Get ready with £1,250 a year to pay for bank bail-outs

[Simpo Two]

UK deficit 'more than predicted'

The government may have to find an extra £39bn a year by 2016 to bring borrowing under control, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) says.

This is on top of the £38bn of fiscal tightening the chancellor announced in the pre-Budget report (PBR).

If the money were raised entirely through tax-raising measures then families would face an average increase of £1,250 in taxes a year.

Alistair Darling is due to present his Budget on 22 April. He has warned that the recession will be more severe than forecast.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7984889.stm

Simpo says:

[Oakey]

Simpo Two said:

UK deficit 'more than predicted'

The government may have to find an extra £39bn a year by 2016 to bring borrowing under control, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) says.

This is on top of the £38bn of fiscal tightening the chancellor announced in the pre-Budget report (PBR).

If the money were raised entirely through tax-raising measures then families would face an average increase of £1,250 in taxes a year.

Alistair Darling is due to present his Budget on 22 April. He has warned that the recession will be more severe than forecast.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7984889.stm

Simpo says:

What?!?!?! Really?!?!?! Who'd have known!!!? I'm glad he's told us all because, you know, I thought this recession was just going to be a little blip in the ocean and everything would be back to normal by Xmas.

[bigburd]

I'm waiting for the loss of "free banking" we've all become accustomed to, banks in many other countries charge for anything from ATM withdrawal, cheques, fund transfers, etc.

[Simpo Two]

And of course making everyone poorer by taxation makes them less able to buy stuff so we'll get another recession... and the cost to the state in benefits goes up... is there any way to tip the scales back to sanity I wonder?

Back to basics. Make stuff. That's what made the Empire. Except we can't live on $1 a day because of the fking TAX; we need £20K just to eat.

[Dogwatch]

"Get ready with £1,250 a year to pay for bank Winky Mcfknut bail-outs."


EFA





first time I've ever been censored!

[Zod]

Oakey said:

What?!?!?! Really?!?!?! Who'd have known!!!? I'm glad he's told us all because, you know, I thought this recession was just going to be a little blip in the ocean and everything would be back to normal by Xmas.

This was the government spin on the Today Programme today: "the recession will be over by the end of the year", so go out and vote next May for Labour, the party that got us out of recession.

[ShadownINja]

Simpo Two said:

Back to basics. Don't borrow money. That's what made the Empire. Except we can't live on $1 a day because of the fking TAX; we need £20K just to eat.

EFA?

[Spiritual_Beggar]

Simpo Two said:

UK deficit 'more than predicted'

The government may have to find an extra £39bn a year by 2016 to bring borrowing under control, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) says.

This is on top of the £38bn of fiscal tightening the chancellor announced in the pre-Budget report (PBR).

If the money were raised entirely through tax-raising measures then families would face an average increase of £1,250 in taxes a year.

Alistair Darling is due to present his Budget on 22 April. He has warned that the recession will be more severe than forecast.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7984889.stm

Simpo says:

So at what point does Brown get impeached for constantly lieing to the public about how "Britain is in a better situation than most to deal with the economic slowdow!"

They must have known the truth.....so have they not been deliberately misleading the public?




Why can't we all just refuse to pay taxes until this idiotic government gives us control and we have an election!!

I lost all faith in this particular Gov a long long time ago!!!!

[Spiritual_Beggar]

Zod said:

Oakey said:

What?!?!?! Really?!?!?! Who'd have known!!!? I'm glad he's told us all because, you know, I thought this recession was just going to be a little blip in the ocean and everything would be back to normal by Xmas.

This was the government spin on the Today Programme today: "the recession will be over by the end of the year", so go out and vote next May for Labour, the party that got us out of recession.

Its brilliant isn't it.

Of course...lets completely forget that it was the government and poor regulation of the financial services that got us into this mess in the first place!

And even when we're out of the recession......we te public will still have a shed load of debt to pay back on GB's behalf!

[Allanv]

So idiot in No10 gets free rent but claims for 2nd home
Idiot in No11 gets free rent but claims for a 2nd home

We call these mortgages. So the 2nd home allowance is for paying for 2 homes from 1 set of wages, yes I understand.

But you live rent free you fktards.

But back to the thread:

The deficit is because you took OUR money and bailed out the banks this I understand but now you looked at the account and went WTF where is this money??? Do you have the brain of a goldfish? YOU spend it on the banks ask them to pay it back you fking idiots.

But you want me to pay it back don’t you pay back the money I already paid in so that you paid to all the lords and Sirs. But wait all my working class mates are being made redundant by the Banks our money bailed out but you still want us to pay to fix the problem don’t you but if you stop and think you will notice as we have done that we are all unemployed so are unable to pay back our money to private companies for your mistakes.

But you still live rent free.

Good time are set to end for you.

[unrepentant]

Allanv said:

So idiot in No10 gets free rent but claims for 2nd home

We call these mortgages. So the 2nd home allowance is for paying for 2 homes from 1 set of wages, yes I understand.

But you live rent free you fktards.

Are you sure about that?

I'd be very surprised if Brown claims a second home allowance.

[Fittster]

unrepentant said:

Allanv said:

So idiot in No10 gets free rent but claims for 2nd home

We call these mortgages. So the 2nd home allowance is for paying for 2 homes from 1 set of wages, yes I understand.

But you live rent free you fktards.

Are you sure about that?

I'd be very surprised if Brown claims a second home allowance.

As Cilla would say, surprise, surprise

" Last year Gordon Brown claimed £16,000 for the second home allowance, to finance his home in Fife.

Up until 2006 the Browns had lived in a Westminster flat, owned by Brown in Great Peter Street (which he bought in 1992 from Robert Maxwell), which he claimed second home allowance for - their main home being in Brown's Fife constituency.

When they moved into Downing Street, I am told that Brown transferred ownership of the flat to his wife. I have been unable to find out whether they still own the flat, whether it has been rented out or whether it has been sold. If it has been sold, surely the Fife house counts as their main home, as it is the only one they own. If they still own and rent out the London flat, aren't they in the same position as Geoff Hoon?

Of course, by claiming for his Fife home, in theory Brown is, in theory, doing nothing different to Tony Blair, who claimed for his house in Sedgefield. But there is a key difference. The Blairs never really lived there full time - it was always clear that it was a second home. Brown's Fife house is his home. It's where his belongings are stored. It's his retreat of choice."

http://www.iaindale.blogspot.com/

[unrepentant]

Fittster said:

unrepentant said:

Allanv said:

So idiot in No10 gets free rent but claims for 2nd home

We call these mortgages. So the 2nd home allowance is for paying for 2 homes from 1 set of wages, yes I understand.

But you live rent free you fktards.

Are you sure about that?

I'd be very surprised if Brown claims a second home allowance.

As Cilla would say, surprise, surprise

" Last year Gordon Brown claimed £16,000 for the second home allowance, to finance his home in Fife.

Up until 2006 the Browns had lived in a Westminster flat, owned by Brown in Great Peter Street (which he bought in 1992 from Robert Maxwell), which he claimed second home allowance for - their main home being in Brown's Fife constituency.

When they moved into Downing Street, I am told that Brown transferred ownership of the flat to his wife. I have been unable to find out whether they still own the flat, whether it has been rented out or whether it has been sold. If it has been sold, surely the Fife house counts as their main home, as it is the only one they own. If they still own and rent out the London flat, aren't they in the same position as Geoff Hoon?

I suppose he claims that 10 Downing Street is his main home? Bit iffy though and I'm suprised that more has not been made of it. The trouble is that Cameron et al are all at it as well. I seem to recall that Cameron claims the biggest second home allowance of all?

Time to scrap the whole thing and pay them all a nightly allowance for nights spent in London equivalent to the rate charged by the nearest Travel Lodge.

[JagLover]

The thread title is incorrect.

Regardless of the cost of the bank bailouts the government's finances are destroyed, due to the fact we entered this recession/depression with the highest structural deficit in the western world.

[oyster]

Zod said:

Oakey said:

What?!?!?! Really?!?!?! Who'd have known!!!? I'm glad he's told us all because, you know, I thought this recession was just going to be a little blip in the ocean and everything would be back to normal by Xmas.

This was the government spin on the Today Programme today: "the recession will be over by the end of the year", so go out and vote next May for Labour, the party that got us out of recession.

But we all know it was Gordon's boom, a global recession and Gordon's recovery.

[ExChrispy Porker]

would it have been better to let the banks fail then?

[Zod]

Does injecting cash into the banks (in common with every other OECD country) absolve them from their conduct of the economy over the last decade?

No, it doesn't.

Edited by Zod on Wednesday 8th April 17:22

[ExChrispy Porker]

Zod said:

Does injecting cash into the banks (in common with every other OECD country) absolve them from their conduct of the economy over the last decade?

No, it doesn't. Your point?

I don't have one. I just asked a question, to which I did not know the answer.
But thanks anyway.

[Zod]

sorry. I deleted the unnecessarily aggressive "Your point?"

[s2art]

ExChrispy Porker said:

would it have been better to let the banks fail then?

RBS? Yes IMHO. The Yanks let Lehmans go. RBS was just too expensive to save. It would have been broken up, bits sold on to LLoyds, Barclays, HSBC etc.