- Freezes taxes on several levels including gas (or petrol as you folks call it.)
- Personal income tax tied to inflation, nothing more
- increase in services for senior citizens/pensioners
- 3.1% economic growth
- decrease in borrowing for '05/'06
- rise in child tax credit
- "Troops injured in the line of duty will not have compensation payments taxed if they remain in the armed forces."
Question: WHY THE HECK aren't the Democrats in the states following this model?????
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4354159.stm
Originally posted by stammerFreezes tax on gas (until sept. we pay hugetax on fuel)
- Freezes taxes on several levels including gas (or petrol as you folks call it.)
- Personal income tax tied to inflation, nothing more
- increase in services for senior citizens/pensioners
- 3.1% economic growth
- decrease in borrowing for '05/'06
- rise in child tax credit
- "Troops injured in the line of duty will not have compensation payments t ...[text shortened]... ts in the states following this model?????
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4354159.stm
Personal income tax allowances have been frozen for two years (there is an election coming)
Old people vote - lets give them some money to buy a few votes
3.1% growth - low interest rate, low unemployment he ha sdone well here.
Decreasing borrowing - he has borrowed so much over the last two yearstheonly way is down.
Child tax credits - bureaucratic system ( costs a fortune) but does help poor families.
Troops - It is cheaper to retain staff than to recruit and new train staff
It has been a genorous budget, but nothing is for free and we'll have to pay for itover the next 4 years before we bribed again just prior to the next election.
You can always point to parts that could be better. As much as I am an admirer of New Labour, I can't say I agree with all of it.
That being said, my point is this: Since Clinton left office the Democrats in both the national presedential campaign and as opposition in congress have taken an approach to spend more and not look for centrist reform measures.
It is these kinds of measures that Clinton enacted after 1994. First, he had to have a Republican congress to do so (which says alot about the Democrats in congress.) Then he was able to do what he campaigned on - an economic-growth approach with progressive slant behind it. The right in our country has long been able to win the economic argument because of their pro-business, cut tax mantra. The left CAN WIN this without having to slash taxes and services - simply stop increasing taxes, creatively cut in targeted areas, and manage the fiscal side of their philosophy well.
This is what Brown/Blair have done from what I can see. You guys didn't have the down turn we did and have recovered where outside the oil industry it has not happened here.
IMO, New Labour would be a smashing success in the United States (as it has been politically in the UK). Unfortunately no one in the Democratic party cares to pay attention to what works.
Originally posted by stammerAs written, I see an enormous reduction in tax revenue and a sizeable increase in government spending. Decreased borrowing? How does he make this thing balance? Somebody has got to get paid, either domestic or foreign.
- Freezes taxes on several levels including gas (or petrol as you folks call it.)
- Personal income tax tied to inflation, nothing more
- increase in services for senior citizens/pensioners
- 3.1% economic growth
- decrease in borrowing for '05/'06
- rise in child tax credit
- "Troops injured in the line of duty will not have compensation payments t ...[text shortened]... ts in the states following this model?????
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4354159.stm
By personal income tax, does he mean taxes on wage income specifically or [i]all[/b] personal income taxes (i.e. property tax, capital gains tax, etc.)?
If he means the later, I bet a lot of retired people are lickin' their chops just waiting for this.
Originally posted by telerionUK taxation:
As written, I see an enormous reduction in tax revenue and a sizeable increase in government spending. Decreased borrowing? How does he make this thing balance? Somebody has got to get paid, either domestic or foreign.
By personal income tax, does he mean taxes on wage income specifically or [i]all personal income taxes (i.e. property tax, capit ...[text shortened]... means the later, I bet a lot of retired people are lickin' their chops just waiting for this. [/b]
Personal Income Tax is taken to mean Pay As You Earn 23p in the pound on everything earnt above a threshold. The threshhold is approximately £5K p.a. ($9K) The threshold will rise with inflation but the basic rate will stay the same. Basically you get an extra £150.00 in your tax free threshold.
But I feel the Democrats lesson from new labour:
By reducing unemployment, (getting more people paying tax) and then investing that money in childcare, education and health is the model the democrats should adopt. Rather than bush's tax cuts, democrats could follow new labour by holding direct taxation but increasing stealth taxes such as inheritance tax and capital gains tax on the sale of property.
Originally posted by telerionHe made a good chunk of the money back my increasing corporate taxes on the oil industry (or rather my accelerating the introduction of tax increases already announced). When the economy is buoyant you can afford to pull off such tricks. I don't think borrowing has decreased though. The reports I've seen suggest this was a very neutral, dead-on balanced budget.
As written, I see an enormous reduction in tax revenue and a sizeable increase in government spending. Decreased borrowing? How does he make this thing balance? Somebody has got to get paid, either domestic or foreign.
By personal income tax, does he mean taxes on wage income specifically or [i]all personal income taxes (i.e. property tax, capit ...[text shortened]... means the later, I bet a lot of retired people are lickin' their chops just waiting for this. [/b]
Environmentally it was a bad budget though. Freezing fuel tax is no way to encourage people from cars to public transport. It also buys into a myth propogated in an earlier post - that cars are expensive to run in the UK. The cost of running a car has actually decreased since the 70s in this country, while the cost of trains and buses has gone up massively (from memory by about 30 fold).
Rich.