Reeves will ask rich to pay more tax
Rachel Reeves has signalled the better off will be forced to “contribute more” as she prepares to raise taxes at the Budget.
Treasury sources have said that the Chancellor will not cut spending on public services or significantly increase borrowing, as she looks to plug a £20-30 billion black hole in the public finances.
It will leave her with no option but to substantially increase taxes.
There will be numerous responses which are far less polite than "goodbye" but behind them is a feature of the ideology which controls Rachel Reeves as a politician.
One reason why people such as our pretend Chancellor are ideologues is that a popular ideology allows them to be assertive without being smart. Keir Starmer's absurd Cabinet brings this out too well for comfort.
6 comments:
The Laffer curve has it's own Wikipedia page so it is unlikely that increased taxation resulting in no extra revenue could be 'unforeseen'.
Which means that a decision to 'tax the rich' more is both breaking the promise of no increase in certain taxes in the manifesto and also yet another instance of class war.
So... is there no room for savings? Where is the ban on Civil Service recruitment? Where is the reduction in MP's allowances? How many QUANGOs have been wound up? None of these things would bring austerity to the voting public.
DJ - during a recent interview, Liz Truss said that Treasury people don't believe in the Laffer curve. There must be huge opportunities for savings, IT systems alone should have created major efficiencies, but all we see are more demands for funding.
Much of the problem appears to be a bloated welfare state which governments won't scale back or even curtail, yet there is no future in endless bloat.
We have just had our Local Elections here. One of the most heartening things about it was how many of the new candidates are questioning the continual demand for rates rises without any attempt at cost cutting.
John - that's encouraging. There are signs of it over here, although any cost cutting is bound to be opposed in the usual ways.
When cutting costs, they always make sure that the services they cut are the ones which immediately bring pain to the public, and always cut back on the lowest paid employees. For councils the "bin-men" * not the very important people hiding in overheated offices. For NHS , the real nursing staff, not the management wondering how spend their IT budget on the next multi million IT disaster, or DEI Executive Facilitator and Department Head, or even the army of lawyers defending against claims of NHS cockups.
So streets fill with rubbish, waiting lists stretch to balance with the numbers who fall off through death of give and pay to go private using those same NHS resources and crime is ignored while our PC PCs are crouched over screens looking for hurty words so that they can get the armed response squad out of the canteen.
Oh dear, we collectively need ever increasing "funding"!!
"bin-men"- the Recycling and Waste Disposal Front Line Operatives, of course.
Doonhamer - I agree, maximum public inconvenience every time. If they cut the very important people hiding in overheated offices then they might even manage with fewer offices. Won't do.
Post a Comment