Budget 2009

Optimist

Spark wrote: »

I would like to know what's happening to the 10p tax rate. Is it abolished now? Will I pay more tax from now on?

The pre budget report in Sept 2008 made the increased allowance of £600 permanent and for 2009/2010 increased it again by £130. This did not make it all better but there are now a lot less "hard working families" loosing than originally forecast

vivatifosi

I've got a question for those of you who watched the coverage. This seems to be the time that the government should be doing something to help small businesses, but having done a quick scan of the web and a read through here, can't see anything mentioned.

Did he actually do anything for SB?

Edited to add: Optimist - loving that sig!

JasonLVC

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

What, ALL Quangos? You want to get rid of Job Centre Plus? The Courts Service? The Crown Prosecution Service? The Highways Agency? The Met Office? OFSTED?

I can see the argument on reducing the numbers. but to make stupid statements like "lets get rid of Quangos" suggests that you have no idea what a Quango is.

Hello RP - I do know what a Quango is (having actually worked for a few in my time as well as the Home Office as well;)).

Apparently though, you are confused as to what a Quango is. Here's a link to help you :-

http://tpa.typepad.com/bettergovernment/files/080515_structure_of_government_1_unseen_government_immediate_release.pdf

But going back to your psot. I didn't actually say "Let's get rid of ALL quangos (but thanks for the mis-quote). I said lets get rid of Quangos - a generalist statement. You have simply added your own spin to my post to validate your point.

It must be pretty desperate in RP's world when you have to deliberately mis-read a post and then use that mis-understood quote as the basis for your response.

Of course, you could always apologise for the mis-quote...even if it may take you at least five days to do so;).

lostinrates

vivatifosi wrote: »

Did he actually do anything for SB?

Edited to add: Optimist - loving that sig!

TBH didn't listen to that bit, but the analysis afterwards a chap said he was aggreived for himself but pleased for his business.

JasonLVC

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

As I said earlier, blanket statements like "lets get rid of Quangos" suggests that the speaker has no idea what one is.

Well, your posts on this thread suggests you aren't interested in debate and more attacking others and especially odd when you seem to have no idea what a quango is yourself.

There are over 1,000 such quango's - are you suggesting you want me to go through the list and individually point out the ones I'd like to see gone or can you now see how childish you were being by trying to discredit me with your mis-quoted post?.

I know you are the worlds No. 1 Labour fanatic, I've no issue with that - but I do have an issue with personal attacks on another posters intelligence or intellect and sly remarks which add nothing to the debate.

Rochdale_Pioneers

JasonLVC wrote: »

I didn't actually say "Let's get rid of ALL quangos (but thanks for the mis-quote). I said lets get rid of Quangos - a generalist statement. You have simply added your own spin to my post to validate your point.).

If you say "lets get rid of Quangos" and don't qualify that you mean "some Quangos" then how else do we read it? I'm not a mind reader. Which ones do you have in mind?

As for getting Quango and Executive Agency confused, yes I apparently did. I Googled it and the Taxpayers Alliance provided me with a list which appears to have been wrong. I then read elsewhere and found almost everyone else making the same mistake, including this paper from the Centre for Policy Studies which describes Executive Agencies as Quangos. So apologies if I got it wrong, but I'm in very illustrious company....

lostinrates

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

I'm in very illustrious company....

and don't you forget it!

Pennywise

vivatifosi wrote: »

I've got a question for those of you who watched the coverage. This seems to be the time that the government should be doing something to help small businesses, but having done a quick scan of the web and a read through here, can't see anything mentioned.

Did he actually do anything for SB?

In a word, no, absolutely nothing of any substance at all. Just the promises of future rises in corporation tax, business rates and employers NIC. Nice!

JasonLVC

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

If you say "lets get rid of Quangos" and don't qualify that you mean "some Quangos" then how else do we read it? I'm not a mind reader. Which ones do you have in mind?

As for getting Quango and Executive Agency confused, yes I apparently did. I Googled it and the Taxpayers Alliance provided me with a list which appears to have been wrong. I then read elsewhere and found almost everyone else making the same mistake, including this paper from the Centre for Policy Studies which describes Executive Agencies as Quangos. So apologies if I got it wrong, but I'm in very illustrious company....

If you admit to not being a mind reader, then how can you make a qualified statement like "the speaker has no idea what one is"?

Anyway, I'll take your post as an apology then RP so that we can move on.

System

So what are people's alternatives to all the "horse !!!!".

I can't stand politics, whatever one side says the other disagrees, be it MP's themselves or the general public on places like this.

There is not a single thing that Darling could have said that wouldn't have resulted in a negative response from the tories.

To summarise, it's all a load of pathetic immature !!!!!!!!.