may know the answer
I understand that the reason they chose NI rather than income tax is to ensure consistency across the union. If true then another unintended consequence of devolution?
Thanks
Wasn't a consequence of devolution per se. The original devolution settlement was much simpler: allow the SG only a single percentage point up or down on basic rate of income tax, IIRC.
It was a consequence, rather, of the Unionist fiddling on the Smith Commission after indyref1 to try and enmesh the Scottish Government aka SNP in a fiscal trap (for instance, deny the SG the power to vary tax oin dividends, to stop evasion of income tax by company directors and the self-employed). But when they enacted a new Scotland Act the Tories ended up screwing themselves as well.
"We are used to hearing that the devolution settlement is constraining the policy choices of the Scottish Government. The notion that the devolution settlement might potentially constrain the UK Government’s policy choices comes as something of a surprise."
The issue is that Scottish funding doesn't match Scottish taxes, and nor does Scottish expenditure.
That Scotland gains more than it raises in tax due to the Barnett formula isn't due to the Smith Commission, it has been the practice for a long time. When Scotland was raising oil revenues that kind of cancelled out, but that's long since stopped being true.
So even under the old formula if the Tories had risen tax by 1p and the Scots had cut theirs by 1p, then thanks to Barnett the Scots would still be better off.
Its Barnett that's the issue, not Smith.
That doenst make sense. Taxes went up and down centrally for decades without that being a problem.
Have a look at the FoA report.
It does make sense and I've looked at the report.
In prior decades nobody cared that tax receipts didn't match up with expenditure and even post-devolution if the same party controlled Westminer and Holyrood I doubt anyone would care either.
The issue is that having a hyperpartisan, hypernationalist devolved government the two sides have no incentive to co-operate with each other. And while in the past more money flowing as a Barnett consequential would just be natural, now its a problem.
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
It’s not ignorant. The minimum wage is £8.91 so 2 hours work is just under £18 (close enough).
Of course the reality on the ground is something different - hence out of touch is a fair complaint - but it is accurate
It is ignorance - the idea that anyone of universal credit can receive money untaxed can only come from someone who has done zero research.
The only way it would occur is if the money was cash in hand and thag opens different issues for a Government minister
It’s misleading, like all politicians - in the way that a “£100m X from the defence budget would pay for Y nurses instead” is.
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed. - Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime - Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor. - Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen. - Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too. - David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
Frasier is probably my favourite tv comedy I reckon
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
It’s not ignorant. The minimum wage is £8.91 so 2 hours work is just under £18 (close enough).
Of course the reality on the ground is something different - hence out of touch is a fair complaint - but it is accurate
It is ignorant since the person working doesn't get £18 due to taper, NI and PAYE income tax. Do you think simply saying "you got £18 extra [but you'll only see £4.50 in your pay packet]" is an adequate response?
Reality on the ground isn't something different, its the system the politicians have created. So the claim was not accurate, earning £18 extra of which you get to keep only £4.50 does not replace £20 lost. It wasn't just inaccurate, it was completely wrong and shows the person speaking doesn't understand the system she is talking about.
It’s misleading, sure, but you said “ignorant” which is something different. I’m sure she knew exactly what she was doing
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
So just to confirm:
- no more taxes - More spending on stuff you like - Reduce the deficit
How do you propose to achieve that?
I just want fairness and it is unfair to remove the uplift at this time
CGT or IHT or both should rise
No idea how I responded to you - was aimed at a Philip Thompson post!
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
It’s not ignorant. The minimum wage is £8.91 so 2 hours work is just under £18 (close enough).
Of course the reality on the ground is something different - hence out of touch is a fair complaint - but it is accurate
It is ignorance - the idea that anyone of universal credit can receive money untaxed can only come from someone who has done zero research.
The only way it would occur is if the money was cash in hand and thag opens different issues for a Government minister
It’s misleading, like all politicians - in the way that a “£100m X from the defence budget would pay for Y nurses instead” is.
But accurate in its own terms
Its not accurate in its own terms.
The claim was that £20 lost from their bank accounts from UC could be replaced by 2 hours work. It can't. It is entirely false in its own terms.
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
So just to confirm:
- no more taxes - More spending on stuff you like - Reduce the deficit
Boris has introduced a 1.25% hypothecated tax from 2023 to be shown on all pay slips for the NHS and social care
I would just pose the question that many people like the idea of a hypothecated tax, so surely it can only be arranged through NI or income tax
How could any other tax be defined as hypothecated
I am not an expert so I just put this up for debate by those who may know the answer
I understand that the reason they chose NI rather than income tax is to ensure consistency across the union. If true then another unintended consequence of devolution?
Thanks
Wasn't a consequence of devolution per se. The original devolution settlement was much simpler: allow the SG only a single percentage point up or down on basic rate of income tax, IIRC.
It was a consequence, rather, of the Unionist fiddling on the Smith Commission after indyref1 to try and enmesh the Scottish Government aka SNP in a fiscal trap (for instance, deny the SG the power to vary tax oin dividends, to stop evasion of income tax by company directors and the self-employed). But when they enacted a new Scotland Act the Tories ended up screwing themselves as well.
"We are used to hearing that the devolution settlement is constraining the policy choices of the Scottish Government. The notion that the devolution settlement might potentially constrain the UK Government’s policy choices comes as something of a surprise."
The issue is that Scottish funding doesn't match Scottish taxes, and nor does Scottish expenditure.
That Scotland gains more than it raises in tax due to the Barnett formula isn't due to the Smith Commission, it has been the practice for a long time. When Scotland was raising oil revenues that kind of cancelled out, but that's long since stopped being true.
So even under the old formula if the Tories had risen tax by 1p and the Scots had cut theirs by 1p, then thanks to Barnett the Scots would still be better off.
Its Barnett that's the issue, not Smith.
That doenst make sense. Taxes went up and down centrally for decades without that being a problem.
Have a look at the FoA report.
It does make sense and I've looked at the report.
In prior decades nobody cared that tax receipts didn't match up with expenditure and even post-devolution if the same party controlled Westminer and Holyrood I doubt anyone would care either.
The issue is that having a hyperpartisan, hypernationalist devolved government the two sides have no incentive to co-operate with each other. And while in the past more money flowing as a Barnett consequential would just be natural, now its a problem.
But we had such a government in Scotland, and a hypernationalist one in London, for years before the tax changes in the post-indyref Scotland Act.
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed. - Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime - Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor. - Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen. - Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too. - David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
Frasier is probably my favourite tv comedy I reckon
Curb your Enthusiasm or any Alan Partridge for me.
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
You can't - which is why everyone tries to avoid talking about the issue
Universal Basic Income (UBI) gets round the problem. There is no disincentive to work as don't lose any UBI.
The problem with UBI is that it is so expensive, and the taxes you have to raise to pay for it create a disincentive to work even if the UBI itself doesn't. The second problem is that some people will choose not to work, figuring they can get by on UBI, and waste their life smoking dope and playing video games instead of doing something useful. Yes, work can be drudgery and exploitative, but it can also teach discipline and self-reliance. The third issue I have with it is more philosophical I suppose: why shouldn't people who are capable of working for a living go out and earn their own money instead of sponging off everyone else? Sorry for sounding like a Tory. But I think the government should be doing a lot more for children, the disabled, refugees, the environment etc not simply paying able bodied grown adults to sit on their arses all day!
The first problem: Yes taxes create a disincentive but unless you're talking about 75% we're looking at a lower disincentive than what exists today.
The second and third problem: People can already do that on our existing welfare system and once doing that the barriers/disincentives for getting into work are much steeper than what would exist under the proposed system.
Tax should always be <50% income right across the whole income scale.
I don't know what that would cost to fix but if I were PM I'd make it a priority. Far more so than gilded pensions.
Do people recall as if it were yesterday how I went anti-herd (post Hartlepool) and got long of 'Starmer Next PM' @ 8?
No? Ok, didn't think so, doesn't matter, Point is, here is a market which HAS moved quite a lot recently. He now has a 4 handle and is clear fav over the midget gem.
I do.
I followed your lead at high 7s. Thank you Last I saw though he was still around 5? (smarkets).
Yes, that "4 handle" is 4.8. Bit of spin there from me. 🙂
Ah... You did promise that I (well, you) would be able to lay it off at 4 or under* within a year, which I'll be holding you to, obviously
*I'm hoping that your four or under is not like HYUFD's no more than 1%, which it turned out easily encompassed 1.5 at least and maybe up to 1.9999 or beyond
Michael Gove made crude sexual comments, joked about paedophilia within top levels of government, and used a racist slur in a series of remarks in his twenties, The Independent can reveal.
The Cabinet Office minister also described Prince Charles as a “dull, wet, drippy adulterer” in speeches at the Cambridge Union while he was a student at Oxford, and after his graduation while working as a journalist.
In apparent attempts at humour, Mr Gove referred to people living in countries colonised by the British as “fuzzy-wuzzies”, accused the late former Tory minister Sir Leon Brittan of being a paedophile, and made a string of sexual jokes at the expense of Conservative minister Lucy Frazer.
The chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, who has been tipped for the position of either foreign secretary or home secretary in a potential reshuffle, also described Margaret Thatcher’s policies as a “new empire” where “the happy south stamps over the cruel, dirty, toothless face of the northerner”, and said that gay people “thrive primarily upon short-term relations”.
Mr Gove made the comments – which were met at the time by cheers, stunned laughter, and shouts of “shame” – at three evening debates at the Cambridge Union in February 1993, December 1993 and during the winter of 1987, recordings of which came to light this week.
Wow. Have these remarks just been unearthed, or was someone sitting on them, waiting for the right time to go public? If the latter then who?
Who cares what someone said when they were a student in the late 80s/early 90s?
I presume Boris is behind this somewhere, though.
Boris or the fragrant Mrs Gove. Wonder if she stumbled across some old cassettes while throwing out her husband's things.
I doubt Mrs Gove would be so vindictive.
No, this is blue-on-blue.
Perhaps getting the pre-emptive “excuse” in before Gove is unceremoniously defenestrated.
Does foreknowledge of the Gove story explain the comings and goings with the chief whip at Downing Street yesterday?
No. It’s hardly a story.
The worst thing seems to have been use of the word “fuzzy-wuzzies” which is to be found in every episode of Dad’s Army ever.
Plus, Boris was “jesting” about picaninnies only a few years ago.
Attacking the future Sovereign is not a good look for a loyal Tory party member thinking about the vote to replace Mr Johnson (or even to vote for Mr Gove at the next election).
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
You can't - which is why everyone tries to avoid talking about the issue
Universal Basic Income (UBI) gets round the problem. There is no disincentive to work as don't lose any UBI.
The problem with UBI is that it is so expensive, and the taxes you have to raise to pay for it create a disincentive to work even if the UBI itself doesn't. The second problem is that some people will choose not to work, figuring they can get by on UBI, and waste their life smoking dope and playing video games instead of doing something useful. Yes, work can be drudgery and exploitative, but it can also teach discipline and self-reliance. The third issue I have with it is more philosophical I suppose: why shouldn't people who are capable of working for a living go out and earn their own money instead of sponging off everyone else? Sorry for sounding like a Tory. But I think the government should be doing a lot more for children, the disabled, refugees, the environment etc not simply paying able bodied grown adults to sit on their arses all day!
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed. - Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime - Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor. - Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen. - Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too. - David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
We share the same tastes. Ticks on every one you list.
Victoria Wood on I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue was a work of wonder.
I only discovered Sedaris last year. Totally in awe.
Boris has introduced a 1.25% hypothecated tax from 2023 to be shown on all pay slips for the NHS and social care
I would just pose the question that many people like the idea of a hypothecated tax, so surely it can only be arranged through NI or income tax
How could any other tax be defined as hypothecated
I am not an expert so I just put this up for debate by those who may know the answer
I understand that the reason they chose NI rather than income tax is to ensure consistency across the union. If true then another unintended consequence of devolution?
Thanks
Wasn't a consequence of devolution per se. The original devolution settlement was much simpler: allow the SG only a single percentage point up or down on basic rate of income tax, IIRC.
It was a consequence, rather, of the Unionist fiddling on the Smith Commission after indyref1 to try and enmesh the Scottish Government aka SNP in a fiscal trap (for instance, deny the SG the power to vary tax oin dividends, to stop evasion of income tax by company directors and the self-employed). But when they enacted a new Scotland Act the Tories ended up screwing themselves as well.
"We are used to hearing that the devolution settlement is constraining the policy choices of the Scottish Government. The notion that the devolution settlement might potentially constrain the UK Government’s policy choices comes as something of a surprise."
The issue is that Scottish funding doesn't match Scottish taxes, and nor does Scottish expenditure.
That Scotland gains more than it raises in tax due to the Barnett formula isn't due to the Smith Commission, it has been the practice for a long time. When Scotland was raising oil revenues that kind of cancelled out, but that's long since stopped being true.
So even under the old formula if the Tories had risen tax by 1p and the Scots had cut theirs by 1p, then thanks to Barnett the Scots would still be better off.
Its Barnett that's the issue, not Smith.
That doenst make sense. Taxes went up and down centrally for decades without that being a problem.
Have a look at the FoA report.
It does make sense and I've looked at the report.
In prior decades nobody cared that tax receipts didn't match up with expenditure and even post-devolution if the same party controlled Westminer and Holyrood I doubt anyone would care either.
The issue is that having a hyperpartisan, hypernationalist devolved government the two sides have no incentive to co-operate with each other. And while in the past more money flowing as a Barnett consequential would just be natural, now its a problem.
But we had such a government in Scotland, and a hypernationalist one in London, for years before the tax changes in the post-indyref Scotland Act.
Not changing tax rates though. So the Barnett consequential issue, which nobody would have cared about last time tax rates were being significantly changed, is an issue now.
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed. - Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime - Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor. - Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen. - Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too. - David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
Frasier is probably my favourite tv comedy I reckon
The first half of each Frasier episode was good but the second-half descent into slapstick usually meant turning off.
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed. - Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime - Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor. - Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen. - Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too. - David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
Frasier is probably my favourite tv comedy I reckon
Some of the ‘farce’ episodes must be up there with the best farce ever written. The log cabin episode, for instance.
Noticeable how the Norwegian conservatives still holding Oslo, even in a poor year. Contrast with London.
The map of Norway is entirely red, apart from some blue and green bits in the far south west + Oslo.
Oslo is the 5th most expensive city in the world, it has a lot of rich residents and more in common with Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster which are still Conservative than Labour Newham or Lewisham or Hackney or Croydon
Yeah it's something that I'm really glad we managed to pull off. Every fibre of my being wants to stay in the UK but ultimately I know this is the right move for both of us and our eventual family. My parents are about to finalise buying a villa in Crete so they're not going to be in the UK for 5-7 months of the year and we can go and visit them quite easily in Crete. I think my biggest regret is leaving behind my sister and her family, we're really very close and we see each other almost every other weekend because she lives in North London not particularly far away from us. I hope that in a world of WhatsApp and zoom it won't be as bad.
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
It’s not ignorant. The minimum wage is £8.91 so 2 hours work is just under £18 (close enough).
Of course the reality on the ground is something different - hence out of touch is a fair complaint - but it is accurate
It is ignorant since the person working doesn't get £18 due to taper, NI and PAYE income tax. Do you think simply saying "you got £18 extra [but you'll only see £4.50 in your pay packet]" is an adequate response?
Reality on the ground isn't something different, its the system the politicians have created. So the claim was not accurate, earning £18 extra of which you get to keep only £4.50 does not replace £20 lost. It wasn't just inaccurate, it was completely wrong and shows the person speaking doesn't understand the system she is talking about.
It’s misleading, sure, but you said “ignorant” which is something different. I’m sure she knew exactly what she was doing
It is "not in the hands" of ministers to guarantee there will be enough lorries on the roads to deliver presents on time this Christmas, the transport secretary has told MPs https://trib.al/EA4BULa
It's a depressing point to make but one that needs to be made nonetheless: a lot of this extra "investment" in public services will simply be soaked up by higher wages and prices.
We won't see any difference in output, and that's if we're lucky. We might very well tax ourselves into stagnation and see public services go backwards as well.
It's a depressing point to make but one that needs to be made nonetheless: a lot of this extra "investment" in public services will simply be soaked up by higher wages and prices.
We won't see any difference in output, and that's if we're lucky. We might very well tax ourselves into stagnation and see public services go backwards as well.
It's a depressing point to make but one that needs to be made nonetheless: a lot of this extra "investment" in public services will simply be soaked up by higher wages and prices.
We won't see any difference in output, and that's if we're lucky. We might very well tax ourselves into stagnation and see public services go backwards as well.
Liz Truss (reportedly) had the right answer. If the issue is a temporary backlog due to the lockdown etc then have temporary borrowing to cover the temporary costs. Keep the permanent tax rates to match the permanent expenditure.
That way the Treasury and the NHS know they need to get value for money and clear the backlog as the borrowing can't go on forever.
Instead we've seen a permanent tax rise, which will go to permanent pay rises, and then where do we stand?
Noticeable how the Norwegian conservatives still holding Oslo, even in a poor year. Contrast with London.
The map of Norway is entirely red, apart from some blue and green bits in the far south west + Oslo.
Oslo is the 5th most expensive city in the world, it has a lot of rich residents and more in common with Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster than Newham or Lewisham or Hackney or Croydon
Noticeable how the Norwegian conservatives still holding Oslo, even in a poor year. Contrast with London.
The map of Norway is entirely red, apart from some blue and green bits in the far south west + Oslo.
Oslo is the 5th most expensive city in the world, it has a lot of rich residents and more in common with Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster than Newham or Lewisham or Hackney or Croydon
It's a depressing point to make but one that needs to be made nonetheless: a lot of this extra "investment" in public services will simply be soaked up by higher wages and prices.
We won't see any difference in output, and that's if we're lucky. We might very well tax ourselves into stagnation and see public services go backwards as well.
It's a depressing point to make but one that needs to be made nonetheless: a lot of this extra "investment" in public services will simply be soaked up by higher wages and prices.
We won't see any difference in output, and that's if we're lucky. We might very well tax ourselves into stagnation and see public services go backwards as well.
Ah, the Brexit dividend...
Oh fuck me, you're boring.
I will make a rule now: I will never ever respond to another of your posts again.
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed. - Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime - Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor. - Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen. - Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too. - David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
Frasier is probably my favourite tv comedy I reckon
Some of the ‘farce’ episodes must be up there with the best farce ever written. The log cabin episode, for instance.
Ski Lodge? Possibly my favourite, along with "The Doctor Is Out" & "The Perfect Guy"
"The Show Must Go Off" and "A Cranes Critique" are great too
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
It’s not ignorant. The minimum wage is £8.91 so 2 hours work is just under £18 (close enough).
Of course the reality on the ground is something different - hence out of touch is a fair complaint - but it is accurate
It is ignorant since the person working doesn't get £18 due to taper, NI and PAYE income tax. Do you think simply saying "you got £18 extra [but you'll only see £4.50 in your pay packet]" is an adequate response?
Reality on the ground isn't something different, its the system the politicians have created. So the claim was not accurate, earning £18 extra of which you get to keep only £4.50 does not replace £20 lost. It wasn't just inaccurate, it was completely wrong and shows the person speaking doesn't understand the system she is talking about.
It’s misleading, sure, but you said “ignorant” which is something different. I’m sure she knew exactly what she was doing
Not stupid, just dishonest. Phew!
Here is reality. Coffey knows that what she is saying is simply wrong. 2 hours work does not equal £18 on UC. Charles knows this as well.
The calculation is simple. Punters have had "benefits" weaponised. They don't know how UC works, don't know about the taper, but know that the minimum wage is close to a tenner.
So although Coffey is utterly misleading people, she knows the people targeted are already ill-informed, mislead and likely to accept what she says because they have been suitably conditioned so.
It's a depressing point to make but one that needs to be made nonetheless: a lot of this extra "investment" in public services will simply be soaked up by higher wages and prices.
We won't see any difference in output, and that's if we're lucky. We might very well tax ourselves into stagnation and see public services go backwards as well.
Liz Truss (reportedly) had the right answer. If the issue is a temporary backlog due to the lockdown etc then have temporary borrowing to cover the temporary costs. Keep the permanent tax rates to match the permanent expenditure.
That way the Treasury and the NHS know they need to get value for money and clear the backlog as the borrowing can't go on forever.
Instead we've seen a permanent tax rise, which will go to permanent pay rises, and then where do we stand?
If you look at NHS (80% spend on oldies) and Pensions (100% spend on oldies) then that's over 50% of all Government spending now and what's sucking all the oxygen out the room.
We really must start trimming entitlements there or we're going to break the bucket.
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed. - Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime - Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor. - Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen. - Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too. - David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
Frasier is probably my favourite tv comedy I reckon
Some of the ‘farce’ episodes must be up there with the best farce ever written. The log cabin episode, for instance.
Ski Lodge? Possibly my favourite, along with "The Doctor Is Out" & "The Perfect Guy"
The radio play episode is great, also the one where he needs to come up with a jingle for his show.
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed. - Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime - Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor. - Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen. - Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too. - David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
Frasier is probably my favourite tv comedy I reckon
Some of the ‘farce’ episodes must be up there with the best farce ever written. The log cabin episode, for instance.
I have a friend who hated 'Cheers' with an absolute passion but loved 'Frasier' and didn't even know the two were linked.
Noticeable how the Norwegian conservatives still holding Oslo, even in a poor year. Contrast with London.
The map of Norway is entirely red, apart from some blue and green bits in the far south west + Oslo.
Oslo is the 5th most expensive city in the world, it has a lot of rich residents and more in common with Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster than Newham or Lewisham or Hackney or Croydon
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed. - Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime - Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor. - Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen. - Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too. - David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
Frasier is probably my favourite tv comedy I reckon
Some of the ‘farce’ episodes must be up there with the best farce ever written. The log cabin episode, for instance.
Ski Lodge? Possibly my favourite, along with "The Doctor Is Out" & "The Perfect Guy"
The radio play episode is great, also the one where he needs to come up with a jingle for his show.
Yes there are plenty of classic episodes, and its on tv every day, twice!
Noticeable how the Norwegian conservatives still holding Oslo, even in a poor year. Contrast with London.
The map of Norway is entirely red, apart from some blue and green bits in the far south west + Oslo.
Oslo is the 5th most expensive city in the world, it has a lot of rich residents and more in common with Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster than Newham or Lewisham or Hackney or Croydon
Not all wealthy places vote conservative. Eg. Edinburgh.
Edinburgh voted for Ruth Davidson, Edinburgh is more Conservative than Scotland as a whole.
Edinburgh is also still not as wealthy as Oslo
Zero Con MPs or MSPs from Edinburgh constituencies.
Not all wealthy places vote conservative. Eg East Dunbartonshire.
In 2015 (pre Brexit) the Conservatives got a higher voteshare in Edinburgh than they did across Scotland as a whole and as I said Edinburgh is still nowhere near as wealthy as Oslo is
Noticeable how the Norwegian conservatives still holding Oslo, even in a poor year. Contrast with London.
The map of Norway is entirely red, apart from some blue and green bits in the far south west + Oslo.
Oslo is the 5th most expensive city in the world, it has a lot of rich residents and more in common with Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster than Newham or Lewisham or Hackney or Croydon
Yeah it's something that I'm really glad we managed to pull off. Every fibre of my being wants to stay in the UK but ultimately I know this is the right move for both of us and our eventual family. My parents are about to finalise buying a villa in Crete so they're not going to be in the UK for 5-7 months of the year and we can go and visit them quite easily in Crete. I think my biggest regret is leaving behind my sister and her family, we're really very close and we see each other almost every other weekend because she lives in North London not particularly far away from us. I hope that in a world of WhatsApp and zoom it won't be as bad.
Our son emigrating to New Zealand in 2003 was emotional and we did visit 4 times and twice to Canada since his move there in 2015 but it is hard at times
Noticeable how the Norwegian conservatives still holding Oslo, even in a poor year. Contrast with London.
The map of Norway is entirely red, apart from some blue and green bits in the far south west + Oslo.
Oslo is the 5th most expensive city in the world, it has a lot of rich residents and more in common with Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster which are still Conservative than Labour Newham or Lewisham or Hackney or Croydon
It's a depressing point to make but one that needs to be made nonetheless: a lot of this extra "investment" in public services will simply be soaked up by higher wages and prices.
We won't see any difference in output, and that's if we're lucky. We might very well tax ourselves into stagnation and see public services go backwards as well.
Liz Truss (reportedly) had the right answer. If the issue is a temporary backlog due to the lockdown etc then have temporary borrowing to cover the temporary costs. Keep the permanent tax rates to match the permanent expenditure.
That way the Treasury and the NHS know they need to get value for money and clear the backlog as the borrowing can't go on forever.
Instead we've seen a permanent tax rise, which will go to permanent pay rises, and then where do we stand?
If you look at NHS (80% spend on oldies) and Pensions (100% spend on oldies) then that's over 50% of all Government spending now and what's sucking all the oxygen out the room.
We really must start trimming entitlements there or we're going to break the bucket.
As I've said on a few occasions, we as a nation need to have a very open and honest discussion about what exactly the purpose of the NHS is. Is it there to prevent everyone from dying, essentially acting as the conqueror of death and extending life expectancy indefinitely, or is it there to act as a safety net for when people fall ill and need to be patched up. My issue is that the NHS was founded to do the latter but has morphed into something that does the former. With limited resources the NHS has delved into making life expectancy gain a key measure of outcomes.
If we want the NHS to act as the vanquisher of death and keep everyone alive for as long as possible then eventually we really will turn into a healthcare service with a country attached to pay for it. No one in government wants to face up to the reality that the NHS needs to do less and provide less healthcare but do it better.
It's a depressing point to make but one that needs to be made nonetheless: a lot of this extra "investment" in public services will simply be soaked up by higher wages and prices.
We won't see any difference in output, and that's if we're lucky. We might very well tax ourselves into stagnation and see public services go backwards as well.
Liz Truss (reportedly) had the right answer. If the issue is a temporary backlog due to the lockdown etc then have temporary borrowing to cover the temporary costs. Keep the permanent tax rates to match the permanent expenditure.
That way the Treasury and the NHS know they need to get value for money and clear the backlog as the borrowing can't go on forever.
Instead we've seen a permanent tax rise, which will go to permanent pay rises, and then where do we stand?
If you look at NHS (80% spend on oldies) and Pensions (100% spend on oldies) then that's over 50% of all Government spending now and what's sucking all the oxygen out the room.
We really must start trimming entitlements there or we're going to break the bucket.
It does seem the only way to balance the books without making any compromises would be to have some sort of exotic virus sweeping society that targets oldies.
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
You can't - which is why everyone tries to avoid talking about the issue
Universal Basic Income (UBI) gets round the problem. There is no disincentive to work as don't lose any UBI.
The problem with UBI is that it is so expensive, and the taxes you have to raise to pay for it create a disincentive to work even if the UBI itself doesn't. The second problem is that some people will choose not to work, figuring they can get by on UBI, and waste their life smoking dope and playing video games instead of doing something useful. Yes, work can be drudgery and exploitative, but it can also teach discipline and self-reliance. The third issue I have with it is more philosophical I suppose: why shouldn't people who are capable of working for a living go out and earn their own money instead of sponging off everyone else? Sorry for sounding like a Tory. But I think the government should be doing a lot more for children, the disabled, refugees, the environment etc not simply paying able bodied grown adults to sit on their arses all day!
The first problem: Yes taxes create a disincentive but unless you're talking about 75% we're looking at a lower disincentive than what exists today.
The second and third problem: People can already do that on our existing welfare system and once doing that the barriers/disincentives for getting into work are much steeper than what would exist under the proposed system.
Under our existing welfare system you have to be actively seeking work and provide evidence of that to continue to claim.
A UBI by definition would have no such requirement as everyone would get it automatically
That's not actually quite true.
The benefits system is incredibly complex in the UK, and while some benefits (JSA) are dependent on seeing work, that is supplemented by Housing Benefit and various means tested things.
Having just read J. M Trow's Richard 111 and the North I set up a tour of the three castles locally involved - Sandal, Pontefract, and Conisbrough. Sandal was easy to find, free car park on site, cafe available, clear information boards, but not much to see. Pontefract more difficult to find, free car park some distance away, more remains but cafe not open. Conisbrough best preserved but car park privatised and needed to download app to park. Gave up. Sandal and Pontefract local authority run, Conisbrough English Heritage - nuff said.
Noticeable how the Norwegian conservatives still holding Oslo, even in a poor year. Contrast with London.
The map of Norway is entirely red, apart from some blue and green bits in the far south west + Oslo.
Oslo is the 5th most expensive city in the world, it has a lot of rich residents and more in common with Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster than Newham or Lewisham or Hackney or Croydon
Not all wealthy places vote conservative. Eg. Edinburgh.
Edinburgh voted for Ruth Davidson, Edinburgh is more Conservative than Scotland as a whole (at least it was before Brexit).
Edinburgh is also still not as wealthy as Oslo
How many Conservative mps and msps does Edinburgh have?
Edinburgh is not that wealthy, certainly outside of central and west Edinburgh, its average house price is below that of most areas in the home counties let along Chelsea and Westminster. Though before 1997 it still elected a Tory MP in Pentlands and Edinburgh West when most of Scotland had Labour MPs.
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
You can't - which is why everyone tries to avoid talking about the issue
Universal Basic Income (UBI) gets round the problem. There is no disincentive to work as don't lose any UBI.
The problem with UBI is that it is so expensive, and the taxes you have to raise to pay for it create a disincentive to work even if the UBI itself doesn't. The second problem is that some people will choose not to work, figuring they can get by on UBI, and waste their life smoking dope and playing video games instead of doing something useful. Yes, work can be drudgery and exploitative, but it can also teach discipline and self-reliance. The third issue I have with it is more philosophical I suppose: why shouldn't people who are capable of working for a living go out and earn their own money instead of sponging off everyone else? Sorry for sounding like a Tory. But I think the government should be doing a lot more for children, the disabled, refugees, the environment etc not simply paying able bodied grown adults to sit on their arses all day!
The first problem: Yes taxes create a disincentive but unless you're talking about 75% we're looking at a lower disincentive than what exists today.
The second and third problem: People can already do that on our existing welfare system and once doing that the barriers/disincentives for getting into work are much steeper than what would exist under the proposed system.
Under our existing welfare system you have to be actively seeking work and provide evidence of that to continue to claim.
A UBI by definition would have no such requirement as everyone would get it automatically
That's not actually quite true.
The benefits system is incredibly complex in the UK, and while some benefits (JSA) are dependent on seeing work, that is supplemented by Housing Benefit and various means tested things.
Yes but a UBI would fund living costs not just housing costs
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
It’s not ignorant. The minimum wage is £8.91 so 2 hours work is just under £18 (close enough).
Of course the reality on the ground is something different - hence out of touch is a fair complaint - but it is accurate
It is ignorance - the idea that anyone of universal credit can receive money untaxed can only come from someone who has done zero research.
The only way it would occur is if the money was cash in hand and thag opens different issues for a Government minister
It’s misleading, like all politicians - in the way that a “£100m X from the defence budget would pay for Y nurses instead” is.
But accurate in its own terms
Its not accurate in its own terms.
The claim was that £20 lost from their bank accounts from UC could be replaced by 2 hours work. It can't. It is entirely false in its own terms.
Gross wages from 2 hours work are £18.
Politicians mislead. They always have done and always will do.
Btw your original claim was “ignorant” not “inaccurate”. This was not ignorant
Yeah it's something that I'm really glad we managed to pull off. Every fibre of my being wants to stay in the UK but ultimately I know this is the right move for both of us and our eventual family. My parents are about to finalise buying a villa in Crete so they're not going to be in the UK for 5-7 months of the year and we can go and visit them quite easily in Crete. I think my biggest regret is leaving behind my sister and her family, we're really very close and we see each other almost every other weekend because she lives in North London not particularly far away from us. I hope that in a world of WhatsApp and zoom it won't be as bad.
The Freedom to live in other countries is something to treasure.
A UC claimant doing 2 hours more work gets about £4.50 net after tax and NI and UC taper.
The bad thing is that nobody in the media has a clue how it works either so she can say that and not be challenged there and then for talking through her arse.
She just has been on ITV main news
You really despair about the inept way she came across
It is reputed 100 conservative mps are against the abolition of the uplift and I really hope they vote with labour later this week and shame HMG
The thing is they clearly don't understand the system they've created themselves.
The problem for years now is that the income tax rates have been fudged, so now nobody has a clue that doesn't pay attention that the income tax rate for someone on UC is 75% - and its going to be even higher once this recent tax rise goes up too. 🤦♂️
Why do we tax those less fortunate than ourselves 75%. Its disgusting and nobody campaigns against it.
Not sure how the Income tax rate could be 75%. Could you explain?
"According to Labour, the current system means that a single parent working 30 hours a week on the national living wage loses £573 a month of their universal credit entitlement – equivalent to a marginal tax rate of 75%. It contrasts this with the 47% marginal tax rate faced by people earning over £150,000 a year, such as the prime minister." In that Graun piece I posted just a moment ago.
OIC, you are referring to marginal tax rate.
Not sure how you deal with that. Not have a UC taper? Abolish UC? Increase the Tax allowance to cover it?
You can't - which is why everyone tries to avoid talking about the issue
Universal Basic Income (UBI) gets round the problem. There is no disincentive to work as don't lose any UBI.
The problem with UBI is that it is so expensive, and the taxes you have to raise to pay for it create a disincentive to work even if the UBI itself doesn't. The second problem is that some people will choose not to work, figuring they can get by on UBI, and waste their life smoking dope and playing video games instead of doing something useful. Yes, work can be drudgery and exploitative, but it can also teach discipline and self-reliance. The third issue I have with it is more philosophical I suppose: why shouldn't people who are capable of working for a living go out and earn their own money instead of sponging off everyone else? Sorry for sounding like a Tory. But I think the government should be doing a lot more for children, the disabled, refugees, the environment etc not simply paying able bodied grown adults to sit on their arses all day!
The first problem: Yes taxes create a disincentive but unless you're talking about 75% we're looking at a lower disincentive than what exists today.
The second and third problem: People can already do that on our existing welfare system and once doing that the barriers/disincentives for getting into work are much steeper than what would exist under the proposed system.
Under our existing welfare system you have to be actively seeking work and provide evidence of that to continue to claim.
A UBI by definition would have no such requirement as everyone would get it automatically
That's not actually quite true.
The benefits system is incredibly complex in the UK, and while some benefits (JSA) are dependent on seeing work, that is supplemented by Housing Benefit and various means tested things.
Something else that Switzerland does a lot better than anywhere else in the world is unemployment benefits. A fully contributory system that pays a percentage of your previous wage with a maximum cap for up to 18 months if you've done 3 years of work within the last 4 and 12 months if you've done 2 years in the last 3 or something along those lines. It's generous but difficult to qualify and there's no real concept of long term unemployment or benefits cheats etc... as it's just not possible.
Comments
I presume Boris is behind this somewhere, though.
The issue is that Scottish funding doesn't match Scottish taxes, and nor does Scottish expenditure.
That Scotland gains more than it raises in tax due to the Barnett formula isn't due to the Smith Commission, it has been the practice for a long time. When Scotland was raising oil revenues that kind of cancelled out, but that's long since stopped being true.
So even under the old formula if the Tories had risen tax by 1p and the Scots had cut theirs by 1p, then thanks to Barnett the Scots would still be better off.
Its Barnett that's the issue, not Smith.
Labour have been the main governing party in Norway for 48 of those 76 years
Starmer said some things then but nobody cares.
No, this is blue-on-blue.
Perhaps getting the pre-emptive “excuse” in before Gove is unceremoniously defenestrated.
Feels instinctively about right - the government taking more than 50% in direct taxation feels wrong.
The issue with Corbyn was that he'd consistently said dodgy stuff for over 30+ years and never changed.
He was still doing antisemitic activities and making antisemitic comments the year before he became leader after decades in the Commons. Not just as a student decades ago.
The second problem is that some people will choose not to work, figuring they can get by on UBI, and waste their life smoking dope and playing video games instead of doing something useful. Yes, work can be drudgery and exploitative, but it can also teach discipline and self-reliance.
The third issue I have with it is more philosophical I suppose: why shouldn't people who are capable of working for a living go out and earn their own money instead of sponging off everyone else?
Sorry for sounding like a Tory. But I think the government should be doing a lot more for children, the disabled, refugees, the environment etc not simply paying able bodied grown adults to sit on their arses all day!
Labour 26.0%
Conservatives 20.3%
The Christian People's party and Liberals both hovering on 4% but the Greens down at 3.6%. As parties move up and down through that 4% barrier, the redistribution of their seats to other parties changes the balance slightly.
The Labour-Centre-SV ticket still looking like a majority with 88 seats (projected).
Labour cheered to the rafters as they achieve historically poor election results. Because Jonas Gahr Støre becomes prime minister.
Have a look at the FoA report.
The second and third problem: People can already do that on our existing welfare system and once doing that the barriers/disincentives for getting into work are much steeper than what would exist under the proposed system.
A UBI by definition would have no such requirement as everyone would get it automatically
The issue isn't what anyone says as a student in the 80s/90s. The issue is that Corbyn remained just as vile, just as antisemitic, just as anti-western and just as much a friend of terrorists and dictators in recent years as he was 30-40 years ago.
Most people go through a stage as a student. Corbyn though never grew up.
Andrew Neil
@afneil
31m
A beautiful night tonight. Made perfect by three dogs at my feet, a generous Jameson’s and a Montecristo.
- Laurel and Hardy: still very funny indeed.
- Some Like it Hot and Dr Strangelove - sublime
- Surprised no-one mentioned Frasier which is one of the best TV comedies ever: a wonderful mix of character, farce, wit and physical comedy. David Hyde-Pierce is a brilliant comic actor.
- Stand ups: Victoria Wood - taken far too early. She had so much to give still. Dylan Moran. Eddie Izzard - when he was a comedian (and not the pompous bore he's now become). But the master of them all is still Dave Allen.
- Yes Minister is still very funny. Blackadder too.
- David Sedaris has written and delivered some very funny pieces.
But the best comedy to my mind combines observation, unexpected connections and some underlying truth. Too much of it nowadays is so predictable and therefore unfunny.
Red 100
Blue 68
72.3% counted
Workers Party heading for victory
It’s hardly a story.
The worst thing seems to have been use of the word “fuzzy-wuzzies” which is to be found in every episode of Dad’s Army ever.
Plus, Boris was “jesting” about picaninnies only a few years ago.
In prior decades nobody cared that tax receipts didn't match up with expenditure and even post-devolution if the same party controlled Westminer and Holyrood I doubt anyone would care either.
The issue is that having a hyperpartisan, hypernationalist devolved government the two sides have no incentive to co-operate with each other. And while in the past more money flowing as a Barnett consequential would just be natural, now its a problem.
But accurate in its own terms
The map of Norway is entirely red, apart from some blue and green bits in the far south west + Oslo.
The claim was that £20 lost from their bank accounts from UC could be replaced by 2 hours work. It can't. It is entirely false in its own terms.
Surely not.
I don't know what that would cost to fix but if I were PM I'd make it a priority. Far more so than gilded pensions.
*I'm hoping that your four or under is not like HYUFD's no more than 1%, which it turned out easily encompassed 1.5 at least and maybe up to 1.9999 or beyond
(Put you down as a maybe..?)
Victoria Wood on I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue was a work of wonder.
I only discovered Sedaris last year. Totally in awe.
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/tel-aviv-copenhagen-seoul-geneva-oslo-hong-kong-zurich-paris-singapore-a8257661.html
Phew!
https://trib.al/EA4BULa
We won't see any difference in output, and that's if we're lucky. We might very well tax ourselves into stagnation and see public services go backwards as well.
That way the Treasury and the NHS know they need to get value for money and clear the backlog as the borrowing can't go on forever.
Instead we've seen a permanent tax rise, which will go to permanent pay rises, and then where do we stand?
Edinburgh is also still not as wealthy as Oslo
I will make a rule now: I will never ever respond to another of your posts again.
🤦🏼♂️
When all on my mind was Gove
Now I find
That most of the time
Gove's not enough
In itself
"The Show Must Go Off" and "A Cranes Critique" are great too
The calculation is simple. Punters have had "benefits" weaponised. They don't know how UC works, don't know about the taper, but know that the minimum wage is close to a tenner.
So although Coffey is utterly misleading people, she knows the people targeted are already ill-informed, mislead and likely to accept what she says because they have been suitably conditioned so.
The constituency that Alistair Darling represented had been redrawn from the days Malcolm Rifkind was an MP on that basis
We really must start trimming entitlements there or we're going to break the bucket.
Not all wealthy places vote conservative. Eg East Dunbartonshire.
Well done on the new job
Frasier says to Niles in an exasperated tone: "Do you have any thoughts you don't express?"
And Niles just looks up and with perfect timing says: "I'm having an unexpressed thought right now."
Brilliant stuff! And this is wonderful physical comedy - apparently filmed in one take - https://youtu.be/EpImet3Xwgw
The other stand up comedian I love is Billy Connolly - https://youtu.be/t7nsAMwl1T4.
Dame Edna had her moments too - https://youtu.be/nROe4L0hwiE.
Oh yeah, the Tories were kicked out of Scotland due to redrawn boundaries. Very counterfactual.
If we want the NHS to act as the vanquisher of death and keep everyone alive for as long as possible then eventually we really will turn into a healthcare service with a country attached to pay for it. No one in government wants to face up to the reality that the NHS needs to do less and provide less healthcare but do it better.
The benefits system is incredibly complex in the UK, and while some benefits (JSA) are dependent on seeing work, that is supplemented by Housing Benefit and various means tested things.
The average house in Oslo costs 5.7 million kroner ie about £476,000, significantly more expensive than the average Edinburgh property and home ownership is higher in Oslo than London
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1049493/average-price-residential-property-in-norway-by-city/#:~:text=Oslo was the Norwegian city,kroner as of February 2021.
Politicians mislead. They always have done and always will do.
Btw your original claim was “ignorant” not “inaccurate”. This was not ignorant
Red 99
Blue 69
86.2% counted
Workers Party heading for victory