politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Seven days before the Midterms Trump sees a sharp drop in his

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Seven days before the Midterms Trump sees a sharp drop in his approval ratings

With just a week to go before Trump’s first major electoral test since becoming President the latest Gallup approval rating sees a biggish drop. The chart shows that polling over the past week his net ratings edging down 4% to minus 14. This reverses a recent trend of his ratings getting better.

Read the full story here

Nigelb

Not first, like the Republicans, I trust.

Alistair

The Trump admin's response to the synagogue shooting has been bad.

I can see a massive Jewish block vote against Republicans now as Kelly Ann Conway goes on TV and tries to downplay the specifically anti-semitic nature of the attack to try and reframe it as an general anti-religion attack.

DecrepitJohnL

Still the question remains, do voters see Trump as part of or separate from the Republican Party? If the latter, it will be easy to rage against the president while voting for the GOP candidate for town dog catcher.

Charles

Alistair said:

The Trump admin's response to the synagogue shooting has been bad.

I can see a massive Jewish block vote against Republicans now as Kelly Ann Conway goes on TV and tries to downplay the specifically anti-semitic nature of the attack to try and reframe it as an general anti-religion attack.

I though the Jewish community was heavily Dem skewed anyway - how much difference will it make?

Nemtynakht

Alistair said:

The Trump admin's response to the synagogue shooting has been bad.

I can see a massive Jewish block vote against Republicans now as Kelly Ann Conway goes on TV and tries to downplay the specifically anti-semitic nature of the attack to try and reframe it as an general anti-religion attack.

As was said when Corbyn wanted to rewrite what anti semitism is, It is not just Jewish people, it is their friends and people who don’t like the way they are being treated who vote

Anazina

Anazina said:

Foxy said:

volcanopete said:

Polling by the Democrats now indicate the Trump fightback has stalled and the Blues are surging ahead-Michigan-Dems +15
Ohio +8
Pennsylvania +15
North Carolina +5
Wisconsin +11.

The next polling on the 5 Red seats could be revealing.The Blues are 4-1 with Betfair to take Texas with GOP as low as 1-10.

If the Dems do that well in swing states, the writing is on the wall for the Donald.

What might do for him in the end is the coastal boom. The rust belt that carried him to victory is a virtual bystander as the deep blue coasts’ economies skyrocket.

Charles

@DavidL

Our school uses pattern teaching

“Jane likes cats”
“Jane likes dogs”
“Jane likes horses”

In each case with a picture

So if your kid can figure out the pattern and look at the picture they don’t need to read at all...

Alistair

Charles said:

Alistair said:

The Trump admin's response to the synagogue shooting has been bad.

I can see a massive Jewish block vote against Republicans now as Kelly Ann Conway goes on TV and tries to downplay the specifically anti-semitic nature of the attack to try and reframe it as an general anti-religion attack.

I though the Jewish community was heavily Dem skewed anyway - how much difference will it make?

Hilary 'only' got 70% of the Jewish vote, Obama managed over 80%.

Given the concentration of the Jewish population that kind of extra oomf could turn right congressional or state races. I'm looking at you Florida.

rcs1000

Charles said:

Alistair said:

The Trump admin's response to the synagogue shooting has been bad.

I can see a massive Jewish block vote against Republicans now as Kelly Ann Conway goes on TV and tries to downplay the specifically anti-semitic nature of the attack to try and reframe it as an general anti-religion attack.

I though the Jewish community was heavily Dem skewed anyway - how much difference will it make?

I see the Republican strongholds of Manhattan and Los Angeles under threat of turning Blue.

rcs1000

Charles said:

@DavidL

Our school uses pattern teaching

“Jane likes cats”
“Jane likes dogs”
“Jane likes horses”

In each case with a picture

So if your kid can figure out the pattern and look at the picture they don’t need to read at all...

It's similar in LA :

Jane likes Prada
Jane lives Chanel
Jane likes Alexander McQueen

Foxy

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Alistair said:

The Trump admin's response to the synagogue shooting has been bad.

I can see a massive Jewish block vote against Republicans now as Kelly Ann Conway goes on TV and tries to downplay the specifically anti-semitic nature of the attack to try and reframe it as an general anti-religion attack.

I though the Jewish community was heavily Dem skewed anyway - how much difference will it make?

I see the Republican strongholds of Manhattan and Los Angeles under threat of turning Blue.

How about Pittsburgh? Classic rust belt Trumpland.

Charles

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

@DavidL

Our school uses pattern teaching

“Jane likes cats”
“Jane likes dogs”
“Jane likes horses”

In each case with a picture

So if your kid can figure out the pattern and look at the picture they don’t need to read at all...

It's similar in LA :

Jane likes Prada
Jane lives Chanel
Jane likes Alexander McQueen

Whole word teaching is f*****g crazy

“If you don’t know what the word is look at the picture and guess”

They aren’t learning to read they are learn pictograms

YBarddCwsc

Foxy said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Alistair said:

The Trump admin's response to the synagogue shooting has been bad.

I can see a massive Jewish block vote against Republicans now as Kelly Ann Conway goes on TV and tries to downplay the specifically anti-semitic nature of the attack to try and reframe it as an general anti-religion attack.

I though the Jewish community was heavily Dem skewed anyway - how much difference will it make?

I see the Republican strongholds of Manhattan and Los Angeles under threat of turning Blue.

How about Pittsburgh? Classic rust belt Trumpland.

Don’t be daft.

I was in Pittsburgh a month or so back.

Pittsburgh isn’t Trumpton.

It is the rural hinterland outside Pittsburgh that is Trump Country.

Chris_A

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

IanB2

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

FrancisUrquhart

'We will not be silenced': Bolsonaro opponents pledge widespread protests

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/29/jair-bolsonaro-brazil-protests-opposition

HYUFD

DecrepitJohnL said:

Still the question remains, do voters see Trump as part of or separate from the Republican Party? If the latter, it will be easy to rage against the president while voting for the GOP candidate for town dog catcher.

The GOP Congress has even worse ratings than Trump

FrancisUrquhart

Not exactly surprising news,

Stark east-west divide in attitudes towards minorities in Europe
Report also flags gulf in attitudes on nationalism, abortion, gay rights and more

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/29/stark-east-west-divide-attitudes-towards-minorities-europe-pew-report

Andrew

HYUFD said:

The GOP Congress has even worse ratings than Trump

Given Congress is only marginally more popular than an outbreak of ebola, that's not saying much.

Richard_Nabavi

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

It's most skewed towards the recipients of Universal Credit, van drivers, and those just on the edge of the higher-rate band.

The particular figures quoted look rather odd, though. Where does the £20 average gain for basic-rate taxpayers come from?

HYUFD

Trump's approval rating today is 40% with Gallup, that compares to 45% for Obama at this stage of his presidency just before the Democrats lost 63 seats in the House and 63% for George W Bush at the same stage of his presidency before the Republicans gained 8 seats in the House.
https://news.gallup.com/interactives/185273/r.aspx?g_source=WWWV7HP&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

Thus Trump's first midterms are far more likely to be closer to Obama's than George W Bush's.

Charles

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

Does someone have to post that story about the 10 friends in a pub again?

rcs1000

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

Does someone have to post that story about the 10 friends in a pub again?

That was a ridiculous story. No way would I would I been seen dead in a pub.

Big_G_NorthWales

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

Charles

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

FrancisUrquhart

Done up like a kipper...

https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/29/18027032/foxconn-wisconsin-plant-jobs-deal-subsidy-governor-scott-walker

Charles

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

Does someone have to post that story about the 10 friends in a pub again?

That was a ridiculous story. No way would I would I been seen dead in a pub.

You don’t have 10 friends anyway

What happened to your London trip?

rcs1000

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not exactly surprising news,

Stark east-west divide in attitudes towards minorities in Europe
Report also flags gulf in attitudes on nationalism, abortion, gay rights and more

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/29/stark-east-west-divide-attitudes-towards-minorities-europe-pew-report

What's interesting, though, is how quickly attitudes can change. Forty years ago, the idea that Ireland would be a land with legal abortions and gay marriage would have been inconceivable.

FrancisUrquhart

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not exactly surprising news,

Stark east-west divide in attitudes towards minorities in Europe
Report also flags gulf in attitudes on nationalism, abortion, gay rights and more

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/29/stark-east-west-divide-attitudes-towards-minorities-europe-pew-report

What's interesting, though, is how quickly attitudes can change. Forty years ago, the idea that Ireland would be a land with legal abortions and gay marriage would have been inconceivable.

Not much sign of that in the east, if anything going the other way.

Richard_Nabavi

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not exactly surprising news,

Stark east-west divide in attitudes towards minorities in Europe
Report also flags gulf in attitudes on nationalism, abortion, gay rights and more

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/29/stark-east-west-divide-attitudes-towards-minorities-europe-pew-report

What's interesting, though, is how quickly attitudes can change. Forty years ago, the idea that Ireland would be a land with legal abortions and gay marriage would have been inconceivable.

65 years ago the idea that England would be a land with legal abortions and gay marriage would have been inconceivable.

Autres temps, autres moeurs

not_on_fire

HYUFD said:

Trump's approval rating today is 40% with Gallup, that compares to 45% for Obama at this stage of his presidency just before the Democrats lost 63 seats in the House and 63% for George W Bush at the same stage of his presidency before the Republicans gained 8 seats in the House.
https://news.gallup.com/interactives/185273/r.aspx?g_source=WWWV7HP&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

Thus Trump's first midterms are far more likely to be closer to Obama's than George W Bush's.

The November 2002 midterm elections were highly atypical as they took place soon after 9/11

Chris_A

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

RobD

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

What's that in relative terms?

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/bpolitics/status/1057039903643631617

not_on_fire

RobD said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

What's that in relative terms?

RobD said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

What's that in relative terms?

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

The £860 is misleading as higher rate payers will pay about an additional £340 of NI.

Chris_A

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

Richard_Nabavi

Chris_A said:

... you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

I think we might be making some progress in understanding.

Chris_A

RobD said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

What's that in relative terms?

£14k (about half average earnings) 0.9%
£28 k (average) 0.45%
£56k (about twice average) 1,.5%

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

NickPalmer

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

"What is NI?" (asking as a higher-rate 68-year-old in full-time employment). I appear to be due to get the entire £860, since over 65 one doesn't pay NI at all. I have no idea why being older gives me this benefit, but I look forward to being able to increase my Labour Party contributions.

Chris_A

Richard_Nabavi said:

Chris_A said:

... you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

I think we might be making some progress in understanding.

But they're not going to be getting it because Hammond has splurged it on tax cuts for the wealthy.

RobD

Chris_A said:

RobD said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

What's that in relative terms?

£14k (about half average earnings) 0.9%
£28 k (average) 0.45%
£56k (about twice average) 1,.5%

And this accounts for all changes mentioned in the budget?

HYUFD

not_on_fire said:

HYUFD said:

Trump's approval rating today is 40% with Gallup, that compares to 45% for Obama at this stage of his presidency just before the Democrats lost 63 seats in the House and 63% for George W Bush at the same stage of his presidency before the Republicans gained 8 seats in the House.
https://news.gallup.com/interactives/185273/r.aspx?g_source=WWWV7HP&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

Thus Trump's first midterms are far more likely to be closer to Obama's than George W Bush's.

The November 2002 midterm elections were highly atypical as they took place soon after 9/11

That is true, the 2002 midterms were the first midterms an incumbent President saw their party gain seats in both the House and Senate since FDR's first midterms in 1934

Big_G_NorthWales

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

My calculation is that a worker will gain £691 per annum and gains £130 for personal allowance

Chris_A

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

HYUFD

NickPalmer said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

"What is NI?" (asking as a higher-rate 68-year-old in full-time employment). I appear to be due to get the entire £860, since over 65 one doesn't pay NI at all. I have no idea why being older gives me this benefit, but I look forward to being able to increase my Labour Party contributions.

Have to admire your work ethic Nick Palmer, most 68 year olds, especially those who had worked long hours as MPs, would be retired and going on cruises or spending days on the golf course rather than still working full time

Richard_Nabavi

NickPalmer said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

"What is NI?" (asking as a higher-rate 68-year-old in full-time employment). I appear to be due to get the entire £860, since over 65 one doesn't pay NI at all. I have no idea why being older gives me this benefit, but I look forward to being able to increase my Labour Party contributions.

It's completely mad. I simply don't understand why neither Labour nor Conservative Chancellors have removed this anomaly. It looks like that rarest thing: a fiscal no-brainer which would raise money and to which no-one could reasonably object. What's more, it's only going to get more of an anomaly as more people choose to work after retirement age.

Richard_Nabavi

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Hammond has increased it from £7.83/hour to £8.21/hour from next April (4.9% increase)

Cyclefree

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not exactly surprising news,

Stark east-west divide in attitudes towards minorities in Europe
Report also flags gulf in attitudes on nationalism, abortion, gay rights and more

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/29/stark-east-west-divide-attitudes-towards-minorities-europe-pew-report

What's interesting, though, is how quickly attitudes can change. Forty years ago, the idea that Ireland would be a land with legal abortions and gay marriage would have been inconceivable.

65 years ago the idea that England would be a land with legal abortions and gay marriage would have been inconceivable.

Autres temps, autres moeurs

If a prevailing culture can change one way, it can also change again in a very different direction. We should never be complacent about the liberties we have won. People often assume that all change will necessarily be progressive. And that ain’t necessarily so. There are some trends now which make me worried about whether in 40 or 50 years Western society will be as liberal and free as it is now.

not_on_fire

Richard_Nabavi said:

NickPalmer said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

"What is NI?" (asking as a higher-rate 68-year-old in full-time employment). I appear to be due to get the entire £860, since over 65 one doesn't pay NI at all. I have no idea why being older gives me this benefit, but I look forward to being able to increase my Labour Party contributions.

It's completely mad. I simply don't understand why neither Labour nor Conservative Chancellors have removed this anomaly. It looks like that rarest thing: a fiscal no-brainer which would raise money and to which no-one could reasonably object. What's more, it's only going to get more of an anomaly as more people choose to work after retirement age.

Something something old people vote more

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Maybe with respect you should know because you do not seem to realise how much it is rising. The figure is 4.9%

Also you seem to imply £50,000 income makes somene rich. As a matter of interest do yo know how much train drivers earn

Chris_A

Richard_Nabavi said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

It's most skewed towards the recipients of Universal Credit, van drivers, and those just on the edge of the higher-rate band.

The particular figures quoted look rather odd, though. Where does the £20 average gain for basic-rate taxpayers come from?

From the government's own analysis https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-to-2020/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-20

Richard_Nabavi

not_on_fire said:

Something something old people vote more

No, I don't think that's it. Currently only about 10% of pensioners work, and over half only work part-time or are self-employed, and so wouldn't pay much NI. The figure was much lower a few years ago, when the change should have been made - it will get more difficult in the future as there will be more losers from any change.

I think the real reason for not doing it is that civil servants and governments want to maintain the fiction that National Insurance is national insurance.

Chris_A

Richard_Nabavi said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Hammond has increased it from £7.83/hour to £8.21/hour from next April (4.9% increase)

This year will earn £14289 and pay £488 in IT and £701 in NICs
Next year will earn £14983 and pay £497 in IT and £784 in NICs (assuming same threshhold as this year)

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

It's most skewed towards the recipients of Universal Credit, van drivers, and those just on the edge of the higher-rate band.

The particular figures quoted look rather odd, though. Where does the £20 average gain for basic-rate taxpayers come from?

From the government's own analysis https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-to-2020/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-20

And everyone on the national living wage will receive a 4.9% rise in their pay

You seem to want to ignore that. Also looks like train drivers are 'rich' in your world

Chris_A

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Certainly anyone on the 88% centile of earnings is rich and it's sophistry to pretend otherwise.

Chris_A

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

My calculation is that a worker will gain £691 per annum and gains £130 for personal allowance

Not so because they pay more IT and NICs because of the higher salary.

Chris_A

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Maybe with respect you should know because you do not seem to realise how much it is rising. The figure is 4.9%

Also you seem to imply £50,000 income makes somene rich. As a matter of interest do yo know how much train drivers earn

I don't care how they earn it - anyone earning £50k per year is rich. Personally I'd put it at upper quintile of earnings.

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Certainly anyone on the 88% centile of earnings is rich and it's sophistry to pretend otherwise.

The left do not like anything to do with success and resent even train drivers, senior nurses, teachers, police officers, and fire service personal earning £50,000 plus and snear at them as rich

The true politics of envy

Chris_A

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

It's most skewed towards the recipients of Universal Credit, van drivers, and those just on the edge of the higher-rate band.

The particular figures quoted look rather odd, though. Where does the £20 average gain for basic-rate taxpayers come from?

From the government's own analysis https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-to-2020/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-20

And everyone on the national living wage will receive a 4.9% rise in their pay

You seem to want to ignore that. Also looks like train drivers are 'rich' in your world

Oops I forgot that you have to be a toff to be rich.

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

It's most skewed towards the recipients of Universal Credit, van drivers, and those just on the edge of the higher-rate band.

The particular figures quoted look rather odd, though. Where does the £20 average gain for basic-rate taxpayers come from?

From the government's own analysis https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-to-2020/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-20

And everyone on the national living wage will receive a 4.9% rise in their pay

You seem to want to ignore that. Also looks like train drivers are 'rich' in your world

Oops I forgot that you have to be a toff to be rich.

You are really riduculous

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Maybe with respect you should know because you do not seem to realise how much it is rising. The figure is 4.9%

Also you seem to imply £50,000 income makes somene rich. As a matter of interest do yo know how much train drivers earn

I don't care how they earn it - anyone earning £50k per year is rich.

You are sad

Richard_Nabavi

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Certainly anyone on the 88% centile of earnings is rich and it's sophistry to pretend otherwise.

The left do not like anything to do with success and resent even train drivers, senior nurses, teachers, police officers, and fire service personal earning £50,000 plus and snear at them as rich

The true politics of envy

Not quite true, they support them if they are on strike for even more money.

Chris_A

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

It's most skewed towards the recipients of Universal Credit, van drivers, and those just on the edge of the higher-rate band.

The particular figures quoted look rather odd, though. Where does the £20 average gain for basic-rate taxpayers come from?

From the government's own analysis https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-to-2020/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-20

And everyone on the national living wage will receive a 4.9% rise in their pay

You seem to want to ignore that. Also looks like train drivers are 'rich' in your world

I'm not ignoring it but if you're already getting £8.30 per hour it's not going to benefit you.

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

It's most skewed towards the recipients of Universal Credit, van drivers, and those just on the edge of the higher-rate band.

The particular figures quoted look rather odd, though. Where does the £20 average gain for basic-rate taxpayers come from?

From the government's own analysis https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-to-2020/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-20

And everyone on the national living wage will receive a 4.9% rise in their pay

You seem to want to ignore that. Also looks like train drivers are 'rich' in your world

I'm not ignoring it but if you're already getting £8.30 per hour it's not going to benefit you.

This will give a 4.9% rise to millions of carers, hospitality workers, and many people just managing

NickPalmer

Cyclefree said:

If a prevailing culture can change one way, it can also change again in a very different direction. We should never be complacent about the liberties we have won. People often assume that all change will necessarily be progressive. And that ain’t necessarily so. There are some trends now which make me worried about whether in 40 or 50 years Western society will be as liberal and free as it is now.

I agree. But we should also avoid being too self-righteous about cultures which have attitudes that were common in Britain in living memory. I went to see Bohemian Rhapsody at the weekend (very good, by the way - nice balance of Queen's music and the human story), and I recalled uncomortably that the gay kisses and other sexual activity would have made me distinctly uncomfortable 40 years ago, whereas I now see them as entirely natural. So although it's depressing that eastern Europe is still so homophobic, I don't think we should feel amazingly superior - we've just moved on a bit.

Foxy

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Certainly anyone on the 88% centile of earnings is rich and it's sophistry to pretend otherwise.

The left do not like anything to do with success and resent even train drivers, senior nurses, teachers, police officers, and fire service personal earning £50,000 plus and snear at them as rich

The true politics of envy

Largely a matter of definition. £50 000 is nearly twice median national household income, so not unreasonable to classify as rich.

Chris_A

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

It's most skewed towards the recipients of Universal Credit, van drivers, and those just on the edge of the higher-rate band.

The particular figures quoted look rather odd, though. Where does the £20 average gain for basic-rate taxpayers come from?

From the government's own analysis https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-to-2020/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-20

And everyone on the national living wage will receive a 4.9% rise in their pay

You seem to want to ignore that. Also looks like train drivers are 'rich' in your world

I'm not ignoring it but if you're already getting £8.30 per hour it's not going to benefit you.

This will give a 4.9% rise to millions of carers, hospitality workers, and many people just managing

It won't because as I've pointed out they'll pay more NICs and IT. It'll be a real 4.6% rise.

Big_G_NorthWales

Time to call it a day

I hope everyone has a restful night

Good night folks

Big_G_NorthWales

Foxy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Certainly anyone on the 88% centile of earnings is rich and it's sophistry to pretend otherwise.

The left do not like anything to do with success and resent even train drivers, senior nurses, teachers, police officers, and fire service personal earning £50,000 plus and snear at them as rich

The true politics of envy

Largely a matter of definition. £50 000 is nearly twice median national household income, so not unreasonable to classify as rich.

It is a nonsense definition

Chris_A

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Maybe with respect you should know because you do not seem to realise how much it is rising. The figure is 4.9%

Also you seem to imply £50,000 income makes somene rich. As a matter of interest do yo know how much train drivers earn

I don't care how they earn it - anyone earning £50k per year is rich.

You are sad

.
So £50k is a middle income earner is it?

MikeL

There has been a lot of talk about UC but what about the general freeze on benefits like child benefit and child tax credits?

I don't think these were mentioned at all - implying freeze continues?

But I would have thought media would be quick to say that a continuing benefit freeze would imply austerity is continuing?

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

It's most skewed towards the recipients of Universal Credit, van drivers, and those just on the edge of the higher-rate band.

The particular figures quoted look rather odd, though. Where does the £20 average gain for basic-rate taxpayers come from?

From the government's own analysis https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-to-2020/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-20

And everyone on the national living wage will receive a 4.9% rise in their pay

You seem to want to ignore that. Also looks like train drivers are 'rich' in your world

I'm not ignoring it but if you're already getting £8.30 per hour it's not going to benefit you.

This will give a 4.9% rise to millions of carers, hospitality workers, and many people just managing

It won't because as I've pointed out they'll pay more NICs and IT. It'll be a real 4.6% rise.

And you are arguing over a 4.6 nett rise. How many workers will see a 4.6% nett rise this year

Foxy

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

IanB2 said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

You need to knock the extra NI off to get the true comparison. But shockingly skewed towards the better off, nevertheless. Something Labour might have spotted a tad earlier.

It's most skewed towards the recipients of Universal Credit, van drivers, and those just on the edge of the higher-rate band.

The particular figures quoted look rather odd, though. Where does the £20 average gain for basic-rate taxpayers come from?

From the government's own analysis https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-to-2020/income-tax-personal-allowance-and-basic-rate-limit-from-2019-20

And everyone on the national living wage will receive a 4.9% rise in their pay

You seem to want to ignore that. Also looks like train drivers are 'rich' in your world

I'm not ignoring it but if you're already getting £8.30 per hour it's not going to benefit you.

This will give a 4.9% rise to millions of carers, hospitality workers, and many people just managing

Good news, but as many of those are working for councils getting far less than 4.9% budget increase, it will squeeze in other ways.

Chris_A

Oh incidentally personal allowances have been frozen for 2020/21 so it'll be partially clawed back then.

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Maybe with respect you should know because you do not seem to realise how much it is rising. The figure is 4.9%

Also you seem to imply £50,000 income makes somene rich. As a matter of interest do yo know how much train drivers earn

I don't care how they earn it - anyone earning £50k per year is rich.

You are sad

.
So £50k is a middle income earner is it?

What does it matter. Aspiration is in most of us and if someone earns £50,000 or more good luck to them as long as they pay their taxes.

The left have this strange envy of success

HYUFD

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Nick 'million dollars a year' Clegg

Chris_A

Richard_Nabavi said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Certainly anyone on the 88% centile of earnings is rich and it's sophistry to pretend otherwise.

The left do not like anything to do with success and resent even train drivers, senior nurses, teachers, police officers, and fire service personal earning £50,000 plus and snear at them as rich

The true politics of envy

Not quite true, they support them if they are on strike for even more money.

I'm not sneering at what anyone earns I'm sneering at people like you who think that £50k is a normal salary. It isn't.

NickPalmer

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

Something something old people vote more

No, I don't think that's it. Currently only about 10% of pensioners work, and over half only work part-time or are self-employed, and so wouldn't pay much NI. The figure was much lower a few years ago, when the change should have been made - it will get more difficult in the future as there will be more losers from any change.

I think the real reason for not doing it is that civil servants and governments want to maintain the fiction that National Insurance is national insurance.

Yes, I think you're right. And as you say, nobody over 65 on high earnings could seriously grumble at chipping in a bit like everyone else.

You're very kind, Big G - I work partly because I need to for family reasons, but I think I'd want to anyway - perhaps 4 days a week in that case. If one's lucky enough to be reasonably fit in mind and body, it seems a bit depressing to spend every day on golf courses and the like when one might be doing something useful.

Big_G_NorthWales

Chris_A said:

Oh incidentally personal allowances have been frozen for 2020/21 so it'll be partially clawed back then.

The £12,500 was a manifesto commitment for 2020. It has been brought forward by one year so where is the clawback

MikeL

The £20 figure relates to 20/21 - ie change between 19/20 and 20/21.

The figure is so low because PAs are frozen that year (I'm unclear why figure isn't zero).

But in any case the £20 is on top of the gain in 19/20!

RoyalBlue

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Maybe with respect you should know because you do not seem to realise how much it is rising. The figure is 4.9%

Also you seem to imply £50,000 income makes somene rich. As a matter of interest do yo know how much train drivers earn

I don't care how they earn it - anyone earning £50k per year is rich.

You are sad

Harsh words from you @Big_G_NorthWales !

Sunil_Prasannan

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Maybe with respect you should know because you do not seem to realise how much it is rising. The figure is 4.9%

Also you seem to imply £50,000 income makes somene rich. As a matter of interest do yo know how much train drivers earn

I don't care how they earn it - anyone earning £50k per year is rich.

You are sad

I'm slightly sad
Just very slightly sad
And there you have it!

Richard_Nabavi

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Certainly anyone on the 88% centile of earnings is rich and it's sophistry to pretend otherwise.

The left do not like anything to do with success and resent even train drivers, senior nurses, teachers, police officers, and fire service personal earning £50,000 plus and snear at them as rich

The true politics of envy

Not quite true, they support them if they are on strike for even more money.

I'm not sneering at what anyone earns I'm sneering at people like you who think that £50k is a normal salary. It isn't.

When did I say that?

Big_G_NorthWales

NickPalmer said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

Something something old people vote more

No, I don't think that's it. Currently only about 10% of pensioners work, and over half only work part-time or are self-employed, and so wouldn't pay much NI. The figure was much lower a few years ago, when the change should have been made - it will get more difficult in the future as there will be more losers from any change.

I think the real reason for not doing it is that civil servants and governments want to maintain the fiction that National Insurance is national insurance.

Yes, I think you're right. And as you say, nobody over 65 on high earnings could seriously grumble at chipping in a bit like everyone else.

You're very kind, Big G - I work partly because I need to for family reasons, but I think I'd want to anyway - perhaps 4 days a week in that case. If one's lucky enough to be reasonably fit in mind and body, it seems a bit depressing to spend every day on golf courses and the like when one might be doing something useful.

Nick - nice of you to attribute that to me but I didnt say it

I do believe NIC should be paid by everyone earning irrespective of age and expect it will be closed one day

Foxy

MikeL said:

There has been a lot of talk about UC but what about the general freeze on benefits like child benefit and child tax credits?

I don't think these were mentioned at all - implying freeze continues?

But I would have thought media would be quick to say that a continuing benefit freeze would imply austerity is continuing?

Yes, the devil is in the detail!

Chris_A

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Maybe with respect you should know because you do not seem to realise how much it is rising. The figure is 4.9%

Also you seem to imply £50,000 income makes somene rich. As a matter of interest do yo know how much train drivers earn

I don't care how they earn it - anyone earning £50k per year is rich.

You are sad

.
So £50k is a middle income earner is it?

What does it matter. Aspiration is in most of us and if someone earns £50,000 or more good luck to them as long as they pay their taxes.

The left have this strange envy of success

I'm not envious at all. I'm perfectly happy with what I earn (which is less) than £50k and yes as I'm in the upper quintile I consider myself rich. When compared with the lot of millions in this country it would be foolish to thin otherwise.

Big_G_NorthWales

RoyalBlue said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That was not my question. How much will a person earn pe annum on the new national lving wage compared to this year and add on top the increased the personal allowance

No idea what the new minimum wage is.

Maybe with respect you should know because you do not seem to realise how much it is rising. The figure is 4.9%

Also you seem to imply £50,000 income makes somene rich. As a matter of interest do yo know how much train drivers earn

I don't care how they earn it - anyone earning £50k per year is rich.

You are sad

Harsh words from you @Big_G_NorthWales !

I do not like envy

NickPalmer

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nick - nice of you to attribute that to me but I didnt say it

I do believe NIC should be paid by everyone earning irrespective of age and expect it will be closed one day

Sorry, no, was HYUFD - thanks.

Chris_A

Richard_Nabavi said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Certainly anyone on the 88% centile of earnings is rich and it's sophistry to pretend otherwise.

The left do not like anything to do with success and resent even train drivers, senior nurses, teachers, police officers, and fire service personal earning £50,000 plus and snear at them as rich

The true politics of envy

Not quite true, they support them if they are on strike for even more money.

I'm not sneering at what anyone earns I'm sneering at people like you who think that £50k is a normal salary. It isn't.

When did I say that?

When did I say I was sneering at the rich? If £50k pa is not rich then what is it? And please don't tell me it's middle income because that's risible.

philiph

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Certainly anyone on the 88% centile of earnings is rich and it's sophistry to pretend otherwise.

The left do not like anything to do with success and resent even train drivers, senior nurses, teachers, police officers, and fire service personal earning £50,000 plus and snear at them as rich

The true politics of envy

Not quite true, they support them if they are on strike for even more money.

I'm not sneering at what anyone earns I'm sneering at people like you who think that £50k is a normal salary. It isn't.

When did I say that?

When did I say I was sneering at the rich? If £50k pa is not rich then what is it? And please don't tell me it's middle income because that's risible.

The answer to that may depend on the out goings

NickPalmer

Incidentally, Ipsos-MORI, while still showing a Tory 2-point lead (39-27) is the second poll in a week to show a sharp recovery in Corbyn's rating (+5.5 net, back level with May). 28% thinking he's good isn't wonderful, but it looks as though the depths of the summer are behind him. The historical charts are interesting, too - essentially only Blair and Cameron managed to stay popular for long.

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-10/pm-slides-oct-18.pdf

philiph

NickPalmer said:

Incidentally, Ipsos-MORI, while still showing a Tory 2-point lead (39-27) is the second poll in a week to show a sharp recovery in Corbyn's rating (+5.5 net, back level with May). 28% thinking he's good isn't wonderful, but it looks as though the depths of the summer are behind him. The historical charts are interesting, too - essentially only Blair and Cameron managed to stay popular for long.

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-10/pm-slides-oct-18.pdf

Ooooopps

39 - 37 I assume

RobD

NickPalmer said:

Incidentally, Ipsos-MORI, while still showing a Tory 2-point lead (39-27) is the second poll in a week to show a sharp recovery in Corbyn's rating (+5.5 net, back level with May). 28% thinking he's good isn't wonderful, but it looks as though the depths of the summer are behind him. The historical charts are interesting, too - essentially only Blair and Cameron managed to stay popular for long.

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-10/pm-slides-oct-18.pdf

To me it looks as though Corbyn is joint last in terms of approval ratings.

Foxy

philiph said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Chris_A said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Chris_A said:

Charles said:

Chris_A said:

Sorry back to the Budghet. Huffpost's view

The comparative impact in 2020 and 2021 is even more stark. “A basic rate taxpayer will have an average gain of £20. A higher rate taxpayer will have an average real gain of £228,” the Treasury admits in the small print. £228 is an astonishing 11 times greater benefit. The most telling thing came when Hammond hailed all this as “a tax cut for 32 million people”. It turns out that was made up of 26.1 million on lower incomes getting a small tax break, and 4.1 million better off earners getting a much bigger payout. You could call it a tax policy for the few, not the many.

This explains your conundrum quite nicely

https://www.moorestephens.co.uk/msuk/moore-stephens-south/news/april-2016/the-tax-system-explained-using-a-beer-analogy

Rubbish. If Hammond had increase the personal allowance and left the higher rate threshhold unchanged every single tax payer would have benefited by £130. He could then have used the money frittered away on handouts to the rich by putting it into schools or social care, for example. He could also have perhaps increased the personal allowance even more and given every taxpayer a £150 reduction and you can bet your life that extra £20 would be far more valuable to the minimum wage earner than the rich on £50k.

How do you define the rich

Certainly anyone on the 88% centile of earnings is rich and it's sophistry to pretend otherwise.

The left do not like anything to do with success and resent even train drivers, senior nurses, teachers, police officers, and fire service personal earning £50,000 plus and snear at them as rich

The true politics of envy

Not quite true, they support them if they are on strike for even more money.

I'm not sneering at what anyone earns I'm sneering at people like you who think that £50k is a normal salary. It isn't.

When did I say that?

When did I say I was sneering at the rich? If £50k pa is not rich then what is it? And please don't tell me it's middle income because that's risible.

The answer to that may depend on the out goings

Being rich is not so much about absolute income, I agree. It is perhaps about having spare money, from income, capital or family assets.

Following Hammonds budget, I have an extra tenner a week, so am definitely richer.

Scrapheap_as_was

I can confirm that on returning from Wembley.... I am definitely sad..... But not surprised.

AndyJS

New poll puts the two main parties in Britain on 83%, a bit of a contrast to the situation in most other European countries:


"Europe Elects
‏ @EuropeElects
17m17 minutes ago

UK, Deltapoll poll:

CON-ECR: 43% (+6)
LAB-S&D: 40%
LDEM-ALDE: 6% (-2)
UKIP-EFDD: 5% (-1)
SNP/PC-G/EFA: 4% (+1)
GREENS-G/EFA: 2% (-3)

Field work: 24/10/18 – 26/10/18
Sample size: 1,017"

Scrapheap_as_was

Chris_A said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Question

How much will someone on the increased national living wage from april and the new personal allowance gain on say a 35 hour week

All basic rate tax payers will gain £130 per year in income tax. All higher rate tax payers will gain £860 per year.

That's bollocks. "all". .. Tsk.

Many current higher rate taxpayers will no longer be if on 47k .. You aren't 860 up.

RobD

AndyJS said:

New poll puts the two main parties in Britain on 83%, a bit of a contrast to the situation in most other European countries:


"Europe Elects
‏ @EuropeElects
17m17 minutes ago

UK, Deltapoll poll:

CON-ECR: 43% (+6)
LAB-S&D: 40%
LDEM-ALDE: 6% (-2)
UKIP-EFDD: 5% (-1)
SNP/PC-G/EFA: 4% (+1)
GREENS-G/EFA: 2% (-3)

Field work: 24/10/18 – 26/10/18
Sample size: 1,017"

Because of the glorious FPTP voting system. None of this coalition backroom deal nonsense.