I was reading in the paper today how people are renting a place in Greenwich because the comute into london is going to get more expensive.
I was trying to work out the maths they were talking about in my head, but it made no sense what so ever.

Also, I was reading about the "freeze on council tax (terms and conditions apply: only counts on provision of counting inflation)" and thought "How the fuck is £70/year going to make the slightest possible diference to anyone strugggling."

It gave me a mental image of two stressed out parents sitting in their flat, with loads of recpits all over the dinning room table, with two calculators with those ticker-tapes, one saying "I can't belive it, we've got more out than we've got coming in, we can't continue to live here, we'll have to move" and the other going "If only we could make up this £70/year shortfall, then we would be OK".
( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:02, 2 replies, latest was 14 years ago)

HAHA!
I love that idea.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:02, Reply)

There was a discussion about this on the radio this morning
and they had some party representative defending it. After being constantly challenged by the presenter about how it's not really going to make any discernable difference to the average UK family as it amounts to one tank full of petrol, all he could come up with was "It all helps".
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:07, Reply)

I reckon it's more to do with slapping local authorities down.

(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:09, Reply)

Which is rather silly given how they are desperate to push "localism"

(Bazongaloid, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:11, Reply)

They'd rather have people vote out their local councilors rather than MP's

(PsychoChomp, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:19, Reply)

It doesn't help that local authorities (Labour ones) are happy to make people redundant
rather than use their surplus funds. That doesn't get the national party votes.

I was staggered to read the levels of surplus cash and whatnot the authorities have.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:20, Reply)

That changes a lot during the year.
It's generally good to have surplus cash though, in case something unexpected happens.
And I'd rather they get rid of anyone they can do without rather than spend money on stuff they don't need.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:22, Reply)

Agreed.
But the local authority jobs are good, pensionable jobs where the people pay tax and national insurance. They are not McJobs.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:27, Reply)

I've had experience of a sort of localism through the programme I used to work on.
It was a bit of a mixed bag. Having group of people deciding on how to spend programme money isn't a bad idea when they are looking to support social enterprises or community services. Having them want to spend £7500 on paying an electricity bill so a railway bridge can have some pretty lights is a different kettle of trout.

Then again you can say that the State spends money on stupid things as well, so...
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:29, Reply)

I think the idea is that it's easier to hold local government to account
so it should shut down that sort of stupid spending.
That is if the voters bother to look into this shit, but they never do.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:36, Reply)

The problem with tax changes are
either you help everyone a little (£70 a year is fuck all but it's still something) or you target it specifically to the people you think need it and have a whole mess of admin.
You can't do both because it gets very expensive very quickly.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:05, Reply)

Thing is though, they're not giving everyone £70 a year, which is how they're acting.
They're just not taking an extra £70, which is different.

If they handed me £70, I'd say 'thanks, great, ill treat myself', but they're not, they're just not going to take £70 on top of the £1200 or soo they're already taking.
( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:09, Reply)

Yep, I know seems stupid to me that with all the cost cutting in local government.
They're even considering raising coucil tax at all. I know it's because they are getting less from central government but really. It's far too high at the moment.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:13, Reply)

It would be better to target tax cuts at lower earners as they are more likely to spend the money they aren't paying in tax
rather than saving it, which is what people on higher rates of tax do.

The simplest way to do this is to raise the income tax threshold.

All this shit about the 50p tax rate discouraging entrepreneurs is just that, utter shit.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:11, Reply)

Al, what do you do for a living?
You seem to have (gasp) quite knowledgeable opinions on the economy, yet appear to drive a white van, thus negating them
( sporters I’m sincerely gratitude to you, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:14, Reply)

Little bit of this, little of that, know what I mean?
I get stuff, I move stuff, I can do things for you, if the price is right.
(Bazongaloid, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:23, Reply)

I'd happily scrap the 50p tax, but only when it's affordable and it shouldn't be put ahead of tax relief for lower earners.
I think that whole story was bollocks spun into a big story so the Tory's would look good to the middle classes for a week. It was just some shitty report from a think tank, dozens of those saying anything you like are released every week.
(PsychoChomp, Mon 3 Oct 2011, 15:16, Reply)