I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
This week sees more states join in person early voting , notably Arizona on the 9th .
The main economic data out this week is the final pre-election inflation report due on Thursday . This should show a further fall helped by lower prices at the pump.
The big unknown is what happens to gas prices over the next month. Israel’s decision in terms of what targets are hit in Iran will have a huge bearing and the subsequent retaliation from Iran .
A jump in pump prices will be leapt on by Trump and with such a close race could make a difference .
Harris has narrowed Trumps lead on the economy but what happens in the Middle East hangs over the last month of the election campaign .
Saudi will pump oil to flatten any rises.
Russia is rather hoping for oil price spikes to pay for its Ukraine adventure. The GDP is still looking quite healthy because the economy is on a war footing. But its foreign currency reserves are in a parlous state. There is a persuasive argument that whether it wins or loses the war, the Russian economy is screwed when that war footing ends.
The Russian economy is mahoosively on a war footing, judging by reports, with military spending representing a staggering proportion of spending. This is, to say the least, extremely worrying as it creates a momentum which will not necessarily end with Ukraine, however that ends if it ever does. A kind of economic logic which which will drive the regime to continue military adventures as the economy will fall over if they don't. Declaring "peace" in Ukraine through some kind of Trump "deal" will not end the danger in Europe - most likely makes it worse.
Phone call to confirm remortgage this evening for March. Looking at 5 year gilt rates (4.089%), the bank can't actually recover the rate it's going to give me (3.79%) today !
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
The problem is we have 30-60 years of fiddling round the edges of our tax system. So unless we start again that sort of issue is unavoidable.
Almost one in ten – 9% – of 18-24 year olds have a favourable view of Hamas, compared to 3% of the general British public. More than two thirds (68%) of the British public has an unfavourable view of Hamas, as do 50% of young Britons.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) do not believe that reports that Hamas killed around 1,200 Israelis in the attacks on 7th October 2023 are broadly true, compared to 7% of the wider British public. Just over half (55%) of the British public think that those reports are broadly true, compared to 39% of 18-24 year olds.
An astounding 16% of young British adults believe that the attacks carried out by Hamas on 7th October 2023 were justified, compared to 7% of the wider British public. This figure rises to 28% among people identifying as “very left-wing”.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) believe that the British Government is wrong to classify Hamas as a terrorist group, compared to 7% of the British public and an astonishing 31% among the “very left-wing”.
I have a feeling a lot of those "very left wing" people aren't Muslims. I think it is worrying that you can be against Israel's ongoing actions, but to be an unbeliever in what was probably the mostly widely filmed massacre is very concerning. We aren't relying on 3rd hand accounts of how bad it was, the footage is endless and new examples are constantly being released, but as we saw Owen Jones has tried on the yeah, but no, but yeah spreading doubt approach even after he was shown the horrific film that the Israelis put out.
The majority of under 30s who back Hamas will be British Muslims, the remainder Corbynite students mainly who have an ideological opposition to Israel
I don't think one has to be Muslim or a student or a dedicated Corbynite to be saddened, at the least, by many if Israel's actions over the past few years. The treatment of the Palestinians on the West Bank has been dreadful; they have had little real opportunity to try and make something of their 'state'. What Hamas did a year ago was beyond dreadful but to my mind at least that does not excuse the obliteration of Gaza and the wholesale slaughter of the population. It reminds me of the destruction of Warsaw by the Nazi's in 1944.
Indeed. The search for a comprehensive settlement that does the best possible for good people on all sides not really being attempted yet. Until this is the aim (USA? EU? UN? Saudi? Turkey? China? Egypt? Jordan? - could they all agree on such an aim and start getting pressure going) then the atrocity of one sided despair continues on all sides.
Agreed. However I'm by no means sure that all the major players in Israel are interested in the sort of settlement which would allow those Palestinians still on the West Bank and in Gaza to stay there. I also suspect that significant elements in the US support them. And the actions which those sections of Israeli society take and support simply act as recruiting sergeants for Hamas. I think the UN is doing it's best, and the Saudi's, Egyptians and Jordanians are taking a much more pragmatic view.
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
I don't think the blow back will be as bad as feared if the government sorted out cliff edges at £50-60k and £100-120k...they really piss people off and cause all sorts of problems. Try being a company owner that then ask if people want to work more / take on more responsibility for a pay rise, no, they want more vacation, 4 days a week, etc etc etc, anything but take the more money to work more as going into those brackets is just shooting yourself in the foot (particularly if you have kids).
Absolutely. Good post. I agree.
All it needs if for clients to phase some payments and it's quite easy for self-employed people to earn £80k in year one, then £120k in year too – gross. They then pay an eyewatering 62% tax on the income in the £120k-£125k range in year 2... so lose out massively just because their clients were late paying them, or a project slipped a month or two.
It's utterly ridiculous.
Reeves could offer people a choice: keep your PA but pay 45%+2% NI after £100k, or keep using the ludicrous existing system. She could then say that she hasn't raised taxes because people have a choice.
Of course, the vast majority of people would switch. And in a a year or two she could say, "I'm please to say that most people chose to accept ur offer to change. And that is why today, Mr Speaker, I moving the 45p bracket to all taxpayers from £100k, but protecting the PA for all."
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
The problem is we have 30-60 years of fiddling round the edges of our tax system. So unless we start again that sort of issue is unavoidable.
Oh indeed the whole tax code is a big mess, a bit like an old piece of software that’s been maintained by someone else for the past decade, but they just left and now it’s your job!
It’s a big leap to re-write whole chunks of it from scratch, with lots of potential unintended consequences, even if it’s the right thing to do in the long term.
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
Salary sacrifice is already exploding as higher-rate taxpayers seek to reduce their taxable salaries below cutoffs for child benefits and free childcare.
Yes, and I’m on a ship expecting to dodge them all. One running ahead, soon so drench either the UK of France in heavy rain, depending on which model you choose (I’d lean towards the latter, southern track, proceeding across Germany to the Baltic), one developing behind, one off the beam.
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Does the Treasury really have no modelling for how people in the real world react to these cliff edges?
Also at £50k is the child benefit withdrawal, which adds even more to the 40% income tax rate application.
Millions of people don’t want to paid in the £50k-60k range, nor in the £100k-120k range, and people can and do reduce their hours to avoid.
I remember the first time I bumped into the 40% rate - I had a company car and there was loads of overtime available, which was great as I was saving a deposit. 60-70 hours a week, awesome when you’re 24 or 25. It hits you like a brick that you’re suddenly volunteering to work Sundays for what’s barely minimum wage take home, and so the work/life balance was adjusted accordingly.
The local landlord was very happy, my savings account and my employer less so.
Child allowance is now tapered from £60,000 but it's just shuntered the issue to a slightly different group of people.
In my case I could now easily live on £50,000 a year - mortgage is paid off, the car is paid off and still decent - so it's simply going to result in me keeping money in the company / salary sacrificing as much as I can.
Yup. For many reasons I have a fairly modest job that would put me in the 50-60k bracket IF I worked 5 days a week. So I don't - I moved to 4 days long ago and make sure anything near to the threshold goes into a pension. There's just something about the 50% figure that grates.
Up here in the Flatlands you don't need a lot of money if you aren't high maintenance, anyway.
Would I have tried harder without the stupid wall? Probably.
Mind you, provided there isn't something really daft in the budget I'm going to cut it to 0 days a week, at least for any formal job.
Even if the message is true, the timing is appalling and it's obvious that they don't think the Palestinians have any responsibility for what's going on.
It was put out on the 6th of October. What sort of date range should be off limits around an anniversary, a week before and after, the whole month?
I'd say the day before an anniversary of the mass slaughter of Jews is too close. Do you think it's too close?
I don't particularly, not when the IDF is still battering the fuck out of Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon, but then I have no knowledge of the book of etiquette on when one is and is not allowed to make tweets.
The psychodrama around Sue Gray is as nothing to the one that will engulf the Tories unless the new leader kills the monster lurking in the wings...
not if Boris Johnson can help it. It’s clear that his memoir, Unleashed, out this week, is primarily intended not as a historical account but as deliberate myth-making. His motivation for picking up his pen is often assumed to be Churchill’s: “History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.” Johnson’s interest is far more immediate. It’s whether he can lever a misleading version of his past into an eventual comeback.
There were two stunning moments on air that revealed just how power-hungry Johnson is. Bradby asked who he preferred as US president, Harris or Trump? Johnson replied pompously that “the job of a UK premier is to be on the best possible terms with both”. An astonished Bradby said: “But you’re not the premier!” Johnson’s face fell and he lapsed into incoherent mumbling: “Yeah, yeah, I know, but…”
The second was when Bradby asked who he’d prefer as Tory leader. Johnson, who’d been watching with narrowed eyes and wolfish grin, momentarily lost control. His face contorted, his cheeks ballooned and he blew a raspberry. He could not disguise his contempt. His verbal recovery was quick — “four good candidates…” — but nobody could fail to grasp how Johnson will view the next leader. In his imagination he’s still the rightful prime minister. They’ll be a rival to destroy.
If Trump wins in November there must be a strong chance Boris returns as Tory leader and tries to emulate his US counterpart and fellow icon of the populist right.
Johnson would also be more likely to squeeze the Farage and Reform vote and take back Labour seats in the redwall than any of the 4 Tory leadership candidates. He would fail to regain Tory votes lost to the LDs and much of the blue wall but so would most of the 4 except Tugendhat.
Jenrick has already said he would welcome Boris back in the parliamentary party and there are enough Boris loyalists left who would give up their seat in a by election for him even on the thinner Tory benches. Cleverly was also loyal to Boris to the end, even after Javid and Sunak had resigned.
Loyal to Boris? I mean why? I can see that, for purely careerist reasons, some might have wanted to suck up to him when he wielded power, but now he's just a disgraced old has-been who's not even an MP. Why would anyone give the twerp even the time of day?
Boris remains the Prince over the Water for most Tory members and much of the parliamentary party and if Trump wins again I would make it at least evens Boris is Leader of the Conservative party again by the next general election
sundersays.bsky.social @sundersays.bsky.social · 1h Elon Musk is offering $ to sign a pro-Trump pre-election petition, linked to a voter registration drive in swing states. Inducements to register are not legal.
Almost one in ten – 9% – of 18-24 year olds have a favourable view of Hamas, compared to 3% of the general British public. More than two thirds (68%) of the British public has an unfavourable view of Hamas, as do 50% of young Britons.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) do not believe that reports that Hamas killed around 1,200 Israelis in the attacks on 7th October 2023 are broadly true, compared to 7% of the wider British public. Just over half (55%) of the British public think that those reports are broadly true, compared to 39% of 18-24 year olds.
An astounding 16% of young British adults believe that the attacks carried out by Hamas on 7th October 2023 were justified, compared to 7% of the wider British public. This figure rises to 28% among people identifying as “very left-wing”.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) believe that the British Government is wrong to classify Hamas as a terrorist group, compared to 7% of the British public and an astonishing 31% among the “very left-wing”.
I have a feeling a lot of those "very left wing" people aren't Muslims. I think it is worrying that you can be against Israel's ongoing actions, but to be an unbeliever in what was probably the mostly widely filmed massacre is very concerning. We aren't relying on 3rd hand accounts of how bad it was, the footage is endless and new examples are constantly being released, but as we saw Owen Jones has tried on the yeah, but no, but yeah spreading doubt approach even after he was shown the horrific film that the Israelis put out.
The majority of under 30s who back Hamas will be British Muslims, the remainder Corbynite students mainly who have an ideological opposition to Israel
I don't think one has to be Muslim or a student or a dedicated Corbynite to be saddened, at the least, by many if Israel's actions over the past few years. The treatment of the Palestinians on the West Bank has been dreadful; they have had little real opportunity to try and make something of their 'state'. What Hamas did a year ago was beyond dreadful but to my mind at least that does not excuse the obliteration of Gaza and the wholesale slaughter of the population. It reminds me of the destruction of Warsaw by the Nazi's in 1944.
You can think all of that and still not support Hamas, like the 9% of young people polled who now have a favourable view of Hamas
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
The problem is we have 30-60 years of fiddling round the edges of our tax system. So unless we start again that sort of issue is unavoidable.
Oh indeed the whole tax code is a big mess, a bit like an old piece of software that’s been maintained by someone else for the past decade, but they just left and now it’s your job!
It’s a big leap to re-write whole chunks of it from scratch, with lots of potential unintended consequences, even if it’s the right thing to do in the long term.
I'm a big fan of "burn it and start again". As long as you learn from the previous mistakes.
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Does the Treasury really have no modelling for how people in the real world react to these cliff edges?
Also at £50k is the child benefit withdrawal, which adds even more to the 40% income tax rate application.
Millions of people don’t want to paid in the £50k-60k range, nor in the £100k-120k range, and people can and do reduce their hours to avoid.
I remember the first time I bumped into the 40% rate - I had a company car and there was loads of overtime available, which was great as I was saving a deposit. 60-70 hours a week, awesome when you’re 24 or 25. It hits you like a brick that you’re suddenly volunteering to work Sundays for what’s barely minimum wage take home, and so the work/life balance was adjusted accordingly.
The local landlord was very happy, my savings account and my employer less so.
Yes. I am sure London is different, but in much of the UK the decent ordinariness of collective household ambition is not really appreciated. Add to that that 2 people working longish hours even on minimum wage can earn between them £40-£50K, a high proportion of it untaxed, which in much of the UK is still quite a lot of money.
There's a genuine tension here.
£60k is about the ballpark for the Head of Science in provincial secondary schools. The very top of the payscale for Mr Chips with no management responsibilites is just under £50k, but it's pretty rare to get that now. It's the sort of level that isn't enormously aspirational, and I'm sure there are plenty here who wouldn't get out of bed for such a pittance. But you don't have to be particularly monastic to reach that level and think "this is the equilibrium between work to live and live to work". That's especially true if your housing costs are low.
National income requires there to be a decent wedge of people who don't settle for that, who push on to be paid a lot more, and are willing to be taxed quite a lot on it. But national expenditure requires there to be a hefty number of people who are willing to settle for that much/little. And national harmony requires some sort of mutual understanding that I don't think exists at the moment.
Mr. JohnL, funny you should mention protectionism etc. I quite like Good Times Bad Times, and their recent video included a bit on why the British lost their place as top dogs (essentially, missing the technological boat of automobiles through daft legislation and being fixated on free trade) and contrasts this with America's re-shoring of industrial capacity and moving to a more lukewarm attitude regarding free trade.
Even if the message is true, the timing is appalling and it's obvious that they don't think the Palestinians have any responsibility for what's going on.
It was put out on the 6th of October. What sort of date range should be off limits around an anniversary, a week before and after, the whole month?
I'd say the day before an anniversary of the mass slaughter of Jews is too close. Do you think it's too close?
I don't particularly, not when the IDF is still battering the fuck out of Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon, but then I have no knowledge of the book of etiquette on when one is and is not allowed to make tweets.
The most annoying thing about it is that, for once, we actually have a government 1) making an investment and 2) making that investment in the north. That should be unequalified good news.
But they've messed it up
I do wonder how much, if any, of this is the "Ed Miliband" effect
His name is a byword for failure. Is this project doomed by association?
I feel a bit betrayed/confused by it. Miliband was making all the right kind of noises about moving us away from O&G and driving a renewable energy economy, solar, offshore wind and the rest, and frankly upsetting the kind of people you need to upset to get it done.
As an aside, the Northern Echo also has details of the "gifts" received by North East Mayor Kim McGuinness since her election in May.
A cake was delivered without prior notice addressed to the mayor. Donor: Capital & Centric LTD. Value: £50. Date: May 6 2024. Private dinner with other UK Mayors. Donor: Aviva Investors. Value: £50. Date: 20 May 2024. Private dinner. Donor: Hitachi. Value: £50. Date: June 5 2024. Chamber of Commerce Business Awards. Donor: Chamber Business Awards. Value: £100. Date: June 27 2024. BBC Proms concert in Gateshead and reception. Donor: BBC Proms Concert – The Glasshouse. Value: £50. Date: July 26 2024. Edinburgh Tattoo Ceremony and evening meal. Donor: Edinburgh Tattoo. Value: £300. Date: August 19 2024 “If U Care Share” shirt. Donor: If U Care Share. Value: £50. Date: August 30 2024. Great North Run Dinner. Donor: Great North Run Company. Value: £150. Date: September 7 2024. Accommodation at Hilton Hotel, Gateshead, before Great North Run. Donor: Great North Run Company. Value: £200. Date: September 7 2024. Private dinner at Labour Party Conference. Donor: Nissan. Value: £50. Date: September 24 2024.
For balance, she also declined a number of gifts:
An invitation from Channel 4 to a Paralympic Games Garden Party in Paris. Football tickets offered by Sunderland AFC, Newcastle United shirt sponsor Sela, and Newcastle Airport, as well as hospitality packages at an England rugby match at Twickenham and England’s one-day cricket international against Australia at Chester-le-Street.
In the current spirit of neo-puritanism when it comes to political leaders receiving any kind of freebie, do we not need to apply some form of context (apart from the routine Labour bashing)?
If this is going to the North East Mayor, what is going to other Council leaders such as the Mayor of Newham or the Leader of Surrey County Council? The value of the accepted gifts is just over £1000 - you may say that's £1000 too much but even if you take the cake and send it to a residential home (for example), you've still accepted the cake.
Good morning everyone.
She can't donate it to a Residential Home, as the Telegrunt would run a front page piece about her trying to bribe people in a residential home to vote for her, with pieces of cake. And how therefore the world just ended.
And presumably how she is therefore worse than Marie Antoinette, and not even supplying her own cake.
Anyhoo, the cake should clearly be a biscuit, so that we can say she is taking the biscuit.
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
The problem is we have 30-60 years of fiddling round the edges of our tax system. So unless we start again that sort of issue is unavoidable.
Oh indeed the whole tax code is a big mess, a bit like an old piece of software that’s been maintained by someone else for the past decade, but they just left and now it’s your job!
It’s a big leap to re-write whole chunks of it from scratch, with lots of potential unintended consequences, even if it’s the right thing to do in the long term.
I'm a big fan of "burn it and start again". As long as you learn from the previous mistakes.
Agreed, but you have to go into it well prepared, with a clear specification of what your inputs and outputs are supposed to look like.
I don’t see a lot of evidence that Miss Reeves is going to pull a rabbit out of a hat, but am prepared to be surprised on the day. There’s a lot of potential banana skins in there for a first-time Chanchellor.
At the moment it is the treasury which is providing the costings for the budget measures.
According to the OBR timetable its economic forecast to be released tomorrow to government is based on pre budget measures, ie the current position on existing government policies.
The first economic forecast from the OBR based on the forthcoming budget measures is to be released to government in a weeks time on Monday 14 October.
We could see more briefing/leaks from government next week as they try to get the numbers to work.
As an aside, the Northern Echo also has details of the "gifts" received by North East Mayor Kim McGuinness since her election in May.
A cake was delivered without prior notice addressed to the mayor. Donor: Capital & Centric LTD. Value: £50. Date: May 6 2024. Private dinner with other UK Mayors. Donor: Aviva Investors. Value: £50. Date: 20 May 2024. Private dinner. Donor: Hitachi. Value: £50. Date: June 5 2024. Chamber of Commerce Business Awards. Donor: Chamber Business Awards. Value: £100. Date: June 27 2024. BBC Proms concert in Gateshead and reception. Donor: BBC Proms Concert – The Glasshouse. Value: £50. Date: July 26 2024. Edinburgh Tattoo Ceremony and evening meal. Donor: Edinburgh Tattoo. Value: £300. Date: August 19 2024 “If U Care Share” shirt. Donor: If U Care Share. Value: £50. Date: August 30 2024. Great North Run Dinner. Donor: Great North Run Company. Value: £150. Date: September 7 2024. Accommodation at Hilton Hotel, Gateshead, before Great North Run. Donor: Great North Run Company. Value: £200. Date: September 7 2024. Private dinner at Labour Party Conference. Donor: Nissan. Value: £50. Date: September 24 2024.
For balance, she also declined a number of gifts:
An invitation from Channel 4 to a Paralympic Games Garden Party in Paris. Football tickets offered by Sunderland AFC, Newcastle United shirt sponsor Sela, and Newcastle Airport, as well as hospitality packages at an England rugby match at Twickenham and England’s one-day cricket international against Australia at Chester-le-Street.
In the current spirit of neo-puritanism when it comes to political leaders receiving any kind of freebie, do we not need to apply some form of context (apart from the routine Labour bashing)?
If this is going to the North East Mayor, what is going to other Council leaders such as the Mayor of Newham or the Leader of Surrey County Council? The value of the accepted gifts is just over £1000 - you may say that's £1000 too much but even if you take the cake and send it to a residential home (for example), you've still accepted the cake.
Good morning everyone.
She can't donate it to a Residential Home, as the Telegrunt would run a front page piece about her trying to bribe people in a residential home to vote for her, with pieces of cake. And how therefore the world just ended.
And presumably how she is therefore worse than Marie Antoinette, and not even supplying her own cake.
Anyhoo, the cake should clearly be a biscuit, so that we can say she is taking the biscuit.
Of course the Northern Echo has those details because they were openly declared. It is a matter of public interest but in terms of corruption the issue is what, if anything, is received in return. That is the important bit.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
Mr. JohnL, funny you should mention protectionism etc. I quite like Good Times Bad Times, and their recent video included a bit on why the British lost their place as top dogs (essentially, missing the technological boat of automobiles through daft legislation and being fixated on free trade) and contrasts this with America's re-shoring of industrial capacity and moving to a more lukewarm attitude regarding free trade.
We lost our place as top dogs because we took our capital and invested it elsewhere where lower costs maximised return. The US has spent years of study trying to avoid our mistakes and our Imperial decline but it went hog-wild on repeating that one. Meanwhile, Chinese factories are closing down and they are investing in Vietnam, etc. And so it goes - round and round and wound again...
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Almost one in ten – 9% – of 18-24 year olds have a favourable view of Hamas, compared to 3% of the general British public. More than two thirds (68%) of the British public has an unfavourable view of Hamas, as do 50% of young Britons.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) do not believe that reports that Hamas killed around 1,200 Israelis in the attacks on 7th October 2023 are broadly true, compared to 7% of the wider British public. Just over half (55%) of the British public think that those reports are broadly true, compared to 39% of 18-24 year olds.
An astounding 16% of young British adults believe that the attacks carried out by Hamas on 7th October 2023 were justified, compared to 7% of the wider British public. This figure rises to 28% among people identifying as “very left-wing”.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) believe that the British Government is wrong to classify Hamas as a terrorist group, compared to 7% of the British public and an astonishing 31% among the “very left-wing”.
I have a feeling a lot of those "very left wing" people aren't Muslims. I think it is worrying that you can be against Israel's ongoing actions, but to be an unbeliever in what was probably the mostly widely filmed massacre is very concerning. We aren't relying on 3rd hand accounts of how bad it was, the footage is endless and new examples are constantly being released, but as we saw Owen Jones has tried on the yeah, but no, but yeah spreading doubt approach even after he was shown the horrific film that the Israelis put out.
The majority of under 30s who back Hamas will be British Muslims, the remainder Corbynite students mainly who have an ideological opposition to Israel
I don't think one has to be Muslim or a student or a dedicated Corbynite to be saddened, at the least, by many if Israel's actions over the past few years. The treatment of the Palestinians on the West Bank has been dreadful; they have had little real opportunity to try and make something of their 'state'. What Hamas did a year ago was beyond dreadful but to my mind at least that does not excuse the obliteration of Gaza and the wholesale slaughter of the population. It reminds me of the destruction of Warsaw by the Nazi's in 1944.
You can think all of that and still not support Hamas, like the 9% of young people polled who now have a favourable view of Hamas
Old King Cole was not supporting Hamas.
Thank you. For the avoidance of doubt there several policies which Hamas has which I could not and would not excuse. While I can understand the October 7th incursion, the murders of civilians, the associated atrocities and the taking of hostages demean and devalue the whole enterprise. Further, Hamas' policies towards those deemed unacceptable to strict Muslims almost put it on a par with the Taliban! It was very sad indeed that the Gazans voted Hamas into power almost 20 years ago, but perhaps understandable, given the policies of the Israeli state.
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
The problem is we have 30-60 years of fiddling round the edges of our tax system. So unless we start again that sort of issue is unavoidable.
Oh indeed the whole tax code is a big mess, a bit like an old piece of software that’s been maintained by someone else for the past decade, but they just left and now it’s your job!
It’s a big leap to re-write whole chunks of it from scratch, with lots of potential unintended consequences, even if it’s the right thing to do in the long term.
I'm a big fan of "burn it and start again". As long as you learn from the previous mistakes.
"Burn it and start again" is often the most tempting option, but usually not the best one. If the "start again" isn't meticulously well planned, you can end up reintroducing all the bugs that had been fixed by the old version and in an even deeper mess than before. In my experience, the incremental approach is usually the best one.
Almost one in ten – 9% – of 18-24 year olds have a favourable view of Hamas, compared to 3% of the general British public. More than two thirds (68%) of the British public has an unfavourable view of Hamas, as do 50% of young Britons.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) do not believe that reports that Hamas killed around 1,200 Israelis in the attacks on 7th October 2023 are broadly true, compared to 7% of the wider British public. Just over half (55%) of the British public think that those reports are broadly true, compared to 39% of 18-24 year olds.
An astounding 16% of young British adults believe that the attacks carried out by Hamas on 7th October 2023 were justified, compared to 7% of the wider British public. This figure rises to 28% among people identifying as “very left-wing”.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) believe that the British Government is wrong to classify Hamas as a terrorist group, compared to 7% of the British public and an astonishing 31% among the “very left-wing”.
I have a feeling a lot of those "very left wing" people aren't Muslims. I think it is worrying that you can be against Israel's ongoing actions, but to be an unbeliever in what was probably the mostly widely filmed massacre is very concerning. We aren't relying on 3rd hand accounts of how bad it was, the footage is endless and new examples are constantly being released, but as we saw Owen Jones has tried on the yeah, but no, but yeah spreading doubt approach even after he was shown the horrific film that the Israelis put out.
The majority of under 30s who back Hamas will be British Muslims, the remainder Corbynite students mainly who have an ideological opposition to Israel
I don't think one has to be Muslim or a student or a dedicated Corbynite to be saddened, at the least, by many if Israel's actions over the past few years. The treatment of the Palestinians on the West Bank has been dreadful; they have had little real opportunity to try and make something of their 'state'. What Hamas did a year ago was beyond dreadful but to my mind at least that does not excuse the obliteration of Gaza and the wholesale slaughter of the population. It reminds me of the destruction of Warsaw by the Nazi's in 1944.
Indeed. The search for a comprehensive settlement that does the best possible for good people on all sides not really being attempted yet. Until this is the aim (USA? EU? UN? Saudi? Turkey? China? Egypt? Jordan? - could they all agree on such an aim and start getting pressure going) then the atrocity of one sided despair continues on all sides.
Agreed. However I'm by no means sure that all the major players in Israel are interested in the sort of settlement which would allow those Palestinians still on the West Bank and in Gaza to stay there. I also suspect that significant elements in the US support them. And the actions which those sections of Israeli society take and support simply act as recruiting sergeants for Hamas. I think the UN is doing it's best, and the Saudi's, Egyptians and Jordanians are taking a much more pragmatic view.
Agreed; but unless and until the major players who are not Israel and the Palestinians (see my suggested list above) but include all those with real global and local clout are more or less agreed about the direction of travel and intend to use global clout to require it, this will go on for ever.
Sherlock Holmes applies: once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
This isn't going to be quick, but a return to managed status quo ante 7th October 2023 is now in the list of impossibles.
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
The problem is we have 30-60 years of fiddling round the edges of our tax system. So unless we start again that sort of issue is unavoidable.
Oh indeed the whole tax code is a big mess, a bit like an old piece of software that’s been maintained by someone else for the past decade, but they just left and now it’s your job!
It’s a big leap to re-write whole chunks of it from scratch, with lots of potential unintended consequences, even if it’s the right thing to do in the long term.
We have the cliff edges because politicians were desperate to maintain the fiction that headline tax rates hadn't gone up. And the cliff edges have been largely frozen since 2009-2010 and the personal allowance for several years.
We are all paying much more tax we would have done pre GFC, both direct and indirect, and for worse output.
Developments on a very strange story that first surfaced earlier this year. Chump Bibles, as bought by ... chumps. Apologies if this has been posted and I missed it.
The Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters’s (Trumpist R) has put out an ITT for Bibles to go in every schoolroom in Oklahoma (55,000 bibles) which only aligns with God Bless the USA Bibles endorsed by Mr Trump and one other which costs $90 per copy. The previous one he endorsed that also included the text of the C&W song "God Bless the USA" by Lee Greenwood. They cost $60 each.
They must include the King James Versions (apparently Kings are OK for this), US Constitution, Pledge of Allegiance, Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
For some reason it leaves out all the Constitutional Amendments after ~1790.
I'd have thought that separation of Church and State would have taken care of this, but ... hey ho.
A salesperson at Mardel Christian & Education searched, and though they carry 2,900 Bibles, none fit the parameters.
But one Bible fits perfectly: Lee Greenwood’s God Bless the U.S.A. Bible, endorsed by former President Donald Trump and commonly referred to as the Trump Bible.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
The problem is we have 30-60 years of fiddling round the edges of our tax system. So unless we start again that sort of issue is unavoidable.
Oh indeed the whole tax code is a big mess, a bit like an old piece of software that’s been maintained by someone else for the past decade, but they just left and now it’s your job!
It’s a big leap to re-write whole chunks of it from scratch, with lots of potential unintended consequences, even if it’s the right thing to do in the long term.
I'm a big fan of "burn it and start again". As long as you learn from the previous mistakes.
"Burn it and start again" is often the most tempting option, but usually not the best one. If the "start again" isn't meticulously well planned, you can end up reintroducing all the bugs that had been fixed by the old version and in an even deeper mess than before. In my experience, the incremental approach is usually the best one.
It's always the same problem with big complex issues in a mature society, unless you scorch the earth you are rebuilding a boat while in choppy waters in the middle of the Pacific ocean several thousand miles from land.
Almost one in ten – 9% – of 18-24 year olds have a favourable view of Hamas, compared to 3% of the general British public. More than two thirds (68%) of the British public has an unfavourable view of Hamas, as do 50% of young Britons.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) do not believe that reports that Hamas killed around 1,200 Israelis in the attacks on 7th October 2023 are broadly true, compared to 7% of the wider British public. Just over half (55%) of the British public think that those reports are broadly true, compared to 39% of 18-24 year olds.
An astounding 16% of young British adults believe that the attacks carried out by Hamas on 7th October 2023 were justified, compared to 7% of the wider British public. This figure rises to 28% among people identifying as “very left-wing”.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) believe that the British Government is wrong to classify Hamas as a terrorist group, compared to 7% of the British public and an astonishing 31% among the “very left-wing”.
I have a feeling a lot of those "very left wing" people aren't Muslims. I think it is worrying that you can be against Israel's ongoing actions, but to be an unbeliever in what was probably the mostly widely filmed massacre is very concerning. We aren't relying on 3rd hand accounts of how bad it was, the footage is endless and new examples are constantly being released, but as we saw Owen Jones has tried on the yeah, but no, but yeah spreading doubt approach even after he was shown the horrific film that the Israelis put out.
The majority of under 30s who back Hamas will be British Muslims, the remainder Corbynite students mainly who have an ideological opposition to Israel
I don't think one has to be Muslim or a student or a dedicated Corbynite to be saddened, at the least, by many if Israel's actions over the past few years. The treatment of the Palestinians on the West Bank has been dreadful; they have had little real opportunity to try and make something of their 'state'. What Hamas did a year ago was beyond dreadful but to my mind at least that does not excuse the obliteration of Gaza and the wholesale slaughter of the population. It reminds me of the destruction of Warsaw by the Nazi's in 1944.
You can think all of that and still not support Hamas, like the 9% of young people polled who now have a favourable view of Hamas
Old King Cole was not supporting Hamas.
Thank you. For the avoidance of doubt there several policies which Hamas has which I could not and would not excuse. While I can understand the October 7th incursion, the murders of civilians, the associated atrocities and the taking of hostages demean and devalue the whole enterprise. Further, Hamas' policies towards those deemed unacceptable to strict Muslims almost put it on a par with the Taliban! It was very sad indeed that the Gazans voted Hamas into power almost 20 years ago, but perhaps understandable, given the policies of the Israeli state.
It was just wrong of @HYUFD to come to his conclusion on your post
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Let me guess: you receive WFA?
No I’ve still got quite a few years before I get to pension age . The WFA cut is a moronic policy , raises very little and has burnt a ridiculous amount of political capital .
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
The problem is we have 30-60 years of fiddling round the edges of our tax system. So unless we start again that sort of issue is unavoidable.
Oh indeed the whole tax code is a big mess, a bit like an old piece of software that’s been maintained by someone else for the past decade, but they just left and now it’s your job!
It’s a big leap to re-write whole chunks of it from scratch, with lots of potential unintended consequences, even if it’s the right thing to do in the long term.
We have the cliff edges because politicians were desperate to maintain the fiction that headline tax rates hadn't gone up. And the cliff edges have been largely frozen since 2009-2010 and the personal allowance for several years.
We are all paying much more tax we would have done pre GFC, both direct and indirect, and for worse output.
Many people are actually paying less tax than they used to - because employee NI was reduced by 4% compared to last year.
The issue for you is that once you hit £50,000 or so you are now caught by all the frozen allowances and cliff edges...
Very rare as it is for me to recommend somebody from the Paul Marshall stable, but the writer of that article is Tom McTague, who I first noticed when I read his "The McSweeney Project". I hope McSweeney thought takes over the Starmer govt and replaces silliness such as Miliband's carbon-capture stupidity
If the government go after pensions tax relief then they will undermine confidence into saving into pensions right the way down the line, not just for higher earners, and therefore they'll get fewer people saving into pensions. This will create a greater future burden on the State.
At present, I'm not confident I'll even be able to access all of my pension when I hit the magic age, which could also be can-kicked again.
There are at least 20 years between now and then and a lot of governments to come; a hard-left one might even nationalise (i.e. confiscate) some or all of people's pension pots.
Even if the message is true, the timing is appalling and it's obvious that they don't think the Palestinians have any responsibility for what's going on.
It was put out on the 6th of October. What sort of date range should be off limits around an anniversary, a week before and after, the whole month?
I'd say the day before an anniversary of the mass slaughter of Jews is too close. Do you think it's too close?
I don't particularly, not when the IDF is still battering the fuck out of Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon, but then I have no knowledge of the book of etiquette on when one is and is not allowed to make tweets.
In which case, don't start wars you can't win.
Which wars did the West Bank and the sovereign state of Lebanon start?
The contrast between victimy bleating about the date of a tweet and the Billy Big Bollocks 'Israel is the toughest guy on the block' stuff is always good for a laff.
Very rare as it is for me to recommend somebody from the Paul Marshall stable, but the writer of that article is Tom McTague, who I first noticed when I read his "The McSweeney Project". I hope McSweeney thought takes over the Starmer govt and replaces silliness such as Miliband's carbon-capture stupidity
"What McSweeney really offers is a hard-headed, unromantic clarity about Labour’s purpose that is more reminiscent of the party’s tougher social democratic past than its softer liberal present. He — more than Starmer — is someone who would be instantly recognisable to any figure from the old Labour Right, from Ernest Bevin to John Reid but is a rarer sight in Westminster of late. He did not learn his politics at Oxford and the bar, but on council estates working for local government. This experience has given him an instinctive loathing for the kind of badge-wearing politics of virtue the Labour Right has long associated with the middle-class Left."
Almost one in ten – 9% – of 18-24 year olds have a favourable view of Hamas, compared to 3% of the general British public. More than two thirds (68%) of the British public has an unfavourable view of Hamas, as do 50% of young Britons.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) do not believe that reports that Hamas killed around 1,200 Israelis in the attacks on 7th October 2023 are broadly true, compared to 7% of the wider British public. Just over half (55%) of the British public think that those reports are broadly true, compared to 39% of 18-24 year olds.
An astounding 16% of young British adults believe that the attacks carried out by Hamas on 7th October 2023 were justified, compared to 7% of the wider British public. This figure rises to 28% among people identifying as “very left-wing”.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) believe that the British Government is wrong to classify Hamas as a terrorist group, compared to 7% of the British public and an astonishing 31% among the “very left-wing”.
I have a feeling a lot of those "very left wing" people aren't Muslims. I think it is worrying that you can be against Israel's ongoing actions, but to be an unbeliever in what was probably the mostly widely filmed massacre is very concerning. We aren't relying on 3rd hand accounts of how bad it was, the footage is endless and new examples are constantly being released, but as we saw Owen Jones has tried on the yeah, but no, but yeah spreading doubt approach even after he was shown the horrific film that the Israelis put out.
The majority of under 30s who back Hamas will be British Muslims, the remainder Corbynite students mainly who have an ideological opposition to Israel
I don't think one has to be Muslim or a student or a dedicated Corbynite to be saddened, at the least, by many if Israel's actions over the past few years. The treatment of the Palestinians on the West Bank has been dreadful; they have had little real opportunity to try and make something of their 'state'. What Hamas did a year ago was beyond dreadful but to my mind at least that does not excuse the obliteration of Gaza and the wholesale slaughter of the population. It reminds me of the destruction of Warsaw by the Nazi's in 1944.
You can think all of that and still not support Hamas, like the 9% of young people polled who now have a favourable view of Hamas
Old King Cole was not supporting Hamas.
Thank you. For the avoidance of doubt there several policies which Hamas has which I could not and would not excuse. While I can understand the October 7th incursion, the murders of civilians, the associated atrocities and the taking of hostages demean and devalue the whole enterprise. Further, Hamas' policies towards those deemed unacceptable to strict Muslims almost put it on a par with the Taliban! It was very sad indeed that the Gazans voted Hamas into power almost 20 years ago, but perhaps understandable, given the policies of the Israeli state.
It was just wrong of @HYUFD to come to his conclusion on your post
Young HYUFD has not yet realised, sadly, that not everything in this world is totally right or totally wrong.
Mr. JohnL, in brief: it's short-termism, a chronic problem in British politics.
Not quite. It is Britain not understanding how markets really work. From Thatcher onwards, we have signed up to an idealised Adam Smith free market as might be taught, for instance, in the introductory modules of Oxford's PPE course. In the real world, our rivals play hardball, witness America's combination of massive subsidies and protectionism. We see investment as a cost to be cut, and protectionism as unsporting and un-British. This is alongside the other difficulties already mentioned.
Smith, of course, was far more pragmatic in his economics than is Thatcherite free market dogma.
He would, for example, immediately have twigged the flaw in privatising monopoly utilities.
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
The problem is we have 30-60 years of fiddling round the edges of our tax system. So unless we start again that sort of issue is unavoidable.
Oh indeed the whole tax code is a big mess, a bit like an old piece of software that’s been maintained by someone else for the past decade, but they just left and now it’s your job!
It’s a big leap to re-write whole chunks of it from scratch, with lots of potential unintended consequences, even if it’s the right thing to do in the long term.
We have the cliff edges because politicians were desperate to maintain the fiction that headline tax rates hadn't gone up. And the cliff edges have been largely frozen since 2009-2010 and the personal allowance for several years.
We are all paying much more tax we would have done pre GFC, both direct and indirect, and for worse output.
Absolutely right – such ludicrous fiction is behind the absurd £100-120k trap (62% marginal rates!).
Reeves should bin it. Make the rate 45p at £100k, so everyone pays a marginal rate of 47% (including NI) from £100k, but there is no attack on the PA. She can then reasonably call this
• a tax cut (because the marginal rates are more benign in reality) • a pro-growth policy (because millions won't jump through hoops to avoid the 62% trap) • a progressive tax, because those earning £100-120k won't be paying higher marginal rates than those earning £125k+
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
(There is no upper age limit for train drivers, so after just 4 years of training pensioners could be earning £55k at ScotRail. Not bad)
"What McSweeney really offers is a hard-headed, unromantic clarity about Labour’s purpose that is more reminiscent of the party’s tougher social democratic past than its softer liberal present.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
Almost one in ten – 9% – of 18-24 year olds have a favourable view of Hamas, compared to 3% of the general British public. More than two thirds (68%) of the British public has an unfavourable view of Hamas, as do 50% of young Britons.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) do not believe that reports that Hamas killed around 1,200 Israelis in the attacks on 7th October 2023 are broadly true, compared to 7% of the wider British public. Just over half (55%) of the British public think that those reports are broadly true, compared to 39% of 18-24 year olds.
An astounding 16% of young British adults believe that the attacks carried out by Hamas on 7th October 2023 were justified, compared to 7% of the wider British public. This figure rises to 28% among people identifying as “very left-wing”.
More than one eighth of British 18-24 year olds (13%) believe that the British Government is wrong to classify Hamas as a terrorist group, compared to 7% of the British public and an astonishing 31% among the “very left-wing”.
I have a feeling a lot of those "very left wing" people aren't Muslims. I think it is worrying that you can be against Israel's ongoing actions, but to be an unbeliever in what was probably the mostly widely filmed massacre is very concerning. We aren't relying on 3rd hand accounts of how bad it was, the footage is endless and new examples are constantly being released, but as we saw Owen Jones has tried on the yeah, but no, but yeah spreading doubt approach even after he was shown the horrific film that the Israelis put out.
The majority of under 30s who back Hamas will be British Muslims, the remainder Corbynite students mainly who have an ideological opposition to Israel
I don't think one has to be Muslim or a student or a dedicated Corbynite to be saddened, at the least, by many if Israel's actions over the past few years. The treatment of the Palestinians on the West Bank has been dreadful; they have had little real opportunity to try and make something of their 'state'. What Hamas did a year ago was beyond dreadful but to my mind at least that does not excuse the obliteration of Gaza and the wholesale slaughter of the population. It reminds me of the destruction of Warsaw by the Nazi's in 1944.
You can think all of that and still not support Hamas, like the 9% of young people polled who now have a favourable view of Hamas
Old King Cole was not supporting Hamas.
Thank you. For the avoidance of doubt there several policies which Hamas has which I could not and would not excuse. While I can understand the October 7th incursion, the murders of civilians, the associated atrocities and the taking of hostages demean and devalue the whole enterprise. Further, Hamas' policies towards those deemed unacceptable to strict Muslims almost put it on a par with the Taliban! It was very sad indeed that the Gazans voted Hamas into power almost 20 years ago, but perhaps understandable, given the policies of the Israeli state.
It was just wrong of @HYUFD to come to his conclusion on your post
Young HYUFD has not yet realised, sadly, that not everything in this world is totally right or totally wrong.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
"What McSweeney really offers is a hard-headed, unromantic clarity about Labour’s purpose that is more reminiscent of the party’s tougher social democratic past than its softer liberal present.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
I fully expected this change (though personally would be very happy if it didn’t go ahead).
If that’s off the table it’s starting to look interesting where all this extra money is coming from. Surely it can’t all be IHT and CGT?
The issue with reducing pension tax relief from 40% to 20% is that it will hit someone on eg £55K with a reduction of tax relief of about £1100 if they are paying 5% of their income into their pension. But the big money would come from those on much higher incomes than £55K paying much more than 5% into their pensions.
Reeves could finesse this by eg raising the higher rate band from £50K to £55K which would be basically self financing for those paying into pensions on incomes just above £50K. And/or increase the personal allowance a bit to achieve tax neutrality for middle income earners while still hitting the high income earners.
All I'm seeing is even more reasons to keep you income below £50,000 by any means practical..
Depends what standard of living you want.
True - but it's creating an incentive to avoid being in the £50-60,000 income band when that previous reason (child benefit taper) has been only recently been raised to £60,000.
Agreed. It needs a root and branch review of tax bands and reliefs to remove these kinds of disincentives, combined with the removal of the higher rate relief on pension payments. All it requires is simple modelling and the political courage to face the blowback from top income earners.
Problem with pensions is that you also have employer contributions - anyone sane will be maximising those and taxing that is going to be hard work....
That mainly applies to small owner businesses. I'd leave them alone.
Um, I suspect we will see companies introducing more salary sacrifice options because that is by far the sanest way to put money in a pension.
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
They’re going to spend every budget closing the latest loophole left over from the previous budget, unless they’ve really thought through what they are trying to achieve and how people might react to the changes made, including short-term changes between the announcement and the taking effect.
The problem is we have 30-60 years of fiddling round the edges of our tax system. So unless we start again that sort of issue is unavoidable.
Oh indeed the whole tax code is a big mess, a bit like an old piece of software that’s been maintained by someone else for the past decade, but they just left and now it’s your job!
It’s a big leap to re-write whole chunks of it from scratch, with lots of potential unintended consequences, even if it’s the right thing to do in the long term.
I'm a big fan of "burn it and start again". As long as you learn from the previous mistakes.
"Burn it and start again" is often the most tempting option, but usually not the best one. If the "start again" isn't meticulously well planned, you can end up reintroducing all the bugs that had been fixed by the old version and in an even deeper mess than before. In my experience, the incremental approach is usually the best one.
If the requirements haven't changed much over time, that's fine.
If there's stuff bolted on over many years by a string of people no longer around to ask why the hell they did something then maintenance gets expensive. Perfect documentation does not exist.
And who hasn't looked at some old code and got annoyed at the developer before remembering that, oops, yes, I did that. Maybe that's just me getting old...
sundersays.bsky.social @sundersays.bsky.social · 1h Elon Musk is offering $ to sign a pro-Trump pre-election petition, linked to a voter registration drive in swing states. Inducements to register are not legal.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
(There is no upper age limit for train drivers, so after just 4 years of training pensioners could be earning £55k at ScotRail. Not bad)
I would gently suggest rolex wearing pensioners is an idiotic conservative advert when many are struggling on the basic pension.
And if you think I could drive a train then you have some very weird ideas
As for train drivers they are members of very powerful unions who can and do hold the country to ransom and they are very well paid anyway
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
I expect it's a case of "who you know" for the successful applicants.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
As an aside, the Northern Echo also has details of the "gifts" received by North East Mayor Kim McGuinness since her election in May.
A cake was delivered without prior notice addressed to the mayor. Donor: Capital & Centric LTD. Value: £50. Date: May 6 2024. Private dinner with other UK Mayors. Donor: Aviva Investors. Value: £50. Date: 20 May 2024. Private dinner. Donor: Hitachi. Value: £50. Date: June 5 2024. Chamber of Commerce Business Awards. Donor: Chamber Business Awards. Value: £100. Date: June 27 2024. BBC Proms concert in Gateshead and reception. Donor: BBC Proms Concert – The Glasshouse. Value: £50. Date: July 26 2024. Edinburgh Tattoo Ceremony and evening meal. Donor: Edinburgh Tattoo. Value: £300. Date: August 19 2024 “If U Care Share” shirt. Donor: If U Care Share. Value: £50. Date: August 30 2024. Great North Run Dinner. Donor: Great North Run Company. Value: £150. Date: September 7 2024. Accommodation at Hilton Hotel, Gateshead, before Great North Run. Donor: Great North Run Company. Value: £200. Date: September 7 2024. Private dinner at Labour Party Conference. Donor: Nissan. Value: £50. Date: September 24 2024.
For balance, she also declined a number of gifts:
An invitation from Channel 4 to a Paralympic Games Garden Party in Paris. Football tickets offered by Sunderland AFC, Newcastle United shirt sponsor Sela, and Newcastle Airport, as well as hospitality packages at an England rugby match at Twickenham and England’s one-day cricket international against Australia at Chester-le-Street.
In the current spirit of neo-puritanism when it comes to political leaders receiving any kind of freebie, do we not need to apply some form of context (apart from the routine Labour bashing)?
If this is going to the North East Mayor, what is going to other Council leaders such as the Mayor of Newham or the Leader of Surrey County Council? The value of the accepted gifts is just over £1000 - you may say that's £1000 too much but even if you take the cake and send it to a residential home (for example), you've still accepted the cake.
Good morning everyone.
She can't donate it to a Residential Home, as the Telegrunt would run a front page piece about her trying to bribe people in a residential home to vote for her, with pieces of cake. And how therefore the world just ended.
And presumably how she is therefore worse than Marie Antoinette, and not even supplying her own cake.
Anyhoo, the cake should clearly be a biscuit, so that we can say she is taking the biscuit.
Of course the Northern Echo has those details because they were openly declared. It is a matter of public interest but in terms of corruption the issue is what, if anything, is received in return. That is the important bit.
I would have thought having a local MP/mayor attend a dinner is good advertising for the charity/organisation and doesn't necessarily involve any quid pro quo on the part of the MP/mayor.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
Although thanks for proving my point that a lot of people want to be train drivers and most aren't good enough to pass the required tests.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
Yes but it's certainly not a case of noone wanting to do the job.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
I expect it's a case of "who you know" for the successful applicants.
That’s nearly British Airways cadet pilot scheme levels of application, impressive. (They had 25k applicants for 100 jobs this year).
The issues, as others have said, are that the job looks superficially easy, and that the very strong union means the pay is well above market clearing rate.
Against that is the long hours of concentration required, the constant performance monitoring, and the chance of being first on the scene at a gruesome suicide or level crossing accident.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
I am sure you are right but the number wanting to be train drivers is extraordinary
The owner of British Gas is exploring a potential investment in Hinkley Point C as French state energy giant EDF scrambles to raise more funds for the troubled nuclear project.
Centrica has held discussions about a possible deal in recent months, although the talks are thought to be at an early stage, The Telegraph understands.
City sources suggested the company could put at least £1bn into the scheme, which is being built in Somerset, in exchange for a stake of 5pc or more.
Any deal would also likely secure Centrica a share of the plant’s electricity output, at a time when energy suppliers are revisiting nuclear as a potential source of “clean” power to replace fossil fuels.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
There's no way the number of people suitable to become a train driver is as low as 0.5% of the applicants. No chance. If there were two vacancies to be filled they'd both be filled. What there is a is a limited supply of fully qualified drivers but it's due to the scarcity of the job not that it's a job that noone wants and/or is incapable of doing. Your and @Nigelb arguments are a nonsense here.
I'm fearful. Sir Keir seems to be relying on the budget to save him. But such is the media narrative that it will probably get a terrible reception whatever Rachel does. And we've already had one relaunch today; we can't have another one. I think Sir Keir might have blown it.
Perhaps she can give a completely honest, straightforward budget speech which hides nothing, and therefore does not unravel over days.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
Although thanks for proving my point that a lot of people want to be train drivers and most aren't good enough to pass the required tests.
If I ever made a career change it would be to either become a teacher or a train driver.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
I expect it's a case of "who you know" for the successful applicants.
That’s nearly British Airways cadet pilot scheme levels of application, impressive. (They had 25k applicants for 100 jobs this year).
The issues, as others have said, are that the job looks superficially easy, and that the very strong union means the pay is well above market clearing rate.
Against that is the long hours of concentration required, the constant performance monitoring, and the chance of being first on the scene at a gruesome suicide or level crossing accident.
At least you don't have to pay to drive the 0650 to Rotherham for 5 years before you have a chance at getting on the Azuma.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
I am sure you are right but the number wanting to be train drivers is extraordinary
Not in today's market. Many jobs have 200 or more applicants per vacancy.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
There's no way the number of people suitable to become a train driver is as low as 0.5% of the applicants. No chance. If there were two vacancies to be filled they'd both be filled. What there is a is a limited supply of fully qualified drivers but it's due to the scarcity of the job not that it's a job that noone wants and/or is incapable of doing. Your and @Nigelb arguments are a nonsense here.
IIRC the problem Avanti had was the salary is quite low during training, I think the Manchester Evening News said the salary wasn't far off minimum wage.
Plus they don't have enough staff to drive the trains and train new starters.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
Although thanks for proving my point that a lot of people want to be train drivers and most aren't good enough to pass the required tests.
If I ever made a career change it would be to either become a teacher or a train driver.
I'd love to work the East Coast mainline.
There were vacancies in Doncaster not that long ago..
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
(There is no upper age limit for train drivers, so after just 4 years of training pensioners could be earning £55k at ScotRail. Not bad)
I'd missed that story. The Conservatives really do have an advert about Labour's WFA cut featuring pensioners in nice-looking homes and one apparently wearing a Rolex. Saatchi and Saatchi must be turning in its corporate grave. https://x.com/conservatives/status/1842167118990823595
It even undermines their Labour comms is a shambles narrative.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
There's no way the number of people suitable to become a train driver is as low as 0.5% of the applicants. No chance. If there were two vacancies to be filled they'd both be filled. What there is a is a limited supply of fully qualified drivers but it's due to the scarcity of the job not that it's a job that noone wants and/or is incapable of doing. Your and @Nigelb arguments are a nonsense here.
That's not what I said, of course.
There are certainly those who will be attracted by the high pay. I was merely pointing out that it's a shit job. Whether it merits the absolute level of pay is debatable; what's not is that it requires a premium level of pay.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
There's no way the number of people suitable to become a train driver is as low as 0.5% of the applicants. No chance. If there were two vacancies to be filled they'd both be filled. What there is a is a limited supply of fully qualified drivers but it's due to the scarcity of the job not that it's a job that noone wants and/or is incapable of doing. Your and @Nigelb arguments are a nonsense here.
You are correct - the actual ratio is 1 in 400 of the people who apply get there in the end...
And as my brother will happily point out - it doesn't take that many momentary mistakes and you will be out of the job...
Which is why the ratio is so extreme, most people simply cannot concentrate long enough...
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
I am sure you are right but the number wanting to be train drivers is extraordinary
Not in today's market. Many jobs have 200 or more applicants per vacancy.
It's Tory government's fault.
Since the introduction of Universal Credit you now have to show evidence of the jobs you have applied for.
So even if you're not qualified for the job, applying helps meet your UC commitments.
We've had hundreds of application for very basic jobs and top end jobs from people who are unemployed.
The owner of British Gas is exploring a potential investment in Hinkley Point C as French state energy giant EDF scrambles to raise more funds for the troubled nuclear project.
Centrica has held discussions about a possible deal in recent months, although the talks are thought to be at an early stage, The Telegraph understands.
City sources suggested the company could put at least £1bn into the scheme, which is being built in Somerset, in exchange for a stake of 5pc or more.
Any deal would also likely secure Centrica a share of the plant’s electricity output, at a time when energy suppliers are revisiting nuclear as a potential source of “clean” power to replace fossil fuels.
The owner of British Gas is exploring a potential investment in Hinkley Point C as French state energy giant EDF scrambles to raise more funds for the troubled nuclear project.
Centrica has held discussions about a possible deal in recent months, although the talks are thought to be at an early stage, The Telegraph understands.
City sources suggested the company could put at least £1bn into the scheme, which is being built in Somerset, in exchange for a stake of 5pc or more.
Any deal would also likely secure Centrica a share of the plant’s electricity output, at a time when energy suppliers are revisiting nuclear as a potential source of “clean” power to replace fossil fuels.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
I expect it's a case of "who you know" for the successful applicants.
That’s nearly British Airways cadet pilot scheme levels of application, impressive. (They had 25k applicants for 100 jobs this year).
The issues, as others have said, are that the job looks superficially easy, and that the very strong union means the pay is well above market clearing rate.
Against that is the long hours of concentration required, the constant performance monitoring, and the chance of being first on the scene at a gruesome suicide or level crossing accident.
At least you don't have to pay to drive the 0650 to Rotherham for 5 years before you have a chance at getting on the Azuma.
Ha indeed. That BA scheme is just about the only way (as a Brit) to get a frozen ATPL without being six figures in debt, for a job that pays back little more than minimum wage for several years.
The Easyjet and Ryanair guys mostly still live with their parents, in a house with a large mortgage taken out on it.
The first thing Reeves should do is u-turn on the WFA and say she’s managed to find the money elsewhere . Take the ridicule and move on .
Good morning
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
+1 - the issue really did show how bad this Government was at media communications. The correct thing was to say it's a temporary cut which is made up for in next years above inflation pension increase..
Indeed the optics of announcing it at the same time as awarding train drivers bumper pay increases to c£70,000 pa was just bad politics
I think the money is better spent on people actually working for a living than freebies for Rolex-wearing millionaire pensioners.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
The problem with train drivers is that it's nowhere near as easy as people think it is - but most people think they can do it...
Most people probably wouldn't want to do it. The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
The application ratio for train driver jobs is 200-1.
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
It is hardly surprising with the wages on offer
And most will fail at the first or second hurdle...
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
Although thanks for proving my point that a lot of people want to be train drivers and most aren't good enough to pass the required tests.
If I ever made a career change it would be to either become a teacher or a train driver.
I'd love to work the East Coast mainline.
There were vacancies in Doncaster not that long ago..
The owner of British Gas is exploring a potential investment in Hinkley Point C as French state energy giant EDF scrambles to raise more funds for the troubled nuclear project.
Centrica has held discussions about a possible deal in recent months, although the talks are thought to be at an early stage, The Telegraph understands.
City sources suggested the company could put at least £1bn into the scheme, which is being built in Somerset, in exchange for a stake of 5pc or more.
Any deal would also likely secure Centrica a share of the plant’s electricity output, at a time when energy suppliers are revisiting nuclear as a potential source of “clean” power to replace fossil fuels.
Comments
If HMRC are not careful they could lose a fair bit of employer / employee NI were greater use of salary sacrifice made..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79nrgp97x9o
It's for microRNA work which is how the body makes the various tissue types from the same DNA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb0SPF0B1cQ
RefUK talking about launching a private prosecution. Two-tier justice etc.
I think the UN is doing it's best, and the Saudi's, Egyptians and Jordanians are taking a much more pragmatic view.
All it needs if for clients to phase some payments and it's quite easy for self-employed people to earn £80k in year one, then £120k in year too – gross. They then pay an eyewatering 62% tax on the income in the £120k-£125k range in year 2... so lose out massively just because their clients were late paying them, or a project slipped a month or two.
It's utterly ridiculous.
Reeves could offer people a choice: keep your PA but pay 45%+2% NI after £100k, or keep using the ludicrous existing system. She could then say that she hasn't raised taxes because people have a choice.
Of course, the vast majority of people would switch. And in a a year or two she could say, "I'm please to say that most people chose to accept ur offer to change. And that is why today, Mr Speaker, I moving the 45p bracket to all taxpayers from £100k, but protecting the PA for all."
It’s a big leap to re-write whole chunks of it from scratch, with lots of potential unintended consequences, even if it’s the right thing to do in the long term.
Up here in the Flatlands you don't need a lot of money if you aren't high maintenance, anyway.
Would I have tried harder without the stupid wall? Probably.
Mind you, provided there isn't something really daft in the budget I'm going to cut it to 0 days a week, at least for any formal job.
·
1h
Elon Musk is offering $ to sign a pro-Trump pre-election petition, linked to a voter registration drive in swing states. Inducements to register are not legal.
https://bsky.app/profile/sundersays.bsky.social/post/3l5vy2kimjh2q
£60k is about the ballpark for the Head of Science in provincial secondary schools. The very top of the payscale for Mr Chips with no management responsibilites is just under £50k, but it's pretty rare to get that now. It's the sort of level that isn't enormously aspirational, and I'm sure there are plenty here who wouldn't get out of bed for such a pittance. But you don't have to be particularly monastic to reach that level and think "this is the equilibrium between work to live and live to work". That's especially true if your housing costs are low.
National income requires there to be a decent wedge of people who don't settle for that, who push on to be paid a lot more, and are willing to be taxed quite a lot on it. But national expenditure requires there to be a hefty number of people who are willing to settle for that much/little. And national harmony requires some sort of mutual understanding that I don't think exists at the moment.
It's quite long (55 minutes) and mostly about the USA, British bit is from 35 or 40 minutes in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTWdh1dr4ZI
She can't donate it to a Residential Home, as the Telegrunt would run a front page piece about her trying to bribe people in a residential home to vote for her, with pieces of cake. And how therefore the world just ended.
And presumably how she is therefore worse than Marie Antoinette, and not even supplying her own cake.
Anyhoo, the cake should clearly be a biscuit, so that we can say she is taking the biscuit.
I don’t see a lot of evidence that Miss Reeves is going to pull a rabbit out of a hat, but am prepared to be surprised on the day. There’s a lot of potential banana skins in there for a first-time Chanchellor.
According to the OBR timetable its economic forecast to be released tomorrow to government is based on pre budget measures, ie the current position on existing government policies.
The first economic forecast from the OBR based on the forthcoming budget measures is to be released to government in a weeks time on Monday 14 October.
We could see more briefing/leaks from government next week as they try to get the numbers to work.
That would be the worse thing to do as she would be shown to be weak and anyway she will always be remembered for it, much like Gordon Brown's 75p pensioners rise
Best just to carry on unless of course the legal challenge upends it
She is right to remove it.
Sherlock Holmes applies: once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
This isn't going to be quick, but a return to managed status quo ante 7th October 2023 is now in the list of impossibles.
We are all paying much more tax we would have done pre GFC, both direct and indirect, and for worse output.
The Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters’s (Trumpist R) has put out an ITT for Bibles to go in every schoolroom in Oklahoma (55,000 bibles) which only aligns with God Bless the USA Bibles endorsed by Mr Trump and one other which costs $90 per copy. The previous one he endorsed that also included the text of the C&W song "God Bless the USA" by Lee Greenwood. They cost $60 each.
They must include the King James Versions (apparently Kings are OK for this), US Constitution, Pledge of Allegiance, Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
For some reason it leaves out all the Constitutional Amendments after ~1790.
I'd have thought that separation of Church and State would have taken care of this, but ... hey ho.
A salesperson at Mardel Christian & Education searched, and though they carry 2,900 Bibles, none fit the parameters.
But one Bible fits perfectly: Lee Greenwood’s God Bless the U.S.A. Bible, endorsed by former President Donald Trump and commonly referred to as the Trump Bible.
https://oklahomawatch.org/2024/10/03/state-education-department-seeks-bids-for-55000-classroom-bibles/
It’s going to be a long match this one.
The issue for you is that once you hit £50,000 or so you are now caught by all the frozen allowances and cliff edges...
Here is McTague's articles and books
https://unherd.com/author/tom-mctague/
https://www.theatlantic.com/author/tom-mctague/
https://www.waterstones.com/author/tom-mctague/3706927
At present, I'm not confident I'll even be able to access all of my pension when I hit the magic age, which could also be can-kicked again.
There are at least 20 years between now and then and a lot of governments to come; a hard-left one might even nationalise (i.e. confiscate) some or all of people's pension pots.
The contrast between victimy bleating about the date of a tweet and the Billy Big Bollocks 'Israel is the toughest guy on the block' stuff is always good for a laff.
"What McSweeney really offers is a hard-headed, unromantic clarity about Labour’s purpose that is more reminiscent of the party’s tougher social democratic past than its softer liberal present. He — more than Starmer — is someone who would be instantly recognisable to any figure from the old Labour Right, from Ernest Bevin to John Reid but is a rarer sight in Westminster of late. He did not learn his politics at Oxford and the bar, but on council estates working for local government. This experience has given him an instinctive loathing for the kind of badge-wearing politics of virtue the Labour Right has long associated with the middle-class Left."
https://unherd.com/2024/10/who-killed-sue-gray/
He would, for example, immediately have twigged the flaw in privatising monopoly utilities.
Reeves should bin it. Make the rate 45p at £100k, so everyone pays a marginal rate of 47% (including NI) from £100k, but there is no attack on the PA. She can then reasonably call this
• a tax cut (because the marginal rates are more benign in reality)
• a pro-growth policy (because millions won't jump through hoops to avoid the 62% trap)
• a progressive tax, because those earning £100-120k won't be paying higher marginal rates than those earning £125k+
And it will be much simpler to administer.
She should do it.
The salary for train drivers reflects the supply and demand for labour, nothing more. I'm not sure why these basic laws of labour market economics only apply to CEOs and Premier League footballers, and not people in public service roles.
(There is no upper age limit for train drivers, so after just 4 years of training pensioners could be earning £55k at ScotRail. Not bad)
https://x.com/rcolvile/status/1843243919976632643
Just don't touch the Downing Street pies...
The hours are both unpredictable and unsocial, and it involves large periods of time away from home. And you're sitting down for most of the (long) workday, with very limited breaks, which is not at all good for your health.
If there's stuff bolted on over many years by a string of people no longer around to ask why the hell they did something then maintenance gets expensive. Perfect documentation does not exist.
And who hasn't looked at some old code and got annoyed at the developer before remembering that, oops, yes, I did that. Maybe that's just me getting old...
And if you think I could drive a train then you have some very weird ideas
As for train drivers they are members of very powerful unions who can and do hold the country to ransom and they are very well paid anyway
More first responders slaughtered today. It seems as if there’s no red line in terms of how many innocent civilians the IDF is willing to wipe out .
Source : Times
Figures from Virgin Trains show that this month more than 15,000 people applied for 78 jobs starting in 2018 to drive a new generation of Azuma trains on the east coast mainline. ScotRail was recently inundated by more than 22,000 applications for 100 train driver jobs.22 Oct 2016
I expect it's a case of "who you know" for the successful applicants.
You need a certain type of mindset to be a train driver..
Although thanks for proving my point that a lot of people want to be train drivers and most aren't good enough to pass the required tests.
The issues, as others have said, are that the job looks superficially easy, and that the very strong union means the pay is well above market clearing rate.
Against that is the long hours of concentration required, the constant performance monitoring, and the chance of being first on the scene at a gruesome suicide or level crossing accident.
Centrica has held discussions about a possible deal in recent months, although the talks are thought to be at an early stage, The Telegraph understands.
City sources suggested the company could put at least £1bn into the scheme, which is being built in Somerset, in exchange for a stake of 5pc or more.
Any deal would also likely secure Centrica a share of the plant’s electricity output, at a time when energy suppliers are revisiting nuclear as a potential source of “clean” power to replace fossil fuels.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/british-gas-owner-considers-1bn-investment-hinkley-point/
Probably not, though.
I'd love to work the East Coast mainline.
Plus they don't have enough staff to drive the trains and train new starters.
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1842167118990823595
It even undermines their Labour comms is a shambles narrative.
There are certainly those who will be attracted by the high pay. I was merely pointing out that it's a shit job.
Whether it merits the absolute level of pay is debatable; what's not is that it requires a premium level of pay.
And as my brother will happily point out - it doesn't take that many momentary mistakes and you will be out of the job...
Which is why the ratio is so extreme, most people simply cannot concentrate long enough...
Since the introduction of Universal Credit you now have to show evidence of the jobs you have applied for.
So even if you're not qualified for the job, applying helps meet your UC commitments.
We've had hundreds of application for very basic jobs and top end jobs from people who are unemployed.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/07/uks-22bn-carbon-capture-pledge-follows-surge-in-lobbying-by-fossil-fuel-industry-records-show
I'm strongly in favour of zonal pricing (though as always, the devil will be in the details).
Charging customers for energy based on location ‘could harm UK industry’
Trade groups warn against government’s idea that those further from power projects should pay more
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/07/zonal-energy-pricing-plan-uk-industry-trade-groups-ed-miliband
If done right, the market should lower the overall cost of electricity in the UK - and incentivise regional industrial investment.
The Easyjet and Ryanair guys mostly still live with their parents, in a house with a large mortgage taken out on it.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/reform-manchester-airport-fight-police-private-prosecution/
A take from 'journalist' Isobel Oakeshott (aka Richard Tice's partner) on Talk-TV:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kfUhJdPt-s
Slightly different way of doing politics.
Makes me feel old.
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2024/oct/07/leonard-rossiter-physicality-british-theatre