advertisement


Spending review 2013

Tony L

Administrator
I was out all day, so missed it, relying on a well-crafted, polite and insightful write-up covering all salient points here. Amazingly no such thread occurred. So, what's the verdict?

My impression from the little I've seen on the TV is that Mr Osborne's "thinking" was along the lines: 'austerity clearly hasn't worked, therefore we need more austerity'. I guess the tax payer can expect even less services and infrastructure for their money for the next few years.
 
Maybe, but isn't really it all about shrinking the state, irrespective of the impact on people, communities, economic growth?
 
I was out all day, so missed it instead relying on a well-crafted, polite and insightful write-up covering all salient points here. Amazingly no such thread occurred. So, what's the verdict?

My impression from the little I've seen on the TV is that Mr Osborne's "thinking" was along the lines: 'austerity clearly hasn't worked, therefore we need more austerity'. I guess the tax payer can expect even less services and infrastructure for their money for the next few years.

Most of the hit seems to have been reductions in the size of the various government departments. Of this I wholeheartedly approve.

The tinkering about with the welfare rules is just electioneering.

The end to automatic annual pay rises for Civil servants is also a good move.

Chris
 
The headline for me was the removal of Mick's Winter Fuel Allowance. I hope he doesn't have to break down his Gerrard for firewood.
 
The end to automatic annual pay rises for Civil servants is also a good move.

Chris

Thats a matter of opinion , but I do note that parasitic old granny who lives in London managed to get a 5% and as she always fin off to warmer climates on holiday I wonder if she will get her winter fuel allowance .
 
Matthew

I still keep my winter fuel allowance because I keep my time in Spain to less than 183 days pa.

Overall I agree mainly with reducing the government depts, less government is always good. The 7 day rule just panders to the blue rinse brigade and like Chris said is just electioneering because it hardly saves any money.

I still think he is being too soft and could take a few more percentage points off all departments across the board.

The good news, however, is that Nulab are now going along with it, so the austerity programme will continue no matter who wins the next election.

Overall not to bad.

Mick
 
I also note he didn't take on bleedin penny of you PFM pensioners :confused:

when a large percentage of you continue to moan about state spending and without a hint of irony ignore the fact you are costing the bastard state a fortune with your never to be seen again pension provisions , getting shit loads of free stuff and draining the resource of the NHS .
 
I was out all day, so missed it, relying on a well-crafted, polite and insightful write-up covering all salient points here. Amazingly no such thread occurred. So, what's the verdict?

Mick P/Mescalito:

'All good stuff, but they should have cut deeper'.

Mull and assorted pinkos:

'There's no way Cameron can survive this'.

Good summary of impact of cuts here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23061795

Main points here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23060592

My impression from the little I've seen on the TV is that Mr Osborne's "thinking" was along the lines: 'austerity clearly hasn't worked, therefore we need more austerity'. I guess the tax payer can expect even less services and infrastructure for their money for the next few years.

Actually infrastructure spending is set to grow in some areas (eg road and rail transport). Services will certainly shrink.
 
Mull and assorted pinkos:

'There's no way Cameron can survive this'.

.

Actually Cameron wad dead in the water round about December 2010, the one and only good decision he has made was to have fixed terms parliaments enshrined in law , otherwise he'd now be on the lecture circuit .
 
Topic on The Wright Show this morning on the proposed cuts to services from the spending review was along the lines of 'would we be happy to pay a little more in tax to retain front line services and personnel?'.

But the teaser question during the break was something like 'Does the UK have the highest taxes in the western world?' to which the answer after the break was 'True' and Matthew Wright clarified it as the UK having the highest taxes overall if you combine income tax, NI, VAT, fuel duty, council tax etc etc.

So it would appear we are taxed the most already, still have a high deficit and debt (compared to other westernised countries), don't have the best services available for the population and we are facing more cuts to these services.
 
I also note he didn't take on bleedin penny of you PFM pensioners :confused:

when a large percentage of you continue to moan about state spending and without a hint of irony ignore the fact you are costing the bastard state a fortune with your never to be seen again pension provisions , getting shit loads of free stuff and draining the resource of the NHS .

We'd be daft not to grab everything we are entitled to, Paul.
I'm not a state pensioner yet. But when I am, I'll be in like flint. I view it as a retrospective tax rebate on all the taxes the govt. robbed me of over the years.

We view the wife's pension as "mad money".

Chris
 
I also note he didn't take on bleedin penny of you PFM pensioners :confused:

when a large percentage of you continue to moan about state spending and without a hint of irony ignore the fact you are costing the bastard state a fortune with your never to be seen again pension provisions , getting shit loads of free stuff and draining the resource of the NHS .

Paul

What you say is in essence true. Pensioners funded the OAP by paying into the NI and the contributions were very low in the 60s/70s/80s and nineties. It is only recently that the cap went up and the pension age put back in order to balance the books. Yes, we have basically stolen from the young.

I read somewhere ( I think Sunday Times) that if a pensioner retired in 2012 and lives to be 80, he would have under contributed by 18% for the state pension hr receives. You will pick up the bill for our over generous state pension and I have no alternative but to thank you.

My only get out clause is that from the ages of 22 to 62, I paid 40p in the pound tax, so overall I feel I have paid my whack and like Chris will spend my state pension on those little luxuries in life such as Easyjet air fares.

Yours gratefully

Mick
 
Mick
I had no idea you were on your uppers to the extent that you consider an Easyjet flight a luxury!
 
We'd be daft not to grab everything we are entitled to, Paul.
I'm not a state pensioner yet. But when I am, I'll be in like flint. I view it as a retrospective tax rebate on all the taxes the govt. robbed me of over the years.

We view the wife's pension as "mad money".

Chris

How has the govt. robbed you?
 
I also note he didn't take on bleedin penny of you PFM pensioners :confused:

when a large percentage of you continue to moan about state spending and without a hint of irony ignore the fact you are costing the bastard state a fortune with your never to be seen again pension provisions , getting shit loads of free stuff and draining the resource of the NHS .

So you want to see means tested benefits for OAPs. Some socialist!
 
So you didn't pay part of your earnings to share in the costs of a modern industrial nation with all the benefits and advantages that brings then?
 


advertisement


Back
Top