Vitamins For Macular Degeneration
Body & Soul2 mins ago
An Open Invitation To Join Me To Try To Save Our Beloved Country.
34 Answers
Markets in panic, pensions on the brink of bankruptcy, rising interest rates, the pound crashing. It’s taken Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng just 6 days to tank the economy with their ‘mini-budget’ – and put our livelihoods on the line.
Mini-budget --> maximum chaos.
This is about the money left in our pockets at the end of the month. Rising interest rates sending mortgages skyrocketing. A weaker pound making clothes and food more expensive.
This budget has plunged us into even more chaos, just when we needed urgent help to get through the cost of living crisis.
Millions of people across the country are enraged by their decision to borrow billions to give to the rich - and tank the economy in the process. International financial institutions, the Bank of England and even Tory MPs have savaged the plan. There’s only one option: rip up the budget.
Use the link below to join me and add your name today:
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Spicerack
//I see Eddie Izzard is going on to one of those 'All Women Lists' so beloved of your Party, MrF. Be nice, won't it. Could be your first lady PM. Have something to boast about then, won't you. ;-)//
Lol, you believe I’ve got an affiliation or membership to the Labour party?
You’re the fully paid up voting member, not me(Tory of course).
Anyway, you said you were going to the beach?
//I see Eddie Izzard is going on to one of those 'All Women Lists' so beloved of your Party, MrF. Be nice, won't it. Could be your first lady PM. Have something to boast about then, won't you. ;-)//
Lol, you believe I’ve got an affiliation or membership to the Labour party?
You’re the fully paid up voting member, not me(Tory of course).
Anyway, you said you were going to the beach?
….but since you mentioned it Spicey, me old china:
https:/
//Fewer than two in five 2019 Conservative voters still intend to vote for the party. One in six plan to switch directly to Labour.
There are three key factors in Labour's lead. First, the proportion of 2019 Conservative voters who now say they will vote Labour has risen to a sizeable 17%, doubling from 8% in our poll published on Monday. Only 37% of those who backed the Conservatives in the previous election currently intend to stick with the party.//
Careful what you wish for.
Tell us though how things are going in Brum at the conference?
Funny thing is, the opposition parties don’t bead to do a lot atm, BlunderTruss is firing all the ammo for them.
https:/
//Fewer than two in five 2019 Conservative voters still intend to vote for the party. One in six plan to switch directly to Labour.
There are three key factors in Labour's lead. First, the proportion of 2019 Conservative voters who now say they will vote Labour has risen to a sizeable 17%, doubling from 8% in our poll published on Monday. Only 37% of those who backed the Conservatives in the previous election currently intend to stick with the party.//
Careful what you wish for.
Tell us though how things are going in Brum at the conference?
Funny thing is, the opposition parties don’t bead to do a lot atm, BlunderTruss is firing all the ammo for them.
//NJ, if the 40% rate isn’t justified, why not begin with reducing that for a lot more folk instead of the 1.6% who pay the 45% rate?//
To make it fairer for everybody, Corby. There’s no reason why 1% of taxpayers should pay 40% of the income tax revenue. If that can be reduced a little then that’s a good thing, surely. If the poorest 1% of taxpayers were paying 40% of income tax revenue there would, quite justifiably, be calls to make the system fairer.
// So has mine, only slightly, but it meant a higher tax code, which wiped it out.//
It would not have wiped it all out, 10CS. You would only have lost 20% of it (assuming you are a basic rate taxpayer). Of course if you had been paying tax at the highest rate, you would have lost 45% of the increase. Now that would have been unfair.
To make it fairer for everybody, Corby. There’s no reason why 1% of taxpayers should pay 40% of the income tax revenue. If that can be reduced a little then that’s a good thing, surely. If the poorest 1% of taxpayers were paying 40% of income tax revenue there would, quite justifiably, be calls to make the system fairer.
// So has mine, only slightly, but it meant a higher tax code, which wiped it out.//
It would not have wiped it all out, 10CS. You would only have lost 20% of it (assuming you are a basic rate taxpayer). Of course if you had been paying tax at the highest rate, you would have lost 45% of the increase. Now that would have been unfair.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.