Forum menu
TomZesty
Full Member
Thank goodness, me too. I’ll get back to sponging on my summer break.
You make 3 teachers in the forum now!
Pity my lads grown up, would have been handy to know when he was still studying at school. 🙂
My mum’s **** raging, watching C4 news with her now, she gets the basic state pension and £137 a month from a pension she accrued for working at a council care home a number of years ago and the winter fuel allowance paid for her logs and towards gas/electricity, she’s meant to get £187 month from the private pension but it gets taxed down to £137.
You might want to get someone with all the facts to check the details - but my mental arrithmetic says she shouldn't be paying as much tax as that... basic state pension is about 11.5K pa. 187/m ~ 2.2K pa = 13.7K pa total income - of which the first 12.5k is tax free and so she should be taxed at 20% on the 1.2K above this = which would take her £187 a month down to £167.
She won't qualify for PIP if she's not had it before retirement age. She may qualify for attendants allowance if she needs external help. If she's caring for you she should get carers allowance (I'm not sure she'll manage to argue she needs attendants allowance and is caring for you). The entire benefits system is a total mess meaning that people who deserve it often don't claim it.
The idea that my in-laws who go on four foreign holidays a year, usually including 2 cruises, need winter fuel payments is ridiculous (although they have the thermostat set at 24 constantly!). They were horrified when the press hinted tripple lock might go last year, but are very annoyed when hospital appointments have been rescheduled because of strikes... So whilst I don't want to see any individual suffer (and would encourage anyone who thinks they will struggle to make sure they are claiming everything they are entitled to) I think scrapping winter fuel payments probably is an inevitable consequence of the pension itself being tripple locked.
Good first step towards sorting the NHS incoming…
Not convinced by that. Stopping building 40 desperately needed hospitals isnt good.
Asking Consultants just to work more hours than they currently do for free in many cases isnt going to work
An increase in pay will hopefully start attracting more people, but you need training post to be available. I am not aware that have been any increases in training posts.
Also social care pay needs addressing, many are on minimum wage which for the work these brilliant people do is terrible,
Stopping building 40 desperately needed hospitals isnt good.
Do we 'desperately need' 40 new hospitals, d'you know? Even if we do, there weren't 40 new hospital being built anyway, it was made up nonsense by Johnson. There was I think two or three brand new hospitals being built and some additional building work to another 34 to make them larger. Reeves has said that all of them will come under review
Do we ‘desperately need’ 40 new hospitals, d’you know?
Yes we do, do you not watch the news?
it was made up nonsense by Johnson
No it wasnt. Funding has been allocated to some and building started.
I am not anti Labour here, I work in the NHS, I just dont see any steps so far that are going to change anything for the positive.
Yes we do, do you not watch the news?
I'm not sure that 3 brand new hospitals and 20 or so projects to add wings or larger buildings on existing sites is going to make a huge difference to the waiting list for treatments. There's a waiting list becasue there's not enough workforce, not space. Personally I'd rather see the money allocated to those projects being spent to reform GP and dental services.
Not convinced by that. Stopping building 40 desperately needed hospitals isnt good.
Given that the reality never matched the announcement, I'm not sure how much the NHS has actually lost. And they'd be **** all use with no one there to staff them. It's a worthwhile trade off for now. None of us in the public sector have enough of what we need.
Looking forward to seeing what cuts HMRC will have to make to fund part of our pay rise, given that our job is to get tax revenue in to fund public services, a fact the last government tried to hide from the public accounts committee.
All this chaos is of Labour's own making and it's going to get worse.
Everyone is now squabbling amongst themselves about how we take from one hand and give to the other.
It's incorrect and a distraction. And could easily solve but just removing or adjusting Labour's terrible and self-imposed fiscal rules.
We've had years of this argument - a restraint on available money and Labour look set to make it even worse.
I think Reeves sounds exhausted and confused over her own doing. Something is off. She must know it's twaddle.
My thoughts that the economy will get worse (in some areas) under Labour is being cemented that she promised more difficult decisions will need to be made.
You also have to question the validity of the OBR or the IFS in this process if the government can simply not get access to previous government's info. (Which is rubbish but that's what's being peddled.
Questions all over that and the OBRs 5 years in the future modelling.
Labour can operate within a clean slate frame-work. They don't have to inherent anything for future spending from the Tories (other than resource constraints and inflationary pressure.)
Until they change this thinking we are probably having a Tory based economic future with a bit of pointless give and take. People will suffer.
What is the point of Labour?
Ta Poly, I'll look into it and get the exact figures to check
Anyone hear the automaton on R4 Today program getting interviewed by Mishal Husain this morning?, I had the radio on as my mum was helping and she told me to "switch that ****ing woman (another word for woman actually) off"
Bzzzzzzzt.... fiscal rules............ whirrrrrrrr........ economic stability ........... zzzzzzzzziiiiiiip .......... independent pay review body's....review bodys.......review bodys......review bodys.....review bodys ..................... bzzzt...bzzzzt....bzzzzttttt ........... public finances .........pssst.....pssst......pssst.......irresponsibleirensponsibleiresponsibleiresponsible ................ click....click....click ......... financial responsibility ......financial responsibility ........financial responsibility ............fhit .... fhit...... fhit.... fhit..... fhit ...... inherited difficult decisions ..... inherited difficult decisions .... inherited difficult .......... decisions....decisions ......decisions ....... tic .....tic ......tic...... tic ........ tic ......goverment difficult .....goverment difficult ........government difficult ............... brrrrrrrrzzzzzzzzzzzzz ............ private sector ...... private sector .......sector ........sector ...........private............ unlock....unlock.. .......unlock ...... unlock.......
2hours 10minutes in below.
Somafunk - yeah that's all I hear.
But that's what happens when people repeat economics buzz without looking one inch below the surface.
Government spending has more in common with double entry accounting than wider economic observations acknowledge.
Shoddy journalism.
With our new fiscal lock, never again can a government play fast and loose with the public finances.
brings back memories of Browns "end of boom and bust" speeches.
All this chaos is of Labour’s own making and it’s going to get worse.
So nothing to do with Tory misrule and 14 years of madness, Ok then.....
Everyone is now squabbling amongst themselves about how we take from one hand and give to the other.
Really, the current incarnation of the Labour Party seems remarkably disciplined at the moment, the only noise I can here are the usual whingers on here and apparently some old bloke on his allotment.
See it's more of the same from yourself and still no insight into why Labour may be following this path if your novel economic approach is so easy to implement?
See it’s more of the same from yourself and still no insight into why Labour may be following this path if your novel economic approach is so easy to implement?
It’s not exactly rocket science to draw a parallel between Reeves previous employment and her current economic principles though is it?.
New government comes in and in the first months make small changes to try and balance the books to forecast against their term, it's not shocking, it's pretty common, small tweaks, see how the markets react, keep moving.
Still seeing all the 'lets spend our way out of trouble' stuff being thrown up, backed by MMT, do people (who actively stated they didn't vote Labour) surprised that a new government isn't implementing something that's never been tried in isolation by a western nation in their first few weeks, also remember, all these posts from Murphy, Kelton et al, they're on the outside trying to look in, basing their comments on their beliefs and no internal information that Reeves and her team have.
New government comes in and in the first months make small changes to try and balance the books to forecast against their term, it’s not shocking, it’s pretty common, small tweaks, see how the markets react, keep moving.
That doesn’t excuse the cuts for those at the bottom of the food chain
Reeves and co are going to have to up their performance. This is the third or fourth "much worse than I thought" statement from a new minister, it's so obviously the favoured text from HQ. Fact is she had that text written weeks ago but wasn't going to share it with the rest of us because she knew it would scare the horses.
blackhat
Free Member
Reeves and co are going to have to up their performance. This is the third or fourth “much worse than I thought” statement from a new minister, it’s so obviously the favoured text from HQ.
I don't really mind that, it was always going to be this way and to an extent it's true, look at the statements from the IFS and OBR.
What I'm interested in are the announced policies, not a "politician doing politics".
So far I do have a few concerns but I'm willing to see how things play out.
The end of October will provide a lot of answers.
Fact is she had that text written weeks ago but wasn’t going to share it with the rest of us because she knew it would scare the horses.
Yeah, that's kind of how politics and government works.
I'm not sure I've seen anyone trying to justify how the previous government were planning on plugging these holes? It's all just Labour's problem?
Yes it is clearly now a Labour problem but how it can be solved and how urgent it is to solve are where things can be done differently.
I hope that in the next few years Labour are brave enough to simplify and straighten out the tax system. The fewer rules, the fewer the loopholes. I don't actually object to paying a bit more tax - in fact, as a relatively high earner I tend to feel that I get away with it quite well with anything that's salary sacrifice basically being discounted by 62%, including part time.
Certainly the most irritating people that I work with are complaining noisily about the statement by Rachel Reeves, so it must have something right. Provided that an increase in taxation is applied fairly to everyone (ie no special exemptions for the public sector), then it's likely worth it.
Labour didn't campaign on a platform of radical reform, so it shouldn't be a surprise that it's mostly a case of steady as she goes. Even if the ship is sinking!
The government spending on health continues to increase. In the past this has been covered by a certain extent by cuts in other areas, particularly defence. There isn't much left to squeeze, so surely something has to give?
Cancelling major infrastructure projects isn't going to help the countries productivity problem.
Just catching up with channel 4 news.
I tell you what, Labour are being (shhhhhhhh!) pretty radical (shhhhhh!) in their plans to reform planning and get huge house building schemes pushed through.
Are we going to see the death of nimbyism? Or rather it'll still be there but "no shizzle given, it's being built, deal with it"?
I hope that in the next few years Labour are brave enough to simplify and straighten out the tax system. The fewer rules, the fewer the loopholes
I made one of our Policy guys squirm when I asked why the last round of reform of our corner of the tax maze had made it more complicated, not less. Didn't seem to be even on the radar that making it simpler makes it harder to fiddle, either freeing up time to investigate other problems or - God forbid - making it easier use AI to risk cases.
KISS clearly a radical new concept in the Civil Service.
I think the Tories deserve the last few weeks of being told how shit they were, we've had 14 years of them blaming the last labour government for everything. Reap what you sow....
KISS clearly a radical new concept in the Civil Service.
Careful the PCS will be round to have a word and explain that simple = less need for HMRC staff!
I tell you what, Labour are being (shhhhhhhh!) pretty radical (shhhhhh!) in their plans to reform planning and get huge house building schemes pushed through.
Hardly radical but something that does need to be sorted out. As discussed before though, all comes down to where the people are coming from who are building the houses and even with the backup plan of the government stepping in and taking over from developers (because they cannot make enough money out of it) the same problem exists especially as the reason they cannot do it may partly be because the manpower is not there to do it and they can't control that.
I tell you what, Labour are being (shhhhhhhh!) pretty radical (shhhhhh!) in their plans to reform planning and get huge house building schemes pushed through
Tinkering to make it appear so.
Believing the private sector will just step in and do all this stuff is for the birds.
I don't understand this version of radical either.
I tell you what, Labour are being (shhhhhhhh!) pretty radical (shhhhhh!) in their plans to reform planning and get huge house building schemes pushed through
Tinkering to make it appear so.
Believing the private sector will just step in and do all this stuff is for the birds.
I don’t understand this version of radical either.
You don't think developers will take the opportunity to line their own pockets getting involved with hastily pushed through housing developments?
Believing the private sector will just step in and do all this stuff is for the birds.
They will if there are incentives, besides who better to get to re-build council housing stock?
Hiya,
In all of this and the reduction in tax revenues the SNP summed it up perfectly, rejoin the SM and this would solve the majority of the deficit... Instead we are falling down the Tory hole still ;-(
JeZ
Sorry about this....
/Rant/
Well thanks Rachel Reeves......
As a parent who has their child at an "independent" school because the local state schools are worse than crap I thought I'd got away with not paying VAT on the fees until January....
But no - it's being applied 'retrospectively' to anything invoiced after 29th July....
As a family of modest income we've made sacrifices to be able to send her to a good school, I'll do my best to keep her there, but the amount of people withdrawing is mad - where are they all going to go? The state schools in the area have no space as already over subscribed.
Considering Starmer was the beneficiary of a scholarship/bursery at an independent school it's nice to see he's removed that form of education for the 'working people' who he claims to be working for.....
Has he forgotten that his Dad was 'only a toolmaker' and his Mum an Nurse? Would they have coped with having to pay VAT on top of the reduced fees they paid through the scholarship/bursery?
Here's novel idea to plug the £22bn hole - don't give Ed Miliband £11.6bn to give to foreign climate change aid...... Let sort our own $hit out before we pi$$ money away to other countries.
/Rant/
<quote>But no – it’s being applied ‘retrospectively’ to anything invoiced after 29th July….</quote>
its not - VAT only applies to fees relating to the school term starting in jan 25 (even if they are paid now - this is the retrospective bit - to stop people paying for the jan 25 and onwards fees now to avoid vat). So this next term (starting in sept 24) is still free of VAT, as you thought it would be.
I also have a child at a private school....its nice that labour have made private schools that little bit more exclusive again - keeps the hoi poloi out /sarcasm
keeps the hoi poloi out /sarcasm
You should get your child to give you the benefit of their education, as 'hoi' in the phrase is the definitive article so it should read "keeps hoi polloi out" - you spelt polloi wrong as well.
/also sarcasm 🙂
As a family of modest income we’ve made sacrifices to be able to send her to a good school
OMG I am overcome with grief at your position, how will you cope darling?
fenderextender
You don’t think developers will take the opportunity to line their own pockets getting involved with hastily pushed through housing developments?
Oh yes but I'm not actually opposed to that if it gets the job done. I can't see how they have a hope of getting the amount of houses built they wish to without private sector involvement.
Full disclosure, I'm pretty partisan on this as I can't ever see my lad and his little family ever getting their own home without major intervention to at least try to tackle the housing deficit. He's in the classic rental trap down here in the SE, the costs for rentals are mad and house prices themselves even worse. I'm clutching at straws for him, I admit that but I have to hope Labour will improve things.
I also have a child at a private school….its nice that labour have made private schools that little bit more exclusive again – keeps the hoi poloi out /sarcasm
Labour should have got rid of private school all together as they have no place in an equal society but then that would be the sort of thing an actual Labour Party would be doing and not a pretend one.
"As a family of modest income we’ve made sacrifices to be able to send her to a good school"
Maybe stop eating so many avocados yeah?
"As a family of modest income we’ve made sacrifices to be able to send her to a good school"
Individual cases can obviously be difficult - I of course have no idea about the sacrifices you've made. But it seems to me the anger should be directed at the fact that the local schools are so bad the only good school is a private one.
Abolition of private schools would lift the standards of education in this country and would help tackle the bias society has to the success of those who by accident of birth were lucky enough to have rich parents. The least that should be done is adding VAT, removing charity status, and paying full business rates.
Individual cases can obviously be difficult – I of course have no idea about the sacrifices you’ve made. But it seems to me the anger should be directed at the fact that the local schools are so bad the only good school is a private one.
Abolition of private schools would lift the standards of education in this country and would help tackle the bias society has to the success of those who by accident of birth were lucky enough to have rich parents. The least that should be done is adding VAT, removing charity status, and paying full business rates.
Agree that the state school system needs sorting - but it's been ignored by all previous government no matter which party has been in power. None of them have covered themselves in glory with education have they?
By taxing some of the current pupils/families out of the independent education system where are they going to go?
Schools are crumbling (RAC), teachers are leaving, population is increasing - where do you start?
I'm guessing not by stuffing a load more kids into overcrowded inadequate, under staffed and under funded schools?
Not all independent schools are like Eton, Repton or Fettes where the fees are £10-15k/term...... but the fees for local independent schools aren't exactly cheap when you factor in 'normal/modest' income etc. when you have mortgage, bills and all the other outgoings associated with keeping a roof over your head and food on the table.
So please don't think by financial impact/sacrifice I mean I'll have to use the Lambo and V8 Range Rover less - we aren't all loaded.
Oh, and by implementing this policy the UK would be the ONLY Western nation to tax education......