Wednesday 8th July 2015

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 5:51 am

Morning all.

So, it's another Osborne budget day. I wonder what's going to be in it? (/sarcasm)

A good piece on the inevitable financial cruelty by Frankie Boyle

Don’t expect any humanity in the chancellor’s emergency budget

http://gu.com/p/4aehe" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 8:26 am

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

So, it's another Osborne budget day. I wonder what's going to be in it? (/sarcasm)

A good piece on the inevitable financial cruelty by Frankie Boyle

Don’t expect any humanity in the chancellor’s emergency budget

http://gu.com/p/4aehe" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Morning,
Gideon is an ass,
with a pie,
To share as he sees fit,
So I guess,
we should expect
an asspierational budget?

(I'll get my coat)

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 8:44 am

Another 'emergency' budget to throw the economy into recession - to provide continuing justification for cuts and privatisation - which will then be allowed to struggle back to health for the next economic miracle, some time shortly before 2020.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 9:19 am

Morning
BBC applying their in depth.analysis.on ESA.,getting the name.wrong and propagandising that.WRAG.means you are deemed.capable of work.

Declan Gaffney doing his.best.on twitter to.correct.them.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 9:25 am

Thank you HindleA.

Some key journalists don't seem to bother about getting their facts straight about matters that probably don't really interest or affect them these days eh?

Declan Gaffney ‏@djmgaffneyw4 1h1 hour ago
Here is @bbcnickrobinson getting this totally wrong. There are no ESA elements paid to 'those deemed capable of work' pic.twitter.com/aiwXdWZmKD

Nick Robinson ‏@bbcnickrobinson 57m57 minutes ago
@djmgaffneyw4 It's called WRAG

Jonathan Portes ‏@jdportes 41m41 minutes ago
@bbcnickrobinson Nick, you're wrong & @djmgaffneyw4 is right. WRAG means incapable of work but capable of work - related activity.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 9:34 am

Nick Robinson ‏@bbcnickrobinson 7m7 minutes ago
Nick Robinson retweeted Declan Gaffney
Correction to my blog re expected cuts to ESA (sickness benefit in old money). WRAG to be cut ...see below

Well that sounds as though said through gritted teeth.

minch · Post by **minch** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 9:48 am

The Telepraph has the statement 'Chancellor set to cut taxes for middle class families with plans to raise the 40p tax threshold'.
A quick delve around the net (please correct me if I am wrong) has the percentage of UK who are middleclass at 30% and the percentage who pay higher rate tax at just under 15%. Therefore most of the middle class do not have a tax cut if they raise the 40p tax threshold.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 10:20 am

minch wrote:The Telepraph has the statement 'Chancellor set to cut taxes for middle class families with plans to raise the 40p tax threshold'.
A quick delve around the net (please correct me if I am wrong) has the percentage of UK who are middleclass at 30% and the percentage who pay higher rate tax at just under 15%. Therefore most of the middle class do not have a tax cut if they raise the 40p tax threshold.

Yes, but they aspire to.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 10:20 am

Good-morning, everyone.
Gentle, misting rain here, not too cold - perfect hiking weather.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 10:40 am

Chinese stock markets tumbled again on Wednesday as investors shrugged off a series of support measures by Chinese regulators, including the central bank’s first public statement in support of the market since it cut interest rates in late June. Minutes after opening, the Shanghai Composite Index fell by just over 8%. while the Shenzhen Component was down almost 5%.

Within ten minutes of trading, more than 1,000 shares across China’s two stock markets had dropped by the daily limited of 10% and had their shares automatically suspended. About 1,400 companies, or more than half of those listed – filed for a trading halt in an attempt to prevent further losses.

China’s securities regulator said there was “panic” in the stock market with irrational selling off increasing and “leading the stock market to a situation of intense liquidity”.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... s-of-panic" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Richard Murphy - Tax Research UK - today:

Now I am aware that the Chinese market is isolated and was massively over-heated, but if you’re looking for contagion look further east than Greece.
This one is worrying because China is a vastly bigger economy than Greece could ever be, and the impact will be much, much bigger.

The bigger picture is not good.
Crashes can still happen and we’re almost certainly nearer the next in the UK than we are the last.
That’s why austerity that destroys our capacity to cope is so wrong.
http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015 ... for-china/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I respect Mr. Murphy's work a great deal. If anyone knows of limitations Murphy has I'm not aware of, please don't hesitate to let me know.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 10:45 am

Actually, I have some sympathy with the idea that the threshold for higher rate tax is too low, it follows logically from the taboo on raising the basic rate. Raising it now though, is disgusting, like burning £50 notes in front of a homeless person.

In an idle half hour once, I worked out a scheme of income tax rates and bands tied to median earnings. I'm sure we all know someone who complains about paying 40% tax, it would be good if you could say to them, half the population get paid less than half as much as you.
My scheme had an intermediate 30% rate.

minch · Post by **minch** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 10:48 am

This is worth a read.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2 ... ZzxKvlWIeU

Doyne Farmer of the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico and the University of Oxford says leaders and their economic advisers have no way to work out quantitatively which mix of solutions works best, so fall back on ideological preferences and whatever historical examples support them. Deadlock ensues.

minch · Post by **minch** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 10:52 am

gilsey wrote:Actually, I have some sympathy with the idea that the threshold for higher rate tax is too low, it follows logically from the taboo on raising the basic rate. Raising it now though, is disgusting, like burning £50 notes in front of a homeless person.

In an idle half hour once, I worked out a scheme of income tax rates and bands tied to median earnings. I'm sure we all know someone who complains about paying 40% tax, it would be good if you could say to them, half the population get paid less than half as much as you.
My scheme had an intermediate 30% rate.

My plan would be to give everyone a cash sum and then tax all income at 30%.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 11:03 am

Richard Murphy - Tax Research UK - today

...the Chinese government is spending a fortune at home to bail out its stock market, most of which money it is unlikely to recover. That’s likely to be money not coming our way soon as a result, because those who have bought property overseas on the crest of their Chinese stock market gains will no longer be doing so and the Chinese government is unlikely to be pouring money into the UK economy any time soon as a result of the current domestic situation.

So far from saving in the UK, which is what Osborne needs China to do, it is more likely to be pulling money out. Some of those London investment properties are going to be on the market soon as people try to cover their stock market losses at home. And that means that the boost China has given, on which George Osborne has relied to make his books look like they will balance, will be disappearing.

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015 ... PGvnc.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(my bold)

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 11:16 am

Still, at least Gideon has somebody else to blame if it all goes belly up again......

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 11:17 am

citizenJA wrote:Richard Murphy - Tax Research UK - today
...the Chinese government is spending a fortune at home to bail out its stock market, most of which money it is unlikely to recover. That’s likely to be money not coming our way soon as a result, because those who have bought property overseas on the crest of their Chinese stock market gains will no longer be doing so and the Chinese government is unlikely to be pouring money into the UK economy any time soon as a result of the current domestic situation.

So far from saving in the UK, which is what Osborne needs China to do, it is more likely to be pulling money out. Some of those London investment properties are going to be on the market soon as people try to cover their stock market losses at home. And that means that the boost China has given, on which George Osborne has relied to make his books look like they will balance, will be disappearing.

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015 ... PGvnc.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(my bold)

Are we talking a dubai style property development retreat or properties being sold?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 11:31 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Still, at least Gideon has somebody else to blame if it all goes belly up again......

No way.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 11:42 am

StephenDolan wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Richard Murphy - Tax Research UK - today
...the Chinese government is spending a fortune at home to bail out its stock market, most of which money it is unlikely to recover. That’s likely to be money not coming our way soon as a result, because those who have bought property overseas on the crest of their Chinese stock market gains will no longer be doing so and the Chinese government is unlikely to be pouring money into the UK economy any time soon as a result of the current domestic situation.

So far from saving in the UK, which is what Osborne needs China to do, it is more likely to be pulling money out. Some of those London investment properties are going to be on the market soon as people try to cover their stock market losses at home. And that means that the boost China has given, on which George Osborne has relied to make his books look like they will balance, will be disappearing.

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015 ... PGvnc.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(my bold)
Are we talking a dubai style property development retreat or properties being sold?

Yes.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 11:49 am

citizenJA wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Richard Murphy - Tax Research UK - today (my bold)
Are we talking a dubai style property development retreat or properties being sold?
Yes.

If it's the former Osborne could have a problem, if the latter there's a nice stamp duty windfall.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 12:29 pm

Good morfternoon.

David Cameron, at PMQs, keeps speaking of "A Modest Proposal". Does he realise what he is referring to?

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 12:32 pm

Just caught PMQs.

There have been quite a few asides from BBC journalists about how the Tories can more easily get things through early on "while Labour is in disarray".

If that was the plan, I think Harman just torpedoed it. She had Cameron pretty much skewered on everything she raised from sport participation since the Olympics (down), Human Rights Act and questioning whether Cameron is following proper parliamentary procedure in his attempt to bring about EVEL.

Significantly, she effectively raised doubts about the truthfulness of Cameron's answers, highlighting the dodgy use of different time scales and questioning his claim of having consulting the head of the procedure committee on EVEL when the committee hasn't even been set up yet (and the promise Cameron had made was to consult the committee, not the head).

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 12:40 pm

Afternoon all.

Just back in to hear Martha Kearney announcing that Osborne was 'brandishing his red box' on the steps of Downing Street. I hate all this hackneyed bragging rhetoric ... it's political willy waving.

And now he's announcing their intention to 'finish the job'. From him and the Tories I find that a very chilling phrase.

He is claiming the country elected a 'strong majority government' to get on with the job .....

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 12:40 pm

Willow904 wrote:Just caught PMQs.

There have been quite a few asides from BBC journalists about how the Tories can more easily get things through early on "while Labour is in disarray".

If that was the plan, I think Harman just torpedoed it. She had Cameron pretty much skewered on everything she raised from sport participation since the Olympics (down), Human Rights Act and questioning whether Cameron is following proper parliamentary procedure in his attempt to bring about EVEL.

Significantly, she effectively raised doubts about the truthfulness of Cameron's answers, highlighting the dodgy use of different time scales and questioning his claim of having consulting the head of the procedure committee on EVEL when the committee hasn't even been set up yet (and the promise Cameron had made was to consult the committee, not the head).

...and yet according to AS :
"Snap PMQs verdict: A comfortable win for Cameron, even if he was deploying some statistical jiggery-pokery during the exchanges on sport. (Harman was asking a specific question about sports participation since 2012, but Cameron brushed her aside with a series of more general sports participation stats.) Harman’s Magna Carta question did not get through Cameron’s defences, and, although, on English votes for English laws (Evel), she had a point about Cameron not consulting the procedure committee, it is hard to score a hit at PMQs with a point about select committee consultation, and Cameron’s general point about Labour’s evasiveness on Evel was more telling."

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 12:42 pm

Sarah Champion MP ‏@SarahChampionMP 33s33 seconds ago
I've no doubt Osborne will "finish the job" - there are still some working families, young people & disabled hanging in there, not for long!

Exactly.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 12:42 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:Afternoon all.

Just back in to hear Martha Kearney announcing that Osborne was 'brandishing his red box' on the steps of Downing Street. I hate all this hackneyed bragging rhetoric ... it's political willy waving.

And now he's announcing their intention to 'finish the job'. From him and the Tories I find that a very chilling phrase.

He is claiming the country elected a 'strong majority government' to get on with the job .....

That can't be this one then, given that the *government* majority is now much smaller than in 2010-15?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 12:54 pm

Andy Bell ‏@andybell5news 17s17 seconds ago
Ed Miliband will feel vindicated on permanent non dom status being abolished - not to mention energy market inquiry this week #Budget

and

Chris Ship ‏@chrisshipitv 4m4 minutes ago
Shows how stung George Osborne was when Labour hit him with plans to abolish non doms in the election campaign

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 12:58 pm

Nick Robinson ‏@bbcnickrobinson 2m2 minutes ago
Threat by HSBC to re-locate pays off as @George_Osborne promises to phase out bank levy & restrict to UK balance sheets #Budget2015

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 1:03 pm

Diana Johnson retweeted
Clare Moody MEP ‏@ClareMoodyMEP 2m2 minutes ago
Today's #TTIP vote result: @EuroLabour MEPs secure protection of public services w. full carve-out from #TTIP text:

YAY! - if that means what I think it means.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 1:08 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:
Willow904 wrote:Just caught PMQs.

There have been quite a few asides from BBC journalists about how the Tories can more easily get things through early on "while Labour is in disarray".

If that was the plan, I think Harman just torpedoed it. She had Cameron pretty much skewered on everything she raised from sport participation since the Olympics (down), Human Rights Act and questioning whether Cameron is following proper parliamentary procedure in his attempt to bring about EVEL.

Significantly, she effectively raised doubts about the truthfulness of Cameron's answers, highlighting the dodgy use of different time scales and questioning his claim of having consulting the head of the procedure committee on EVEL when the committee hasn't even been set up yet (and the promise Cameron had made was to consult the committee, not the head).
...and yet according to AS :
"Snap PMQs verdict: A comfortable win for Cameron, even if he was deploying some statistical jiggery-pokery during the exchanges on sport. (Harman was asking a specific question about sports participation since 2012, but Cameron brushed her aside with a series of more general sports participation stats.) Harman’s Magna Carta question did not get through Cameron’s defences, and, although, on English votes for English laws (Evel), she had a point about Cameron not consulting the procedure committee, it is hard to score a hit at PMQs with a point about select committee consultation, and Cameron’s general point about Labour’s evasiveness on Evel was more telling."

Yeah, I know. I read that after I posted here and just couldn't square it with what I'd just watched. Cameron was all over the place, stumbling over his words and at one point later referred to someone else as the "Prime Minister" before correcting himself in one of the most incoherent sentences I've ever heard from him. In the battle of the selective facts, Cameron came off much worse, at one point trying to take credit for a rise in sport participation since London won the Olympics bid, when attempting to avoid admitting it had gone down since 2012 (which it has). Really desperate stuff.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 1:09 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:
Willow904 wrote:Just caught PMQs.

There have been quite a few asides from BBC journalists about how the Tories can more easily get things through early on "while Labour is in disarray".

If that was the plan, I think Harman just torpedoed it. She had Cameron pretty much skewered on everything she raised from sport participation since the Olympics (down), Human Rights Act and questioning whether Cameron is following proper parliamentary procedure in his attempt to bring about EVEL.

Significantly, she effectively raised doubts about the truthfulness of Cameron's answers, highlighting the dodgy use of different time scales and questioning his claim of having consulting the head of the procedure committee on EVEL when the committee hasn't even been set up yet (and the promise Cameron had made was to consult the committee, not the head).
...and yet according to AS :
"Snap PMQs verdict: A comfortable win for Cameron, even if he was deploying some statistical jiggery-pokery during the exchanges on sport. (Harman was asking a specific question about sports participation since 2012, but Cameron brushed her aside with a series of more general sports participation stats.) Harman’s Magna Carta question did not get through Cameron’s defences, and, although, on English votes for English laws (Evel), she had a point about Cameron not consulting the procedure committee, it is hard to score a hit at PMQs with a point about select committee consultation, and Cameron’s general point about Labour’s evasiveness on Evel was more telling."

I haven't even visited that site since election day - based on that I'm not missing much

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 1:16 pm

Hi. Moving away from the budget for a moment (whiny voice going on in background,) I decided to look up this Active People Survey Cameron mentioned during PMQs that show an increase in sport. Lo and behold I can only find references up to 2012 on their website http://archive.sportengland.org/researc ... urvey.aspx.

Even when we look at that it is only a survey of 30 mins exercise per week and most sporting categories show a decrease. Perhaps Dave would like to clarify; to the House of course since he made such statements at the dispatch box.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 1:22 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
StephenDolan wrote: Are we talking a dubai style property development retreat or properties being sold?
Yes.
If it's the former Osborne could have a problem, if the latter there's a nice stamp duty windfall.

Thank you, StephenDolan, you're perceptive you know, intelligent.
I understand better now.
I still don't know which one though London is London - I can't see a full Dubai-type failure there. I'm probably wrong.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 1:28 pm

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam 3m3 minutes ago
Osborne: Social rents charged by housing associations to be cut by 1%, not frozen. that sounds brutal for their finances/ bonds.

What twisted logic has he applied to make a case for that? Social rents aren't the problem ...

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 1:46 pm

Looking forward to the Devil in the detail being highlighted in the coming hours and days.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 3:36 pm

C'mon, has Osborne made everybody here lose the power of speech?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 3:38 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:C'mon, has Osborne made everybody here lose the power of speech?

Yes.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 3:39 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:C'mon, has Osborne made everybody here lose the power of speech?

Yep - I'm having my accountant run over the figures before commenting

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 3:40 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:C'mon, has Osborne made everybody here lose the power of speech?

Well I did wonder about commenting on that big push for a massive social housing building plan, Anatoly, but then Harriet didn't even bring that up.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 3:41 pm

StephenDolan wrote:Looking forward to the Devil in the detail being highlighted in the coming hours and days.

The devil & Chancellor Jeff are welcome to each other
entire Tory government can hightail it straight to where they'd not choose to go on their own

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 3:44 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:C'mon, has Osborne made everybody here lose the power of speech?

Driving back from the hospital so a bit distracted, but heard something about him introducing the living wage with a rise of 40 pence above minimum wage. I've been wondering what people will spend it on.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 3:46 pm

Is it me or has he nicked a lot of Labour's ideas?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 3:56 pm

They've backed away from tax credit cuts and just frozen them for 4 years. That's something, I suppose. They realized that it would be disastrous politically.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:01 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam 3m3 minutes ago
Osborne: Social rents charged by housing associations to be cut by 1%, not frozen. that sounds brutal for their finances/ bonds.
What twisted logic has he applied to make a case for that? Social rents aren't the problem ...

Ah, what the hell does Jeff mean?
'Social rents charged by housing associations to be cut by 1%'?
Those renting from a housing association currently blessed with not having to apply for lawful entitlements paid for by taxation we all pay into UK social security provision system are being pestered by this Tory chancellor how, now?
Could someone please explain what the dude is doing here?
Is this legal?

the Book Tax next
Own more than x number of books?
You're not entitled to more than x number of books, because the Tory chancellor has to pay down the deficit the mess Labour made by teaching you to read so pay up if you want to keep your books longtermeconomicplan
I thought about teeth taxes but that's too close to too awful

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:06 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:They've backed away from tax credit cuts and just frozen them for 4 years. That's something, I suppose. They realized that it would be disastrous politically.

Good afternoon, Tubby Isaacs, thank you for your posts last night.
I responded to a couple posts expressing disagreement with your analysis.
If I've misunderstood your commentary or if you disagree with my posts, don't hesitate to let me know, I can't learn what I don't know I'm ignorant about.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:08 pm

He stole Labour's clothes.

The Living Wage thing is pure pre-distribution.

I don't like it (the best way of helping the poor is to give them money rather than fix prices) but it is good politics.

it didn't leak and so Harman fluffed her reply, talking about cuts to tax credits without any scheme to raise wages, when the whole point was he had just introduced such a scheme.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:09 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Is it me or has he nicked a lot of Labour's ideas?

I'm glad the Tory Chancellor's disposed of non-dom status but I've not read or heard his exact words on the subject he may have made it worse.

mbc1955 · Post by **mbc1955** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:16 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:
Willow904 wrote:Just caught PMQs.

There have been quite a few asides from BBC journalists about how the Tories can more easily get things through early on "while Labour is in disarray".

If that was the plan, I think Harman just torpedoed it. She had Cameron pretty much skewered on everything she raised from sport participation since the Olympics (down), Human Rights Act and questioning whether Cameron is following proper parliamentary procedure in his attempt to bring about EVEL.

Significantly, she effectively raised doubts about the truthfulness of Cameron's answers, highlighting the dodgy use of different time scales and questioning his claim of having consulting the head of the procedure committee on EVEL when the committee hasn't even been set up yet (and the promise Cameron had made was to consult the committee, not the head).
...and yet according to AS :
"Snap PMQs verdict: A comfortable win for Cameron, even if he was deploying some statistical jiggery-pokery during the exchanges on sport. (Harman was asking a specific question about sports participation since 2012, but Cameron brushed her aside with a series of more general sports participation stats.) Harman’s Magna Carta question did not get through Cameron’s defences, and, although, on English votes for English laws (Evel), she had a point about Cameron not consulting the procedure committee, it is hard to score a hit at PMQs with a point about select committee consultation, and Cameron’s general point about Labour’s evasiveness on Evel was more telling."

Haven't we had more than enough evidence already that, in spite of its spurious calls for Membership support in 'speaking truth to power', the Guardian's Chief Political blogger is no more than a lying, canting shill for Tory propaganda? Truth to power, my arse, when you can't even speak the truth to your readers.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:16 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:He stole Labour's clothes.

The Living Wage thing is pure pre-distribution.

I don't like it (the best way of helping the poor is to give them money rather than fix prices) but it is good politics.

it didn't leak and so Harman fluffed her reply, talking about cuts to tax credits without any scheme to raise wages, when the whole point was he had just introduced such a scheme.

It is significantly less impressive when the details are looked at (surprise!)

This budget will unravel in the next few days as Osborne's efforts usually do. I expect next year's offering will be considerably less triumphalist.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:18 pm

So now we know.

It's jam tomorrow for hardworkingfamilies(TM) and Osborne's "rabbit out of the hat" moment came with his announcement of the New Tory National Living Wage! Cue IDS laughing uproariously and order papers raining down like confetti accompanied by whooping and cheering.

This will be £9 an hour by 2020. It will be £7.20 an hour by next April. Unless there's a change of plan. Of course, as NMW rises with inflation, the NMW will be £6.70 in October and would have been close to £7 by next April anyway on its current trajectory - and £9 by 2020.

So it's bollocks.

The Living Wage Foundation currently has the Living Wage outside London at £7.85 an hour, and at £9.15 an hour in London. It is due to be recalculated in November - and is likely to be in the region of £8.25/£9.65.

WRAG effectively gone - yes, the grouping will still exist, but for all "new" claimants assessed by the WCA from now (including all those "old" ones who have been waiting a year or more for their first assessments) a WRAG allocation will not mean any extra money.
Support Group claimants get to keep their extra money - but only as long as the next or subsequent WCAs don't put them in WRAG or on JSA.
This will be a saving for IDS so that he can squander some more of our dosh on his useless vanity projects.

Most of the rest we already knew.

According to the IFS, the statements on Universal Credit mean a "much less generous" system that the one originally proposed (as if it wasn't bad enough) and the cuts to tax credits will push another 40,000 children into poverty. Personally, I think it'll be more than that.
Osborne has given with one hand and taken more away with the other as far as poor people are concerned.

So Osborne has stolen Labour's plan for wages but not been quite as generous; he has cut every bit as severely as expected; he has cut corporation tax; he has pegged public sector pay rises at 1% for another 4 years (making it 9 years on the trot) thus effectively cutting it again; his new non-dom rule only affects people who live here for 15 of the last 20 years and won't come into effect for another 2 years.

I do not believe for one nano-second that there will be £8 Billion more for the NHS. I'll wait for the small print.

To recap - own property worth a lot of money, you're OK; be a non-dom, you're OK for now; be a corporation, and you get a tax break; be a public sector worker, and you don't need a pay rise even if the rest of Britain needs a pay rise; be sick and you're fucked.

S.N.A.F.U. as my father used to say.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:18 pm

citizenJA wrote:... I can't learn what I don't know I'm ignorant about.

Whereas it's my ignorance that has taught me how little I know, гражданка.