Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

But this is also fantasy politics. Something politicians say to pretend you don't have to make difficult choices. You can cut waste, sure, but it isn't enough to make up for the huge cost of providing pensions, benefits or services. Reform tried this nonsense and soon found themselves having to raise taxes because adult social care is expensive and making sure people don't order too many post-it cuts and cut back on the after-hours taxis doesn't pay for it.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Income tax is due a rise, it hasnt been raised for 50 years, just cut. The state of the nations finances hasn't much to do with this Govt, who've been in a little over a year, but the last 20 years, and decisions made by the electorate.

With an ageing non productive population, increaded demands on the NHS/care systen, and a public that demand all this and more, but dont want to pay for it.

If they cut NI to protect those that bother to work then fair enough.
Its like when you go shopping, you don't get something for nothing, and if you want more, you have to pay more.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

</snip>

I'd be a lot more concerned about the younger, fitter, and can't be arsed non productive population.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

or we could offer less, and pay less.

The government doesn't deserve more tax receipts as it has proven itself incapable of being being able to spend it prudently.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

What do you want less of ? Health, education, police, transport, state pension?

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

less bullshyte

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

I'd go for:

Facebook
Twitter (lets rename it 'X' because . . . )
Net Zero
AI
Data Centers
TV (40 channels of shite is more than enough)
Idiots
Spam Phone Calls
Advertisements
Promoting the 2% of stuff that the other 98% don't give a toss about
American Culture
Shops/Businesses selling nothing but cheap rubbish imports



'sigh' . . . and breathe :D

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Like Reform do in Kent. :D

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Except most of those dont seem to have anything to do with income tax we pay.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

true enough . . but I'd still like less of them

oh, and I forgot to add the Celebrity Fixation to the list, far too much of that around for my liking :Yes:

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Less spent on illegal immigration
Less benefits for working age people that are a bit anxious
Less benefits for legal immigrants that have never worked (usually relatives brought over)
Less money spent on public sector pensions
Less money wasted in the NHS
Less money spent on the Chagos islands (hopefully no money)

To start, if I really think about it I could easily come up with more.

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

This, this & this again

I pulled this from my HMRC app , it’s for last tax year

This shows a breakdown of how your taxes have be spent by government.
Description
Welfare (21.6%)
Health (20.2%)
State Pensions (11.4%)
National Debt Interest (11.1%)
Education (10.2%)
Defence (5.2%)
Public Order and Safety (4.4%)
Transport (4.2%)
Business and Industry (4.2%)
Government Administration (2.1%)
Housing and Utilities, like street lighting (1.8%)
Environment (1.4%)
Culture, like sports, libraries, museums (1.2%)
Overseas Aid (0.7%)
Outstanding payment- to 4b- Ell/n 5%)

My local council spending
Adult Social Care and Children's Care account for 80% of all net Council expenditure.

Meanwhile, in a neighbouring council
https://www.stockton.gov.uk/article/...ds-this-winter


These numbers to me are petrifying

Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 

Indeed if you look at the figures, then over 50% of all Government spending is on welfare, health and pensions. So if the consensus is that saving need to be made, then these are are areas which need to be targeted.

Except, although logically obvious, they are political dynamite. No party wants to campaign on ‘vote for us and we will cut pensions and money for the NHS - because that is absolutely necessary’. Won’t end well.

So we get the short-term views, vote for us, it’ll all be fine! Maybe, maybe, if (and it’s a big if), you can grow the economy then, fine, maybe health etc. can be better funded. But maybe in the short term, to do this requires cuts in the above services to invest in others?

Re: Starmer’s chronicles