The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[badgerx16]

FTSE and the pound are up this morning on early trading.

[trousers]

12 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

FTSE and the pound are up this morning on early trading.

Excellent news... Means my pension fund should start rising again... Which means more inheritance tax for good causes... Win win!

[egg]

48 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

FTSE and the pound are up this morning on early trading.

Sadly 5 and 10 year UK Gilts are going in the same direction. 

[OldNick]

12 hours ago, egg said:

Examples - Smith & Nephew down 12.48%, Persimmon 7.47%, Taylor Wimpey 6.7%, Howden/Whitbread/Barratt all down over 5%. Similar on the 250 - Bellway, Crest, Wetherspoon etc. Housing and alcohol related stock has taken a battering today.The market isn't seeing optimism in those sectors. 

that is a surprise re the house builders. Would have thought they would be good. I can only assume they feel that inflation and mortgages are on the way up . That is a shame, Im not partisan as I want us all to do well, but if the markets are not reacting well!

As for some not worrying too much about the fall of the pound, remember that commodities are bought with the dollar and so fuel etc will go up, adding to infltion.

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, egg said:

Sadly 5 and 10 year UK Gilts are going in the same direction. 

At a 12 month high for 10 year this morning. 

[pingpong]

Oh no.

 

https://www.pensions-expert.com/Investment/Budget-2024-Bond-managers-downplay-gilt-market-volatility?ct=true

 

[whelk]

It’s all the lads are talking about on the building site today. What’s going on in the gilt markets?

 

[iansums]

The difference between this budget and Truss's is that this has been drip-fed over a period of months whereas Truss's came as a complete shock, they tried to do too much, too soon and of course did not get the OBR 'approval'. This was a budget harking back to the 'old' Labour ways and a budget for the public sector, the private can go fuck itself, let's see how that works out.

[The Left Back]

5 hours ago, iansums said:

The difference between this budget and Truss's is that this has been drip-fed over a period of months whereas Truss's came as a complete shock, they tried to do too much, too soon and of course did not get the OBR 'approval'. This was a budget harking back to the 'old' Labour ways and a budget for the public sector, the private can go fuck itself, let's see how that works out.

Agree this was a budget harking back to labour, and long overdue.  And it will make a nice rest and a change for the private sector to be fucking itself rather than fucking us.

[whelk]

Can’t believe the news channels aren’t leading with the catastrophic market performance of Stirling and the FTSE since the budget. Come on let’s wheel out Ed Conway 

Edited November 1 by whelk

[iansums]

31 minutes ago, The Left Back said:

Agree this was a budget harking back to labour, and long overdue.  And it will make a nice rest and a change for the private sector to be fucking itself rather than fucking us.

Agreed, terrible the way those small businesses treated you.

[The Kraken]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

Can’t believe the news channels aren’t leading with the catastrophic market performance of Stirling and the FTSE since the budget. Come on let’s wheel out Ed Conway 

FTSE up today more than it dropped yesterday. Panic stations.

[Gloucester Saint]

7 hours ago, iansums said:

The difference between this budget and Truss's is that this has been drip-fed over a period of months whereas Truss's came as a complete shock, they tried to do too much, too soon and of course did not get the OBR 'approval'. This was a budget harking back to the 'old' Labour ways and a budget for the public sector, the private can go fuck itself, let's see how that works out.

Businesses got plenty of help through the pandemic and we’re all paying that back for generations. Getting NHS waiting lists down means that we can get more of the working age population active to help close the skills gaps which helps all types of businesses. A hard Brexit means a £40bn black hole annually until some of it can be undone. Agree on the Truss bit.

Also, our economy is far more complex than public v private these days. GP practices, charities, FE and universities technically in the latter and will be impacted hugely by the NI increases but it does fund other infrastructure they need.

Edited November 1 by Gloucester Saint

[trousers]

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Businesses got plenty of help through the pandemic and we’re all paying that back for generations. Getting NHS waiting lists down means that we can get more of the working age population active to help close the skills gaps which helps all types of businesses. A hard Brexit means a £40bn black hole annually until some of it can be undone. Agree on the Truss bit.

Also, our economy is far more complex than public v private these days. GP practices, charities, FE and universities technically in the latter and will be impacted hugely by the NI increases but it does fund other infrastructure they need.

Businesses got loans which they are still having to pay back. What help were you thinking about?

[CB Fry]

40 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Businesses got loans which they are still having to pay back. What help were you thinking about?

Nope. Loads of business got grants that did not need to be paid back at all. The £10k grant springs to mind immediately.

[egg]

2 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

Nope. Loads of business got grants that did not need to be paid back at all. The £10k grant springs to mind immediately.

Indeed. And a loan is help.  

[CB Fry]

£22bn in grants paid out between March 2020 and March 2022.

Does not include Furlough to cover wages.

[CB Fry]

Furlough £96billion.

Not loans.

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, CB Fry said:

Furlough £96billion.

Not loans.

None of the furlough money went to businesses. It went to the staff. The employers still had to pay NI and pension contributions.

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, CB Fry said:

Furlough £96billion.

Not loans.

All went to employees. None to any business.

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, egg said:

Indeed. And a loan is help.  

They weren’t free.

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, CB Fry said:

Nope. Loads of business got grants that did not need to be paid back at all. The £10k grant springs to mind immediately.

The £10k grant was only available to businesses that paid no or very little business rates.

[CB Fry]

6 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

All went to employees. None to any business.

The government did not pay employees directly, the businesses claimed it. Employees are a business so your distinction is telling.

If you're going to pretend that the only help business got was "loans" then fine but it's not true.

 

[egg]

8 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

They weren’t free.

Your idea of "help" is a "gift", not help. Loans helped businesses through difficult times and should be repaid.

I'm not sure why there's this expectation that the state gifts monies. 

[rallyboy]

13 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Businesses got plenty of help through the pandemic

Not all businesses, many were left out while some trades were gifted support they didn't need, as people on here will know from personal experience.

Yes, it had to be done quickly but the whole Covid support funding was poorly arranged allowing some fraudsters to exploit it.

As someone who paid huge amounts of taxes over decades but got zero support, my memory of that time will always be a government literally gifting millions of pounds to its friends and family through furlough and PPE contracts, in a blatant display of corruption.

Hopefully the Covid Fraud team will be knocking on doors soon.

[Lord Duckhunter]

16 hours ago, The Left Back said:

Agree this was a budget harking back to labour, and long overdue.  And it will make a nice rest and a change for the private sector to be fucking itself rather than fucking us.

What about the care sector, can they “fuck themselves”? Care England saying it’ll add £2.4 billion to care home employment costs.
 

GP”s? fuck them as well. BMA saying employment costs added to GP’s are “monumental”.
 

Charities! go fuck yourselves as well, what do they need the billions it’ll cost them for? , RSPCA saying it’ll cost them  £1 million in extra payroll taxes alone. 

Anyone who thinks tax can be raised from bus8ness alone with no knock on effect on “working people” is deluded. And what’s it for, the OBR growth predictions are horrendous. 

This borrow, tax and spend budget together with his general unpopularity will ensure he’ll only get 5 years. 

[whelk]

Yeah first 3 months will fully dictate how 5 years goes.

Although NI ncreases are definitely going to impact operating costs of plenty of areas that can ill afford it eg Local Govt

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c629zw75x58o

 

[hypochondriac]

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1852464766226190756?t=Ar_AmmYUdwVumGFiru3IEw&s=19

I can't stand lammy but christ this tedious bunch of cunts make me want to support him. Wish he'd just tell them to fuck off. 

[The Left Back]

8 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

What about the care sector, can they “fuck themselves”? Care England saying it’ll add £2.4 billion to care home employment costs.
 

GP”s? fuck them as well. BMA saying employment costs added to GP’s are “monumental”.
 

Charities! go fuck yourselves as well, what do they need the billions it’ll cost them for? , RSPCA saying it’ll cost them  £1 million in extra payroll taxes alone. 

Anyone who thinks tax can be raised from bus8ness alone with no knock on effect on “working people” is deluded. And what’s it for, the OBR growth predictions are horrendous. 

This borrow, tax and spend budget together with his general unpopularity will ensure he’ll only get 5 years. 

He may only get 5 years but what a great 5 years it promises to be.  I'm already enjoying the impact it's having on the those who have been defending the absolute shit show we've all lived through over the last 14 years.  5 years might not be enough to repair all of the damage done but if they can keep their nerve and ignore the frothing southern gammons and the masochistic northern Anderson wannabes they can certainly make an impact.

[iansums]

16 minutes ago, The Left Back said:

He may only get 5 years but what a great 5 years it promises to be.  I'm already enjoying the impact it's having on the those who have been defending the absolute shit show we've all lived through over the last 14 years.  5 years might not be enough to repair all of the damage done but if they can keep their nerve and ignore the frothing southern gammons and the masochistic northern Anderson wannabes they can certainly make an impact.

I think you’re going to be a little disappointed ☹️ 

[Gloucester Saint]

10 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

What about the care sector, can they “fuck themselves”? Care England saying it’ll add £2.4 billion to care home employment costs.
 

GP”s? fuck them as well. BMA saying employment costs added to GP’s are “monumental”.
 

Charities! go fuck yourselves as well, what do they need the billions it’ll cost them for? , RSPCA saying it’ll cost them  £1 million in extra payroll taxes alone. 

Anyone who thinks tax can be raised from bus8ness alone with no knock on effect on “working people” is deluded. And what’s it for, the OBR growth predictions are horrendous. 

This borrow, tax and spend budget together with his general unpopularity will ensure he’ll only get 5 years. 

There’s some truth in this but also some balancing factors missing. Universities I was reading today also have an additional NI bill of around £400m in a sector which is already cutting jobs. GPs, social care and charities also impacted as you’ve highlighted.
However, around £20bn of the deficit costs left behind by the Conservatives was Brexit leaving costs so we can’t have it both ways. If you think a hard Brexit is great, that’s up to you but whoever won in July had to pay the bill and there isn’t a magic money tree. 52% of the electorate wanted it and 100% of us have to fund it, self-defeating though I think Brexit was. 
Also, we need to get more of the workforce fit and ready for work. There are yawning skills gaps and the welfare bill has been too high for a few years.

Finally, there is no way Badenoch is winning the next election. Her target is to get the majority down to 60-80 seats. That would represent significant progress. Whether Starmer gets more than 5 years is a different story. 

 

[Tamesaint]

11 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

 

This borrow, tax and spend budget together with his general unpopularity will ensure he’ll only get 5 years. 

With Badenoch in charge there is no way that the Conservatives will be in power in 5 years time. 

 

[The Kraken]

10 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

With Badenoch in charge there is no way that the Conservatives will be in power in 5 years time. 

 

Don’t go stamping on people’s dreams. Posters on here have been given infraction points for that before.

 

Edited November 2 by The Kraken

[Lord Duckhunter]

11 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

There’s some truth in this but also some balancing factors missing. Universities I was reading today also have an additional NI bill of around £400m in a sector which is already cutting jobs. GPs, social care and charities also impacted as you’ve highlighted.

If they wanted to raise a significant amount through NI, they should have reversed Hunts last cut. They made a political choice which will do more harm & actually flatten growth, & they’ve always claimed it’s the proceeds of growth that will deliver the improvements it public services & the NHS. If the OBR are right with their growth projections there won’t be any noticeable difference & they’ll need to come back with more tax rises or borrow more. 
 

I was critical of Sunaks last budget & of Hunts previous efforts but as soon as there’s a hint of criticism of Starmers his fan boys on here get all upset. Employers NI is the absolute worse lever to pull whether you’re Labour or Conservative, to do it for party political purposes (because you can blur the working people line) will come back and bite them. 

[whelk]

I love the premise is that if businesses have to pay more tax they inevitably contract and there is no growth.

Labour were so cautious about tax rises and boxed themselves in. The NI bribe/cuts from Truss and Hunt were clearly not truly affordable but didn’t have the balls in Hunts case to resist calls for tax cuts. Truss was clearly just insane from the start, 

money supply is money supply though but when it is comes to business we are all lead to believe their margins are so small, many will go t9 the wall well if a small increase in NI tips you over then your business model isn’t hugely viable . Anyway as with all budgets we will have to wait and see its success or failure but the constant need for endless analysis and then presenting predictions as fact is comical. Economies are complex beasts despite being shown as simple.

[Lord Duckhunter]

The OBR are the ones predicting poor growth in years 4 & 5. 

[whelk]

26 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

The OBR are the ones predicting poor growth in years 4 & 5. 

 

[egg]

50 minutes ago, whelk said:

I love the premise is that if businesses have to pay more tax they inevitably contract and there is no growth.

Labour were so cautious about tax rises and boxed themselves in. The NI bribe/cuts from Truss and Hunt were clearly not truly affordable but didn’t have the balls in Hunts case to resist calls for tax cuts. Truss was clearly just insane from the start, 

money supply is money supply though but when it is comes to business we are all lead to believe their margins are so small, many will go t9 the wall well if a small increase in NI tips you over then your business model isn’t hugely viable . Anyway as with all budgets we will have to wait and see its success or failure but the constant need for endless analysis and then presenting predictions as fact is comical. Economies are complex beasts despite being shown as simple.

The impact will be more significant than you believe. In round numbers, the NI change is about £800 a year for income up to £10k, and then an extra 1.2% for everything on top. The NI bill for a business with a wage bill of c.£3m will increase circa £120k. Many employers will maintain profits by job losses which is damaging in all manner of ways. 

Lower down the scale, I know of small businesses who'll be letting staff go as they can't cover the extra NI and still make the profit to justify the effort and risk of  running the business. 

You're right that labour boxed themselves in so left themselves little choice other than this. The impact will be seen in time, but it won't be positive. 

[whelk]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

The impact will be more significant than you believe. In round numbers, the NI change is about £800 a year for income up to £10k, and then an extra 1.2% for everything on top. The NI bill for a business with a wage bill of c.£3m will increase circa £120k. Many employers will maintain profits by job losses which is damaging in all manner of ways. 

Lower down the scale, I know of small businesses who'll be letting staff go as they can't cover the extra NI and still make the profit to justify the effort and risk of  running the business. 

You're right that labour boxed themselves in so left themselves little choice other than this. The impact will be seen in time, but it won't be positive. 

It’s a Labour government. People want public services funded. The line repeated ad nauseam that if businesses pay more everyone suffers. Let’s see, but you are basically coming with arguments promoted by a party that were annihilated at last election. see Hypo’s hyperbole about CGT, Duckhunter on rent caps, VAT on private schools, abolishing non doms etc All policies that have arguments to help the wealthy. Absolutely no tax is popular and each has a credible counter argument as to why it should be lower. FWIW I am not hugely keen on the NI measures introduced and understand your concerns but clearly whatever they did would have the press and Tories wailing.

[egg]

 

18 minutes ago, whelk said:

It’s a Labour government. People want public services funded. The line repeated ad nauseam that if businesses pay more everyone suffers. Let’s see, but you are basically coming with arguments promoted by a party that were annihilated at last election. see Hypo’s hyperbole about CGT, Duckhunter on rent caps, VAT on private schools, abolishing non doms etc All policies that have arguments to help the wealthy. Absolutely no tax is popular and each has a credible counter argument as to why it should be lower. FWIW I am not hugely keen on the NI measures introduced and understand your concerns but clearly whatever they did would have the press and Tories wailing.

I've got no issue with most of what they did - vat on school fees, non dom changes, CGT (I'd have gone higher), or pretty much everything else (iht on pensions and farms excepted), but this NI change for me will be really damaging for employees and employers. 

My view is  not from a position of political ideology, as perhaps is the case for others, but as a business owner. My politics are that public services should be improved, and that those with the broadest shoulders should pay. Leaving the responsibility for bailing us out on all businesses, regardless of their ability to pay, means plenty of narrow shoulders will carry the weight. 

[Weston Super Saint]

3 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

If they wanted to raise a significant amount through NI, they should have reversed Hunts last cut.

I assume that's next on the list after today's admission that they should never have promised taxes won't rise in their manifesto.

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 hours ago, egg said:

My view is  not from a position of political ideology, as perhaps is the case for others, but as a business owner. My politics are that public services should be improved, and that those with the broadest shoulders should pay. Leaving the responsibility for bailing us out on all businesses, regardless of their ability to pay, means plenty of narrow shoulders will carry the weight. 

Some people seem to think there’s 2 groups of tax payers, business & people, and taxing business doesn’t eventually filter down to working people. Labour know this full well, but because they made this ridiculous triple tax lock, have had to use this damaging measure. There’s a legitimate argument to be had as to whether  raising tax to invest in public services will result in better services and stimulate growth, and we’d be on different sides of that argument. But I can’t believe anyone from your side of the debate can seriously think increasing pay roll taxes is the particular lever to pull.

For people who’ve spent years bemoaning Tory selfishness & incompetence to support this measure is bizarre. A prime example of putting party before country. If they wanted to raise this amount, reversing previous NI would be a far less damaging measure. I’m sure they’ll come to regret not doing so in the long run. 

 

Edited November 3 by Lord Duckhunter

[egg]

10 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Some people seem to think there’s 2 groups of tax payers, business & people, and taxing business doesn’t eventually filter down to working people. Labour know this full well, but because they made this ridiculous triple tax lock, have had to use this damaging measure. There’s a legitimate argument to be had as to whether  raising tax to invest in public services will result in better services and stimulate growth, and we’d be on different sides of that argument. But I can’t believe anyone from your side of the debate can seriously think increasing pay roll taxes is the particular lever to pull.

For people who’ve spent years bemoaning Tory selfishness & incompetence to support this measure is bizarre. A prime example of putting party before country. If they wanted to raise this amount, reversing previous NI would be a far less damaging measure. I’m sure they’ll come to regret not doing so in the long run. 

 

On your first point, yep, there appears to be a perception that businesses can just do this and the people won't get hurt. That ain't the reality. 

On the rest, they had to raise this money as we're skint and public services are on their knees so I'm not sure that an if should attach to the raising money question. Where people's views vary on this is whether they consider it necessary to support increased public expenditure through increased taxes. I do. 

The issue is the how to go about it. They should never have boxed themselves into the corner of not being able to reverse the daft Tory NI give away. Madness from both parties but Reeves should have just reversed it and been done with it. 

[trousers]

Apologies if this has already been asked/addressed, but if the Employer NI increase is such a good idea, why have they exempted the NHS (and other public sector employers?) from it? Doesn't having to exempt some employers simply undermine how good an idea it was in the first place? 

[The Kraken]

52 minutes ago, trousers said:

Apologies if this has already been asked/addressed, but if the Employer NI increase is such a good idea, why have they exempted the NHS (and other public sector employers?) from it? Doesn't having to exempt some employers simply undermine how good an idea it was in the first place? 

I don’t think anybody has said it was a good idea?  Taxes had to go up somehow after the last two cuts in NI which were pretty much done as a vote win bribe, but Labour painted themselves in a corner with a daft election policy that direct taxes for the working person wouldn’t go up. So this was their workaround, and seems pretty poorly executed.

Personally I’d have much preferred honesty from the very start. Call the NI cuts what they were, unaffordable bribes, and state that they’ll be reversed. But that wasn’t a vote winning policy, even though it was pretty obvious it was going to happen.

[whelk]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

Apologies if this has already been asked/addressed, but if the Employer NI increase is such a good idea, why have they exempted the NHS (and other public sector employers?) from it? Doesn't having to exempt some employers simply undermine how good an idea it was in the first place? 

I’d need a table and some beans. Basically increasing tax on a service (that does not make a profit) and to use those additional tax revenues to fund said service doesn’t make too much sense.

[Weston Super Saint]

33 minutes ago, whelk said:

I’d need a table and some beans. Basically increasing tax on a service (that does not make a profit) and to use those additional tax revenues to fund said service doesn’t make too much sense.

Taxing charities on the other hand is fair game, serves them right for their profiteering.

[Farmer Saint]

10 hours ago, whelk said:

It’s a Labour government. People want public services funded. The line repeated ad nauseam that if businesses pay more everyone suffers. Let’s see, but you are basically coming with arguments promoted by a party that were annihilated at last election. see Hypo’s hyperbole about CGT, Duckhunter on rent caps, VAT on private schools, abolishing non doms etc All policies that have arguments to help the wealthy. Absolutely no tax is popular and each has a credible counter argument as to why it should be lower. FWIW I am not hugely keen on the NI measures introduced and understand your concerns but clearly whatever they did would have the press and Tories wailing.

It amazes me the fuss that is being made when a Labour Government do a Labour thing.

Out of everyone on here, I should be the most pissed off - you lot have not seen anywhere near the amount of money wiped off their estate that I have.

However, I have consistently said to my family and friends that I would happily pay more tax if we see investment in public services and infrastructure. This is what we are getting.

All the shit about the OBR forecasts as well. Who gives a fuck what they're saying in 4 to 5 years, there are tons of budgets within that timeframe to take into account the fucked up geo-political landscape and the economic wasteland that is Brexit.

Suck it up blue bitches - the only reason we have a Labour government is because of the pure incompetence, dishonesty and corruption of your party. You lot only have yourselves to blame.

[Whitey Grandad]

42 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

It amazes me the fuss that is being made when a Labour Government do a Labour thing.

Out of everyone on here, I should be the most pissed off - you lot have not seen anywhere near the amount of money wiped off their estate that I have.

However, I have consistently said to my family and friends that I would happily pay more tax if we see investment in public services and infrastructure. This is what we are getting.

All the shit about the OBR forecasts as well. Who gives a fuck what they're saying in 4 to 5 years, there are tons of budgets within that timeframe to take into account the fucked up geo-political landscape and the economic wasteland that is Brexit.

Suck it up blue bitches - the only reason we have a Labour government is because of the pure incompetence, dishonesty and corruption of your party. You lot only have yourselves to blame.

I tend to agree but my concern is that what they call ‘investment’ is actually going to be more subsidies. In my world investment should lead to returns somewhere down the line.

Infrastructure is what we are badly lacking.