Well that's the BUDGET what do we think.

[Hymer C 9.]

Budget done for a while again, though I am sure they will find more ways to keep putting the taxes up, they seemed to have wacked the drinks up all of them not just ciders and alc pops and will keep doing so for the 4 years automatically, so when the next election comes it won't have to be mentioned (crafty) Making a good go at getting at the moterist directly and indirectly. oh and a magnificant £50 extra towards our winter fuel. what do you think of it all. Carol.

 

 

[Guest Tracker]

£50 more for heating and £50 more income tax following the rate reduction to 20%

 

Could have been worse but I do think this budget, like all 10 before him, was a con and a wasted opportunity.

 

How can it be right to give income tax back to high earners and let low income people subsidise it?

 

Socialism Jock style I guess!

[Robb]

Puzzled!!!

I'm not 60 for 5 months yet! I am Disabled but only get Income Support! I live in Rented accommodation! I don't Smoke or Drink! I already drive a Tax Exempt Vehicle but looking at buying a Motor Home! The only thing I'm concerned about is Road Tax on the Motor Home? Spos I better buy one with a 900cc engine LOL LOL :-)

This Budget has done nothing for me except increase my shopping bills as it has done for all in my position, unless you earn loads or have a great pension, or have massive savings.

Maybe the Motor Home will be put on hold. :'(

[CliveH]

Stick to your VW camper - it looks great! Its a classic and both me and my sons want one.

 

And if you pay no tax on it - so much the better!!

 

If I had one I would LPG it as well - cheapest round here is 46.9p a litre and average is 49.9p - most expensive 56.9p

 

 

[CliveH]

As for the budget - Darling to be fair had no room for manoeuvre but PLEASE do not think I was sorry for him.

 

This lot have wasted money left right and centre and now we have to pay for it.

 

Only positive point was Cameron’s response - VERY good! - He really rammed it home - highest taxes - highest debt! - A run on a bank then its nationalisation - loss of peoples details by Gov Depts!!

 

I had him down as a bit of a wet end - but his performance today was excellent.

 

Wonderful to see Brown and Darling squirming.

 

[Syd]

CliveH - 2008-03-12 3:58 PM

 

As for the budget - Darling to be fair had no room for manoeuvre

 

 

Can anyone tell me when we ever had a budget where the chancellor had room to manoeuver.

 

Plenty of room for almost anything if they could just get their brains out of the tax, tax, tax mindset

[J9withdogs]

At last the government seems to acknowledging the contribution to the economy made by the small businessman and not hammering them so hard (lol)

[Guest Tracker]

J9withdogs - 2008-03-12 6:20 PM

 

At last the government seems to acknowledging the contribution to the economy made by the small businessman and not hammering them so hard (lol)

 

Unless they are successful enough to buy a fast expensive car!

[BGD]

Syd - in truth, every single year ( so long as the Government of the day has got an overall majority in the House of Commons, the Chancellor of the Exchequer for that Government can do as he likes.... so long as the Cabinet of that Government approves his ideas.

 

So, here's the boring bit:

 

Contrary to the slick PR talk that every Chancellor makes to the contrary, he does NOT have to "balance the Books"....and the Labour Government has done that in only one year out of all it's last years in office.

 

In every other year it's public spending has been greater than it's tax take, even in the first few years in office when the economy was growing strongly and thus GDP (and tax-take) was also growing strongly even without the extra taxes which they have been introducing year after year.

 

Thus for 9 of the past ten years, the Government has increased it's PSBR (Public Sector Borrowing Requirement). In only one year so far as I can recall did it ever pay a small amount of this now utterly massive PSBR back.

 

PSBR is a bit like a person taking out a loan to spend now and (hopefully) pay back over an extended period.

One of Labours biggest problems however, is that it has racked up such a huge PSBR to fund extentions to Public Sector projects, New Ministeries, new Quango's etc etc, that it now cannot even keep pace with the interest payments, let alone pay back any of the hundreds of billions of capital that it now owes.

And most of the money it has borrowed to spend has not gone into things which would make UK plc any fitter, more efficient, or increase future GDP.

In economic terms its' essentially just gone down the drain...it's spending hasn't earned anything much back as increased GDP, which is what prudent investment-in-the economy spending should do.

Thus, it has to increase the amount of tax-take from GDP, at a point where GDP is going stagnant because UK plc is (depending on who you believe) either coming onto a plateau, or entering a recessionary period.

 

In simple terms, the PSBR nightmare that the spend-spend-spend current Labour Government has got itself into, is like someone who has borrowed so much on high-interest credit cards that they cannot any longer pay even the monthly interest, let alone any of the capital back, at the same time as their Company is losing business, and cutting back on the overtime opportunities that the person had been relying on for a long time.

 

BUT, (there's always a "but", eh?) the Chancellor in reality only has to look ahead as far as the next General Election.

So long as long term economic problems (and to my mind the Monstrous amount of PSBR that the Government has squandered, just dwarfs any other economic issues).

So long as they can stagger on, and the bubble doesn't burst until they get the chance to be re-elected, he won't care.

 

My personal betting is that the PSBR millstone is going to be the thing which actually drives the UK into full-blown recession within the next 12 months, and finally proves Labours claims to be prudent, as totally false.

Today's Budget did nothing other than brush the problem under the carpet for a few more months, whilst he desperately hopes for some sort of miracle turnaround from the recession lurking just around the corner.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Robb]

sorry but it must be my tag

 

"we need a Revolution"

[Mel B]

I'm fed up of having to support people who have kids! What about having a benefit for those of us who haven't over-populated the world!!!! Haven't taken maternity leave, child support, maternity allowance, etc, etc, but slogged every year of her life since she was 16 (and thats a long time now!).

 

Does anyone know if he changed the tax for house purchases? I heard that there was a suggestion that the stamp duty might be altered to make it fairer ... yes, I know that's not a word you usually associated with the government ... but I have to hope!

[Vernon B]

Hi BGD

 

That earlier critique of yours ( too long to quote in full again) was very impressive - me thinks you should be on the opposition front bench.

 

I guess like anyone else who was able to stay awake during his speech I had problems reconciling the Chancellor's (and his boss's) claims of prudence and stability with my own simplistic view of economics. For example, how can it be financially sustainable to double the rate of spending on the NHS to get, at best, a 10% improvement in service and continue with that strategy across the whole of the public sector.

 

Anyway the main reason for this post is to ask if you can provide the figures to support your assertion that the PSBR is running away with itself ie what did it stand at in 1997 and what is it now? I believe your right but I ain't seen any absolute figures - they're fond of quoting PSBR as a perct of GDP and that, of course, doesn't appear too alarming.

 

A more quantified measure of where we're heading might help me and the wife make the decision as to when we should drive the MH over that cliff we've lined up in southern Spain!

 

V

 

 

[chatterdog]

Can i ask the question re: new taxation classes, when they come into effect - how is it going to affect all you good people with motorhomes. Is it along with the fuel rise going to mean that you have to think twice before driving off into the sunset for those few peaceful days away

[omidknight]

Mel B - 2008-03-12 8:48 PM

 

I'm fed up of having to support people who have kids! What about having a benefit for those of us who haven't over-populated the world!!!! Haven't taken maternity leave, child support, maternity allowance, etc, etc, but slogged every year of her life since she was 16 (and thats a long time now!).

 

!

 

Yes let there be some tax benefits for those of us who choose not to increase the population. We are reducing the number of roads, houses, work places, hospitals, travelling etc etc

[BGD]

Mel B - 2008-03-12 8:48 PM

 

I'm fed up of having to support people who have kids! What about having a benefit for those of us who haven't over-populated the world!!!! Haven't taken maternity leave, child support, maternity allowance, etc, etc, but slogged every year of her life since she was 16 (and thats a long time now!).

 

Does anyone know if he changed the tax for house purchases? I heard that there was a suggestion that the stamp duty might be altered to make it fairer ... yes, I know that's not a word you usually associated with the government ... but I have to hope!

 

 

A very interesting point, and one with which I have always agreed.

 

If you decide to have children, you look after them and you fund them.

 

There's a limit to how far you can take that idea in practice.......for example I think schools, colleges and Universities will allways require funding from the general exchequer (ie all taxpayers).

 

But I'd remove Child Benefit forthwith.

It isn't even means tested, so is paid to every couple/single parent regardless of their income or saviings.

I'd also remove paid Maternity Pay, as I see no reason why a Company and it's customers should have to pay for a woman to take whatever time off that she chooses after she's chosen to have a baby......they have to keep the job open for her anyway, but I would reduce the time period during which Companies have to do that too.

 

I would also immediately remove Paternity Leave and Paternity Pay.

The father has 9 months to prepare for the birth, it doesn't come as a surprise. he can save up his holiday accrual to take paid time off if he so wiches, just like any other employee who chooses to request time off with pay.

 

I would also reduce the amount of weekly Social Security Benefit and Unemployment Benefit substantially, and I would make the payment of Unemplyment Benefit conditional upon working full time on local social projects (helping old people, cleaning parks etc etc). Time off with "pay" for attending interviews.

 

In return for all the above, I would substantially increase the threshold for Income Tax, to maybe 15,000 per year.

And I would amalgamate Employess National Insuarance Contributions into Income Tax.

At a stroke, all the costs of duplicating the costs of collecting emplyees PAYE and NI and admistering them wih two separate Monster Government Departments would be saved. Thus the amount of Income Tax paid by people who earn more than the threshold would be reduced as a lot less of their money would have to support Public Sector Administrators.

 

Thus every penny of the first (say) 15,000 of any persons income would be kept by that person.

Thus we get an actual incentive to work, even in part-time or lower paid jobs, and we actually get a real dis-incentive not to work.

 

 

 

 

 

[pagey]

bruce i dont always agree with you but you have this one spot on

[Mel B]

I nominate Bruce as the next PM!!!!! :-D

[KD]

i second that, the problem is he wouldnt stand a chance too many people get too many benifits that bruce quite rightly would make them work for

[BGD]

K&D - 2008-03-13 8:39 PM

 

i second that, the problem is he wouldnt stand a chance too many people get too many benifits that bruce quite rightly would make them work for

 

Nail on the head mate.

 

Any party standing for election has to consider what most people will vote for.

 

However, the BGD party can easily get round that one, just like Labour who promised in writing in their manifesto that they'd have a Referendum on the EU Constitution/Treaty, and then refused to allow one............

 

 

 

 

So, in my manifesto I pledge that the BGD party will give £10,000 extra to every citizen in the UK. Every year. A free handout.

We will also cease to tax petrol and diesel (I don't mean cease taxing it any higher, I mean totally cease to tax it), and likewise we will remove all duty on cigarettes and alcohol.

 

That should more or less get us in with a thumping majority.....and then after the Mother of all piss-ups at Number 10 to celebrate our success, I will go on TV the following morning to announce that the last lot lied about the books, and the situation is in fact much worse than the lying sods led us all to believe, so we're having to postpone the milk-and-honey stuff for a bit.

Instead, we are forced by the lawful financial legacy of the previous Government to implement a revised strategy with immediate effect..........containing all of the elements in my post above.

 

Simple eh?

 

That's how every other political party does it; and it works a treat.

 

VOTE BGD.....AT LEAST HE'S TRUTHFUL ABOUT HIS LIES!!

 

:D

 

 

 

[Guest peter]

Mel B - 2008-03-12 8:48 PM

 

I'm fed up of having to support people who have kids! What about having a benefit for those of us who haven't over-populated the world!!!! Haven't taken maternity leave, child support, maternity allowance, etc, etc, but slogged every year of her life since she was 16 (and thats a long time now!).

 

Does anyone know if he changed the tax for house purchases? I heard that there was a suggestion that the stamp duty might be altered to make it fairer ... yes, I know that's not a word you usually associated with the government ... but I have to hope!

Agree with you totally Mel. My wife and I have been hammered all our married life subsidising people who choose to have loads of kids and then expect the state to pay for their keep. >:-) >:-)

[602]

Hi,

 

Am I right in believing that my car's carbon footprint is SMALLER than the carbon footprint of a child? And that if every person had only two children shared with a similarly restricted partner(s), then our overall impact on the environment would gradually reduce due to natural wastage? So lets pay everyone with two kids , say, £1000 to be neutralised.

 

Lets say I paid 10% of my income into a pension fund, for all of my working life. And my off-spring (remember, there's only two) paid the same into MY fund......what will it be worth when I turn 60? Then I draw the interest only as a pension, while my kids continue to pay in. When I pop my clogs, the fund is still generating an income for my kids to draw as a pension. Repeat ad infinitum. Within a couple of generations, the fund will be big enough for my great great grand kids not to have to work. We should be so lucky.

 

602

[Mel B]

Just thought of a possible upset to the proposal of BGD as Prime Minister .. he's got a Bailey's drink problem ... :-(

 

Do you think it would be a problem based on previous incumbents?? :-D

[BGD]

Mel B - 2008-03-15 8:57 AM

 

Just thought of a possible upset to the proposal of BGD as Prime Minister .. he's got a Bailey's drink problem ... :-(

 

Do you think it would be a problem based on previous incumbents?? :-D

 

 

Reply from the Press Office of the BGD Party:

 

 

 

Dear Reporter,

 

We thank you for your recent correspondence.

 

You're quite right to enquire about BGD's Baileys drink problem....you are of course referring to the fact that he can't get enough of the mint choc one.

 

We anticipate however that this is only a short-term issue; as once news of this supply problem is released into the public domain, well-wishers, and those who want to suck up to the BGD Party in exchange for Honours or back-handers once we sweep into Government will no doubt wish to arrange delivery of cases of Mint Choc Baileys to Party HQ here in sunshineland, on a regular basis from now on.

 

 

 

In answer to your second question:

 

No, we don't think this is a problem based on previous encumbents.

They all drank stupid stuff like Pimm's, Brown Ale, Buck's Fizz and other poncy cocktaily-thingies with umbrellas and little plastic spikey things with cherries impaled on 'em.

 

And, to make matters even worse, they kept changing their minds!

 

How can a Prime Minister ever expect the electorate to trust him when time after time, he shows a wishy-washy, namby-pamby, uncertain and wavering approach to such a key matter of State?

 

Mornings: "Ummm, perhaps tea dear. No, maybe a poncy latte coffee. No, make it an orange juice perhaps".

 

Lunchtime: "Thankyou, but I think I've gone off the Froggy fizzy water now; maybe an Earl Grey? No, I fancy a Lapsang Su Shong. Iced. No, hot".

 

Dinner with the US President: "Ooooooh, I just don't know. Should we take the '78 Shiraz, or the 84 Burgundy? I'll do whatever you want me to George."

 

Nightcap back at Number 10: "I just can't make up my mind Jeeves..bring both the Famous Grouse and the hot chocolate with the squirty cream on top and I'll try to decide whilst I work on these young Secretaries...."

 

How on earth can anyone expect you to Govern efficiently when you can't even make your mind up once and for all and then stick to your principles?

 

 

It is a problem which we in the BGD Party intend to wrestle with to the very bottom of the bottle.

It is clear, from all the Opinion Polls, that the UK electorate are crying out for someone who can at last offer spirited leadership, has a glass-half-full attitude, will not stand for half-measures.

 

No longer will members of the Great British Public who will be serving BGD at all and any Conference, Hotel, Grand Manor House reception, Public Speaking engagement, cocktail party or other soiree, suffer the angst and humiliation of not knowing our policy on this essential matter.

As a selfless service to those who throughout the land who will elect and then adore their new Lord and Master, BGD's policy will remain icily clear and unwavering: Mint-Choc Baileys, LARGE, with just the one lump of hielo.

 

A global policy, for a global world!

 

Just imagine the umbounded joy of serfs and peasants throughout the land and in every other country around the planet, in knowing automatically what to serve the Great and Glorious Leader on every occasion...........and BGD does it because BGD cares about them.

 

Verily, his cup overfloweth.....