Cost of living squeeze in 2022

[loafer123]

Sway said:

What I can't see in there, is whilst 'tax rates' would increase massively, that's countered somewhat by the UBI itself offsetting against that.

One example is;

“ If funded through income tax it would require tax rates to start at 58p for the first £1 earned and rise to 85p for the higher and top rates.”

I’m not sure many people would be happy with a basic rate income tax of 58%, let alone the rest.

[A500leroy]

vulture1 said:

I got a pathetic 3% pay increase.

last 2 years not had a single day off. Worked all through covid in a big supermarket. Big supermarket just announced huge profits. I am responsible for 25-60 people who all got a near 6% increase. Feel well and truely mugged off.

Your lucky.

Here at Royal mail towers weve been given two options.

A. Nothing, nil 0%

B.5% over 2 years if we agree to Sunday working, later start/finish times (ie 12pm-10pm),reduction of sick pay, annualised hours (no overtime to be paid) and removal of £25 delivery allowance bonus.

[Sway]

loafer123 said:

Sway said:

What I can't see in there, is whilst 'tax rates' would increase massively, that's countered somewhat by the UBI itself offsetting against that.

One example is;

“ If funded through income tax it would require tax rates to start at 58p for the first £1 earned and rise to 85p for the higher and top rates.”

I’m not sure many people would be happy with a basic rate income tax of 58%, let alone the rest.

That's the nominal rate though, and doesn't take into account the 'rebate' provided by UBI.

It also doesn't have to solely be funded via Income Tax.

[gotoPzero]

vulture1 said:

I got a pathetic 3% pay increase.

last 2 years not had a single day off. Worked all through covid in a big supermarket. Big supermarket just announced huge profits. I am responsible for 25-60 people who all got a near 6% increase. Feel well and truely mugged off.

Do they pay you for your 28 days leave?

As for the pay rise. I would speak to your management and suggest you want 6% as well unless you have had a rise earlier in the same period?

[speedy_thrills]

JagLover said:

What is the biggest item in most people's spending?, the mortgage, and those on fixed rates deals are likely seeing little change and might well have locked in very low mortgage rates while they had a chance.

Mortgages are 29% of homeowners income. Consequently I think most people would rather pay a higher mortgage rate than endure inflation because a mortgage is less than a third of their income on average. My view is that what Reserve Banks are doing by letting inflation run above target for years doesn't make sense. If households are shocked by inflation they will stop discretionary spending and we will have a recession. Not just that but shocked consumers take a long time to return.

I understand there is some argument that house price stability is important for credit creation but most household spending is not on credit using their house as an collateral. People typically view their house as a place to live, whether it's worth half a million or one million British pesos is irrelevant for most practical daily purposes.

Non-tradable inflation is a smaller part of spending than tradable inflation basically.

[Mr Whippy]

roger.mellie said:

Mr Whippy said:

/Tin foil hat on

Makes you wonder… very easy to bring about UBI in this climate of financial fear.

I too don’t get it really.

BofE raising rates to increase job scarcity and keep salaries down.
Government worried about poor people having no money and stuff.

Which one is it?

Would you have a problem with UBI? I know the pros and cons, I see no evidence of it being promoted in the current climate. If the BoE rate rises are to increase job scarcity I’d love to hear your reasoning, and stuff.

Umm, interest rate rises are used to cool down an economy, an economy full of people out-bidding each other on goods/services and employers out-bidding each other for employees.

The BofE specifically said they don’t want people to get pay rises.


They tool they use is to cool the economy, that means cooling down how much money people spend.
They get the bulk of their money from wages.

They get wages for working in… you guessed it, jobs.


Or benefits/UBI.

[Mr Whippy]

/tin foil hat back on

I think it’s all on purpose.

The entire last 24 months is full of useful opportunities to bring in policy to create economic woes.

Germany at least hasn’t committed economic suicide over energy costs.

It seems right now the UK loves the idea of:

Cutting interest rates at start of pandemic, then leaving them on their arse.

Stamp duty break for no reason causing a housing price/demand spike.

Pseudo UBI through pandemic.

Pretending inflation will be transitory, doing nothing, then suddenly deciding it won’t be transitory and doing something.

Putin is Hitler 2.0, let’s cause energy and food inflation out of the wazoo at the worst possible time, while in the past we’d sit back and bury our heads.


Almost everything here was discretionary and arguably most of it could have not been done and we’d still see the sun rise every morning.


It’s like China locking down again.

And Liz Truss saying she wants to sanction China for being neutral.


Is there an economic Cold War already going on for a year or two, but it’s been obfuscated by seemingly retarded policies by all ‘sides’?


I just can’t stack up how every government is being so out of sorts over the last two years.

As noted only Germany seems to have a brain wrt their economy.

We appear to want havoc to ensue.

[loafer123]

Sway said:

loafer123 said:

Sway said:

What I can't see in there, is whilst 'tax rates' would increase massively, that's countered somewhat by the UBI itself offsetting against that.

One example is;

“ If funded through income tax it would require tax rates to start at 58p for the first £1 earned and rise to 85p for the higher and top rates.”

I’m not sure many people would be happy with a basic rate income tax of 58%, let alone the rest.

That's the nominal rate though, and doesn't take into account the 'rebate' provided by UBI.

It also doesn't have to solely be funded via Income Tax.

It is a wealth redistribution model. Take the money from the high earners and give it to those who don’t earn, or earn less.

The issue is that the high earners won’t carry on working hard if they only take home 15% of each marginal extra £.

[JagLover]

loafer123 said:

Sway said:

loafer123 said:

Sway said:

What I can't see in there, is whilst 'tax rates' would increase massively, that's countered somewhat by the UBI itself offsetting against that.

One example is;

“ If funded through income tax it would require tax rates to start at 58p for the first £1 earned and rise to 85p for the higher and top rates.”

I’m not sure many people would be happy with a basic rate income tax of 58%, let alone the rest.

That's the nominal rate though, and doesn't take into account the 'rebate' provided by UBI.

It also doesn't have to solely be funded via Income Tax.

It is a wealth redistribution model. Take the money from the high earners and give it to those who don’t earn, or earn less.

The issue is that the high earners won’t carry on working hard if they only take home 15% of each marginal extra £.

The tax rate required depends on the amount paid out in a UBI. IMO it would only ever work at a level where it pays for the bare necessities of live, a room in a flat share say with basic food, with anything further to be earned.

Many of those who talk about envisage far more generous schemes where people can not work if they want, which is when you start needed penal levels of tax to pay for it.

Let us say it is set at £700 a month per person, but the tax/NI allowances and many benefits are scrapped to pay for it. Then see how much taxes need to rise.

[glazbagun]

Mr Whippy said:

/tin foil hat back on

I think it’s all on purpose.

The entire last 24 months is full of useful opportunities to bring in policy to create economic woes.

Is there an economic Cold War already going on for a year or two, but it’s been obfuscated by seemingly retarded policies by all ‘sides’?

I just can’t stack up how every government is being so out of sorts over the last two years.

As noted only Germany seems to have a brain wrt their economy.

We appear to want havoc to ensue.

China for a long time has been accused of deliberately undervaluing their currency. Germany has an undervalued currency thanks to the other nations in the Euro. Have we & the US just said "Oh yeah? Watch this!"

Earning power is being smashed, it's capital gains all the way.

[loafer123]

How can it be set at a level below the benefit cap?



Or is the assumption that people get UBI and benefits?

[Welshbeef]

JagLover said:

The tax rate required depends on the amount paid out in a UBI. IMO it would only ever work at a level where it pays for the bare necessities of live, a room in a flat share say with basic food, with anything further to be earned.

Many of those who talk about envisage far more generous schemes where people can not work if they want, which is when you start needed penal levels of tax to pay for it.

Let us say it is set at £700 a month per person, but the tax/NI allowances and many benefits are scrapped to pay for it. Then see how much taxes need to rise.

Yes we could start small and build

Say in this order UBI pays for these directly over paid to the individuals

Water rates - free to all
TV licence free to all
Bus pass free to all / this would hugely see people move out of cars very quickly.
Land line free to all
Fibre internet free to all
Council tax free to all
Gas and electric free to all
Milk and eggs free to all.

[Armchair_Expert]

A500leroy said:

Your lucky.

Here at Royal mail towers weve been given two options.

A. Nothing, nil 0%

B.5% over 2 years if we agree to Sunday working, later start/finish times (ie 12pm-10pm),reduction of sick pay, annualised hours (no overtime to be paid) and removal of £25 delivery allowance bonus.

Then your lucky - I have not had a pay rise since 2011.

[Welshbeef]

Armchair_Expert said:

A500leroy said:

Your lucky.

Here at Royal mail towers weve been given two options.

A. Nothing, nil 0%

B.5% over 2 years if we agree to Sunday working, later start/finish times (ie 12pm-10pm),reduction of sick pay, annualised hours (no overtime to be paid) and removal of £25 delivery allowance bonus.

Then your lucky - I have not had a pay rise since 2011.

Do you mean 0% for 11 years or a pay rise lower than CPI ?

[Armchair_Expert]

Welshbeef said:

Do you mean 0% for 11 years or a pay rise lower than CPI ?

0% - well, thinking about it there may have been a 1% rise a couple of times, but always well below inflation / cost of living increases.

Public sector, so big safety net of guaranteed pay each month despite productivity, but no long term reward in rises or bonuses.

[Sway]

Armchair_Expert said:

Welshbeef said:

Do you mean 0% for 11 years or a pay rise lower than CPI ?

0% - well, thinking about it there may have been a 1% rise a couple of times, but always well below inflation / cost of living increases.

Public sector, so big safety net of guaranteed pay each month despite productivity, but no long term reward in rises or bonuses.

There's generally a 'long term reward' in the form of a pension that is pretty much impossible to achieve in the private sector.

[NerveAgent]

Mr Whippy said:

/tin foil hat back on

I think it’s all on purpose.

The entire last 24 months is full of useful opportunities to bring in policy to create economic woes.

Germany at least hasn’t committed economic suicide over energy costs.

It seems right now the UK loves the idea of:

Cutting interest rates at start of pandemic, then leaving them on their arse.

Stamp duty break for no reason causing a housing price/demand spike.

Pseudo UBI through pandemic.

Pretending inflation will be transitory, doing nothing, then suddenly deciding it won’t be transitory and doing something.

Putin is Hitler 2.0, let’s cause energy and food inflation out of the wazoo at the worst possible time, while in the past we’d sit back and bury our heads.


Almost everything here was discretionary and arguably most of it could have not been done and we’d still see the sun rise every morning.


It’s like China locking down again.

And Liz Truss saying she wants to sanction China for being neutral.


Is there an economic Cold War already going on for a year or two, but it’s been obfuscated by seemingly retarded policies by all ‘sides’?


I just can’t stack up how every government is being so out of sorts over the last two years.

As noted only Germany seems to have a brain wrt their economy.

We appear to want havoc to ensue.

Alternatively, not so big brained Germany made their economy completely reliant on Russian gas and now has no option but to keep funding a war whilst damaging its political future…

[Mr Whippy]

glazbagun said:

China for a long time has been accused of deliberately undervaluing their currency. Germany has an undervalued currency thanks to the other nations in the Euro. Have we & the US just said "Oh yeah? Watch this!"

Earning power is being smashed, it's capital gains all the way.

Since 2008 it does feel like there was this silent race to the bottom on currency, a bit tor for tat.
Then you have the spartly islands. The P3 Orion incident (albeit under Bush iirc). Then Taiwan posturing.
Then covid.
Now more lockdowns at their end.
And then Liz Truss’ words.

And right now we’re using Putin as a proxy excuse for NATO strengthening and increased military spending, but really the elephant in the room that we won’t mention is China.

If this were a game of Cluedo you’d be thinking China, but somehow we’re all seemingly looking at covid and Putin.


Of course if this is the case there is little we can do about it any way… but it’d at least help people make sense of it, but perhaps they’d be a lot less happy about it/worried etc.

[survivalist]

NerveAgent said:

Alternatively, not so big brained Germany made their economy completely reliant on Russian gas and now has no option but to keep funding a war whilst damaging its political future…

Not sure how it’s damaging it’s political future. The U.K. gets most of its gas from Norway, but the reasons for that aren’t political - seems that up until 6 months ago we were more than happy for oligarchs to invest in our country.

[Armchair_Expert]

Sway said:

There's generally a 'long term reward' in the form of a pension that is pretty much impossible to achieve in the private sector.

That was the promise made a long time ago, however, it has been broken and now that golden handshake no longer exists.