UK 2Q GDP surpasses all expectations - Fastest Pace In 4 Years

StevieJ

Really2 wrote: »

Don't do a graham on me steve.

The point is clear (as vat 20% for lab or con was mainstream anyway pre election) there is no evidence tax has been increased more than it would have been under labour.
It actually looks less after not increasing NI as much as was planed by the previous government.

OK where is the link 'mainstream anyway' is Devonian revisionism at its best

Really2

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

The Treasury has been asking for a 40% cuts scenario.

So no departments had been asked for 40% cuts then.

I know my wifes LG are already planing the 25% cuts to 2014. Can't see why that would change unless it needed to.

I presume the 40% scenario is to see if things are worse they could see where further trimmings could be made. (Much like a stress test)

But like most things on here scenario has now become fact.

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

Don't do a graham on me steve.

The point is clear (as vat 20% for lab or con was mainstream anyway pre election) there is no evidence tax has been increased more than it would have been under labour.
It actually looks less after not increasing NI as much as was planed by the previous government.

He's not, he's doing a stevie on you, fun, isn't it when you type a load of stuff to explain what you are saying and just get that back Can't accuse me of a one liner as I never stop typing:D

Anyway, I'm in agreement with you on this thread.

It was labour who first came out and said they would cut harder than maggie did.

It's no good arguing politics. With the amount of spin politics has in it, any one side of the political arena can just shoot lines at each other, and no one ever comes out on top.

Basics of it are...all would have had to have cut, and all had little choice. Any party who took the election would have had the economy steering them....not the other way around.

Really2

StevieJ wrote: »

OK where is the link 'mainstream anyway' is Devonian revisionism at its best

Feb
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/7226112/Labour-and-Conservatives-both-plan-to-raise-VAT-to-20-per-cent.html

The Conservatives and Labour are both planning to raise VAT as high as 20 per cent to replenish Britain's ailing finances, it has emerged.

maybe, but unlike our friend I can back it up.

Sir_Humphrey

Really2 wrote: »

So no departments had been asked for 40% cuts then.

I know my wifes LG are already planing the 25% cuts to 2014. Can't see why that would change unless it needed to.

I presume the 40% scenario is to see if things are worse they could see where further trimmings could be made. (Much like a stress test)

But like most things on here scenario has now become fact.

I suspect DCMS may get that sort of figure.

You need to realsie that a 25% cut is away with the fairies, let alone 40%.

tomterm8

Really2 wrote: »

Yes, so you are saying that because labour are not in power the tax increases are more than what labour had planed?



No they have asked for 25% I know becasue my wife may be one of those 25%

Who have been asked for 40% cuts?


But remind me again as you seem unwilling to do so why are we talking about these cuts.

Are you denying that Mr Alexander wrote to all departments telling them to prepare a plan for cuts of 25% and 40%?

As for why we are talking about these cuts... I would say because the global economy had the worst recession since 1930, the only recession where the word growth was negative since 1945, and Mr Brown is obviously responsible for the fact that German, Iceland, Ireland, America, Spain, France, Russia, Latvia, Hungary, and almost every other member of the G20 had the worst recession in their country for thiry years.

Get real. When you look at the world, with major european economies going to the IMF, and with dozens of peripheral countries being close to collapse, your narative of 'everything was labours fault' just looks like so much BS.

Labour made mistakes. They took us into an illegal war, another war that was unwinnable, regulated the banks in a very cack handed way, and spent too much in the good times. However, the conservative party agreed with Labours spending plans, announcing that they would follow them right up until the SHTF.

Really2

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

I suspect DCMS may get that sort of figure.

Maybe, but I should imagine there will be room also (after the olympics etc)

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

You need to realsie that a 25% cut is away with the fairies, let alone 40%.

So do you think it needs to be more?

Sir_Humphrey

tomterm8 wrote: »

Labour made mistakes. They took us into an illegal war, another war that was unwinnable, regulated the banks in a very cack handed way, and spent too much in the good times. However, the conservative party agreed with Labours spending plans, announcing that they would follow them right up until the SHTF.

Actually, they agreed with every policy you have just mentioned.

StevieJ

Really2 wrote: »

Feb
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/7226112/Labour-and-Conservatives-both-plan-to-raise-VAT-to-20-per-cent.html


maybe, but unlike our friend I can back it up.

It is just some Tory reporter making things up I mean a link to a quote from Darling.

What does this mean

It is also believed that privately Mr Darling has ruled out increasing income taxes or the scope of VAT. However, he has left open the possibility of increasing the sales tax in the next Parliament.

I will give you a clue - Nothing

Sir_Humphrey

Really2 wrote: »

Maybe, but I should imagine there will be room also (after the olympics etc)

So do you think it needs to be more?

By away with the fairies I mean:

It is a figure that is a) too large, and b) unachievable in a democracy.

Still, if the economy tanks over the next year, we will have no doubt what caused it.