Starmer still strong betting favourite for post-election PM – politicalbetting.com
Options
Starmer still strong betting favourite for post-election PM – politicalbetting.com
Although it is less than 3-weeks since Liz Truss became the leader of the Conservative Party and was made Prime Minister the betting markets are still far from convinced that she will lead the party to victory in the general election.
0
Comments
-
"Next week’s round of polling could be very telling."
Mid-term polling is never very telling. I know it's difficult for politics nerds, but most people don't focus on politics until a few months before the next election, unless there's a massive and urgent crisis on.2 -
It will be very telling for those who want to believe it.1
-
Not much support for Martin Lewis2
-
The odds still favour Starmer as PM but with most seats, not a majority. A reverse of 20100
-
Its a huge saving compared to the figures you were personally bandying about just a few weeks ago.RochdalePioneers said:
EDIT - oh dear, he has described insane £2,500 a year energy bills as "a considerable saving". Which is absolutely isn't, it is cementing into place a price which has doubled vs last winter.RochdalePioneers said:Kwarteng on his feet and goes directly into the energy crisis.
This is the Tories problem. Saying something counter-factual to people's reality. Then sneering at them.
Expectations management was set by constantly talking about £3.5k to £5k bills.3 -
Great! The price hasn't gone to the moon! But £5k bills was like telling people they would be a £squillion - unpayable. For an awful lot of people, the capped doubling of prices is STILL unpayable.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its a huge saving compared to the figures you were personally bandying about just a few weeks ago.RochdalePioneers said:
EDIT - oh dear, he has described insane £2,500 a year energy bills as "a considerable saving". Which is absolutely isn't, it is cementing into place a price which has doubled vs last winter.RochdalePioneers said:Kwarteng on his feet and goes directly into the energy crisis.
This is the Tories problem. Saying something counter-factual to people's reality. Then sneering at them.
Expectations management was set by constantly talking about £3.5k to £5k bills.
You expect people to thank the government for doubling their energy bills?0 -
No, the Government haven't doubled their energy bills, the Russians etc have caused prices to go up.RochdalePioneers said:
Great! The price hasn't gone to the moon! But £5k bills was like telling people they would be a £squillion - unpayable. For an awful lot of people, the capped doubling of prices is STILL unpayable.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its a huge saving compared to the figures you were personally bandying about just a few weeks ago.RochdalePioneers said:
EDIT - oh dear, he has described insane £2,500 a year energy bills as "a considerable saving". Which is absolutely isn't, it is cementing into place a price which has doubled vs last winter.RochdalePioneers said:Kwarteng on his feet and goes directly into the energy crisis.
This is the Tories problem. Saying something counter-factual to people's reality. Then sneering at them.
Expectations management was set by constantly talking about £3.5k to £5k bills.
You expect people to thank the government for doubling their energy bills?
But you know that don't you? You're being partisan for the sake of it.2 -
FPT:
Indeed so. It would be relatively easy for a NATO operation to target the Black Sea Fleet, and Russian air defences inside Ukraine, followed by extensive bombing of every railway line half a mile inside the Russia/Ukraine border. The Russians can’t operate without railways, and would have little choice but to withdraw from Ukraine or be cut off.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not really. That is exactly the point. There are many non nuclear options. Russian use of battlefield nukes could be met with active NATO participation in Ukraine for example.Malmesbury said:
Given that the Americans are the only ones in NATO with non-ballistic missile delivered nukes (the gravity bombs) responding to a Russian tac nuke without going strategic is... interesting...Richard_Tyndall said:
Not downplayed, just put into perspective. The concern amongst the military apparently is that politicians will see the use of battlefield nukes as being indicative of the Russians being willing to use the ICBMs so they are keen to ensure it is clear to politicians that there is a big distinction in Russian minds between the use of tactical and strategic nuclear arsenals. They are not trying to limit the western response, just put the Russian use into context.LostPassword said:
Just clarifying, but is the perspective that use of small nukes should be downplayed and no big deal made of it?Richard_Tyndall said:
One of my closest friends used to run the situation room for Middle East and Afghanistan at NATO headquarters outside Brussels. British military planners are taught that the Russians see the use of tactical nukes as nothing more than a heavier form of artillery on their side whilst being aware of their potential to paralyse and disorient NATO and the West. Or at least the politicians in the West. One of the main jobs of the NATO planners and senior leaders in the event of the Russians using nukes on the battlefield is to put it into perspective for Western political leaders and stop them doing something stupid.turbotubbs said:
Might be my normalcy bias but I can’t see Russia using the first nuclear weapon in war since 1945. I still believe there are enough sensible people involved in the chain of command.rottenborough said:
FWIW, as a wild prediction, I think he will use a tactical nuke in desperation to try and scare the West away from Ukraine and then a NATO rain of absolute airforce fire will wipe out so much of the command structure, senior officers locations and general staff and comms in the field that the elite will remove him from office before it gets worse.Leon said:
Yes, I'm worried about Putin because he is losing, calamitously, not because he is winningrottenborough said:
He is definitely frightened because everything he has touched in last 12 months has turned to absolute shit and he knows it. As do the elite around him.Leon said:
Indeed. If you're a young man in Yakutia or Dagestan you're thinking: Why the Fuck should I die for Putin?TimS said:A number of consistent stories on social media that Russia is actually pushing forward with something more like full mobilisation in the rural and ethnic minority areas while going gently on Moscow and St Petersburg. Confirmed by the Russian I interviewed earlier today who told me he didn't expect to be called up as he is in Moscow and has a long term injury.
A form of ethnic cleansing? White Russians like other ethno-nationalists around Europe fear being outbred by minorities in their borders. Sending the young menfolk in to be slaughtered in Ukraine is a handy way of stemming the tide while achieving geopolitical and domestic political aims.
The republics of the South and Far East need to wake up to what's being done and seize back their independence. If Chechnya has another go it might find it has more support from outside than last time. There may never be a better opportunity.
But this is obviously the risk of Full Mobilisation, and Putin must know this, which makes me think he is much more frightened and paranoid then we realise. Which is not good
He has pulled off one of the greatest military disasters in decades if not hundreds of years.
And there is more to come.
For bonus points, give them a fortnight’s notice of the Kerch Bridge being destroyed, and watch all the Russians leave Crimea almost immediately.3 -
This is an unusual special economic exercise. Budgets and Spring/Autumn statements usually heard in relative calm. This one is being openly laughed at.
Probably doesn't help that next to Kwarteng is Simon Clarke. Who this morning was talking about a new government making new decisions. Instead of their mistakes in raising taxes to boost income they will cut taxes to boost income.
So whoever was responsible for these terrible decisions, it wasn't him. He was Chief Secretary to the Treasury, what does it have to do with him?0 -
Unfortunately for Liz Truss many typical Conservative voters in big detached houses will be paying £5,000. In fact as many as are paying less than £2,500 will be paying more and the £400 payment runs out next March.RochdalePioneers said:
Great! The price hasn't gone to the moon! But £5k bills was like telling people they would be a £squillion - unpayable. For an awful lot of people, the capped doubling of prices is STILL unpayable.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its a huge saving compared to the figures you were personally bandying about just a few weeks ago.RochdalePioneers said:
EDIT - oh dear, he has described insane £2,500 a year energy bills as "a considerable saving". Which is absolutely isn't, it is cementing into place a price which has doubled vs last winter.RochdalePioneers said:Kwarteng on his feet and goes directly into the energy crisis.
This is the Tories problem. Saying something counter-factual to people's reality. Then sneering at them.
Expectations management was set by constantly talking about £3.5k to £5k bills.
You expect people to thank the government for doubling their energy bills?1 -
Big shout out to the people who successfully laid Martin Lewis as next PM.2
-
I agree with Pioneers on this one. If people's bills are still higher this winter, to a fairly shocking extent, then the government messaging is all wrong. They shouldn't be congratulating themselves on how much good they've done, as it will be discordant with people's personal experience. It will probably lead people to assume that "other people" have benefited more than they have and the government have picked on them personally.BartholomewRoberts said:
No, the Government haven't doubled their energy bills, the Russians etc have caused prices to go up.RochdalePioneers said:
Great! The price hasn't gone to the moon! But £5k bills was like telling people they would be a £squillion - unpayable. For an awful lot of people, the capped doubling of prices is STILL unpayable.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its a huge saving compared to the figures you were personally bandying about just a few weeks ago.RochdalePioneers said:
EDIT - oh dear, he has described insane £2,500 a year energy bills as "a considerable saving". Which is absolutely isn't, it is cementing into place a price which has doubled vs last winter.RochdalePioneers said:Kwarteng on his feet and goes directly into the energy crisis.
This is the Tories problem. Saying something counter-factual to people's reality. Then sneering at them.
Expectations management was set by constantly talking about £3.5k to £5k bills.
You expect people to thank the government for doubling their energy bills?
But you know that don't you? You're being partisan for the sake of it.1 -
Sherbourne result is very poor for Labour.
I reckon the Tories might gain Cov NW against the general tide next GE...1 -
Abolishing stupid EU rules like the bankers bonus cap, attracting more taxes to be paid in the UK rather than abroad. 👏👏👏
Liberalising planning rules in areas - better follow through on that. 👏👏👏1 -
What you and I think doesn't matter much. Its what the *voters* think that matters. And from what we see and hear they think a lot more like me on this one than you.BartholomewRoberts said:
No, the Government haven't doubled their energy bills, the Russians etc have caused prices to go up.RochdalePioneers said:
Great! The price hasn't gone to the moon! But £5k bills was like telling people they would be a £squillion - unpayable. For an awful lot of people, the capped doubling of prices is STILL unpayable.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its a huge saving compared to the figures you were personally bandying about just a few weeks ago.RochdalePioneers said:
EDIT - oh dear, he has described insane £2,500 a year energy bills as "a considerable saving". Which is absolutely isn't, it is cementing into place a price which has doubled vs last winter.RochdalePioneers said:Kwarteng on his feet and goes directly into the energy crisis.
This is the Tories problem. Saying something counter-factual to people's reality. Then sneering at them.
Expectations management was set by constantly talking about £3.5k to £5k bills.
You expect people to thank the government for doubling their energy bills?
But you know that don't you? You're being partisan for the sake of it.
This lot have been in office for 12 years and we have a serious shortage of generating capacity. The shortages we now face have been predicted for years before Putin went into Ukraine. Blaming this government for the clear and widely understood failings of this government - and the same for previous governments when they fail - is something voters are very savvy about.0 -
It’s easy to identify problems, and more difficult to identify solutions.state_go_away said:Not much support for Martin Lewis
Every solution to the energy problem this winter, needs to work on the basis that supply is 15-20% down in last year. Therefore, demand MUST drop by that amount, irrespective of how that happens.2 -
Get those horrible universal credit people into jobs - or we will cut it. Hmm0
-
Kwarteng has made a huge error with his special fiscal operation.
Describing the £2,500 energy price cap as a saving is a huge faux, still means a lot of people will be paying a lot more than last year.2 -
Big shout out to the people who successfully gave money to Smarkets traders at return less than inflation or interest rates.TheScreamingEagles said:Big shout out to the people who successfully laid Martin Lewis as next PM.
1 -
Dethreaded. Gah.
FPT:
He's applying normal political argument standards.RochdalePioneers said:
EDIT - oh dear, he has described insane £2,500 a year energy bills as "a considerable saving". Which is absolutely isn't, it is cementing into place a price which has doubled vs last winter.RochdalePioneers said:Kwarteng on his feet and goes directly into the energy crisis.
This is the Tories problem. Saying something counter-factual to people's reality. Then sneering at them.
Comparing what has happened with a modelled projection, and calling it a real difference.
(Is the bloke a Remainer
?)
Whether it is perceived as a real saving will be interesting. My take is that the issue is significantly neutralised in the short to shortish term, but that there is a UXB attached, with an indeterminate time fuse. And that the lumpen media are going to have to find something else with which to scare their readers.
I note that La Truss's 2 year freeze extends to within 3 months of the latest possible date for the next election.
On which basis I forecast the 2024 election to be September 2024 or earlier.1 -
Nah, the smugness of laying X at huge odds is priceless.BartholomewRoberts said:
Big shout out to the people who successfully gave money to Smarkets traders at return less than inflation or interest rates.TheScreamingEagles said:Big shout out to the people who successfully laid Martin Lewis as next PM.
0 -
Its a whistle-stop tour isn't it!
SLAM: we're cutting the bankers bonus cap to bring more of them to London
SLAM: we're creating special local piracy zones where locals have no say
SLAM: we're cutting taxes for the well off0 -
I dunno, at 1/1000 the value of money in two years’ time will have eaten the profits.TheScreamingEagles said:Big shout out to the people who successfully laid Martin Lewis as next PM.
Hell, a 1/10 certainty for this time next year, could be profitably invested elsewhere.1 -
That will be fine, Bart and JRM will explain to them that it could have all been much much worse. And everyone will be grateful.TheScreamingEagles said:Kwarteng has made a huge error with his special fiscal operation.
Describing the £2,500 energy price cap as a saving is a huge faux, still means a lot of people will be paying a lot more than last year.
After all, once you're explaining, you're winning, aren't you?1 -
That's why we need to have campaigns around how people can reduce their energy use. There will be very few cases where it will not be possible to find some reductions.RochdalePioneers said:
Great! The price hasn't gone to the moon! But £5k bills was like telling people they would be a £squillion - unpayable. For an awful lot of people, the capped doubling of prices is STILL unpayable.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its a huge saving compared to the figures you were personally bandying about just a few weeks ago.RochdalePioneers said:
EDIT - oh dear, he has described insane £2,500 a year energy bills as "a considerable saving". Which is absolutely isn't, it is cementing into place a price which has doubled vs last winter.RochdalePioneers said:Kwarteng on his feet and goes directly into the energy crisis.
This is the Tories problem. Saying something counter-factual to people's reality. Then sneering at them.
Expectations management was set by constantly talking about £3.5k to £5k bills.
You expect people to thank the government for doubling their energy bills?4 -
Its only double. Who are you to complain, a Putin apologist?TheScreamingEagles said:Kwarteng has made a huge error with his special fiscal operation.
Describing the £2,500 energy price cap as a saving is a huge faux, still means a lot of people will be paying a lot more than last year.0 -
Excellent news! They are repealing IR35!
I'm voting Tory...0 -
Why should foreigner get away with not paying UK VAT in the UK
Tories hate the indigenous British IIRC0 -
It might actually increase the tax take....RochdalePioneers said:Excellent news! They are repealing IR35!
I'm voting Tory...1 -
Globally, yes. Here in the UK, not necessarily. We could, for example, pay so much for gas that we outbid many other countries and keep gas use in the UK the same as last year. That would of course be a pretty daft idea, but you see what I mean.Sandpit said:
It’s easy to identify problems, and more difficult to identify solutions.state_go_away said:Not much support for Martin Lewis
Every solution to the energy problem this winter, needs to work on the basis that supply is 15-20% down in last year. Therefore, demand MUST drop by that amount, irrespective of how that happens.0 -
Whatever else, all these changes are decisive & help Truss make the case that she is not just continuity Boris Johnson.
I also feel enthused that clearly there is a mood to shake things up, and agree that UK should be targeting higher economic growth.3 -
"I have another measure Mr Speaker"
SLAM
SLAM
SLAM
Have never seen a special economic activity like this. Nor one received so badly in the house.0 -
Of all the Prime Ministers I remember Truss is uniquely unimpressive. There have been party leaders who could have given her a run for her money-IDS being the most obvious-but for a PM she is peerless.0
-
19% tax from April 23
Abolition of 45% tax rate2 -
Additional tax rate abolished. Wasn't expecting that2
-
Blimey.. that is a brave statement4
-
Wowsers. He's abolishing the additional rate of tax. And cutting income tax. And cutting NI. And removing the planned revenues from higher Corporation Tax. And and and.
But spending on stuff will continue at the same speed.
Bonkers. Gloriously bonkers! Politics is such fun.0 -
AFAIK, no government has ever targeted lower economic growth, so I suppose the question we should be asking is what the government is targeting less in order to target economic growth more, and is that a good idea?rkrkrk said:Whatever else, all these changes are decisive & help Truss make the case that she is not just continuity Boris Johnson.
I also feel enthused that clearly there is a mood to shake things up, and agree that UK should be targeting higher economic growth.1 -
Just burning through as much debt as they can raise from the markets for the next two years and then leave the ensuing mess for Starmer and Reeves to clear up.Big_G_NorthWales said:19% tax from April 23
Abolition of 45% tax rate
It is like Bullingdon Club economics.
Smash the restaurant and then get someone else to clean up.6 -
The children will pay for this insanity.1
-
Well thank fuck most of our big orders are in Euro.0
-
VAT-free shopping for overseas visitors - I’m looking forward to my family Christmas trip already!1
-
Who is Skeletor on the Labour front bench next to Reeves?0
-
That was very dramatic and revolutionaryRazedabode said:Blimey.. that is a brave statement
It will be interesting just how this is received in the coming days0 -
Absolutlely. The incentives are one thing, but people also need to know the sensible responses to those incentives. Otherwise you get people doing things like this;AlistairM said:
That's why we need to have campaigns around how people can reduce their energy use. There will be very few cases where it will not be possible to find some reductions.RochdalePioneers said:
Great! The price hasn't gone to the moon! But £5k bills was like telling people they would be a £squillion - unpayable. For an awful lot of people, the capped doubling of prices is STILL unpayable.BartholomewRoberts said:
Its a huge saving compared to the figures you were personally bandying about just a few weeks ago.RochdalePioneers said:
EDIT - oh dear, he has described insane £2,500 a year energy bills as "a considerable saving". Which is absolutely isn't, it is cementing into place a price which has doubled vs last winter.RochdalePioneers said:Kwarteng on his feet and goes directly into the energy crisis.
This is the Tories problem. Saying something counter-factual to people's reality. Then sneering at them.
Expectations management was set by constantly talking about £3.5k to £5k bills.
You expect people to thank the government for doubling their energy bills?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-61478106
Truro Food Bank manager Simon Fann said: "[We have had] reports of children having upset stomachs, or, in worst cases, food poisoning because some parents are turning their fridges and freezers off overnight."
Now, it's to my professional shame that there are people out there who don't know the best things to do, because my colleages and I really did our best. But as with Covid (it's a germ, do the things we do to stop germs spreading), it's naive to think that public information is unnecessary.
Basically- heat is the thing. Turn the thermostat down, only heat rooms you are using, put on a jumper on.1 -
Billions and billions and billions and billions of pounds of additional borrowing to make rich people richer.5
-
The problem is that a non-nuclear response would cement the idea that you can use a nuke. No matter if the whole world opens a can of whop ass on you.Sandpit said:
Indeed so. It would be relatively easy for a NATO operation to target the Black Sea Fleet, and Russian air defences inside Ukraine, followed by extensive bombing of every railway line half a mile inside the Russia/Ukraine border. The Russians can’t operate without railways, and would have little choice but to withdraw from Ukraine or be cut off.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not really. That is exactly the point. There are many non nuclear options. Russian use of battlefield nukes could be met with active NATO participation in Ukraine for example.Malmesbury said:
Given that the Americans are the only ones in NATO with non-ballistic missile delivered nukes (the gravity bombs) responding to a Russian tac nuke without going strategic is... interesting...Richard_Tyndall said:
Not downplayed, just put into perspective. The concern amongst the military apparently is that politicians will see the use of battlefield nukes as being indicative of the Russians being willing to use the ICBMs so they are keen to ensure it is clear to politicians that there is a big distinction in Russian minds between the use of tactical and strategic nuclear arsenals. They are not trying to limit the western response, just put the Russian use into context.LostPassword said:
Just clarifying, but is the perspective that use of small nukes should be downplayed and no big deal made of it?Richard_Tyndall said:
One of my closest friends used to run the situation room for Middle East and Afghanistan at NATO headquarters outside Brussels. British military planners are taught that the Russians see the use of tactical nukes as nothing more than a heavier form of artillery on their side whilst being aware of their potential to paralyse and disorient NATO and the West. Or at least the politicians in the West. One of the main jobs of the NATO planners and senior leaders in the event of the Russians using nukes on the battlefield is to put it into perspective for Western political leaders and stop them doing something stupid.turbotubbs said:
Might be my normalcy bias but I can’t see Russia using the first nuclear weapon in war since 1945. I still believe there are enough sensible people involved in the chain of command.rottenborough said:
FWIW, as a wild prediction, I think he will use a tactical nuke in desperation to try and scare the West away from Ukraine and then a NATO rain of absolute airforce fire will wipe out so much of the command structure, senior officers locations and general staff and comms in the field that the elite will remove him from office before it gets worse.Leon said:
Yes, I'm worried about Putin because he is losing, calamitously, not because he is winningrottenborough said:
He is definitely frightened because everything he has touched in last 12 months has turned to absolute shit and he knows it. As do the elite around him.Leon said:
Indeed. If you're a young man in Yakutia or Dagestan you're thinking: Why the Fuck should I die for Putin?TimS said:A number of consistent stories on social media that Russia is actually pushing forward with something more like full mobilisation in the rural and ethnic minority areas while going gently on Moscow and St Petersburg. Confirmed by the Russian I interviewed earlier today who told me he didn't expect to be called up as he is in Moscow and has a long term injury.
A form of ethnic cleansing? White Russians like other ethno-nationalists around Europe fear being outbred by minorities in their borders. Sending the young menfolk in to be slaughtered in Ukraine is a handy way of stemming the tide while achieving geopolitical and domestic political aims.
The republics of the South and Far East need to wake up to what's being done and seize back their independence. If Chechnya has another go it might find it has more support from outside than last time. There may never be a better opportunity.
But this is obviously the risk of Full Mobilisation, and Putin must know this, which makes me think he is much more frightened and paranoid then we realise. Which is not good
He has pulled off one of the greatest military disasters in decades if not hundreds of years.
And there is more to come.
For bonus points, give them a fortnight’s notice of the Kerch Bridge being destroyed, and watch all the Russians leave Crimea almost immediately.
In the Rolling Thunder version of the response, what happens when the Russians put their next nuke on a Polish airbase?0 -
Is the pound down to 1.00 v USD yet?!!!!0
-
I really don’t think tearing up the last 12 years is politically savvy…bizarre.0
-
There are going to have to be some brutal spending cuts to balance the books. I'd be nervous if I was in charge of a local government budget.0
-
Can't see any potential rewards here - just a grade A mess...AlistairM said:
It is certainly different. So far the biggest changes in my working lifetime. It could go either way. Massive risk but potentially massive rewards. We shall see. We should all hope they've made the right call.ping said:The children will pay for this insanity.
It says something when I regard Bozo as sane...0 -
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/council-looking-make-ferocious-cuts-7605831LostPassword said:There are going to have to be some brutal spending cuts to balance the books. I'd be nervous if I was in charge of a local government budget.
0 -
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
·
6m
Top rate of tax gone. Good.
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
·
5m
Will be massively controversial. Paired with a cut in the basic rate, which may get some headlines too. (I disapprove of the latter.)
0 -
Awful economics. Awful politics.
Kwarteng has opened the door for Labour to reverse everything he's just done - and pin the blame on the Tories.
Showering money on the London rich and making goods 20% more expensive for Brits than foreigners will be a tough sell in Don Valley.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/15732373334906511371 -
This has been the Republican approach in the US, but the US can get away with it because people will lend to them while the GOP are wrecking the budget. Will the world carry on lending to the UK?rottenborough said:
Just burning through as much debt as they can raise from the markets for the next two years and then leave the ensuing mess for Starmer and Reeves to clear up.Big_G_NorthWales said:19% tax from April 23
Abolition of 45% tax rate
It is like Bullingdon Club economics.
Smash the restaurant and then get someone else to clean up.0 -
In other news - every social care temp worker and lorry driver will return to using a limited company within weeks. The IR35 changes are going to decimate Employer NI tax take...0
-
Pat McFadden ?RochdalePioneers said:Who is Skeletor on the Labour front bench next to Reeves?
Starmer does not look too happy1 -
SKSBig_G_NorthWales said:
Pat McFadden ?RochdalePioneers said:Who is Skeletor on the Labour front bench next to Reeves?
Starmer does not look too happy0 -
Presumably, just as tax free shopping in the UK works now. The ability to purchase and take away, tax free, was removed a while back. What they offer now, is purchase inshore and get delivered to your address abroadPulpstar said:
How does this work ?Sandpit said:VAT-free shopping for overseas visitors - I’m looking forward to my family Christmas trip already!
Do you need to wave an airline ticket in front of the cashier ?
https://www.selfridges.com/GB/en/features/info/tax-free-shopping-explained/ etc
EDIT: or do they mean re-introducing over the counter tax free? If so, back to the days of show the ticket....0 -
Looking forward to cashiers/salesfolk multiplying everything by .833333333333 for foreign visitors.Pulpstar said:
How does this work ?Sandpit said:VAT-free shopping for overseas visitors - I’m looking forward to my family Christmas trip already!
Do you need to wave an airline ticket in front of the cashier ?0 -
It will have to be claimed back later after or as you depart - there is no other approach that could work....Pulpstar said:
How does this work ?Sandpit said:VAT-free shopping for overseas visitors - I’m looking forward to my family Christmas trip already!
Do you need to wave an airline ticket in front of the cashier ?0 -
Another blimey:
Cost of these tax cuts alone will come to £45bn in a few years. Enormous. And this is before you take into account the energy price guarantee, which will be roughly £60bn EVERY SIX MONTHS… https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1573237876510396417/photo/10 -
Did he really cut the additional rate? What about allowance withdrawal at £100k?
Not going to lie, this statement has made me personally much better off, which doesn't sit right when we see what's happening in the country.6 -
Fadden is very good. Will make an excellent cabinet minister in 2024/5.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Pat McFadden ?RochdalePioneers said:Who is Skeletor on the Labour front bench next to Reeves?
Starmer does not look too happy0 -
Johnson who ?Razedabode said:I really don’t think tearing up the last 12 years is politically savvy…bizarre.
0 -
The government has just given me over ten grand, paid for by borrowing. I won't be spending any of it! Absolute insanity. Last one to leave please turn out the lights.0
-
Presumably you'll donate your share straight back to HMRC?SouthamObserver said:Billions and billions and billions and billions of pounds of additional borrowing to make rich people richer.
2 -
My suggestion would be Part I of the response, simply a demonstration of NATO firepower, all done inside 48 hours of a small tactical nuke from the Russians in Ukraine.Malmesbury said:
The problem is that a non-nuclear response would cement the idea that you can use a nuke. No matter if the whole world opens a can of whop ass on you.Sandpit said:
Indeed so. It would be relatively easy for a NATO operation to target the Black Sea Fleet, and Russian air defences inside Ukraine, followed by extensive bombing of every railway line half a mile inside the Russia/Ukraine border. The Russians can’t operate without railways, and would have little choice but to withdraw from Ukraine or be cut off.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not really. That is exactly the point. There are many non nuclear options. Russian use of battlefield nukes could be met with active NATO participation in Ukraine for example.Malmesbury said:
Given that the Americans are the only ones in NATO with non-ballistic missile delivered nukes (the gravity bombs) responding to a Russian tac nuke without going strategic is... interesting...Richard_Tyndall said:
Not downplayed, just put into perspective. The concern amongst the military apparently is that politicians will see the use of battlefield nukes as being indicative of the Russians being willing to use the ICBMs so they are keen to ensure it is clear to politicians that there is a big distinction in Russian minds between the use of tactical and strategic nuclear arsenals. They are not trying to limit the western response, just put the Russian use into context.LostPassword said:
Just clarifying, but is the perspective that use of small nukes should be downplayed and no big deal made of it?Richard_Tyndall said:
One of my closest friends used to run the situation room for Middle East and Afghanistan at NATO headquarters outside Brussels. British military planners are taught that the Russians see the use of tactical nukes as nothing more than a heavier form of artillery on their side whilst being aware of their potential to paralyse and disorient NATO and the West. Or at least the politicians in the West. One of the main jobs of the NATO planners and senior leaders in the event of the Russians using nukes on the battlefield is to put it into perspective for Western political leaders and stop them doing something stupid.turbotubbs said:
Might be my normalcy bias but I can’t see Russia using the first nuclear weapon in war since 1945. I still believe there are enough sensible people involved in the chain of command.rottenborough said:
FWIW, as a wild prediction, I think he will use a tactical nuke in desperation to try and scare the West away from Ukraine and then a NATO rain of absolute airforce fire will wipe out so much of the command structure, senior officers locations and general staff and comms in the field that the elite will remove him from office before it gets worse.Leon said:
Yes, I'm worried about Putin because he is losing, calamitously, not because he is winningrottenborough said:
He is definitely frightened because everything he has touched in last 12 months has turned to absolute shit and he knows it. As do the elite around him.Leon said:
Indeed. If you're a young man in Yakutia or Dagestan you're thinking: Why the Fuck should I die for Putin?TimS said:A number of consistent stories on social media that Russia is actually pushing forward with something more like full mobilisation in the rural and ethnic minority areas while going gently on Moscow and St Petersburg. Confirmed by the Russian I interviewed earlier today who told me he didn't expect to be called up as he is in Moscow and has a long term injury.
A form of ethnic cleansing? White Russians like other ethno-nationalists around Europe fear being outbred by minorities in their borders. Sending the young menfolk in to be slaughtered in Ukraine is a handy way of stemming the tide while achieving geopolitical and domestic political aims.
The republics of the South and Far East need to wake up to what's being done and seize back their independence. If Chechnya has another go it might find it has more support from outside than last time. There may never be a better opportunity.
But this is obviously the risk of Full Mobilisation, and Putin must know this, which makes me think he is much more frightened and paranoid then we realise. Which is not good
He has pulled off one of the greatest military disasters in decades if not hundreds of years.
And there is more to come.
For bonus points, give them a fortnight’s notice of the Kerch Bridge being destroyed, and watch all the Russians leave Crimea almost immediately.
In the Rolling Thunder version of the response, what happens when the Russians put their next nuke on a Polish airbase?
If Putin wants to escalate things from there, that will be up to him. It can escalate very quickly indeed, if that’s what he wants. Maybe on Day 3, we nuke Murmansk.0 -
Surely this duel tax rate for VAT will be an absolute pay in the arse for small businesses and they will all have to do it? Or have I missed something?Scott_xP said:Awful economics. Awful politics.
Kwarteng has opened the door for Labour to reverse everything he's just done - and pin the blame on the Tories.
Showering money on the London rich and making goods 20% more expensive for Brits than foreigners will be a tough sell in Don Valley.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/15732373334906511370 -
He said something about an electronic system.Pulpstar said:
How does this work ?Sandpit said:VAT-free shopping for overseas visitors - I’m looking forward to my family Christmas trip already!
Do you need to wave an airline ticket in front of the cashier ?
TBH I think VAT-free shopping makes sense. The UK is a huge tourism destination, and with the pound tanking against the dollar it makes us very attractive to Americans. Whilst they are here why not have them spend even more on stuff to take home? Any tourism destination wants to fleece the maximum possible from tourists.2 -
The old system was paper based - he mentioned the new system will be electronic - which will beat queuing behind the Chinese tourists at Heathrow.Pulpstar said:
How does this work ?Sandpit said:VAT-free shopping for overseas visitors - I’m looking forward to my family Christmas trip already!
Do you need to wave an airline ticket in front of the cashier ?1 -
Yup - I think they mean returning to over-the-counter tax free shopping. Which was only abolished a couple of years ago, IIRC. At the moment, the store has to send the purchase to an address abroad.Phil said:
Don’t overseas visitors already have VAT free shopping? I’m sure I used to see signs about it in the high-end shops round here.Sandpit said:VAT-free shopping for overseas visitors - I’m looking forward to my family Christmas trip already!
1 -
I think the VAT free stuff is a reversal of something Rishi announced in 2020.2
-
Rishi scrapped it a couple of years ago, fearing that EU visitors would cost the Treasury too much.Phil said:
Don’t overseas visitors already have VAT free shopping? I’m sure I used to see signs about it in the high-end shops round here.Sandpit said:VAT-free shopping for overseas visitors - I’m looking forward to my family Christmas trip already!
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2020/09/14/retailers-criticise-treasury-over-move-to-scrap-vat-free-shoppin/1 -
You can donate it to the treasuryOnlyLivingBoy said:The government has just given me over ten grand, paid for by borrowing. I won't be spending any of it! Absolute insanity. Last one to leave please turn out the lights.
2 -
Shot his fox?.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Pat McFadden ?RochdalePioneers said:Who is Skeletor on the Labour front bench next to Reeves?
Starmer does not look too happy
No one was expecting an income tax cut for all. Kwartang has smashed this out of the park.
This really is a fantastic tax cutting Government. Right, where are the corresponding cuts to services coming from?1 -
It wouldn't cement that idea, were the consequences sufficiently unpleasant.Malmesbury said:
The problem is that a non-nuclear response would cement the idea that you can use a nuke. No matter if the whole world opens a can of whop ass on you.Sandpit said:
Indeed so. It would be relatively easy for a NATO operation to target the Black Sea Fleet, and Russian air defences inside Ukraine, followed by extensive bombing of every railway line half a mile inside the Russia/Ukraine border. The Russians can’t operate without railways, and would have little choice but to withdraw from Ukraine or be cut off.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not really. That is exactly the point. There are many non nuclear options. Russian use of battlefield nukes could be met with active NATO participation in Ukraine for example.Malmesbury said:
Given that the Americans are the only ones in NATO with non-ballistic missile delivered nukes (the gravity bombs) responding to a Russian tac nuke without going strategic is... interesting...Richard_Tyndall said:
Not downplayed, just put into perspective. The concern amongst the military apparently is that politicians will see the use of battlefield nukes as being indicative of the Russians being willing to use the ICBMs so they are keen to ensure it is clear to politicians that there is a big distinction in Russian minds between the use of tactical and strategic nuclear arsenals. They are not trying to limit the western response, just put the Russian use into context.LostPassword said:
Just clarifying, but is the perspective that use of small nukes should be downplayed and no big deal made of it?Richard_Tyndall said:
One of my closest friends used to run the situation room for Middle East and Afghanistan at NATO headquarters outside Brussels. British military planners are taught that the Russians see the use of tactical nukes as nothing more than a heavier form of artillery on their side whilst being aware of their potential to paralyse and disorient NATO and the West. Or at least the politicians in the West. One of the main jobs of the NATO planners and senior leaders in the event of the Russians using nukes on the battlefield is to put it into perspective for Western political leaders and stop them doing something stupid.turbotubbs said:
Might be my normalcy bias but I can’t see Russia using the first nuclear weapon in war since 1945. I still believe there are enough sensible people involved in the chain of command.rottenborough said:
FWIW, as a wild prediction, I think he will use a tactical nuke in desperation to try and scare the West away from Ukraine and then a NATO rain of absolute airforce fire will wipe out so much of the command structure, senior officers locations and general staff and comms in the field that the elite will remove him from office before it gets worse.Leon said:
Yes, I'm worried about Putin because he is losing, calamitously, not because he is winningrottenborough said:
He is definitely frightened because everything he has touched in last 12 months has turned to absolute shit and he knows it. As do the elite around him.Leon said:
Indeed. If you're a young man in Yakutia or Dagestan you're thinking: Why the Fuck should I die for Putin?TimS said:A number of consistent stories on social media that Russia is actually pushing forward with something more like full mobilisation in the rural and ethnic minority areas while going gently on Moscow and St Petersburg. Confirmed by the Russian I interviewed earlier today who told me he didn't expect to be called up as he is in Moscow and has a long term injury.
A form of ethnic cleansing? White Russians like other ethno-nationalists around Europe fear being outbred by minorities in their borders. Sending the young menfolk in to be slaughtered in Ukraine is a handy way of stemming the tide while achieving geopolitical and domestic political aims.
The republics of the South and Far East need to wake up to what's being done and seize back their independence. If Chechnya has another go it might find it has more support from outside than last time. There may never be a better opportunity.
But this is obviously the risk of Full Mobilisation, and Putin must know this, which makes me think he is much more frightened and paranoid then we realise. Which is not good
He has pulled off one of the greatest military disasters in decades if not hundreds of years.
And there is more to come.
For bonus points, give them a fortnight’s notice of the Kerch Bridge being destroyed, and watch all the Russians leave Crimea almost immediately.
In the Rolling Thunder version of the response, what happens when the Russians put their next nuke on a Polish airbase?
I would presume the US will be talking with China, India etc regarding possible responses. Putin is indulging in extraordinarily reckless threats; it's extremely unlikely that any other country is happy about that.1 -
David is bob on with regards to the politics of this. I can understand why they are showing their patrons with as much cash as they can whilst they can. But it will only accelerate both their decline and the period they are likely to spend in opposition.Scott_xP said:Awful economics. Awful politics.
Kwarteng has opened the door for Labour to reverse everything he's just done - and pin the blame on the Tories.
Showering money on the London rich and making goods 20% more expensive for Brits than foreigners will be a tough sell in Don Valley.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/15732373334906511370 -
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/voluntary-payments-donations-to-governmentOnlyLivingBoy said:The government has just given me over ten grand, paid for by borrowing. I won't be spending any of it! Absolute insanity. Last one to leave please turn out the lights.
4 -
Better make sure you spend your windfall!MaxPB said:Did he really cut the additional rate? What about allowance withdrawal at £100k?
Not going to lie, this statement has made me personally much better off, which doesn't sit right when we see what's happening in the country.0 -
I will increase my charitable contributions. Many others will bank the cash. You can spend hours searching for personal hypocrisies if you like, but the simple fact is that this government is massively increasing borrowing so that rich people can have more money. You may think that will make this a better country. I am sceptical.williamglenn said:
Presumably you'll donate your share straight back to HMRC?SouthamObserver said:Billions and billions and billions and billions of pounds of additional borrowing to make rich people richer.
4 -
Yep same here. It's extraordinary. If people realised what was happening for those better off it might be an Aux Barricades moment.MaxPB said:Did he really cut the additional rate? What about allowance withdrawal at £100k?
Not going to lie, this statement has made me personally much better off, which doesn't sit right when we see what's happening in the country.0 -
Sigh.. I never did get to see Polyarny Inlet. Had an offer of a place on a tanker going that way, long ago. But was young, stupid and busy.....Sandpit said:
My suggestion would be Part I of the response, simply a demonstration of NATO firepower, all done inside 48 hours of a small tactical nuke from the Russians in Ukraine.Malmesbury said:
The problem is that a non-nuclear response would cement the idea that you can use a nuke. No matter if the whole world opens a can of whop ass on you.Sandpit said:
Indeed so. It would be relatively easy for a NATO operation to target the Black Sea Fleet, and Russian air defences inside Ukraine, followed by extensive bombing of every railway line half a mile inside the Russia/Ukraine border. The Russians can’t operate without railways, and would have little choice but to withdraw from Ukraine or be cut off.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not really. That is exactly the point. There are many non nuclear options. Russian use of battlefield nukes could be met with active NATO participation in Ukraine for example.Malmesbury said:
Given that the Americans are the only ones in NATO with non-ballistic missile delivered nukes (the gravity bombs) responding to a Russian tac nuke without going strategic is... interesting...Richard_Tyndall said:
Not downplayed, just put into perspective. The concern amongst the military apparently is that politicians will see the use of battlefield nukes as being indicative of the Russians being willing to use the ICBMs so they are keen to ensure it is clear to politicians that there is a big distinction in Russian minds between the use of tactical and strategic nuclear arsenals. They are not trying to limit the western response, just put the Russian use into context.LostPassword said:
Just clarifying, but is the perspective that use of small nukes should be downplayed and no big deal made of it?Richard_Tyndall said:
One of my closest friends used to run the situation room for Middle East and Afghanistan at NATO headquarters outside Brussels. British military planners are taught that the Russians see the use of tactical nukes as nothing more than a heavier form of artillery on their side whilst being aware of their potential to paralyse and disorient NATO and the West. Or at least the politicians in the West. One of the main jobs of the NATO planners and senior leaders in the event of the Russians using nukes on the battlefield is to put it into perspective for Western political leaders and stop them doing something stupid.turbotubbs said:
Might be my normalcy bias but I can’t see Russia using the first nuclear weapon in war since 1945. I still believe there are enough sensible people involved in the chain of command.rottenborough said:
FWIW, as a wild prediction, I think he will use a tactical nuke in desperation to try and scare the West away from Ukraine and then a NATO rain of absolute airforce fire will wipe out so much of the command structure, senior officers locations and general staff and comms in the field that the elite will remove him from office before it gets worse.Leon said:
Yes, I'm worried about Putin because he is losing, calamitously, not because he is winningrottenborough said:
He is definitely frightened because everything he has touched in last 12 months has turned to absolute shit and he knows it. As do the elite around him.Leon said:
Indeed. If you're a young man in Yakutia or Dagestan you're thinking: Why the Fuck should I die for Putin?TimS said:A number of consistent stories on social media that Russia is actually pushing forward with something more like full mobilisation in the rural and ethnic minority areas while going gently on Moscow and St Petersburg. Confirmed by the Russian I interviewed earlier today who told me he didn't expect to be called up as he is in Moscow and has a long term injury.
A form of ethnic cleansing? White Russians like other ethno-nationalists around Europe fear being outbred by minorities in their borders. Sending the young menfolk in to be slaughtered in Ukraine is a handy way of stemming the tide while achieving geopolitical and domestic political aims.
The republics of the South and Far East need to wake up to what's being done and seize back their independence. If Chechnya has another go it might find it has more support from outside than last time. There may never be a better opportunity.
But this is obviously the risk of Full Mobilisation, and Putin must know this, which makes me think he is much more frightened and paranoid then we realise. Which is not good
He has pulled off one of the greatest military disasters in decades if not hundreds of years.
And there is more to come.
For bonus points, give them a fortnight’s notice of the Kerch Bridge being destroyed, and watch all the Russians leave Crimea almost immediately.
In the Rolling Thunder version of the response, what happens when the Russians put their next nuke on a Polish airbase?
If Putin wants to escalate things from there, that will be up to him. It can escalate very quickly indeed, if that’s what he wants. Maybe on Day 3, we nuke Murmansk.1 -
IR35 FFS
Why bother paying tax at all0 -
Armée de l'air et de l'espace has ASMP-A delivered by Rafale F3.Malmesbury said:
Given that the Americans are the only ones in NATO with non-ballistic missile delivered nukes (the gravity bombs) responding to a Russian tac nuke without going strategic is... interesting...0 -
I think this is an utter fuck up. Tories know they’ll lose the next election and just spaffing whatever random policy to shore up the base0
-
It won't. People intending to buy things like expensive watches have a choice where to buy them if they also travel. May as well take their dollah rather than somewhere else.Sandpit said:
Rishi scrapped it a couple of years ago, fearing that EU visitors would cost the Treasury too much.Phil said:
Don’t overseas visitors already have VAT free shopping? I’m sure I used to see signs about it in the high-end shops round here.Sandpit said:VAT-free shopping for overseas visitors - I’m looking forward to my family Christmas trip already!
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2020/09/14/retailers-criticise-treasury-over-move-to-scrap-vat-free-shoppin/1 -
Hmm we've seen what happens when people feel they're earning enough to be comfy with the GPs. Lifetime pension allowance hit early, more part time working, early retirement.1
-
I think they'll be happy with accelerating the period they spend in opposition.RochdalePioneers said:
David is bob on with regards to the politics of this. I can understand why they are showing their patrons with as much cash as they can whilst they can. But it will only accelerate both their decline and the period they are likely to spend in opposition.Scott_xP said:Awful economics. Awful politics.
Kwarteng has opened the door for Labour to reverse everything he's just done - and pin the blame on the Tories.
Showering money on the London rich and making goods 20% more expensive for Brits than foreigners will be a tough sell in Don Valley.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/15732373334906511371 -
Beer prices cut. Phew, the RedWall back on board.0
-
In Japan's similar scheme, approved large shops have a setup where you show your passport and they confirm that it has a suitably dated entry stamp for a short-term visa, and then you pay the without-tax price at point of purchase.eek said:
It will have to be claimed back later after or as you depart - there is no other approach that could work....Pulpstar said:
How does this work ?Sandpit said:VAT-free shopping for overseas visitors - I’m looking forward to my family Christmas trip already!
Do you need to wave an airline ticket in front of the cashier ?
0 -
Nah they'll just spend it on introducing imperial measurements, more tax cuts for the donor class or taking photos of JRM.williamglenn said:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/voluntary-payments-donations-to-governmentOnlyLivingBoy said:The government has just given me over ten grand, paid for by borrowing. I won't be spending any of it! Absolute insanity. Last one to leave please turn out the lights.
0 -
Xi and Modi were both quite clear with Putin last week. He’ll be getting the Kim Jong-Un treatment, if he’s stupid enough to risk global armageddon.Nigelb said:
It wouldn't cement that idea, were the consequences sufficiently unpleasant.Malmesbury said:
The problem is that a non-nuclear response would cement the idea that you can use a nuke. No matter if the whole world opens a can of whop ass on you.Sandpit said:
Indeed so. It would be relatively easy for a NATO operation to target the Black Sea Fleet, and Russian air defences inside Ukraine, followed by extensive bombing of every railway line half a mile inside the Russia/Ukraine border. The Russians can’t operate without railways, and would have little choice but to withdraw from Ukraine or be cut off.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not really. That is exactly the point. There are many non nuclear options. Russian use of battlefield nukes could be met with active NATO participation in Ukraine for example.Malmesbury said:
Given that the Americans are the only ones in NATO with non-ballistic missile delivered nukes (the gravity bombs) responding to a Russian tac nuke without going strategic is... interesting...Richard_Tyndall said:
Not downplayed, just put into perspective. The concern amongst the military apparently is that politicians will see the use of battlefield nukes as being indicative of the Russians being willing to use the ICBMs so they are keen to ensure it is clear to politicians that there is a big distinction in Russian minds between the use of tactical and strategic nuclear arsenals. They are not trying to limit the western response, just put the Russian use into context.LostPassword said:
Just clarifying, but is the perspective that use of small nukes should be downplayed and no big deal made of it?Richard_Tyndall said:
One of my closest friends used to run the situation room for Middle East and Afghanistan at NATO headquarters outside Brussels. British military planners are taught that the Russians see the use of tactical nukes as nothing more than a heavier form of artillery on their side whilst being aware of their potential to paralyse and disorient NATO and the West. Or at least the politicians in the West. One of the main jobs of the NATO planners and senior leaders in the event of the Russians using nukes on the battlefield is to put it into perspective for Western political leaders and stop them doing something stupid.turbotubbs said:
Might be my normalcy bias but I can’t see Russia using the first nuclear weapon in war since 1945. I still believe there are enough sensible people involved in the chain of command.rottenborough said:
FWIW, as a wild prediction, I think he will use a tactical nuke in desperation to try and scare the West away from Ukraine and then a NATO rain of absolute airforce fire will wipe out so much of the command structure, senior officers locations and general staff and comms in the field that the elite will remove him from office before it gets worse.Leon said:
Yes, I'm worried about Putin because he is losing, calamitously, not because he is winningrottenborough said:
He is definitely frightened because everything he has touched in last 12 months has turned to absolute shit and he knows it. As do the elite around him.Leon said:
Indeed. If you're a young man in Yakutia or Dagestan you're thinking: Why the Fuck should I die for Putin?TimS said:A number of consistent stories on social media that Russia is actually pushing forward with something more like full mobilisation in the rural and ethnic minority areas while going gently on Moscow and St Petersburg. Confirmed by the Russian I interviewed earlier today who told me he didn't expect to be called up as he is in Moscow and has a long term injury.
A form of ethnic cleansing? White Russians like other ethno-nationalists around Europe fear being outbred by minorities in their borders. Sending the young menfolk in to be slaughtered in Ukraine is a handy way of stemming the tide while achieving geopolitical and domestic political aims.
The republics of the South and Far East need to wake up to what's being done and seize back their independence. If Chechnya has another go it might find it has more support from outside than last time. There may never be a better opportunity.
But this is obviously the risk of Full Mobilisation, and Putin must know this, which makes me think he is much more frightened and paranoid then we realise. Which is not good
He has pulled off one of the greatest military disasters in decades if not hundreds of years.
And there is more to come.
For bonus points, give them a fortnight’s notice of the Kerch Bridge being destroyed, and watch all the Russians leave Crimea almost immediately.
In the Rolling Thunder version of the response, what happens when the Russians put their next nuke on a Polish airbase?
I would presume the US will be talking with China, India etc regarding possible responses. Putin is indulging in extraordinarily reckless threats; it's extremely unlikely that any other country is happy about that.0 -
Oh dear oh dear. Tory Chair of the Treasury Select Committee tears Kwarteng a new one because he hasn't run any of these numbers through the OBR.
EDIT - no, the OBR have actually done the work. And he is refusing to release it.1 -
If you take it upon yourself to decide which charities to donate to rather than trusting the government with it, then in your actions you are vindicating Kwarteng's approach of letting people spend more of their own money.SouthamObserver said:
I will increase my charitable contributions. Many others will bank the cash. You can spend hours searching for personal hypocrisies if you like, but the simple fact is that this government is massively increasing borrowing so that rich people can have more money. You may think that will make this a better country. I am sceptical.williamglenn said:
Presumably you'll donate your share straight back to HMRC?SouthamObserver said:Billions and billions and billions and billions of pounds of additional borrowing to make rich people richer.
1 -
Commissioning oil paintings, please.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Nah they'll just spend it on introducing imperial measurements, more tax cuts for the donor class or taking photos of JRM.williamglenn said:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/voluntary-payments-donations-to-governmentOnlyLivingBoy said:The government has just given me over ten grand, paid for by borrowing. I won't be spending any of it! Absolute insanity. Last one to leave please turn out the lights.
0 -
Excellent - a shift from the State to the third sector.SouthamObserver said:
I will increase my charitable contributions. Many others will bank the cash. You can spend hours searching for personal hypocrisies if you like, but the simple fact is that this government is massively increasing borrowing so that rich people can have more money. You may think that will make this a better country. I am sceptical.williamglenn said:
Presumably you'll donate your share straight back to HMRC?SouthamObserver said:Billions and billions and billions and billions of pounds of additional borrowing to make rich people richer.
3
This discussion has been closed.