U turn on winter fuel payments- is it a good move?

In my opinion there is nothing wrong with borrowing money for growth, it’s what most businesses do, they have not ruled out borrowing for growth, there should be no need for QE. Although the spending is headlined as £1 Trillion that is spread over up to 10 yrs which makes it much more plausible, Labour certainly can’t be accused of making short term decisions,
Money for social spending needs to come from taxation, despite the U turn on WFA we can expect the tax increases next budget. We will have to wait until then to see how it all balances out.

Oreo

A lot of older people no longer work so have less money coming in yet have the same everyday needs as anyone else.
They often have various health issues, aren’t all very mobile and feel the cold more.
I think old people are a special case.

Some older people no longer work and have less pension coming in for all the years they did work, but still need to buy at today’s prices.
Who cares?

I've asked my husband and he thinks his tax code was altered automatically to a married man's one, but he doesn't think it impacted on mine. So if we'd both been on the same salary he would have taken home more than me. He also said he wouldn't swear to that in court, though, as it was 45 years ago .

PoliticsNerd

MaizieD

Allira

Doodledog

I agree that young people should get help too - I think CB should be universal, for instance. I would also like to see more free childcare, and am pleased about the rise to the minimum wage.

It shouldn’t be a race to the bottom. I’m not bothered about the WFA personally- it will make little difference to me- but I will not start telling other people what they ‘need’, as I have no idea of others’ circumstances, and object to that as a way of allocating public money. It drags everyone down.

The Government can find/create any money it needs.

Quite right, Allira. It certainly can create any money it likes and all this posturing about there not being enough money is just perpetuating an untruth.

What you see as a truth is the foolishness of extremes to others - think Liz Truss.

Yes, the government can, should they be foolish enough to do so, print as much money money as they want. Printing more money without supporting economic growth or productivity can cause inflation, reduce the currency's value, and create economic instability. Most governments have recognised that responsible monetary policy aims to balance money supply with economic output to maintain stable prices.

I think we are aware of the risk of inflation.

MaizieD knows what she is talking about.

FranP

Martin Lewis is warning that there are already scams out there asking people to apply. You do NOT need to. Please make your own elders aware. www.facebook.com/ThisMorning/videos/691191247222473

Thank you.

We are the elders

I honestly can’t remember- we married in 1980, so well within the timescale. I’d be very surprised if I willingly handed over my salary or tax allowance, but I knew about the allowance before I looked it up.

We married in 1967 and I don't remember a time when I wasn't taxed separately even though I don't remember electing for either.

Perhaps working in the public services meant you were automatically taxed separately?

The damage has been done to the party and they know it was the wrong thing to do , you do not kick people in the teeth and expect them to for get how you treated them , If they want to claw back money wasted why did they all accept the huge pay rise that they were given

gillsterry

The damage has been done to the party and they know it was the wrong thing to do , you do not kick people in the teeth and expect them to for get how you treated them , If they want to claw back money wasted why did they all accept the huge pay rise that they were given

Because they’re doing an important job and expenses are being more closely monitored now.

PoliticsNerd

Pension adequacy is not just about the amount of the pension. Pension levels and benefits vary significantly across Europe due to differing economic conditions, social welfare policies, and cost of living.

To argue that it is the lowest State Pension in Europe you would need to look at far more than just the pension amount.

To argue that it is the lowest State Pension in Europe you would need to look at far more than just the pension amount.

I didn't though argue that is was the lowest in Europe, I said it was inadequate. I'm aware of why pensions and benefits vary across Europe.

The point of my post was to highlight the divisive nature of one group / demographic blaming another for its economic ills. Something that governments, in varying degrees, appear to encourage, or ignore.

MaizieD knows what she is talking about. (Allira)

MaizieD is certainly an advocate of MMT and presents a positive view of the theory. Suporters believe it provides a clear understanding of sovereign currency-issuing governments' capacity to fund public programs without the risk of default, as long as inflation is controlled. It shifts the focus from deficits being inherently bad to managing inflation and resource use.

However, there is another view. Critics are concerned that MMT underestimates inflation risks and the potential for fiscal irresponsibility. They worry that promoting extensive government spending could lead to runaway inflation or undermine fiscal discipline. Some economists also argue that MMT's assumptions about the capacity of central banks and government spending are overly optimistic or lack sufficient empirical support.

MMT is a provocative approach that challenges conventional thinking. Currently it remains outside the mainstream of economic thought.

MaizieD certainly does not offer an unbiased view.

Allira

^I honestly can’t remember- we married in 1980, so well within the timescale. I’d be very surprised if I willingly handed over my salary or tax allowance, but I knew about the allowance before I looked it up.^

We married in 1967 and I don't remember a time when I wasn't taxed separately even though I don't remember electing for either.

Perhaps working in the public services meant you were automatically taxed separately?

No. My husband wasn’t in the public sector. Nor was I in those days, now I think about it. We weren’t taxed separately. As I said, I can’t remember the detail for us personally, but the link I provided shows that the vague memory I have about a married man’s allowance was correct, and my husband thinks that his tax code was adjusted on marriage, along with all married men, but mine wasn’t. As he remembers it, it was a perk for married men, not an adjustment between couples. Neither of us can be certain, but the link does corroborate what we thought was the case, which is that marriage had tax advantages for men.

It’s not important in the context of the WFA anyway- I only mentioned it as an illustration of how differential treatment of married people would be unfair.

MMT supports government borrowing / creation of money improve GDP not to increase social spending, which is pretty much the policy of this government. They have stated that borrowing will not increase to pay for day to day spending. The risk of spending for social giveaways is that financial markets loose confidence and the currency devalues. So far the market accepts the plans without reaction either way.

The spending that Reeves announced were along those lines, however it is going to take time for the benefits to be seen, in the meantime I am expecting taxes to rise and spending to be restricted.