[Closed] Is it just me?

I'm going to get hammered as well, but I'm on the way to promotion and a bigger salary, so it won't [i]feel[/i] like it...

I'm apparently £200 a year worse off, according to the calculator thing on the BBC. Not exactly a severe penalty.

Rachel

Yes it will feel only as though you never got that promotion 🙂

'cept for the additional work...

I also loved the bit about the single mother complaining that housing benefit was being cut ...her benefit was more than my mortgage!

Ok I live in a slum in the north, but only a slum by comparison.

£168 worse off incidentally.

Cool I'm better off, but my wage is still shite!

Woo £86.75 better off! I am rich!!!!!!!!!

but it is a neccessary evil.

most of what I've read about the matter suggests that the "deficit" is a chimera that we should ignore and the measures supposed to correct it will merely worsen the recession. I certainly wonder why we should be bothered about the "markets" when they caused most of the trouble in the first place. Also I can't help feeling this has dropped into the cost-cutting Tories' laps like manna from heaven - a perfect excuse to do what they always want to do 🙁

but it is a neccessary evil.

And yet, as far as can figure out, every other political party in the general election last month, was arguing against immediate spending cuts 😕

💡 Maybe only the Tories were telling the truth - and all the other parties were lying ?

Well ...err yes it is a neccessary evil. The public sector was simply unsustainable in its current form.

I do however wonder whether the ratio of spending cuts to tax rises needed to be so severe or indeed whether the pain could have been spread over a longer period.

...though anyone who says that spending cuts were not needed is clearly in cloud cuckoo land.

As for acting immediately I do very much agree with that ....we could have started slower but it definitely needed to be immediately. ....otherwise w could be another Greece.

. The public sector was simply unsustainable in its current form.

they would say that

otherwise w could be another Greece.

but the Greece situation was caused by the markets downgrading Greece's credit rating. Like I said the other week, why not just declare a jubilee and cancel all the national debts ? Who do we owe them to ?

anyone who says that spending cuts were not needed is clearly in cloud cuckoo land.

Well on May 6th only Tory politicians were arguing for immediate spending cuts. So I guess it means that the overwhelming majority of British voters were "clearly in cloud cuckoo land".

Well thank **** for George - eh ?

£155.60 better off. Get in. 😀

who do we owe them too??? FFS go back to school.

Frodo - Member

who do we owe them too??? FFS go back to school.

Probably best to go to a school capable of answering a question though.

Go on Frodo show us the value of your education.

C£400 worse off as a household. Plus whatever impact my frozen public sector salary has, I think more like £2k pa for each of the two frozen years.

[b]STOP PRESS ............[/b]

I will be £10 better off...

Untill i start to buy stuff with the 2.5% tax i will be screwed, unless MTB bike stuff becomes tax free 😉

I reckon maybe £500 worse of in our household of 2, and that includes the VAT increase
not too bad

Ok who do we owe it too? Well lots of people/institutions/countries etc. We are however in a better poistion than Greece as our debt matures over much longer periods and hence any pain can be spread.

Government debt is bought by many different institutions, these include other countries who may have a surplus (at the time of purchase), equity firms and crucially pensions/ If the government simply turned round and said sod yeh! ... then not only would our credit rating collapse (making it impossible to borrow in the future) but pension funds would also suffer significantly (thats your pension). Now I'm no economist so there are also probably more subtle consequences (as well as quite enourmous political ones).

Remember that the unsustainable investement in publiuc services was only unsustainable in the first place as much of it was paid for by borrowing.

Frodo

FFS go back to school.

Why would anyone need to go back to school ..........when you can learn so much on here ?

Tonight, I learnt that shafting the British people to pay for what the bankers did to the economy, due to their incompetence and greed, was a [i]"necessary evil"[/i].

Besides, that sort of economic logic is best learnt on the playing fields of Eton. So I'm not sure that going back to my state comprehensive in Peckham would be much use.

who do we owe them too??? FFS go back to school.

does that mean you don't know either ??

The benefit and tax changes that have drawn the most headlines are the tip of the iceberg. The big number is 25% cut in public spending over four years. That is a lot of people's jobs, a lot of people who won't be able to find work immediately, and will reduce their spending dramatically.

We'll only know where and how cuts will be made in full detail in October at the comprehensive spending review.

I'm actually nearly £200 better off according to the BBC which I was quite suprised by. Still when you factor in an extra 2.5% VAT I think I'll be more than £200 worse off.

I think Gideon was doing a lot of expectation management. Leaking information and press releases that it was going to hurt a lot and then it only hurts a bit for a lot of people. Civil servants and benefit receivers excepted but even then a pay freeze is better than a cut/round of redundacies which I was half expecting.

Maybe only the Tories were telling the truth - and all the other parties were lying ?

but the Greece situation was caused by the markets downgrading Greece's credit rating

Who do we owe them to ?

Untill i start to buy stuff with the 2.5% tax i will be screwed

. Though I'm not sure you understand the basics of the situation at all, Simon

my theory is that no one else does either - economics appears to slightly shadier than astrology 🙁

I can't see unilaterally cancelling our current debt doing us a lot of good when we go looking to borrow more money to balance the books next year.

I said "jubilee" - that's for everyone, not unilateral!

Can't get my head round it. They want to save £X billion or whatever & if the justice system gets any more 'managers' it'll f***ing topple over!

jonb - Member
I'm actually nearly £200 better off according to the BBC which I was quite suprised by. Still when you factor in an extra 2.5% VAT I think I'll be more than £200 worse off.

I think Gideon was doing a lot of expectation management. Leaking information and press releases that it was going to hurt a lot and then it only hurts a bit for a lot of people. Civil servants and benefit receivers excepted but even then a pay freeze is better than a cut/round of redundacies which I was half expecting.

But job losses were announced. A cut of 25% of govt spending is a huge number of people losing their jobs.

I can't see unilaterally cancelling our current debt doing us a lot of good when we go looking to borrow more money to balance the books next year.

It did quite a lot of good for Argentina - it slashed poverty and unemployment.

Guess what year it happened ?

[img] [/img]

And yes, Argentina is still reaping the rewards of ditching neo-liberalism.....first quarter of this year the economy grew 6.4%

I will be £170 a year better off as a result of the £1000 hike in the basic rate threshold. I hear there may be an increase in NI which may make me worse off

I will be worse off as a result of the 2.5% increase in VAT

the cut in benefits & tax credits for those that have offspring will not affect me as I have no offspring.
cuts in any other benefits & tax credits will not affect me as I have not received any benefit or tax credit of any kind since mid 1987

Capital Gains Tax will not affect me

Public Sector pay freezes will not affect me (directly) as I work in industry and have already had a pay freeze or two in the last 5 years; I am expecting a pay increase this year, but am not holding my breath...

so all I can say is: meh

Well I looked at mine on the BBC site and I'll be about £700 worse off. To be honest though when spread over a year it's not something I'm likely to notice that much.

It did quite a lot of good for Argentina - it slashed poverty and unemployment.

Oh, personally I'll be slightly better off according to the calculator thingy - we earn little enough, and salary sacrifice enough to take us below the threshold at which child tax credit reductions kick in. Will gain on the tax threshold. That of course is always assuming I don't lose out big time due to reduction in government spending - something my company gets a lot of it's income from - though I believe we have already factored in expected cuts and personally I've spent the vast majority of my time recently working on non-government stuff.

Yes, but we're not Argentina, and it's not 2003.

You're not paying attention. It's 2010 and the Argentine economy is very healthy. Look :

[url= http://www.forexpros.com/news/interest-rates-news/wrapup-2-argentina%27s-economic-rebound-solidifies-in-q1-143873 ]Argentina's economic rebound solidifies in Q1[/url]

So how did they do it ? By cutting public spending ? No, the complete opposite ......[i]massive[/i] public spending. Two years ago :

[url= http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081126003213.hz25qhpe&show_article=1 ]Argentina unveils 21 billion USD in infrastructure megaplan[/url]

Quote : [i]"President Cristina Kirchner on Tuesday unveiled a massive public spending plan to pump more than 21 billion dollars into Argentina's infrastructure and counter effects of the global cash crunch."[/i]

💡 But maybe the laws of economics is the opposite in the southern hemisphere ?

gonefishin - Member
Well I looked at mine on the BBC site and I'll be about £700 worse off. To be honest though when spread over a year it's not something I'm likely to notice that much.

Month and a bit of rent/mortgage?

But maybe the laws of economics is the opposite in the southern hemisphere ?

Looks pretty similar to me - if you run with a budget surplus most of the time (which you have to do if defaulting on debt prevents you from borrowing) then you have something left to spend when a recession comes:

[url= http://argentinaeconomy.blogspot.com/2008/01/argentina-government-posts-budget.html ]Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner has consistently argued that maintaining a budget surplus and a cheap peso has helped Argentina recover from a financial crisis in late 2001, when South America's second-largest economy defaulted on about $95 billion of bonds. [/url]

so it looks like you're suggesting a rapid reduction in the deficit is the right thing to do?

Well, apart from gonefishin who must be on a decent wedge fiddling around with calculator, most folks on here don't seem to be out of pocket by as much as I would have thought in an immediate sense. Our household will be a couple of hundred down.

However.... when you add the 2.5% VAT and the fact that whilst my wife and I don't work in the public sector but my job has had it's salary linked to the public sector equiv in the past and my wife works for a charity that gets the majority of its cash from the public sector so are both expecting a pay freeze for the foreseeable future it looks a bit different. A quick bit of back of fag packet maths working on previously expecting say a 2% pay rise and looking at our monthly CC bill for the VAT impact and we will be about £1800 of take home worse off a year. Not to be sneezed at.

It seems a reasonable hit and in many ways I'd take a bit more if it saved a few others the proper hardship of unemployment. I'd been even happier if I was confident that those that profited so spectacularly from the sort of excesses that got the globe in this pickle were contributing equivalently or more so.

However, I'll throw into the mix - how does a government that has to make this sort of nation changing proposals to balance the books justify future spending of £100bn on a new nuclear deterrent. Bonkers!

But maybe the laws of economics is the opposite in the southern hemisphere ?

so it looks like you're suggesting a rapid reduction in the deficit is the right thing to do?

That's hardly what Cristina Kirchner is saying should be the priority right now. But of course the aim should be to reduce the deficit. It doesn't however follow that this should be done by cutting back government spending. And it's certainly not the advise that Cristina Kirchner is giving to Greece - which she claims is an [i]identical [/i] situation as Argentina was in 2001 :

[url= http://world.greekreporter.com/2010/05/08/argentine-president-warns-greece-against-austerity-measures/ ]Argentine president warns Greece against austerity measures[/url]

I'll just add that a pay freeze has a very long term saving.

Say you gave a rate of inflation pay rise (3.4% this year?) in year 1 and same again in year 2 (lots of assumptions there I know) the actual saving is 6.9% in year 2. But unless in year 3 you give a big catch up pay rise you will continue to make that saving in perpetuity.

According to the BBC thing I'll be about £9 worse off, and primarily because of car fuel?

That's hardly what Cristina Kirchner is saying should be the priority right now

Obviously not, but if you look at what Argentina did - it got out of its 2001 crisis by defaulting on debt; it's not doing too badly in the current crisis because since then it's operated a budget surplus and is therefore able to spend now to keep the economy moving. I'm not sure how that mirrors where we are now - if we defaulted on our debt to wipe the slate clean we'd have no access to borrow so wouldn't have anything to spend so we'd be like Argentina in 2001 which was pretty grim by all accounts. Although I guess you could argue that as it's grim anyway why not go for broke?

Although I guess you could argue that as it's grim anyway why not go for broke?

No of course it isn't. The UK today is no where near as grim as Argentina was in 2001 (I was there at the time btw)..... although Greece might be getting there. Right now, considering the global situation, there isn't anything seriously wrong with the UK economy - we're not even recession, and unemployment [i]could be[/i] much higher. Of course all that might change now. Still, the Lib Con government has laid down the basis for blaming everything on New Labour, if things go tits up. And I think they'll probably get anyway with it - judging by how much people appear to be swallowing all the bollox they are being daily drip fed at the moment.

I ran the BBC tax calculator, and was surprised to find myself £75 better off, which I find very strange. I don't mind paying tax - I want the homeless to be sheltered, the sick healed, for justice to be done (faint hope perhaps), and if all these things can be done at minimum inconvenience to me just by paying money I'm happy. I'd rather not have my money wasted on weapons and armed services, but obviously others disagree - however, if I earn more than I can easily spend, and I'm paying less tax, someone else must be paying the price and common sense tells me the party of privilege won't be hitting the rich, though it's well established that giving money to poorer people helps the economy, as they will spend it...

The level of tax in the UK is a joke and this latest budget is just bewildering.

The level of tax in the UK is a joke

too high or too low?

High.

Based on what, LHS?

Too low you mean?

You see all those nice european counties with high standards of living and good services - they pay more tax than we do - especially when you consider that for most of them their healthcare is not paid out of tax.
If you want a low tax economy f off to the states - where people rely on charity to eat and where child mortality rates are distinctly third world

I want to live in a civilized society where the sick the old and the disabled are treated well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

I pay taxes in both the UK and the US. 40% and 50% tax rates plus 20% on top of all that on everything you buy, IMPO, is a joke. Thats before you've looked at the council tax, petrol prices and capital gains tax.

TJ, i wouldn't read everything you see in the Guardian.

LHS - go to the states and stay there then.

Look at that list of countries and their tax rates and remember that healthcare ( around 10% of gdp) is totally funded from taxation here - so is included in the figure for the Uk whereas in other countries healthcare costs are on top of taxation.

Then look at what countries have good service and low levels of poverty . Note the correlation.

So I suggest if you want low tax then go to the states and stay there

LHS, why is it a joke? It's what we need to run the country. Are you suggesting we should stick to an arbitrary figure that 'seems about right' and then deal with that? Maybe Osborne and co would love to hear that idea.

We pay more than the US but they have smaller govt. We pay much less than many places in Europe. Can't complain about that really.

TJ, you seem to have a reputation of being an argumentative fool on here so I don't see the need to rise to your silly remarks.

I have lived in a few european countries as well as the states and canada. What you fail to take into consideration is the level of earnings compared to taxation.

It's what we need to run the country

Is it? Or is waste and unnecessary spending so radically high that we are having to compensate for it?

I wouldn't use tax rates in the US evil empire as any measure of quality, it's well on the way to becoming a 3rd world country except for the rich 🙁

USA 28% of gdp. But healthcare there is 16% of gdp almost all funded on top of tax - So total including healthcare is around 40+% of GDP
UK 39% including healthcare
Germnany 40.5% only part funding healthcare
France 46% funding most healthcare

High tax in the UK - don't buy the neocon propaganda

LHS - which is why the % of GDP is a good indication. We are a low tax economy no matter how you want to look at it. The numbers don't lie.

Not sure what bubble you are living in but we are not a low tax economy.

We are a high tax, low wage economy. Cost of living here is phenomenal.

But, to save you the bother, this is IMPO and I will leave it there because I have seen some of your threads before and I think it will be better to agree to disagree.

So those number are just made up? Despite the respected sources credited on the WIKI page that clearly show that the UK pays less tax than most comparable countries?

Its hard isnt it when the facts don't match your propaganda.

Got any facts that match your daft ideas?

Okay TJ what taxes would you like to see raised and how many of them will directly affect [i]your[/i] income?

I would like to see a massive alteration the way we pay tax. A mix of very progressive income taxes and high carbon taxes. a couple of % points of GDP rise is plenty.

I'd like to see a 20:1 ratio of earnings in every organisation as well - the highest earner cannot earn more than 20 times the lowest - pro rata.

Tax evasion costs the UK £100bn a year

But they're cutting HMRC budgets....

TJ I am assuming you have never lived in a different country apart from the UK?

I am not sure i would trust those wiki figures, especially as they are under doubt for neutrality.

You need to consider a lot more than what you are narrowly looking at.

Income Tax
National Insurance
Council Tax
VAT / Sales Tax
Fuel Tax
Cost of Living indexs - CPI, Housing cost, rental cost etc
Average wage / Household income
Non taxable allowances

All included in those figures. They are the total tax take as a % of gdp

Inflation indexes are irrelevant to % of tax

However they don't include healthcare when it is not taxfunded so to get a fair comparison you need to take that into account.

I have family in the netherlands where they pay significantly more tax than we do. My brother in law was the sole earner in a family of 4. He paid more tax on the same income as I did as a single man - then had to pay for healthcare on top.

All included in those figures.

I wouldn't trust Wiki on that to be honest.

I take it from your response YOU haven't lived in a different country before?

Read the methodology.

[i]I'd like to see a 20:1 ratio of earnings in every organisation as well - the highest earner cannot earn more than 20 times the lowest - pro rata. [/i]

That'll never happen. Why would you want to cap earnings??

Why would you want to cap earnings??

no need, just shoe* them instead 🙂

*ie limit the lowest level

I live in a nice house in a safe place by world standards, my shops are full of food at reasonable prices, electricty, gas and water are delivered to my house, my kids are educated by exceptionally good people in a safe and healthy environment. A few weeks ago I dislocated my collarbone in an act that was completely my fault, the hospital saw, x rayed, treated and discharged me in less than an hour and a half. I have a great transport network and can cross my country in a few hours in my car. There is a regular train service to anywhere I might need to go if I want it. I have access to low cost international air travel and take my holidays in the sun if I want to. By any definition my circumstances are a gift.

Do I pay too much tax or feel ripped off, no, not in comparison to this.

[img] [/img]

But then I know I'm enormously lucky and a few quid more doesn't make me that much happier. I'm one of those crazy bastards who'd happily pay more and does. What petty minded people we have become in this country.

I pay too much tax -- boo ****ing hoo

£70 better off for me, which I find a bit of a joke being a middle earner.

Why not just up the flat rate of tax by 1p??

agree with everything joolsburger said

🙁

Whats the solution then?

Cut unnecessary spending on things like Trident, Aircraft Carriers, war in afghanistan, and give all the money to poor countries instead?

Perhaps if governments lowered taxes in our rich countries by cutting out wasteful and unnecessary spending then charitable donations would increase. The US for example donates twice as much as a percentage of GDP to charity than the UK does.

There isn't a solution to human nature that I'm aware of but perhaps a little perspective is called for.

Also perhaps if we spent a bit less effort robbing poorer nations we'd be a bit safer too, fair price for their goods, open trade agreements, sensibly implmented joint development schemes and so on.

But then if we did that someone would bleat about the fact that their aspargus tips were costing a fortune or that the price of petrol was extortion.

LHS - Member

Whats the solution then?

Cut unnecessary spending on things like Trident, Aircraft Carriers, war in afghanistan, and give all the money to poor countries instead?

I'd share it around a bit wider but yes

As for the USA and charity. I think it stinks to high heaven that in such a rich country many many people rely on charity to eat and that their child mortality rates are so high.

Its incredibly demeaning.

TJ, you obviously have some serious prejudice / hostility towards americans so now we have established that shall we all move on? 😯

you obviously have some serious prejudice / hostility towards americans

so it's prejudice to consider a country to be behaving badly ? I've liked many Americans I've met, but en masse they don't seem to act very sensibly 🙁

He (TJ) makes a fair point though. Those hit worst by Katrina could have easily been in any 'third world' country.

According to the calculator I get £375 back, which as a pretty high earning middle (well, southern ;-)) Englander I find a bit difficult to understand, I was expecting to get hit pretty hard.

You think it is reasonable that people should rely on charity to eat?
That a rich country should have child mortality rates like an impoverished 3rd world county?
That a country with 5% of the worlds population should produce 25% of the worlds greenhouse gases and refuse to sign up to agreements to do anything about it?
Thats 30% of the population has no effective access to healthcare?
That if you are poor and chronically ill you will die of preventable diseases?
That they attempted to patent bismati rice exactly as grown in India for centuries and then try to charge the Indians for using the rice they have since before white man arrived in north America using the threat of a trade war unless they do?

As SFB says I have no problem with individual Americans but as a nation I hate what they do.

Same could be said of the english?

We have the same level of people living below the poverty line as Americans do.

Infant mortality rates in the UK are 0.48/1000 in the US it is 0.63/1000
Iceland is only 0.29/1000. Makes us look pretty bad heh? - 22nd worst country in the world behind South Korea and Israel!

We give half of wha the US give to Charity as a percentage of GDP. We really are a dispicable nation!

And to that rant can be undermining democratic governments by force of arms - done for decades all over south america. Latest being attempts to depose Chavez who like him or loathe him has a clear democratic mandate. relected twice with massive majorities in free and fair elections.

LHS - no one in the UK relies on charity to eat. Everyone gets enough money to eke out a living

None here dies of because they can't afford medical treatments