The Budget

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Well RR won’t step down of that I’m sure.
She’ll have to be pushed.

Basically she’s gaslighted us all into thinking our country was poorer than it actually was. I think she wanted her fiscal policies to deceive us into thinking she’d done An Amazing Job as Chancellor.

This isn't the thread for this, is it? I'm sure I posted on a "Chancellor accused of lying" type of headline.

As I said on the other one, she may just have disagreed with the OPRs figures.

I think Reeves was looking to increase the fiscal headroom from 4 billion to 20 billion. Probably on the advice of the Treasury? So this move sort of fits in with Starmer’s rhetoric at the outset of his reign. Along the lines of the economy will get worse before it gets better.
However as a happy non economist, I am left wondering if it’s good economics to reduce spending power by the raising taxes for working people. Does doing this tax grab mean that a 20 billion headroom is not enough/about right/or on target?
If we care?

Spending power for the State not for the consumer.

Why would we assume the OBR are correct? They can't even figure out when to release the post budget report, I'll give them a clue - it's after the budget.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Our daughters are much better off financially than we were in our late 40’s.

The benefit of good university degrees helped - securing professional employment - both in the public sector (NHS speech & language the other a deputy head - both working full time).

I’m happy and relieved they are so fortunate.

Not everyone is.

'Twas always thus, FGT2.

I think, whichever era we're discussing, it often takes two to be able to survive financially although, even so, some will still be just scraping by and others very comfortable.

The big change now to the previous generation is that more and more are single-parent families (usually mothers) and that can make life very tough. The CSA tried but wasn't a great success. Its successor is struggling.

Of course, the generation previous to that one had similar problems with so many fathers being lost in WW2.

Your daughters are fortunate through their own efforts, FGT, because they have the work ethic.

DaisyAnneReturns

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Well RR won’t step down of that I’m sure.
She’ll have to be pushed.

Basically she’s gaslighted us all into thinking our country was poorer than it actually was. I think she wanted her fiscal policies to deceive us into thinking she’d done An Amazing Job as Chancellor.

This isn't the thread for this, is it? I'm sure I posted on a "Chancellor accused of lying" type of headline.

Apologies DAR
I haven’t seen that one. Just this Budget one.

Oh well. All part of the same mess I suppose.

FriedGreenTomatoes2
Oh well. All part of the same mess I suppose.

That sums it up accurately.

😁

I have just had a quick nose to find the other thread FGT2 I couldn’t see it.

Perhaps DAR could post a link 🤷‍♀️

I agree with you definitely all part of the same mess

As the heading of the thread is The Budget I think it could encompass discussion about the Chancellor's fiscal policies and whether or not the public was deceived into thinking the country's finances were in a worse state than they actually are.

GrannyGravy13

I have just had a quick nose to find the other thread FGT2 I couldn’t see it.

Perhaps DAR could post a link 🤷‍♀️

I agree with you definitely ^all part of the same mess^

Was it on GN or perhaps MN?

It doesn't seem to be on here.

There isn’t a headline like that on here DAR perhaps you could start one.🤔

Allira

As the heading of the thread is The Budget I think it could encompass discussion about the Chancellor's fiscal policies and whether or not the public was deceived into thinking the country's finances were in a worse state than they actually are.

Indeed.
The budget covers so many areas. It seems reasonable to be able to comment on any aspects of the budget that interest, irritate or affect you.

Or even an ongoing irritant from a previous Budget that could have been reversed in this one.

Rachel is not listening.

Oreo

There isn’t a headline like that on here DAR perhaps you could start one.🤔

I had a glimpse at MN (not a member though) and there was something similar but no takers.

The unions aren't happy with RR. I imagine the government will try to brush this under the carpet.

Starmer is going to back the Budget.
Of course he will.
He is a man completely without scruples.

So Kemi Badenoch did not call Rachel Reeves a liar in Parliament. This is a tiff that the far-right and right MSM aided and abetted by online supporters, are spreading. So let's go over what actually happened for those who still think truth matters.

All through the summer, if I recall rightly (and, of course this can be checked) the press were blowing up the size of the "black hole" in the Reeves budget. All sorts of figures were being mentioned by the press. Obviously, they could not know as they do not have access to the figures. But their readers/listeners love to believe the worst and if they like what is being said, to them it is a truth. They got these mythical figures up to £50 billion with no facts, similar to the way they served up "facts" over Brexit.

So where did these figures come from as they couldn't have come from the Treasury? They came from the imagination of the press. They didn't all agree and their guesses varied from £20 billion up to £50 billion. These figures could not and did not come from The Treasury or Rachel Reeves. Apparently some attributed this to a "group of economists". No such group would have access to the Treasury data. The only people who know the actual figures are the Treasury and the OBR. Any such "group of economists" is basing their "guess" albeit educated, on figures they don't have.

In September the BBC reported that "Rachel Reeves has rejected forecasts of a £50bn black hole" in the public finances, despite higher borrowing costs and, in the same interview she said "a lot of them are talking rubbish".

So all through the summer the press built this up while Rachel Reeves, who can say little, said this was rubbish.

Now that both budget and OBR report are out and we know the reality the Press are blaming Reeves for their own miscalculation and many of you are swallowing it hook, line and sinker! She said the press were talking rubbish. Otherwise she never said a word about this.

Isn't it time for a new look at Press Reform when the Press can speculate using unsubstantiated rumours and then blame the government, or in this case Reeves, when it turns out they were wrong!

RR has mentioned the £20 + billion black hole in the nation’s finances at every opportunity since becoming chancellor 🤷‍♀️

GrannyGravy13

RR has mentioned the £20 + billion black hole in the nation’s finances at every opportunity since becoming chancellor 🤷‍♀️

I began to wonder if she had an avatar who was claiming that 🤔 She's very realistic if so.

Would the real Rachel Reeves speak up, please!

The chancellor cannot honestly announce a series of tax rises in her October budget, blame them on this hole that she has just discovered, and claim that she couldn’t have known pre-election that tax rises would be needed to maintain public services. That fact was obvious to all who cared to look. The politics that led the Conservatives to cut £20 billion from national insurance contributions and Labour to rule out either undoing that or increasing income tax or VAT could come back to haunt us. The danger is that we will get a series of much more complex, uncertain and economically risky tax rises in their place.

NB
The above is from a reputable source, if any business in today’s world can be considered reputable.

GrannyGravy13

RR has mentioned the £20 + billion black hole in the nation’s finances at every opportunity since becoming chancellor 🤷‍♀️

The statements she made before the Budget did not amount to a clear, evidence-based disclosure of the actual fiscal gap although a fiscal gap was no suprise to anyone. She did not publicly release or cite an official figure.

She did make more general statements about “the scale of the inheritance” and “a black hole", but the figures come from media reporting or commentary, not from a concrete, independently verifiable forecast or from the Treasury, OBR or Rachel Reeves. Media outlets interpreted or "reported" their guestimate using a variety of figures.

You say "RR has mentioned the £20 + billion black hole in the nation’s finances at every opportunity since becoming chancellor" May I suggest that in fact you have "heard" it repeated often because the bias held by the media you chose to get your news from encourages them to do this.