CornwallFox

Why the laughing emoji?

I'm not sure why we couldn't appeal on cooperation. We won our case last year. We were legally correct. They'd drafted the rules badly. We can't be accused of not cooperating when we simply played by the rules as they were written.

Yes please. And real wingers that aren't inverted. And proper tackles.

Is that because his BBC article doesn't agree with your dislike of the labour budget? Thought it was a very balanced and interesting piece myself.

Cost saving The most obvious advantage is the cost-saving aspect of salary sacrifice. Everyday costs like childcare can cause a heavy financial burden for many employees, so receiving a helping hand from their employer can help reduce this stress. Not only are payments for large purchases like tech devices split over multiple payments throughout the year, but employees can also make tax savings. Using salary sacrifice schemes reduces their taxable income, meaning they’ll pay less in tax and National Insurance contributions. Tech Schemes We all know how much an iPhone costs nowadays… But you might be surprised to learn that mobile phones and other electrical devices can also be purchased via salary sacrifice schemes. These work by allowing employees to spread the cost of their mobile phone, laptop, TV, or even household items like a washing machine, over a 12 month period as salary deductions. This means that the tech is delivered directly to employees, and neither the employee nor company has to be credit checked (more on this below). Plus, employees can choose their own network provider and contract separately to the purchase of the device, making it a super stress-free process for everyone involved. There definitely seems to be an NI saving on the example above, even if not an income tax saving as examples for other purchase streams show. I can't comment on your pricing point, you seem to have an idea what you're talking about so I'll accept that.

They're hoping they won't have to freeze them. It's a way off. They're betting on better results than predicted before this kicks in

It would be amazing if the Tory mismanagement of the country didn't affect you

I don't disagree two budgets of tax increases is a pretty bitter pill. They really need to find a way to good times being ahead. I think inept is OTT. The Tories were absolutely abysmal for 14 years. The country is an absolute shambles. It's not a quick job. Public services are broken, at the same time as taxes and debt are really high, and we've had bugger all economic or wage growth in a decade and a half pretty much. The idea a new government taking this on is inept because they're having to make some crappy choices is OTT. Not that I'm saying they haven't made mistakes, or that the budgets themselves might be mistakes, just I think you need to be honest with yourself about the background context, then feel free to still criticise.

Yeah I thought it was all quite boring. Whatever she did the opposition would oppose so that was equally predictable and boring.

Most labour supporters don't think they're left wing enough. We'd like to see them increase spending and lose their fiscal rules until growth is achieved. The fiscal rules are creating unnecessary economic drag and stopping them being a transformational government. The issue is parents being able to afford their kids isn't really a tax issue - it's a pay issue. And having employers pay wages that can really be lived on without the need for benefits to subsidise poor pay is a real issue. But that might be a hard one for us to find common ground on perhaps?

I understand that's a very popular viewpoint. An alternative consideration for you though: people might have been able to afford 3 kids but then lose their job. Also don't we need the birth rate to be a decent level? I'm really unclear on the cost as ultimately the money will all be spent and taxed multiple times as it's going straight into the real economy so the cost will be offset by recovery elsewhere

JJ is indeed great in midfield but he does a different job to winks. So who is sitting next to our slightly behind JJ so he can maraud forward?

Really not sure what people want. Being realistic with suggestions, what do people think any of the parties would have done differently? The Tories might not have raised tax but would have splashed public spending to already utterly crippled public services thanks to austerity. Reform are a joke party with no policies. Greens would raise taxes on wealth and invest hugely, which kinda appeals to me but isn't really popular with any media or usually the electorate. Lib Dems I'm not really sure tbh. If we want public services to get better were going to need to invest. Removal of two child benefit cap not universally popular it's fair to say but it is also the most direct means to reduce child poverty. What different choices would you make? Not just what would you like, but what would you give up in return?

People buy cars, bikes, white goods and other stuff via salary sacrifice

I the only thing I'd really thought about is the fact I'm not sure why most salary sacrifice schemes have any tax incentives. Why should people get money off fridges just because it comes out their salary? I find it bizarre.

I think the issue is they seem to be genuinely trying to fix the foundations but that is a long term approach. Plus some of the issues will take sustained efforts, like cancer times as you mention them. They seem to be happy to work to the parliamentary and electoral cycle with the aim of having really positive results by the time of the next election, but that doesn't give the short term answers people tend to want. I'm not giving a view either way on that, but I think that's what's happening.

And chips in those silver tumbler type things

Stutter penalties should have been banned years ago

Although her voice is annoying I do enjoy the level of distain in carries when talking about Tory austerity 😅

Reeves sounds horrendous to listen to doesn't she? And the stupid fake smile she started doing after some mild criticism a year ago is also annoying.

The obr have released it not the government

I don't envy you 😅

I used to work in the benefits sector when I was younger and of course many do take the micky. But most don't. I happen to think you build a benefits system to provide a proper and well funded safety net to the majority, then add in severe penalties for those that take the micky. If you base the system on the micky takers, as seems to be the case more and more, then there's no safety net for the rest of us.

You know what, turns out I'm wrong as that was a fair question. So not sure where I got that from. I stand corrected. What I will say though, is although it's not liked, from a purely economic standpoint benefits are actually a positive as it pretty much all gets spent in the economy so it's basically the government directly funding the economy via a middle man. So has an entirely positive economic impact. It's much better for the economy that rich people hoarding it. Pretty much all benefit spending increases growth and goes back to the treasury over time. So it's still a matter of looking up for the problem in our economy.

Look up, not down, for the reason tax rates have to keep increasing.