As far as I can tell, @Noo_Noodid not misquote you. It was just pointed out to you that your statement was misleading at best, incorrect at worst. I was pointing out to you that @Noo_Noo never mentioned anything about you saying that Labour wouldnāt increase taxes about individuals, but was instead pointing out what Labourās promises were precisely, something that you noted in the post I quoted.
To put it bluntly, there is a fiscal hole. How will it be filled? They have to raise the money somehow. Iād argue that they should have implemented a wealth tax and imposed capital restrictions to prevent the capital base from fleeing the country, but thatās just my opinion.
And I am not blaming employers at large. Small businesses will inevitably bear the burden of that, and have much less flexibility. But I will not let the businesses reporting record profits while squeezing their employees get away without any blame.
Thatās precisely what Iām saying. You can blame them for that ambiguity, for being ātypical slimy politiciansā or whatever it is thatās cool to say in enlightened centrism, but if the Conservatives could point out during the campaign that Labour did not rule out increases of the tax of employer NI contributions, then it is not logical to say that Labour did promise they wouldnāt increase that tax.
If it was the Tories, Iād still have the same reaction, of WHERE IS THE WEALTH TAX?
I think itās quite clear that while politicians on both sides may do that, itās only a systemic problem on one particular side of the political aisle, no matter what you may choose to believe. That is not to say that Labour does not have its own systemic issues, like a former Director of the CPS choosing to prioritise personal ties instead of treating everyone in the party equally. But to suggest that the behaviour is the same is false equivalence.
Being honest itās a technicality. They havenāt increased taxes for working people. Will some people lose out down the line, yes probably through slower wage increases. The interesting bit is how those on lower incomes are potentially shielded with the higher min. wage. Small businesses too with the NI threshold.
Technically they not gone back on a pre election pledge.
For me, the UK needs to get moving. Weāve stagnated, weāre not building, or fixing anywhere near enough. Weāvecalso got a huge technical skills shortage now and getting worse. Nowhere near enough doctors, nurses, dentists, engineers, trades and do on.
The knock on effect from it though, which will affect people on lower incomes the worst.
Being reported that Sainsburyās and M&S are about to transfer the cost of NI increases to the shopper
Yeah i would expect that, and i dont know how to counter it. These lot always have their cake and eat it. Tax them harder, they increase the price of milk. Increase their NI liability, bread goes up, increase wage costs, cornflakes gets more expensive.
Organisations like this are always after growth (sales and profit) and everyone pays for it.
Depends. Food retail is quite competitive, so companies may push up prices. They may also swallow some of the additional cost or find ways to cut out some additional costs instead. We wonāt really know until they do it.
We are constantly told that productivity has stalled but no-one appears to know what to do about it. Maybe making workers cost more might focus minds a bit more.
A classic example of dismissing my point by questioning my character.
So the response tried to pull me up on something I didnāt say, yes or no?
Where did it point out my post was misleading or incorrect with fact, especially when the point was not in direct correlation to mine.
Taking your logic, you would have to accept that Noo_Noo response was misleading.
Anyhow, I have noticed @Noo_Noo has responded to your post and drawn a line underneath it so I will leave it as that.