Darling to shaft savers!!

barny_100

gopher2 wrote: »

The tax saving for basic rate payers with £3000 @ 2% interest would be £12 a year. What would you spend yours on, a couple of pizzas?

Paying less tax is always nice and there is certainly a case for taking inflation into account when calculating savings income. Deciding what services to cut not so nice. As generally in life, you only get what you pay for.

I'd rather keep more of my income and decide what to spend it on rather than have it stolen from me and have services I don't want forced on me. Does anyone speak for individual liberty nowadays.

Anyway we should all probably leave this for another forum as it's getting more political than Saving & Investments...

Hungerdunger

barny_100 wrote: »

I'd rather keep more of my income and decide what to spend it on rather than have it stolen from me and have services I don't want forced on me.

But I bet you'd be quick to complain when you needed urgent NHS treatment and found that the waiting list had doubled in size because of cuts.

D1zzy

But I bet you'd be quick to complain when you needed urgent NHS treatment and found that the waiting list had doubled in size because of cuts.

Lets hope nobody needs NHS hospital treatment - Funding first -patients last!
Don't expect treatment if you are over 80 - to old to be cost effective
Dont expect treatment if its expensive (even if its effective)- they'll chop it when the budget runs out
Don't expect to be in a hospital long enough to recover - throughput/targets are the NHS mantra - better for the targets to be sent home and readmitted
I speak from experience

GeorgeHowell

Let's not forget the political dimension here. New Labour is not keen on savers. To its dog-in-a-manger mentality they represent the 'privileged' because they have a few bob tucked away. Whereas those in debt are to them the 'needy'. They are happy to see redistribution from savers to debtors because it is part of improving 'social justice'. In addition New Labour figures that there are less votes to be had from savers than from those in debt. It's not in their political interests to do much to help savers, that's why they are happy with ultra-low interest rates, which also reduce the impact of the ruinous public debt burden that they are building up. Labour will do little for savers.

RayWolfe

George, are you actually a script writer for Central Office? If you're not, you might consider applying. ;-)

trenchwars

Rafter wrote: »

But introducing a tax cut like that now when we have such a huge government deficit would be stupid and just lead to a weaker currency or much higher taxes elsewhere.

With all the billions in bailout cash that is sloshing around, £300 million is hardly going to break the bank.

D1zzy

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Let's not forget the political dimension here. New Labour is not keen on savers. To its dog-in-a-manger mentality they represent the 'privileged' because they have a few bob tucked away. Whereas those in debt are to them the 'needy'. They are happy to see redistribution from savers to debtors because it is part of improving 'social justice'. In addition New Labour figures that there are less votes to be had from savers than from those in debt. It's not in their political interests to do much to help savers, that's why they are happy with ultra-low interest rates, which also reduce the impact of the ruinous public debt burden that they are building up. Labour will do little for savers.

But its the grey vote that now holds the power......

bristolleedsfan

Hungerdunger wrote: »

But I bet you'd be quick to complain when you needed urgent NHS treatment and found that the waiting list had doubled in size because of cuts.

GPs are going to/already do get financial incentives not to refer to make it look as if waiting times are low, many people who are not being referred end up being admitted to Hospital s a matter of urgency.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4974884.ece

http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/bettergovernment/2008/10/gps-paid-not-to.html

Geoffo_M

Rafter wrote: »

Why should savers and pensioners get special treatment? Where to they think the money to pay for such a package come from?
R.

But surely savers & pensioners are being penalised by low interest rates, when arguably, they were the one section of society who were blameless in bringing about the current state of affairs. Over-extended borrowers are being rewarded by record low mortgage repayments. It really doesn't seem fair does it?

silentfox

Rafter wrote: »

Why should savers and pensioners get special treatment? Where to they think the money to pay for such a package come from?

Are you a muppet?