When Osborne talked about borrowing our way into this mess it's worth remembering this video:




according to the IMF the reason the UK has experienced a large build up in public debt is because of the costs of the large loss of output following the crisis. Not quite the story of public sector profligacy the government is usually so keen to tell.

http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2011/10/19040/

_________________
My blog: https://stevenplrose.wordpress.com/

Only one newspaper this morning comes out with any support for the Chancellor on the front page, this is the Star. Which squeezes it in on one side deeming it less important that some celebrity gossip nonsense or other.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/gallery ... 25&index=7

_________________
"Even when you're a super-computer with an IQ of 2000 it's brown trousers time."

Reclaiming "methinks" for the nation

Latest blog post - 2011 - a review (updated 07/10)

_________________
I'm a nasty, violent lefty. You cunt.

I see the Evening Standard are trying to do a bit of damage limitation on the granny tax, even though it's taking a beating in the other right-leaning papers. They're not quite so keen on the stamp duty hike though, it would seem.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/lond ... 81743.html



For all the talk of the rich apparently paying more tax as a result of this Budget, I've not heard too many complaints from them today. Funny, because the bleating about the 50% rate was relentless even though we're led to believe none of them pay it anyway.

_________________
True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.

The sad thing about this Budget is that the government seems too much wedded to the austerity agenda. Of course we need to tackle the deficit left by Labour, but surely there are better ways to deal with it then this. One can only accept that this self-imposed policy will lead to higher unemployment, greater inequality and mass social unrest. Don't be surprised if it all comes to a head during the Olympics this summer.

The Standard has a point about pensioners having done relatively well before.

Even some in the Telegraph have noticed that super-rich pushing up house prices isn't good for everyone. The Telegraph at least has pretensions to represent the wider conservative public, not just rich commuters, like The Standard.

The figures about the low take from the 50p rate are a bit of a wheeze. Loads of income was brought forward to when it was still 40p. You can only do that one, so keep the tax at that high level and you should get more coming in. So they cut in, and income gets deferred to when the rate is 45p. So it looks like loads of people who weren't working/ paying tax at 50p are happy to do so at 45p. They might defer a bit more then, till it's 40p.

Take that lefties!

Excellent blog

http://dpmcbride.tumblr.com/post/197173 ... game-i-was

_________________
My blog: https://stevenplrose.wordpress.com/

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...

Have you seen this explanation of the process by which items end up in the budget?

Couple of Cornish LibDems getting worried about what the pie-tax will do to the pasty trade.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17486692

Also Radio 4 are reporting that the drinks industry are mounting a challenge to the 40p per unit tax as they reckon it breaks EU competition law.

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...

Same thing happening in Scotland- planned minimum price and threatened legal action.

The Mailities heads will explode if their cheap booze is saved by the EU CommieNazis.

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...

They'd have a point, I think.

The EU needs standards and rules so it isn't just a race to the bottom. But a minimum price?

I can't see how it'd affect competition as it'd be a minimum price for everyone.

_________________
Changin' avatars like there's no tomorrow

There are laws against price fixing to protect the consumer by preventing rival companies from getting together and agreeing not to undercut each other.
The theory of competition is that the company which provides the consumer with the most attractive offering (including price) will be the most successful. According to the theory this is beneficial to the consumer as they will get the best product.

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...