Forum menu
some people have been warning about the cumulative effects of dependancy on imported fossil fuels and putting up trade barriers with the rest of the continent
He's not talking about that, he's talking about the speed and scale with which this crisis has unfolded. I know the temptation for you to crow that 'we told you so' is overpowering but really you had no more idea than anyone else of the scale or speed of this, or the causes. Still though, if you want to celebrate the impoverishing of a population to prove a point about brexit then carry on. 🙄
But his assessment that this can only be addressed by holding down the cost of fossil fuels I can’t agree with.
So central heating is a luxury that the plebs can't expect to have next winter? Good luck with selling that. It's all very well talking about ramping up renewables, and that absolutely should happen, but not helping people now will do far more damage to the fight against climate change than a temporary reduction in fossil fuel prices.
you want to celebrate the impoverishing of a population to prove a point about brexit then carry on
Here we go... just stop it. I'm not celebrating anything, just not agreeing with the idea that there wasn't "virtually any prior warning" as regards fossil fuel dependancy or that there would be profiteering and an impact on the cost of living on the back of separating Great Britain from the rest of the European market. I'm just disagreeing with some elements of an article you posted. I'm not cheering on any of this mess.
So central heating is a luxury that the plebs can’t expect to have next winter?
No, I didn't say that. I've been saying the exact opposite, if you care to read my posts.
I’d also go further – Sunak is both incompetent and complicit. A Brexiteer too his bone, and equally doesn’t understand how the economy works.
Its worth remembering that out of the lot of them, Sunak is the one who doesn't just name-check Fatcha, but really, really believes. He is a complete ideologue that EVERYTHING should be left to 'The Market' with absolutely zero state interference. He's on the record stating this time after time
So if anyone is seriously expecting anything at all that will make the lives of the most people any easier, you're in for a disappointment. Remember that in response to rising heating costs he offered a government loan. Thats it. Expect more of that today.
I posted this on the Boris thread: Anthony Browne, one of new utterly vile and obnoxious Boris-cheerleading Brexity 2019 intake of MP’s, has just been on the Five Live MP’s Panel now.
He clearly hasn’t got the first clue about the reality of people struggling with rising living costs (the subject of discussion), and more importantly; clearly couldn’t care less either. He did use the reframe on the issue: ‘well, people are just going to have to live within their means’.
I reckon that'll be Rishi's attitude too.
'The Market' is king. If thats not working for you... tough.
He did use the reframe on the issue: ‘well, people are just going to have to live within their means’.
Doff your cap peasants, didn't YOU know/understand what you were voting for?
just not agreeing with the idea that there wasn’t “virtually any prior warning”
Vague and unspecific predictions back in 2016 about economic calamity do not constitute 'prior warning' of this particular crisis. This crisis is a direct result of profiteering by energy, oil and food suppliers which has been enabled by a tory govt who will do nothing to prevent it. Using brexit as an excuse only allows Johnson and Sunak off the hook. They could fix this, but they won't, because they're not on the side of the population and only care about the interests of big business.
well, people are just going to have to live within their means
Of course that's what he said For years the Tories have been framing the poor as either deserving (pensioners) or undeserving (everyone else) If you have to count the pennies, or there's too much month at the end of the money, that's your look out, and your fault obviously
Stood in the queue behind a young lass at Mo's yesterday I watched as she tried to work out what to put back when she realised she didn't have enough money. The people in line behind her were literally fighting over who was going to to pay for them for her. It was lovely and poor lass was in tears, but this is happening already!
Using brexit as an excuse only allows Johnson and Sunak off the hook
Your article mentions Brexit. I didn't bring it up. I deliberately avoided using the word, because of course we could still be more connected with European markets without being an EU member... there are many examples across the continent. We could have left without much of the damage/opportunities that have come out of the process of leaving due to the political choices made by Johnson, Sunak, Mogg etc on our behalf (and in their interest).
Fuel duty cut by 5p from tonight for 12 months.
Zero rate VAT on home improvements related to energy.
If you rent and don't drive... then your new support is... er...
NI threshold increased by £3K. Everyone paying NI gets that cut (well, they're calling it a cut, but with the increased NI rate... it probably isn't for most).
Final announcement that... just before the next election... they'll be a 1% cut to the basic income tax rate. Handy timing. Vote Sunak.
If you have to count the pennies, or there’s too much month at the end of the money, that’s your look out, and your fault obviously
This is the big right-wing lie. The suggestion that if you're poor, it's your own fault. But whilst it's occasionally the case on the whole this is a vicious lie perpetuated by people who are too greedy and mean to want to help others. They just construct a fiction to justify being mean.
If you have to count the pennies, or there’s too much month at the end of the money, that’s your look out, and your fault obviously
This is the big right-wing lie. The suggestion that if you’re poor, it’s your own fault. But whilst it’s occasionally the case on the whole this is a vicious lie perpetuated by people who are too greedy and mean to want to help others. They just construct a fiction to justify being mean.
I think there's also an element of them wanting to think that the rich are deserving to be rich, and it's not just luck or down to your many*great granddad being a bigger bastard than others around them, and if that's the case then the opposite must be true.
Even those who don't have a privileged background but end up rich are themselves lucky to have been born with the aptitude and skill to do so; and there's always a good dose of luck.
Even those who don’t have a privileged background but end up rich are themselves lucky to have been born with the aptitude and skill to do so; and there’s always a good dose of luck.
Absolutely. And only because of the rest of society around them.
Even those who don’t have a privileged background but end up rich are themselves lucky to have been born with the aptitude and skill to do so; and there’s always a good dose of luck.
Yep, sums me up. The difference between me and others at work in same position is that I put it down to luck (including luck of having an ability than gets a good wage) whereas they put it down to all their hard work. Guess which party they vote for....
I think there’s also an element of them wanting to think that the rich are deserving to be rich
It's another perverse Americanism that we've imported. A lot of the traditional Merican churches believe that the rich end up rich as some kind of reward from god for their righteousness and are thus deserving of their wealth. While the poor on the other hand...
It's an irony that usually escapes them that the wealthiest individuals seem to demonstrate not one shred of any supposed christian values. Donald Trump probably being the epitome of this, though there are no shortage of other examples both in the US and now here. All the Tory cabinet for a start.
A third of the poorest people in the UK can’t afford/don’t run cars. The richest, who own the biggest most expensive and thirsty cars consume 5x more fuel than the poorest.
The Tories are primarily interested in carving off chunks of public assets, services and expenditure to give to their mates - diverting tax revenue to enrich themselves and their followers.
There are plenty of areas where Government investment could be used to drive economic growth and prosperity, but that would mean an increase in the size of the ‘state’. They would rather they channel money into the hands of private enterprise where some gets fed into director’s renumeration and bonuses, including those ex and current MPs acting as ‘advisors’ and Non-executive directors. One of the reasons austerity failed in the UK was that ‘cheap’ money through QE was used by many businesses to fund share buy-backs, thus driving up dividends,P/E ratios and bonuses rather than investing in growth and productivity improvements.
UK productivity and growth has stalled in comparison to G7 peers - increasing interest rates may kill off what little growth there is. The UK economy is also very dependent on consumer spending in retail and services a lot ‘funded’ through credit cards and debt - with fuel and food prices rising, it erodes this discretionary spend. Quite a few people forecasting a recession in the UK as consumer spending gets hit hard.
It’s another perverse Americanism that we’ve
importedexported
Well... it seems us at home will lose for 3 months, and then be back where we were from July... well apart from the £100 increase in utilities.
The BOE rate rises have little to nothing to do with rising inflation right now, it's more like an attempt to get interest rates back to a more reasonable level and give room to do something if there is another shock. As to the fuel duty cut, it will provide some benefit to the poorer sections of society in the form of limiting food price rises, public transport costs etc but it will certainly provide more of a benefit to the richer end. A better thing to do in my opinion would have been a cut in tax rate of domestic fuel. This too would have benefited the richer more but would have provided a more immediate relief to the poorer sections of society than the fuel duty cut.
Fuel duty cut will give the rich far more than the poorer sections of society
I’m a little lost , or not understanding it properly.
So Rich Tarquin in his fuel hungry motor uses 100 litres a week. So he saves a whole £5 from his fuel bill .
Poor Dave in his frugal motor that does the same amount of miles using a mere 20 litres only saves £1 on his fuel bill.
So are you suggesting Tarquin has saved more money than Dave overall.
Considering it’s cost Tarquin over £58 in fuel duty and £18 in vat as opposed to Daves £10 odd in Fuel Duty and £4 in vat them I’m sure Daves better off financially (whilst driving the same miles) than Tarquin
Not to mention the higher amount of VAT Tarquin has paid for his car in the first place , and probably VED and luxury car tax for the first 5 years.
Maths might be a bit out in the calcs above but you get the gist
Seems to me that Sunak has tried to retain Tory votes, while implementing changes that make lower income families not have quite so much of a monthly shortfall for absolute essentials, while giving higher income families effectively more disposable income to further drive out of control inflation.
Roll on the next General Election and the hope of a miracle vote swing from the Dec '19 result!
So are you suggesting Tarquin has saved more money than Dave overall
Yes
Tarquin is loaded and so can afford to run his V8 motor that does 20mpg and costs £500 a year VED, but now has £5 more in his pocket to spend on skinny lattes.
Dave has little money, is frugal and wise and so has bough at Kia that does 100mpg and is £20 VED a year.
Hes now going to save £1 a week, which is nothing compared to the £10 a week increase he has on food and heating.
If Tarquin is hard up he can always chop in his V8 for a cheaper model, but Beatrice thinks the neighbours would look down on them both for owning a Kia.
It’s an irony that usually escapes them that the wealthiest individuals seem to demonstrate not one shred of any supposed christian values.
See also it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. . .
Yep, sums me up. The difference between me and others at work in same position is that I put it down to luck (including luck of having an ability than gets a good wage) whereas they put it down to all their hard work. Guess which party they vote for…
Are you me? 🙂
But Tarquin is putting that £5 back into the local economy, assuming he buys his skinny lattes at the local hipster artisan coffee house rather than the tax fiddling multinationals that plague the high street. Will probably spend more than that £5 on parking to the local authority too.
It’s easy to knock the “rich”.
Assuming they pay their taxes correctly , the input into the financial system of the country is far higher than “the poor”. Don’t forget Tarquin on his high wage has lost all of his income tax allowance as well as any child benefit he may have received for young Rupert and Tabith as well.
Not saying they should be getting anything extra for their money.
Or are we just talking about the super duper “elite” and their tax dodging ways 🤔
So... when looking at today's fuel duty cut announcement... Dave has received bugger all help with his fast rising bills, yet Tarquin can feed inflation via conspicuous consumption with his tax cut? Sounds about right. [ over simplified to the point of being meaningless, but so was the original example ]
Yeah.. I'm no economic expert but it would be more beneficial to cut the price of gas or electricity than a tiny bit of petrol/diesel tax?
It's all smoke and mirrors, he's still making 1p more in VAT than he was pre price hike as was pointed out earlier.
As for Tarquin being the spawn of the devil for earning more, feel free to support the culture war. Apart from the super rich, well paid PAYE people in this country pay huge amounts of tax with very little support if things go wrong. That's of course right and proper but it does get a little boring when the narrative is continually suggesting they are lucky or dont earn their salaries. Of course some get there through the old boys network, most work hard and use the skills and intelligence they have to earn their wages. In the same way many low income workers work damn hard there are also those who make minimal effort. Gross generalisations don't help.
Until we sort out the cost of housing which is ridiculously inflated the social / income divide is only going to get worse. A tax cut here, a benefit rise there isn't going to make any meaningful difference.
As for Tarquin being the spawn of the devil for earning more
He isn't. Who said he was? But the fuel tax cut benefits this (made up) character more than Dave (also entirely fictional). The discussion was about the government's new "extra support", who it helps, and how it fits in with other measures aimed at restricting inflation.
continually suggesting they are lucky
Er... if you are well off, you are lucky. Aren't you? Even if you are well off though your work. Even if it's just the luck to be healthy enough to work at all.
Very well put stumpyjon. Bit too rational for these type of threads though.
That’s of course right and proper but it does get a little boring when the narrative is continually suggesting they are lucky or dont earn their salaries
That's not *quite* what we're saying.
Many people do work hard for their high salaries. But equally, many people work hard and get **** all. The point is that that you mustn't *blame* the poor for being poor, you must recognise that the system is frequently stacked against them and work to undo that. Which is more or less what you are saying.
Fixing the system will take money, and it should be the rich that bear the brunt of paying for it, because they have the most to start with. You can't take all their money, because then there's no incentive to work. But taxation should be progressive - which is recognised, just don't try and undo the progression by the back door.
Nothing wrong with being rich. What's wrong is the rich stacking the system in their favour.
To each according to his need; from each according to his ability.
poor tarquin, it's not his fault
and it isn't.
Point remains that one has choices; other does not, and relatively speaking is not helped very much by the vat cut. The impact is felt on one more than the other. You see that right?
And the impact is even greater on Chris, who works horrific hours for peanuts, and can’t afford to own a car let alone fill if with fuel.
Yet *everything* is becoming more expensive for him with little to no prospect of any improvement. He’s not making choices about driving a bit more economically or cancelling Netflix, he’s deciding whether to start eating a bit less or wear more clothes.
Tarquin is loaded and so can afford to run his V8 motor that does 20mpg and costs £500 a year VED, but now has £5 more in his pocket to spend on skinny lattes.
Dave has little money, is frugal and wise and so has bough at Kia that does 100mpg and is £20 VED a year.
I was agreeing with this.
Until this bit...
Hes now going to save £1 a week, which is nothing compared to the £10 a week increase he has on food and heating.
because surely Tarquin is also hit by a similar or higher rise on the cost of heating his country farmhouse/victorian london mansion/glass covered grand designs cube
sunsk today? Non-event.
Actually, that's wrong; it's an insult to and shows contempt for the low paid and those in fuel poverty who are about to face even more pressure.
because surely Tarquin is also hit by a similar or higher rise on the cost of heating his country farmhouse/victorian london mansion/glass covered grand designs cube
Of course. But if you’re living a high expenditure life, you have options that someone living on a limited income does not. Tightening your belt and cancelling a ski holiday is not the same as waiting for your next wage payment to buy bread and milk. Sunak claims there is limited support he can give (while also signalling an income tax before the next election) so that support should go to those who need it most, not those with the most. Cutting fuel duty at the pumps for all isn’t progressive.
because surely Tarquin is also hit by a similar or higher rise on the cost of heating his country farmhouse/victorian london mansion/glass covered grand designs cube
Yes, but that’s hardly a meagre existence is it.
He’s kids have separate bedrooms, they have a spare room for when people visit and the £400k house is insulated to modern standards with efficient heating systems.
Dave rents a 2 bed flat to squeeze his family into, which has very little insulation, and the landlord won’t invest in the property, so he has very few options to reduce his consumption.
FWIW, I’m in the middle class bracket and Sunaks announcement makes me ~£100 better off fuel wise and ~£300 better off from NI.
But the old lady 2 doors down has received no benefit, as she doesnt work or drive, but still faces the same increase in living costs.
How is that equitable?
Is she looking to install a wind turbine? There must be some “new support” announced today that helps her? No?
Dave here, I've managed to scrape enough money together to buy a bag of frozen sausages, does anyone have Tarquin's address.
Until we sort out the cost of housing which is ridiculously inflated
Which is what increasing interest rates will achieve.
Increasing the cost of debt, reduces the amount people can borrow, so will cool off the demand side of the property market and income/price ratios will reduce to historical rates.
When people’s fixed deals end over the next 1-2 years, people who have over stretched them are in for an unpleasant shock as their mortgage payments increase dramatically.
How is that equitable?
It was never supposed to be, the fuel cut is a specifically targeted measure at the core Tory vote. It's purpose it to cement the chancellors personal standing amongst Tory members and to a lesser extend the Tory party. They don't give a toss about helping the poor.
It's only when i read threads like this that i remember how little chance we have of ever having an effective opposition, we've seen the attempts at utopian societies, and they don't tend to fair well due to the simple fact that people are unpredictable.
The fuel cut is not a tory vote thing, for me, it's aimed at assisting the employers with their overheads and employees with their travel, folk rambling on about 'tarquin' are just showing their prejudices towards 'the rich', this fuel tax cut will help businesses across the UK offset some of the increases, which in turn will offset some of the rises to goods, services, etc. The simple fact is it's just not enough at present though, it needs to be a lot more than 8% of fuel duty being cut for a 1 year period, to cover the current issue, 25% would be a start, 50% would be useful.