Laughing
Well-known member
No not the thread police, just don't like the kind of deflection you are engaging in.Who are you, the thread police?
Completely unnecessary response.
I'm actually interested why Starmer said it's "giving up"?
No not the thread police, just don't like the kind of deflection you are engaging in.Who are you, the thread police?
Completely unnecessary response.
I'm actually interested why Starmer said it's "giving up"?
Three posts in BoroMart said "What he [Starmer] ACTUALLY said was "Moving parts of the Treasury to Darlington, creating a few freeports and re-announcing funding. That isn't levelling up, that is giving up."He didn't, that's what the thread is all about. Haven't you worked that out yet?
You are wrong I'm afraid Laughing. Nothing to do with deflection.No not the thread police, just don't like the kind of deflection you are engaging in.
Labour leader Kier Starmer wants to commit a murder, states to journalists "...I'd kill...but you wouldn't let me get away with it".Who are you, the thread police?
Completely unnecessary response.
I'm actually interested why Starmer said it's "giving up"?
I don't really understand how freezing the tax allowances means that a higher earner will pay another £826, or for that matter, anything. If you earn the same in 2021/2 as in the previous year, you'll pay about the same amount of income tax. If you get a pay rise, you may go into the higher income tax bracket at £50K, but you are earning more, so you should pay more. Actually, in April, the personal allowance goes up by £70, and the higher rate band by £270 before freezing for 5 years, so everyone will pay (a little) less tax next fiscal year.
Similarly universal credit - the £20 increase has been extended to September. Why would that cost anyone £20? I don't follow the logic.
And working tax credit claimants get a one off £500, so that's a help I guess.
Since then we have had a Labour government that actually got the country into the black before the banks ran amok.
I stand corrected- In my limited knowledge I thought surplus and "in the black" were the same thingAs far as I can tell, you've got this right Soutra. The stat is referencing that if someone receives a wage increase each year between now and 2026, but the tax free allowance doesn't also increase each of those years, the total amount they pay in tax will go up. Of course at the same time they'll have more take home pay left after tax so it's not the most helpful stat really imho.
Also this isn't really correct. Blair's Labour had 2 years of running a surplus rather than a deficit in the late 90s but we've never been "in the black" as in not having a national debt. Not that there's anything wrong with that. There's no economic reason a £0 national debt should be something the government strives for.
BoroMart you said what he ACTUALLY said was "Moving parts of the Treasury to Darlington, creating a few freeports and re-announcing funding. That isn't levelling up, that is giving up."Labour leader Kier Starmer wants to commit a murder, states to journalists "...I'd kill...but you wouldn't let me get away with it".
Real quote "I'm starving, I'd kill for a bacon sandwich, but I saw what you did to Ed Milliband and you wouldn't let me get away with it".
It's easy to take phrases and part sentances out of context and make them sound like something entirely different. His message was not anti-northern, or supporting giving up on the north, he wants more done for it, a lot more sustainable investment. If you miss that, then you are clearly prejudiced against him.
Good post. Thank you.On topic, in fairness to Starmer, I've heard this morning that Sunak and the tories didn't share any advance copies of the budget with Labour, where usually that's the convention for the treasury and the opposition.
So Starmer probably had a skeleton of a response speech that he was putting the details in while Sunak was speaking. They probably had that little line prepared "x, y, z, that's not levelling up, that's giving up!" and he's just had to quickly pad it out with whatever got announced. So I don't think Darlo/the NE/whoever should take too much offence. Probably wasn't anything personal.
Well it's clear in the context of a budget response that it isn't enough for the north east.....it clearly isn't by the way, it's still going to be massively deprived compared to most of the country, it's still going to have a poorer economy, worse social issues, poorer housing, more crime, worse education, poorer hospitals, poorer transport infrastructure....I could go on but you get the point. This is scraps to make it look like they care. Just like when Thatcher visited. Did her 'investment' transform the town? Make it a leading town or is it still rated one of the poorest, unhealthiest, least educated parts of the country? That was scraps, this is scraps unless there is a ton of stuff they haven't announced...spoiler, there isn't.BoroMart you said what he ACTUALLY said was "Moving parts of the Treasury to Darlington, creating a few freeports and re-announcing funding. That isn't levelling up, that is giving up."
IF that was Starmer's entire quote, I still don't see why he says it's giving up. It's also not the same as your bacon sandwich example.
I actually like Keir Starmer, so not prejudiced against him, no.
Everyone will pay, including business and the rich apparently, but you can guarantee that business and the rich paying will be dropped before or soon after implementation and the plebs will make up the shortfal.I'm not a Tory fan at all but it's obvious that we the public will pay for it. We can't exactly invoice the virus can we?
You can yes.Not sure if this is what was meant, but if you're on furlough from one company, you can get another full-time job with permission from them if you wish and you'll be paid for both.
The budget is another ridiculous bit of Parliamentary theatre that would work in the old world of newspapers the next day, but in a 24 hour news cycle doesn't do anyone any favours.You are wrong I'm afraid Laughing. Nothing to do with deflection.
I was genuinely interested to know why Starmer had used the words "giving up". However, someone more civil than yourself (Piccalilli Day Tripper) has tried to offer an explanation, which was appreciated.
Yes, I understand that. But it's likely that the UC +£20 will be extended again in September. I have every sympathy for people who need it, I just think it's misleading when people say Joe Blow will be £20 worse off, implying he'll be worse off now.. Why would that cost anyone £20? - Because in September that £20 will be taken away from the recipient- don't forget- if you are on UB you really are in desperate straits and the £20 is an absolute life line- UB is barely enough to exist on at the moment without taking £20 off people.
It will mean more poverty and more people going hungry, more people losing their homes and more strain on the NHS-
That £20 is absolutely crucial.
Yes, I understand that. But it's likely that the UC +£20 will be extended again in September. I have every sympathy for people who need it, I just think it's misleading when people say Joe Blow will be £20 worse off, implying he'll be worse off now.
In my opinion -Go on then explain how?
In my opinion -
Workers should have either been laid off by their companies or put onto state benefits if the company’s couldn‘t afford it. This would have been much less cost and prevented abuse of the furlough scheme.
There should have been a doubling of statutory sick pay for those still working but having to isolate with Covid or having been in contact with somebody with Covid. This would have helped prevent workers ignoring the rules and spreading the virus in the workplace.