| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Inward investment is far higher in France than the UK despite a higher equivalent CT rate.Originally Posted by Vindec
The BBC also said that the energy crisis is INSIGNIFICANT now the news the Queen was unwell had broken.
How long are we going to put up with this shit? I’ve people on my social media more concerned about a wealthy 96 year old than millions of elderly across the country. This country is ****ED
You are correct, debt doesn't have to be paid off just serviced correctly.
The concern currently is that the markets are getting quite jittery about UK PLC's ability to service current debt and therefore future borrowing by the government will become more expensive.
I see no reason why excess profits shouldn't be taxed heavily. These profits are way above the norm and in no way due to companies investment or innovation. If it can be done then do it. I doubt it will be as much as the LP say but something is better than nothing.
If the LP were in government and enacting Truss's policy the Tory boys on here would be screaming blue murder about unfunded policy, maxing out credit cards or other such nonsense.
Like most of our right wing print media they're hypocrites.
You are such a total hypocrite. Got caught out by your own words there AZ.
There is no ideology with you, just political point scoring. Quite clearly when it suits you (to lock us down) borrowing huge sums is fine) when it doesnt (to help with bills) it's not.
TBF, you live a long way away and no doubt have no trouble with your bills and you presumably aren't aware of whats been happening and the bills people and business were facing that now aren't. And nor do you seem to care that much of it. My mother was terrified of the winter. Now she isn't. A mate thought he would close his business this winter, now he won't.
Let me help: People need help with bills NOW. Taxing an entirely unknown sum that could be avoided or may never exist in a years time does not cut it. Those companies will also be paying billions more in tax through profits, but again, that is not with us yet and people need help now.
The solution may be imperfect and temporary but it solves a problem, whereas you offer ideological whingeing that solves nothing and is totally the opposite of what you said a few months ago.
They haven't made the profits yet. They are predicted over the coming year and more and will pay taxes on them at that point. People need help with bills now. How do you suggest we pay for that?
You are defending Truss not because she's pulled out a rabbit.....she hasn't....but because she's a feckin tory
Ff sake
I can't stand the modern Labour Party and think starmer is a wet fact but realise its the only hope we have
Anything here about the Tories and you are on them like a rash defending them
It's an embarrassment
Please don't come out with this oh I am a moderate tory and have even voted for others
Absolute bollocks , you are a raving conservative , it would be better if you dropped your cloak , you are covered in blue and it's not Cardiff City
Through borrowing.
And if we can claw some back by further taxing any excess profits then do it.
Not forgetting the banks who will also profit (by doing bugger all) from government largesse.
Yeah, I'm defending the government who will knock £66 off my monthly bills for 6 months, are giving my kids household £1000 and are subsidising energy bills to prevent imminent economic catastrophe and total disaster for many families.
Yeah, I will defend that over a bunch of messageboard ideologues who demand something be done, and then when it is, do nothing but whinge and offer no solution bar taxing some profits that havent been made and won't be declared for a year or more. I'd rather we not borrow more, but it strikes me that something needs to be done now, not tomorrow.
Jesus wept, do you guys deliberately try and make the Left look unelectable or what?
Is anyone actually arguing that the government shouldn't borrow to pay for this?
The debate is about the fairness of how it should be repaid.
That was because of BREXIT rather than the level of Corporation Tax.
Off he goes again
It's tory boy off Harry Enfield
You're confused, paying off debt isn't the same as servicing it.
Jimbo, for your own sanity, take some time away from the site.
Please don't patronise me. We are talking here about energy bills. As I said, I suspect you are unaware quite what was facing many people this winter and you offered no solution and just criticise anything or anyone that offers one.
You are the one who seemingly wants us to subsidise this winters bills with tax revenues that don't yet exist and won't exist for a year, and do so without borrowing. Good one. You are offering nothing, which is probably why the government is not going with a proposal you endorse.
Labour wanted to freeze energy bills at the current cap £1971.Truss wants to freeze pensioners and kids.Please don't patronise me. We are talking here about energy bills. As I said, I suspect you are unaware quite what was facing many people this winter and you offered no solution and just criticise anything or anyone that offers one.
You are the one who seemingly wants us to subsidise this winters bills with tax revenues that don't yet exist and won't exist for a year, and do so without borrowing. Good one. You are offering nothing, which is probably why the government is not going with a proposal you endorse.
You lot are sounding more like Trumpers talking about Hilary by the day. LOCK HER UP!
Jimbo, don't be so tetchy.Please don't patronise me. We are talking here about energy bills. As I said, I suspect you are unaware quite what was facing many people this winter and you offered no solution and just criticise anything or anyone that offers one.
You are the one who seemingly wants us to subsidise this winters bills with tax revenues that don't yet exist and won't exist for a year, and do so without borrowing. Good one. You are offering nothing, which is probably why the government is not going with a proposal you endorse.
I didn't realize you had been given the keys to the website and set a proviso that one had to proffer a solution different to a price cap in order to contribute to this thread.
I'll explain again. What Truss is doing is adding to general taxation for years to come which will have a big depressive effect on the UK economy. The merits of her particular price cap are moot. What she should have done is funded the price cap from excess energy company profits. When those profits are realized - they are actually flowing in already whereas the tax required to service the debt in her model is way further off in terms of its realization - doesn't matter.
Basically it's a huge money grab which will further enrich already wealthy shareholders at the expense of the poor.
James is just arguing with himself about that because it is easier than facing the fact that this government has made an entirely ideological decision to not chase after companies profiteering from war.Is anyone actually arguing that the government shouldn't borrow to pay for this?
The debate is about the fairness of how it should be repaid.
My view on this is pretty simple, as long as the repayment is not regressive as was first mooted (I imagine leaked to see the reaction) with a flat levy on bills for years to come, then that is a bit of a win.
The profits are slowly flowing in, true (and a windfall tax does currently exist) but not at the rate to cover what is required to cover costs now, which is what is required.
I agree, we would all rather something be covered via someone else paying more tax, and it should be noted that extra profits will result in extra income. My point was rather that you dismissed the impact of borrowing when it suited, yet when it didn't you totally opposed it.
The reality is a solution was needed now and this winter, not just on bills, but to curb inflation and keep the economy going and preventing a recession (or a severe one). That, probably, has been done. Perfect? No. But people and businesses are in a much better position than yesterday and that should be recognised. Sometimes a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. To just simply claim 'oh we will pay for it with profits (that dont yet exist) sounds good but is no actual solution.
There's no contradiction in what I posted today what I did some time ago. Paying debt down is NOT the same as servicing it.
And what is the difference in principle between borrowing for Covid to try and mitigate an economic catastrophe and doing so for energy bills that would also create an economic catastrophe? I agree, in theory, and in practice in future there are profits to be taxed (which will be, and no doubt go into the public purse as unanticipated revenue) but that doesn't help us subsidise bills which will be done for every single household and business in the country in 20 days time.
No one wants endless borrowing, least of all the government, but staring down the barrel as we, and the rest of europe, has been, I think whats been done is right.
FT's editorial on it:
https://www.ft.com/content/b5dbef50-...6-cb1ee2682953
Liz Truss dislikes “handouts”, but she has shown a welcome readiness to be flexible when overwhelming need dictates. British families and households finally have some clarity that substantial support in paying crippling gas and electricity bills is on its way. The new prime minister’s bold package, including an energy price guarantee, is estimated to cost £150bn — more than double the Covid-19 furlough scheme. This is a huge sum, but so is the challenge.
Many more households will stay warm, fewer businesses will fail, and the economic slump this winter will feel slightly less grim. This will help to maintain resolve in the economic war against Vladimir Putin that the UK and its partners cannot afford to lose.
A two-year price cap for households is, nonetheless, a blunt instrument to tackle a multi-faceted crisis. The UK will be paying the cost for decades. As it subsidises costs regardless of income level, it provides a big giveaway to the better-off, while some of the most vulnerable will still struggle with prices at this level. The cap also lessens incentives to reduce consumption, though the price will still be significantly higher than prewar levels.
Precise details will need to be ironed out quickly. Many businesses will also be anxious about how they will cover costs after the government’s six-month price guarantee passes. Truss’s team may need to develop their package as the crisis evolves. Yet with many households and enterprises just weeks away from financial ruin, the government had to opt for speed.
The cap should pull down near-term inflation, reducing immediate debt interest costs, while also potentially easing inflation expectations. But the additional boost to demand may mean inflation proves stickier. And if wholesale prices go even higher, the government’s outlay to maintain the price freeze will increase.
After giving ground on “handouts”, Truss is determined to maintain her campaign pledge to reverse this year’s increase in national insurance and freeze corporation tax at current rates. If she goes ahead, however, borrowing will soar further, and there is little room elsewhere for cutting spending.
Revenue will have to be raised from somewhere. Sterling has crashed to its lowest since 1985 and gilt yields have pushed higher. Investors are jittery over the hefty borrowing and the risks that debt, already at 96 per cent of gross domestic product, could become unsustainable. The Bank of England will have to reassure markets that it remains committed to fighting high inflation despite the government’s intervention. A planned fiscal statement this month also needs to provide precise details on the funding plans, and an independent assessment by the Office for Budget Responsibility.
Attempting to boost energy security — in part by short-term steps to exploit more UK fossil fuels — and to reform pricing to better reflect the country’s energy mix are reasonable goals. But they must not detract from vital efforts to reduce long-term reliance on oil and gas and accelerate the transition to renewable and nuclear energy. In the near-term, gas supplies may become even more scarce, while the price cap might not restrain demand. That makes it vital for the government to push ahead with an information campaign for households and businesses to save energy and raise efficiency.
Today’s package is a crucial step in the battle against Putin’s weaponisation of gas. It will certainly not be the last. But the government must balance the urgency to protect consumers and win the economic war with the Kremlin with the need to preserve Britain’s invaluable reputation for economic prudence.
Ive been driving around today a lot with the radio on, its been a long work day ( 6am till 10.30 pm ) I needed to catch up after my holibobs ( and pay for it
I heard the news about the Price cap set at £2500 for 2 years, thought, thats not at high at £3500 for Oct, 5500 for Jan and 6600 for April 23, so well done the government, they have done something to help the situation
I then thought, I cant wait to see how the " CCMB left " have reacted to the news, of course its good news that its 2500 rather than over 6600 inside the year, it might not be ideal, but its better than leaving the mess run, but the Tories have done it, so its going to be bad, at least it'll be a good read
I was right
But extra profits will result in extra income for whom James?
In the main I support what the government are doing but abhor the fact that they are refusing to claw back some of the money they are giving these companies from the excessive profits they undoubtably will make - profits that they do not have to lift a finger for.
I'm sure lots of already well-renumerated executives will be licking their lips when their salaries increase and bonuses fly in. After all, profiting from war is hardly a new thing.
Us plebians will just have to put up with cost of repaying the borrowing, either through tax increases or - more likely - reduced expenditure on our vital public services.
And of course you would never say "Labour bad, Tory good" would you?!!Ive been driving around today a lot with the radio on, its been a long work day ( 6am till 10.30 pm ) I needed to catch up after my holibobs ( and pay for it
I heard the news about the Price cap set at £2500 for 2 years, thought, thats not at high at £3500 for Oct, 5500 for Jan and 6600 for April 23, so well done the government, they have done something to help the situation
I then thought, I cant wait to see how the " CCMB left " have reacted to the news, of course its good news that its 2500 rather than over 6600 inside the year, it might not be ideal, but its better than leaving the mess run, but the Tories have done it, so its going to be bad, at least it'll be a good read
I was right
Anyway, at least we know how hard you worked today. Bless.
The absolute Tory - first thoughts are "what's in it for me".
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote