The budget

The government hadn't read their own manifesto. Pity the best opposition came from their own side.

Well, well. I can remember some things in the budget that eventually fell apart at the seams. Didn't Osborne put in something about hot and cold pies being taxed differently in the same takeaway?
I'm struggling to remember a Chancellor making such a cock-up that he has to go to the House a week later and withdraw a major item.
This leaves him with a huge problem as "budget" means just that - I'll get this much money in and spend that much and the two amounts balance. What next? Budget Mark 2?

Class war? Rubbish. Nothing to do with class, people who have to go to food banks cannot afford to buy food. Many people who are evicted cannot afford their rent

daphne You seem to agree that the poorest are suffering the most so I don't really understand what you are getting at when you say: "I'm fed up with people making speeches about how terrible it is that people go to food banks, are being evicted blah blah and how it's all the fault of the capitalist society, the mega-rich or whatever. None of them (with a couple of exceptions) seem to know the financial details of those affected. I'm fed up with class war and identity politics."

It is not "class war" to suggest that the tax burden should be proportionate to a person's wealth. If taxes on the richest are reduced, it is fairly obvious that investment in infrastructure and services must be reduced - or the shortfall made up by taking more from the less well off.

daphnedil - your post at 19.59 a little confusing. You are upset about having a tax cut? Is that what you meant?
Do you agree with the Chancellor reducing taxes for those with the biggest income, while raising taxes (NI) for some people who are struggling to get by?
And do you not think there is a link between increasing poverty and homelessness and the way the country is being governed?

It would be easier (and more likely) for the Conservatives to lose a vote of confidence and, with the Leader of the Opposition unable to garner sufficient support to form a government, have General Election by default.

The bookmakers odds suggest that this Parliament will run its course.

She'd have to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act first and she's got enough on her plate at the moment.

Sorry, just realised my link is unavailable although I managed to access it without subscribing. Anyway, the point is that Theresa May could call a snap election but is unlikely to do so.

www.ft.com/content/56b62784-03fb-11e7-aa5b-6bb07f5c8e12

It would be difficult, but it is possible.

How could a Prime Minister call an early Election? I understood that the period between General Elections is now fixed. It can only be earlier if the Government loses a vote of confidence in the Commons and the Leader of the Opposition does not have the support to form a new government.

An early General Election can occur but not at the behest of the PM.

This wasn't you writing this, was it daphne?

thinktankreview.us9.list-manage.com/track/click?u=3c4f6e5b05cc55109609d1652&id=47d1f8d259&e=3dcebd5672

Isn't it the fault of the capitalist society, daphne?

Somehow, I don't think May will dare call an early election now.

Can't wait for this, Jess.

thinktankreview.us9.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=3c4f6e5b05cc55109609d1652&id=189872efa9&e=3dcebd5672

Good! I'm, glad the Guardian is taking this up. I wrote to the Guardian on Friday. I'm on a one-woman mission to inform as many people as possible about the realities and cumulative effect on the poorest of these changes. I was contacted yesterday by somebody in one of the more influential think tanks, so maybe I'm getting somewhere. I'm fed up with people making speeches about how terrible it is that people go to food banks, are being evicted blah blah and how it's all the fault of the capitalist society, the mega-rich or whatever. None of them (with a couple of exceptions) seem to know the financial details of those affected. I'm fed up with class war and identity politics.

Maybe I'll invite IDS and Jeremy Corbyn round for tea - at the same time .

JessM I couldn't care less how much higher earners earn or how much their income tax is cut, if I weren't having to take such a huge cut myself. Sorry, but I get fed up with people making sweeping statements.

Yes, Jess, really fair, this.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/12/families-lose-sixth-income-national-insurance-nics-universal-credit-uk

What should really annoy the lower earring self-employed is that top rate tax payers are getting an income tax cut.
And the chancellor talks of "fairness".

Matthew Taylor was interviewed on Sunday Politics. If anyone is interested I think you will be able to see it on iPlayer.

www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/06/sick-parcelforce-couriers-royal-mail-mands-john-lewis-hamleys-dpd

There's a petition on 38 degrees if you don't think this is right.

Right have found The Joy of Tax - will read the appropriate chapter.. DH says we threw away the JOS because we had tried it all out

I don't agree with Murphy about NI.

People of working age are already paying a high tax rate and they're not so stupid they don't realise it. Some low earners pay more in NI than they do in tax. Add graduate tax (aka student loan payback to that) and some people on quite modest incomes are paying about 45% tax on their incomes. Meanwhile, those with unearned income (eg landlords and those with inherited wealth) and pensioners pay much less.

Governments have tinkered with NI so much that there is no rational relationship between what people pay and what they receive.

These days parents (usually the mother) receive NI if they don't work and stay at home to look after children. This was done to appease stay at home mothers. However, it's possible for a person who has stayed at home most of his/her working life to receive the new full state pension.

I will have 48 years of contributions by the time I'm 66 BUT I won't receive a full state pension, even though I'm a mother too. The reason for that is that I paid into the Teachers' Pension Scheme and, therefore, paid reduced NI. I understand the reason behind the reduced pension. However, I paid extra for my Teachers' Pension and I paid more into state NI than stay at home mothers, but I will receive less state pension. How fair is that?

There are other anomalies too. It's a tax on employment rather than contributory tax/benefit for individuals. It doesn't even work well as a means tested benefit. Every time governments have tried to tinker with it, it's caused problems elsewhere. The whole thing needs a comprehensive review and starting from scratch with fair transitional arrangements, so that people can plan.

dj I think we've got JOT lurking somewhere ( or is it a dog eared copy of the Joy of Sex )

dd - thanks for link will follow it up after coffee.

Thank you for that very long post.I think you've explained the situation very well. NI is not fit for purpose and there needs to be a comprehensive review.

Here's a link to the RSA's report on self-employment, highlighting some of the issues:

www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/reports/the-entrepreneurial-audit

(Sorry! I'm going out,so don't have time to summarise it.)

Chapter 9 in The Joy of Tax, Rigby.
We no longer have NI, but can't subsume it in income tax as there would be a revolt at the overall tax rate.
Murphy suggests a carbon usage tax through bank transactions.