FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Budget 2018
Budget 2018
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
"The NHS has an extra 350 million coming its way soon on a weekly basis. He says trying to keep a straight face. "It's all pie in the sky. 10 DUP MPS have the keys to the kingdom at the moment and are keeping very quiet again. | |||
"The NHS has an extra 350 million coming its way soon on a weekly basis. He says trying to keep a straight face. "I was reading that plenty of people still believe that! It’s amazing what people will accept as truth if it fits their world view. | |||
"The NHS has an extra 350 million coming its way soon on a weekly basis. He says trying to keep a straight face.
I was reading that plenty of people still believe that!
It’s amazing what people will accept as truth if it fits their world view."The funny thing is that you could say £50 million or £500 million. The fact is that most of us do not know what that means if injected into a public service like the NHS. What we understand is if we get health treatment efficiently or whether treatments available in private clinics or elsewhere in the world are available to us. Also,I cannot personally envisage how to spend additional funds outside of treatment, doctors and nursing staff. It is easy to say "let's get 5000 more nurses", but they have to be trained and retained. That appears to be the sticking point. Trained staff often go to higher paid jobs in private clinics or abroad. The answer is to look at longer term strategies. Universal Credit was an attempt to do this and the concept was initially welcomed although when it came to implementation, there is much to condemn. The budget measures seem to be papering over the cracks. The overall budget seems to be average..... | |||
"The NHS has an extra 350 million coming its way soon on a weekly basis. He says trying to keep a straight face.
I was reading that plenty of people still believe that!
It’s amazing what people will accept as truth if it fits their world view.
The funny thing is that you could say £50 million or £500 million. The fact is that most of us do not know what that means if injected into a public service like the NHS. What we understand is if we get health treatment efficiently or whether treatments available in private clinics or elsewhere in the world are available to us.
Also,I cannot personally envisage how to spend additional funds outside of treatment, doctors and nursing staff. It is easy to say "let's get 5000 more nurses", but they have to be trained and retained. That appears to be the sticking point. Trained staff often go to higher paid jobs in private clinics or abroad.
The answer is to look at longer term strategies. Universal Credit was an attempt to do this and the concept was initially welcomed although when it came to implementation, there is much to condemn. The budget measures seem to be papering over the cracks.
The overall budget seems to be average....."It came across to me as a budget built around uncertainty (one off payments) but also one which would take a bit of steam out of labour. I’m not sure is exoect anything more with a possible GE in the next 12 months +’brexit looming. | |||
| |||
"it just looks like a tax reduction bonanza for the wealthy and the scrapping of the extreme right fiscal policy which makes the imposition of austerity on the country for the last 8 years utterly pointless ... what a waste of 8 years" Interesting view 
What makes you say it was wasted? | |||
| |||
"always against over taxing the well off/rich , its a catch 22. its surely the rich and well off that provide many millions with jobs ?? prosperity should be encouraged and incentives given to be so …." Totally agree some people think they are just rich many people have put everything they had and more to start up companies that employ other people why shouldn't they benefit from taking a risk? Without them others wouldn't have a job. | |||
"always against over taxing the well off/rich , its a catch 22. its surely the rich and well off that provide many millions with jobs ?? prosperity should be encouraged and incentives given to be so ….Totally agree some people think they are just rich many people have put everything they had and more to start up companies that employ other people why shouldn't they benefit from taking a risk? Without them others wouldn't have a job. " Ye gods man! You can't say that one here. Incentives for prosperity, rewarding risk takers, rich people provide jobs. The left wing thought police will have you for a hate crime for that lot. Off to the tower with you.  | |||
"always against over taxing the well off/rich , its a catch 22. its surely the rich and well off that provide many millions with jobs ?? prosperity should be encouraged and incentives given to be so …." | |||
"always against over taxing the well off/rich , its a catch 22. its surely the rich and well off that provide many millions with jobs ?? prosperity should be encouraged and incentives given to be so ….Totally agree some people think they are just rich many people have put everything they had and more to start up companies that employ other people why shouldn't they benefit from taking a risk? Without them others wouldn't have a job. " | |||
"always against over taxing the well off/rich , its a catch 22. its surely the rich and well off that provide many millions with jobs ?? prosperity should be encouraged and incentives given to be so ….Totally agree some people think they are just rich many people have put everything they had and more to start up companies that employ other people why shouldn't they benefit from taking a risk? Without them others wouldn't have a job. Ye gods man! You can't say that one here. Incentives for prosperity, rewarding risk takers, rich people provide jobs. The left wing thought police will have you for a hate crime for that lot. Off to the tower with you. the truth is a hard pill to swallow .." | |||
| |||
"More could have been done to raise personal allowances higher and improve the basic wage. Raising the level at which people pay higher rate tax is a good thing, but it might be more equitable to introduce more tax bands - going from 20-40% is a bit of a shock to most people, it would seem more sensible to start with Personal Allowance £15k 15001-25,000 10% 25,001-35,000 15% 35001-45,000 20% 45,001-55,000 25% 55,001-70,000 30% 70,001-100,000 35% 100,001-150,000 40% 150,000+ 45% It would reduce the Income Tax from people earning below £100k, most off us, but it would be a fairer series of steps. It would also make more sense to add 7.5% to everyone as NI payments. At the moment these drop from 12% at £47k to 2%. Instead of dropping to 2%, they should remain at 7.5%. As this would improve most peoples income, then it would have been a just approach. Maybe this is too sensible though? This wouldn’t be over taxing the rich, just gradually introducing tax and letting people adjust as they earn more." I would be more inclined to have personal allowance set as you say at £15000 and agree with NI contributions , but after allowance reached tax everyone at the same rate therefor encouraging people to better themselves without being penalised .encouraging more entrepreneurs the more they earn the more they spend ..you shouldn't punish people for being successful .. | |||
| |||
"More could have been done to raise personal allowances higher and improve the basic wage. Raising the level at which people pay higher rate tax is a good thing, but it might be more equitable to introduce more tax bands - going from 20-40% is a bit of a shock to most people, it would seem more sensible to start with Personal Allowance £15k 15001-25,000 10% 25,001-35,000 15% 35001-45,000 20% 45,001-55,000 25% 55,001-70,000 30% 70,001-100,000 35% 100,001-150,000 40% 150,000+ 45% It would reduce the Income Tax from people earning below £100k, most off us, but it would be a fairer series of steps. It would also make more sense to add 7.5% to everyone as NI payments. At the moment these drop from 12% at £47k to 2%. Instead of dropping to 2%, they should remain at 7.5%. As this would improve most peoples income, then it would have been a just approach. Maybe this is too sensible though? This wouldn’t be over taxing the rich, just gradually introducing tax and letting people adjust as they earn more." I take your point, as it could be seen to be fairer, but moving taxbands isn’t really a shock imo. Most people work in net pay. Fact is, with PA where it is, the really low earners won’t feel any benefit of tinkering. Indeed it’s hard to help them unless it’s via not raising tax on sin products, or reducing VAT. | |||
| |||
| |||
"More evidence that balancing the books was all pie in the sky. The deficit would be wiped out by 2015, then 2020, and then 2025, we were told. Now, he is going to borrow more money - and says he can borrow even more if Brexit crashes the economy. Austerity was never about balancing the books - it was a cover story for a redistribution of state funds from those least likely to vote Conservative to those most likely to vote Conservative. " .... like i said earlier, what a waste of 8 years that was ... the clowns who wouldn't listen to us realists 8 years ago and voted for these morons are now egg faced clowns ... stop fucking the country up, stop voting tory ffs!!! | |||
"More could have been done to raise personal allowances higher and improve the basic wage. Raising the level at which people pay higher rate tax is a good thing, but it might be more equitable to introduce more tax bands - going from 20-40% is a bit of a shock to most people, it would seem more sensible to start with Personal Allowance £15k 15001-25,000 10% 25,001-35,000 15% 35001-45,000 20% 45,001-55,000 25% 55,001-70,000 30% 70,001-100,000 35% 100,001-150,000 40% 150,000+ 45% It would reduce the Income Tax from people earning below £100k, most off us, but it would be a fairer series of steps. It would also make more sense to add 7.5% to everyone as NI payments. At the moment these drop from 12% at £47k to 2%. Instead of dropping to 2%, they should remain at 7.5%. As this would improve most peoples income, then it would have been a just approach. Maybe this is too sensible though? This wouldn’t be over taxing the rich, just gradually introducing tax and letting people adjust as they earn more. I would be more inclined to have personal allowance set as you say at £15000 and agree with NI contributions , but after allowance reached tax everyone at the same rate therefor encouraging people to better themselves without being penalised .encouraging more entrepreneurs the more they earn the more they spend ..you shouldn't punish people for being successful .." Totally agree with encouraging people to succeed, which having a gradual jump in tax 0-10-15-etc, would be better than 0-20-40-45. As the incremental tax would be relatively low it is unlikely to deter people. Most small businesses start of small and use tax relief to pay themselves dividends mitigating the income tax rates, so in reality it doesn’t stop people being succesful. It does however recognise that not everyone is driven to be succesful in monetary terms. | |||
| |||
"The nhs is fantastic with some brilliant people in it ...but ..in our local hospital there are currently 13 midwives...but 11 supervisors / managers with clipboards ...this is where most of its problems lie xxx" The whole NHS is overun with top heavy management , but labour just scream hands off when any changes are made, its labour that will destroy the NHS not the tories | |||
"always against over taxing the well off/rich , its a catch 22. its surely the rich and well off that provide many millions with jobs ?? prosperity should be encouraged and incentives given to be so …." Overtaxed? really? Id happily pay more tax if it were to be spent properly where it's actually needed | |||
"The nhs is fantastic with some brilliant people in it ...but ..in our local hospital there are currently 13 midwives...but 11 supervisors / managers with clipboards ...this is where most of its problems lie xxx The whole NHS is overun with top heavy management , but labour just scream hands off when any changes are made, its labour that will destroy the NHS not the tories" Good point! But your missing the old adage "we have always done it that way" -but it doesn't mean it's the best way! | |||
"The nhs is fantastic with some brilliant people in it ...but ..in our local hospital there are currently 13 midwives...but 11 supervisors / managers with clipboards ...this is where most of its problems lie xxx The whole NHS is overun with top heavy management , but labour just scream hands off when any changes are made, its labour that will destroy the NHS not the tories" By far the best post on the thread.
The Labour party would be more than happy to destroy the NHS. As long as they can blame it on the Tories and reap the political reward.
It's been unofficial Labour policy for years. | |||
"The nhs is fantastic with some brilliant people in it ...but ..in our local hospital there are currently 13 midwives...but 11 supervisors / managers with clipboards ...this is where most of its problems lie xxx The whole NHS is overun with top heavy management , but labour just scream hands off when any changes are made, its labour that will destroy the NHS not the tories" The Labour Party hasnt been running the NHS for 8 years. Compare the waiting times etc today with 2010. It's a nonsense argument to blame Labour for the shambles we have now when theyve had damn all input for such a long time. | |||
"The nhs is fantastic with some brilliant people in it ...but ..in our local hospital there are currently 13 midwives...but 11 supervisors / managers with clipboards ...this is where most of its problems lie xxx The whole NHS is overun with top heavy management , but labour just scream hands off when any changes are made, its labour that will destroy the NHS not the tories The Labour Party hasnt been running the NHS for 8 years. Compare the waiting times etc today with 2010. It's a nonsense argument to blame Labour for the shambles we have now when theyve had damn all input for such a long time. " It's reality time for the NHS. It was brilliant back on 1940's - but it's changing and unless "we" pay more (tax/NI ), or the Government fund it properly then it's going to break. Government's of all colours have planned very badly and not invested in staffing, infrastructure so consequently today it's falling to bits. Sadly we want a Champagne service for lemonade investment! | |||
"The nhs is fantastic with some brilliant people in it ...but ..in our local hospital there are currently 13 midwives...but 11 supervisors / managers with clipboards ...this is where most of its problems lie xxx The whole NHS is overun with top heavy management , but labour just scream hands off when any changes are made, its labour that will destroy the NHS not the tories The Labour Party hasnt been running the NHS for 8 years. Compare the waiting times etc today with 2010. It's a nonsense argument to blame Labour for the shambles we have now when theyve had damn all input for such a long time. " We're still paying off the debt now on Labour's PFI deals for the NHS during their time in power. | |||
| |||
"The era of austerity is not over for working families on benefits or government departments and with brexit looming the squeeze continues to save more, how do you think it went?" When i heard about the increase the the threshold, i thought great!, then i realised that it also ment NIC payments would rise also, then I thought....balls.... | |||
