Budget in two weeks time?

tomstickland

It has been delayed. I can only assume that it contains some real horrors.

FT article suggests that things are worse than recent projections suggested:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f7450dd2-228b-11de-9c99-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1

1984ReturnsForReal_2

tomstickland wrote: »

It has been delayed. I can only assume that it contains some real horrors.

FT article suggests that things are worse than recent projections suggested:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f7450dd2-228b-11de-9c99-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1

Whatever Darling has said take that figure & multiply it by 1.75-2.50%

Cut & Paste that article please..

tomstickland

Some excerpts:

The public finances have deteriorated so much since November that the basic rate of income tax would need to rise by the equivalent of 8 percentage points to bring government borrowing back on track by 2015-16, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said on Monday.

Even the figures presented by the IFS on Monday are already likely to be an underestimate of the true deterioration of the public finances. They were based on the Bank of England’s central economic forecast from February, which suggested a contraction of 2.7 per cent in 2009. As Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, conceded at the weekend, the likely figure is worse than this.

Cat695

In other words everyone get ready to be poorer.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Cat695 wrote: »

In other words everyone get ready to be poorer.

On the bright side....











I cant get poorer.

Cat695

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

On the bright side....











I cant get poorer.

Then you don't know Labour very well. They will find a way.....you breath air don't you!! thats something you need and they will probably tax.

tomstickland

Well, everyone I know who works is already a bit or a lot poorer. Either lost their job or taking a pay cut, abolotion in perks. Combined with rise in cost of living.

I wonder if it's just the long awaited correction to make up for 20 years of unsustainable spending.

treliac

tomstickland wrote: »

Well, everyone I know who works is already a bit or a lot poorer. Either lost their job or taking a pay cut, abolotion in perks. Combined with rise in cost of living.

I wonder if it's just the long awaited correction to make up for 20 years of unsustainable spending.

Yeah, but they're correcting the wrong people. It's always the soft targets.

Roll on 2010 and this lot's downfall.

Generali

The IFS’s £40bn figure for additional borrowing in 2015-16 represents 2.7 per cent of national income, the same fiscal tightening as Mr Darling imposed in the pre-Budget report, when he took an axe to the government’s future capital spending programme.



The IFS was certain that a similar measure was needed in the Budget in two weeks, citing the intervention of Mervyn King, Bank of England governor, who “publicly and pre-emptively withheld” support for a further fiscal stimulus.


If such a fiscal tightening was introduced in the Budget, it would be the equivalent of every family paying an additional £1,250 a year in taxes if public expenditure plans remained unchanged. If public spending plans were cut and no tax rises imposed, there would need to be a five-year freeze in total public spending after adjusting for inflation.


Because some areas of government spending rise automatically faster than this, the IFS said, “this would require real cuts in most other areas of government spending, and even favoured areas such as health or education would undoubtedly see much lower spending growth than they have received in recent years”.

So it'll cost an extra £100 per family per month for the next 5 years just to drag the budget into balance by 2015/16. Plus the extra interest from all this borrowing.

Government spending is going to have to fall. I can't see any other possible outcome. I don't think many people can afford to knock £50/week off their household spending without big cuts in lifestyle. Someone on the median male wage of £400/week net would lose 1/8th of their income!

chucknorris

It will be interesting to see if Labour continue to try and hide the true expense of the current situation prior to the election, I suspect that they will and for that reason the budget may not be as bad as some fear. But of course the price will have to be paid eventually

Generali

chucknorris wrote: »

It will be interesting to see if Labour continue to try and hide the true expense of the current situation prior to the election, I suspect that they will and for that reason the budget may not be as bad as some fear. But of course the price will have to be paid eventually

If they do that the bond market will force their hand. Unless the Government is stupid enough to think they can get the Bank of England to print money to use for present Government spending and nobody will pick up on it.