You can’t run a country spending £90bn a year more than you bring in in tax revenue.
shrug. Japan?
jambalaya - MemberBTW saw my pension advisor yesterday (Osbourne already changed tax relief for higher (45%) rate taxpayers - its virtually zero already) - as I posted before an [b]NHS surgeon[/b] or an MP can have a pension worth £2m at zero cost to themselves but a private sector person is prevented from doing so
I'm not sure you're still reading this thread, A, but this part here- could you explain what you mean?
For the record, a quick text to one of my consultant pals says that you've got this wrong, but often when you post its because of something you've read somewhere- googling for the possible source of it comes up with nothing.
MPs- I think what you've said is correct though.
In Amber Rudd's defence, she must have a pretty good working relationship with Robbie Gibb (formerly editor of BBC's Daily and Sunday Politics show and the Andrew Marr show) who produced the latest Election Debate where Rudd stood in for Maybot...
Not only did the BBC make no mention of any of this:
Or this later hustings where Rudd is thoroughly demolished (BAE and HSBC tied into BBC ??!!??)
Perhaps selective choice in what news is broadcast makes for a good Downing Street director of Communications; could that of helped Robbie Gibb secure his latest role?
Wonder if he'll keep in contact with Andrew Neil, Jo Coburn, Andrew Marr and the rest of the BBC Politics department...
stella public services
Surely that would be a premium German beverage
Another [b]Jambfact[/b]... all NHS Drs whether GPs or Consultants pay for their pensions. Historically Consultants got rather better deals, and were final salary. Us GPs are not. But the amount of employees contribution is eye-watering and the employers contribution is part of a total reimbursement package,to describe it as at zero cost is utterly fake.
What is more, the changes in pension taxation and tax allowance tapers mean that my marginal tax rate on my work every Friday is effectively 62% and the other 38% disappears due to the taxation on pensions annual and lifetime allowances. This is directly a consequence of the [b]current [/b]Government's decisions. This means that lots of us experienced NHS Drs are looking to retire early or go part-time, but I cannot at the moment because the current givernments stance towards the NHS has led to a recruitment crisis even in the leafy shires...
When - as it will - the NHS goes completely titsup - blame them.
You can’t run a country spending £90bn a year more than you bring in in tax revenue.
So here's a pretty radical idea, how about collecting all the tax due and closing some of the loopholes that let the likes of Amazon and Ebay pay miniscule amounts of tax? What about ensuring employees are paid a living wage so that people in work don't have to claim benefits to survive so that the taxpayer is funding the businesses?
an NHS surgeon or an MP can have a pension worth £2m at zero cost to themselves
here's another one - how about you stop telling lies? If you've posted before, it'll have been corrected before so you know it's wrong. Repeating a lie doesn't make it true, no matter how gullible you are.
Put that in a manifesto, win the election, implement the tax rises and then AFTER you have raised the money (or not) see what you have to spend ?
So what's the alternative? Reduce spending? What on?
Jamaba was referring to the fact that many of the public sector pensions are defined contribution, whereas the private sector ones aren't, and are subject to punitive taxes if their pension pot were to get anywhere near that needed to provide the same as the public sector pension, although the private sector pot would need to actually be higher.
Check out this recent Institute for Fiscal Studies article, which says :
In The Times on Tuesday it was suggested that the pension arrangements of a permanent secretary providing an annual pension of £85,000 a year plus a lump sum of £245,000 were worth £1.8 million. That is based on a calculation in the tax code that is supposed to translate the values of these salary-related pension promises into a single cash number. But if I actually wanted to a buy a pension of this size I would need nearer £3 million.
and
So not only are these pensions immensely valuable, their value is greatly understated in official figures. Those high earners lucky enough to have such gold-plated pensions also get an extraordinarily good deal from the taxman relative to people saving into their own pension pot.
https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9692
here's another one - how about you stop telling lies? If you've posted before, it'll have been corrected before so you know it's wrong. Repeating a lie doesn't make it true, no matter how gullible you are.
But that's not the point, the point is that if you repeat a lie often enough, then other people start believing it, and then it's as good as the truth 🙁
You can’t run a country spending £90bn a year more than you bring in in tax revenue.
You can actually. How do you think money is created?
Pretty sure they could have successfully increased tax on higher earners (mostly in the City) after deciding to ignore the Brexit vote and committing to increase investment in the more desolate ares of the UK that voted for Brexit.
The desolate areas would think they had a good deal.
The higher earners would also have predominantly thought they had a better deal than Brexit.
Only the xenophobics and rascists would have had an issue, but as everyone knew at the time there were measures available to control immigration more (see Germany) so they could have been placated as well. And pointing out how immigration was needed to support pensions and the welfare state would have placated them even more.
That's what I would have done, although I think I would have gone for a soft Brexit as we clearly do not want closer political union with that lot...
he is not entitled to claim things not true
I have to point out the Sandler thread at this point...
You can actually. How do you think money is created?
Didn't Japan use QE and end up with big inflation?
TBH I think it is by luck that the QE at the moment hasn't caused inflation - money out of thin air ?
[quote=sobriety ]
.here's another one - how about you stop telling lies? If you've posted before, it'll have been corrected before so you know it's wrong. Repeating a lie doesn't make it true, no matter how gullible you are
But that's not the point, the point is that if you repeat a lie often enough, then other people start believing it, and then it's as good as the truth
TBF to Jamba, he's likely only repeating the lies he's picked up elsewhere.
Didn't Japan use QE and end up with big inflation?TBH I think it is by luck that the QE at the moment hasn't caused inflation - money out of thin air ?
Yes, money is created out of thin air, mostly through fractional reserve banking. Now, it is of course true that a significant increase in money supply risks higher inflation, but the idea that we have to wait for tax revenues before we can spend is laughably absurd.
Jamaba was referring to the fact that many of the public sector pensions are defined contribution,
an NHS surgeon or an MP can have a pension worth £2m at zero cost to themselves
Best of luck convincing folk of that
FWIW pubic sector schemes tend to be defined benefit schemes so you did not even describe them accurately. Double fail
you can point out all you like I agree she released a statement we disagree over why she did it and whether it reflected her true feelings . IF i start saying no statement was made then you will have a point or inaccurately [ or lie] describe its content then you will have a point.I have to point out the Sandler thread at this point...
IMHO its better to not do cross thread posts
he's likely only repeating the lies he's picked up elsewhere.
Possibly but most of us would accept corrections and stop repeating them.
Big inflation in Japan? More like deflation.
Surely this thread should be renamed
"Who wants to have ago at defending jambalaya?"
He spouts absolute nonsense and just makes things up as his comments in this thread show yet again.
Jamaba was referring to the fact that many of the public sector pensions are defined contribution,
eh no, he was trying to claim that public sector pensions are zero contribution
an NHS surgeon or an MP can have a pension worth £2m at [b]zero cost to themselves[/b]
Jamaba was
Playing whataboutery, deflecting or diverting from what was being discussed, I'm sure he has some watchlist alerts set by the way he descends, drops a Jambyfact and leaves.
It's like running into a room and shouting "but Jeremy Corbyn" and running off again
Pretty sure MPs have a 13% salary contribution to their final salary pension. The rest is made up by a 27.2% employer contribution from the treasury (that’s the taxpayer). So for every pound contributed by the MP we are contributing over £2. As they increased their salaries due to expenses scandal their contributions have also increased but so has that of the taxpayer, exponentially.
Oh.....and expenses were not pensionable! Talk about robbing Peter to pay Paul. Flag Day - Too many Florence Nightingales not enough Robin Hoods
and throw in a 5 year fixed term contract!! How many people would be happy with that sort of job security 🙂
jambalaya - Member
You can’t run a country spending £90bn a year more than you bring in in tax revenue...
I've had a brilliant idea to cure that.
How about we cut all welfare for the wealthy. No subsidies of any sort for companies. No subsidies for wealthy landowners.
That may not completely fix the problem, but I've had another brilliant idea to cover that.
Any company operating in this country that does not make a profit of a certain % of its capital value or pay tax should be liquidated after its 3rd year. That will make room for leaner more efficient companies that actually pay tax.
And for the icing on the cake, disqualify anyone from acting as a director of a company if they have been a director of a company that has paid no tax for 2 years.
We can call this new policy Austerity for Wealthy.
We could do some asset slashing too. We haven't been using our Death for Everybody on Both Sides weaponry lately, so how about we sell it to North Korea? It looks flaky enough to appeal to them.
A key point on German healthcare. IN the UK we pay less tax than Germany - and that includes our healthcare. Germany you pay more in tax and then pay for your healthcare on top. German healthcare also costs twice as much to manage than the scots NHS ( NHS england management cost are higher due to the internal market nonsense)
TJ we don’t pay less tax than in Germany - add in tax / ni pkus utility bill taxes, vat on food, no zero rated items ...
What the Germans, French and almost everyone esle I can think if do is pay at least some portion of medical bills either “in cash” or via private insurance. If you look at health spending in the uk where we fall short is in what we pay personally. People are selfish, they won’t pay the higher taxes necessary for the health service we want. They need to pay something directly at the point of usage or via insurance - imo.
NHS costs are rising at 4% pa - technology improvements are raising costs not lowering them (as in other industries) and we are living longer and incurring more bills. Something significant has to change
but you can find £10bn down the back of the sofa to prop up ...
@jam bo
£1bn for NI over 3-5 years vs
£90bn pa (so £270bn - £450bn over comparable period)
A 1% NHS payrise costs £4bn pa so £20bn over a 5 year Parliament (saw that quoted somewhere although it seems a bit high thinking about it. Back of evenlope my guess would be £750m pa or £4bn-ish over 5 years)
An ideology of not bankrupting the country with excessive unaffordable spending seems like a good one to me. A no brainer.
jamba yes we do. go check some facts. Total tax take per head of population in Germany as a % of earnings is higher than the UK. Then you pay for your healthcare on top of your taxation
IN germany its around 40% of your earnings in taxation. In the UK its 35% then in Germany you pay for your healthcare on top.
TJ we don’t pay less tax than in Germany
Here are the actual facts hounding you again
Germany tax as % of GDP = 44.5 % UK = 34.4%
Germany
Gross salary £25,000
After tax £18,923
Tax rate 24.3%
Gross salary £40,000
After tax £27,256
Tax rate 31.8%
Gross salary £100,000
After tax £61,740
Tax rate 38.3%
UK
Gross salary £25,000
After tax £20,279
Tax rate 18.9%
Gross salary £40,000
After tax £30,480
Tax rate 24.8%
Gross salary £100,000
After tax £65,780
Tax rate 34.3%
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/may/27/tax-britons-pay-europe-australia-us
People are selfish, they won’t pay the higher taxes necessary for the health service we want.
i will.
£4bn easy find. What's more useful in the fight against domestic extremism or effects the well being of the majority of the population- funding for policing and the NHS or nuclear missiles we will never use , more so against those currently killing UK citizens
An ideology of not bankrupting the country with excessive unaffordable spending seems like a good one to me. A no brainer.
Not sure if serious or trolling.
A 1% NHS payrise costs £4bn pa so £20bn over a 5 year Parliament (saw that quoted somewhere although it seems a bit high thinking about it. Back of evenlope my guess would be £750m pa or £4bn-ish over 5 years)
In other words, you don't know what you're talking about so you're just making stuff up. Again.
[i]Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank, has estimated that every 1% pay rise would cost £500m a year.[/i]
New polling for the King’s Fund thinktank found that two-thirds (66%) of the public are willing “to pay more taxes in order to maintain the level of spending needed” on the health service.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/16/two-thirds-support-higher-taxes-to-fund-nhs
saw that quoted somewhere although it seems a bit high thinking about it
same source as...
[img]
[/img](c) jambafantasies
What frustrates me about this whole shebang is that when you start comparing UK politics & domestic social policy to those of our European neighbours, we seem to be stuck in some bygone age of feudalism where our politicians are akin to the Lord of the Land & we’re the scummy subjects who are told we survive only by the benevolence of our betters in Westminster.
For example, take the long term privatisation policy the Conservatives started in the Thatcher era. Something that appeared to serve one long term goal of undermining the unions, and the short term goal of making a fast buck at the expense of future generations.
I’m my opinion it’s pointless, unhelpful, misleading etc. To compare us to France & Germany when our reapective public infrastructures are so totally different. For example, public utilities are still by and large public owned and profit is ploughed back in, whereas in the UK we sold our public utilities, which then got stripped to the bone for profit, no longer contribute to the exchequer. In a bizarre twist of fate we now have large parts of our utilities and transport part owned by EU governments, who are actually reinvesting the profits made in the UK into their own infrastructure.
So all this bollox about public expenditure and running at unacceptable deficits is all of their own making, it’s just that the peasants are again bailing the Rich kids out by simply putting up with it all & having the odd random I’ll informed internet rant...!
