Budget 2025

[BoldonLad]

Point 2 - the variations for pre-2015 pensions are due to the additional state pension, ie GRP, Serps & S2P. There were sweet spots on the earnings scale where you did well (the lower end), and obviously also impacted by whether you were contracted out or not - most salary related company schemes were contracted out.
I can assure you that there are people out there who have those sized State Pensions - bear in mind the rises they have had over the last decade.
Point 3 - That is the scenario I mean. I don't know what the figures might be.
There is plenty of discussion about RfA's wording on financial adviser sites, and that is where you hear of the higher state Pensions too. I have a client couple who each get around £16,500 pa from their State Pensions

oh dear, I must not have been as poor as I thought 😂

I have been in receipt of state pension for 13 years, I can assure you, the increases have not made THAT kind of difference to State Pension. I was Contracted Out for most of my working life, but, Mrs @BoldonLad was Contracted-in. I must check her bank again, in case she has been holding out on me and lying about her Pension Income 😂

I take your word for the £16k each couple, but, I am truly amazed, unless this has been achieved by deferring State Pension, perhaps?

 

[C R]

Could we stop this RfA thing when talking about the chancellor? I have very little respect for her, or the government she is part of, but there's no reason to use an expression that started as a misogynistic put down from the more unsavoury parts of the Internet.

 

[BoldonLad]

Could we stop this RfA thing when talking about the chancellor? I have very little respect for her, or the government she is part of, but there's no reason to use an expression that started as a misogynistic put down from the more unsavoury parts of the Internet.

No problem for me, would a simple "Rachel" suffice, or, would you prefer "Reeves", either would be similar to how Keir Starmer is typically referred to, and, rather better than the previous Chancellor's usual "nickname" on here.

 

[CXRAndy]

Oops, there wasnt a £30bn blackhole


View: https://x.com/darrengrimes/status/1994383699589111842?t=Wrj-54CNW7xLl11jgpsqOw&s=19

 

[First Aspect]

This might be the one time I ever agree with @CXRAndy (although his use of language is unpleasant). I hope it doesn't trigger some kind of existential crisis for me.

Reeves clearly was floundering on the question about 3 years before MOT for new cars and I get the horrible suspicion that it was the first time she had thought about it.

Electric cars now pay VED at £195 (+£425 or something if it over £40k). So the whole paying for the roads argument seems a bit contrived. VED and fuel tax was a tax on efficiency and emissions but that has long since gone.

What I do know is that I will be nursing my middle-aged diesel for a lot longer before going Electric. It has £30 VED for life, no car payments and is surprisingly frugal on the fuel. For those EV owners with a drive and home charging, the cost model still works even with the pay per mile tax. For me in an urban area with no access to such, EV fuel costs were highly marginal at best since the public charging network pricing is insanely high. With the extra EV tax, it is simply uneconomic - an irony because urban environments are exactly where EVs should be most beneficial to improving air quality.

I assume at some stage, the ULEZ restrictions will move past Euro 6 and I will have to part with my car, but I think this a way away.

It is a plan with no great way of checking compliance outside the MOT test or government mandated black boxes in cars. I am very far from being against road pricing - it will happen at some stage but this scheme seems to penalise the least worst car options and be - at best - difficult to work.

They are virtually talking from a script in these interviews and she answered slightly the wrong question.

You need to get away from the idea of VED being some sort of environmental tax. It has been presented as such and arguably used as such to a certain extent.

However past a certain point it is just a tax and it goes into the general tax pot. And if one tax in that pot goes down something needs to replace it. In this case, fuel duty or rather the takings from it.

I suspect if there was a link between it and road maintenance costs people would be more accepting. But by the same token the abuse we'd get on bicycles would get even worse.

 

[PurplePenguin]

ISAs replaced PEPs in 1999

PEPs were introduced by the Conservatives in 1987.

The declared purpose, I believe was to encourage wider share ownership.

This, plus the conversion of mutuals were both earlier versions of RfAs "wider investment in the stock market". In the case of the conversion of mutuals, I suspect that wider share ownership was a by-product, rather than an intended outcome.

PEPs and ISAs, it would appear have not had the desired effect for RfA, it will be interesting to see if she achieves better outcomes in this area.

I was talking about cash ISAs and the purpose of them was to encourage savings.

 

[PurplePenguin]

Could we stop this RfA thing when talking about the chancellor? I have very little respect for her, or the government she is part of, but there's no reason to use an expression that started as a misogynistic put down from the more unsavoury parts of the Internet.

Isn't this point of view a bit sexist? Male politicians get called all sorts of names (See Boris Johnson), but they are generally considered to be robust enough to tolerate it; however, as soon as a female politician is called a name (Thatcher excluded) there is a rush of people looking to defend her.

Personally, I just use their actual names.

 

[CXRAndy]

Could we stop this RfA thing when talking about the chancellor? I have very little respect for her, or the government she is part of, but there's no reason to use an expression that started as a misogynistic put down from the more unsavoury parts of the Internet.

Rather hypocritical stance. 🤔

Personally, I dont worry what others of no consequence call me.

RFA deserves everything she is getting.

Totally incompetent, dangerous ideology in power

 

[AuroraSaab]

I can't see the aim of the Isa change - which is presumably to encourage people to invest in stocks and shares Isas - paying off much. Isas were viewed as a safe haven for money so risk averse people will just put any extra over the Isa limit into low interest accounts, they aren't going to gamble on stocks and shares. If punters want to invest with risk they'd probably look elsewhere.

 

[briantrumpet]

 

[briantrumpet]

Well, that's me convinced.

 

[Pblakeney]

Well, that's me convinced.

View attachment 11314

There was also no democracy, and women had no say in any matter.
Is that what she wants? 🤔😂

 

[briantrumpet]

There was also no democracy, and women had no say in any matter.
Is that what she wants? 🤔😂

'Love thy neighbour' only applies to the ones in mansions.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Could we stop this RfA thing when talking about the chancellor?

She did play a part in it by suggesting her economic experience was a bit more extensive that the actual case.

• Bank of England (2000-2006): Reeves genuinely worked as an economist for the Bank of England after graduating from Oxford and completing a master's in economics at the London School of Economics (LSE). This role included a secondment to the British Embassy in Washington DC.
• HBOS (2006-2009): After leaving the Bank of England, she worked at HBOS. On her CV and in public statements, she initially described this role as working as an "economist" at the bank.
• The "Rachel from Accounts" Nickname: Following scrutiny by the political blog Guido Fawkes and reports from former colleagues, it emerged her actual role at HBOS was a managerial position within the bank's complaints or customer relations department, a support role covering administration and IT matters.
• CV Update: Following the revelations, her LinkedIn profile was quietly updated to describe her role at HBOS as being in "Retail Banking". This led to criticism from opposition politicians and the media, who mockingly referred to her as "Rachel from accounts".

Maybe it's misogynistic not to subject her to the same disparagement we would for a man.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Actually I'm quite surprised. She has a degree - admittedly PPE (general studies), a masters and worked for the Bank of England for six years and yet she continually talks about the economy as if it is analogous to a household budget.
Why did she leave the BofE for an 'admin' role?