| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. 12:54 - May 22 with 4199 views | OldFart71 |
Despite taking in an extra 5 billion in tax the Government has managed to borrow the 4th highest since records began. It was expected to be 17.9 bn, but ended up at 20.2 bn. At this rate Labour will bankrupt the country before their five years are up.
Despite the country being taxed at it's highest since after WW2 it is now deemed that Reeves will either have to increase taxes or cut services.
How can Starmer proclaim he is looking into paying more pensioners the winter fuel payment because of the better state of the country.
No it's not in a better state and despite 14 years of Tory mismanagement Labour are even surpassing them in the handling of the economy. |  | | |  |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 20:27 - May 22 with 530 views | Bluecoin |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 20:08 - May 22 by portmanking |
Bitcoin is *the* long term strategy of the lot. It's the only genuine form of digital collateral there is. The cat is well and truly out of the bag now and people like BlueBadger will be the ones wishing they'd taken it seriously in 5 years' time. |
His/her/their pension will probably own some too. |  | | |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 20:35 - May 22 with 495 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 20:08 - May 22 by portmanking |
Bitcoin is *the* long term strategy of the lot. It's the only genuine form of digital collateral there is. The cat is well and truly out of the bag now and people like BlueBadger will be the ones wishing they'd taken it seriously in 5 years' time. |
May a few years ago not at $111k buy in. I am happy with my ETH at $305 though. |  | | |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 20:53 - May 22 with 464 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 19:58 - May 22 by Bluecoin |
Apologies I didn't do a full UK Sportsbook analysis of the odds before I posted.
Let's try again. Reform are favourites with most bookies, I see on odds checker. That's says it all.
I'm not getting into a debate comparing Sportsbook offers by the way , got better thing to do tonight bud! |
It's not most.
"As of May 2025, Reform UK is not the bookmakers' favourite to win the most seats in the next UK general election. Labour remains the frontrunner, with odds around 6/4, reflecting a 33.33% implied probability of winning the most seats. Reform UK has moved into second place, with odds of 11/4, indicating a 26.67% chance." |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 20:58 - May 22 with 458 views | Lord_Lucan |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 20:53 - May 22 by The_Flashing_Smile |
It's not most.
"As of May 2025, Reform UK is not the bookmakers' favourite to win the most seats in the next UK general election. Labour remains the frontrunner, with odds around 6/4, reflecting a 33.33% implied probability of winning the most seats. Reform UK has moved into second place, with odds of 11/4, indicating a 26.67% chance." |
Sorry but the spiral of this argument is doing my head in.
Live.............
 |  |
| |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 21:24 - May 22 with 425 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 15:32 - May 22 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
She’s not really done anything wrong other than inherit a sh1tshow, and in fairness she’s just enacting government fiscal policy, not dictating it. The problem is we are running so much national debt it’s eating up increasing amounts of government spending. Adding a couple of pc on 0.5% of the top earners is not going to cover even the £20bn ‘black hole’, let alone the >£100bn of annual debt servicing.
It’s also a function of how badly run our economy has been over the last few decades. Germany has built a successful export based economy, with better public services and much lower debt to gdp. The only way forward really is some long term policy to encourage investment and diversify our economy. That and taxes on wealth (not income since that’s not how the genuinely wealthy take their income). |
I’m not convinced she’s done anything particularly right. It’s not an area I’ve any experience in, so know sod all and could well be wrong. Some of the criticisms I’ve read about her include:
- Disability cuts - will make tens (hundreds?) of thousands of vulnerable people poorer
- Winter Fuel Payment - makes thousands of vulnerable pensions poorer, and she’s now having to partially roll back and find a complex solution to a problem of her own making. Political kamikaze for very little gain.
- Imposition of £6 billion “efficiency” saving from government departments = continuation of austerity approach and will require about 75,000 civil service job losses.
- Counter-intuitive policies that oppose her supposed primary target of growing the economy and that also increase inflation (e.g. the above actions that make people poorer, the below issues around interest rates, sanctioning via the regulators the recent over-inflation bill rises that have obviously now pushed up inflation, and the NI hike)
- A self-imposed “financial rule” not grounded in economic reality and that’s also underpinned by forecasts of reducing the cost of borrowing (only one slight problem - the cost of borrowing (interest rate) and amount of debt being serviced are both going up)
- Continuing a policy of elevated interest rates that harm growth (and therefore most of us Brits - especially as people have to borrow more as they’re becoming poorer) in order to attract foreign savings as a way of balancing the books.
- Reluctance/failure to even discuss the issue of government interest payments on money created and deposited in commercial banks to deal with the financial crash, the adverse impact of Brexit and the pandemic. We don’t have to pay all/any of that (some countries’ central banks don’t charge interest on such deposits).
- Little sign she’s interested in redistributing wealth based on her spring statement
She seems to be struggling with her main aim of growth. The plans/actions don’t seem to be aligned with the goal.
She’s got a difficult job though, as yes she inherited a sh*tshow and also other government department policies are attacking the potential for growth (not least the recent reduction in net immigration by several hundred thousand which has a huge hit on the economy, far more than the savings from the Winter Fuel Payments or Civil Service cuts). [Post edited 22 May 21:26]
|  |
| |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 21:27 - May 22 with 415 views | DJR |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 18:39 - May 22 by Bluecoin |
Hats off to you. You've been on a wild ride! Great return but has had a disappointing year so far. I'm not a holder myself, but follow it.
I looked at ETH for my degen bag, but went with Solana. Currently I'm loading up on Sui. I think it's the one to watch.
Not suggesting you should all go and buy it, before anyone starts having kittens, ffs. [Post edited 22 May 18:40]
|
A friend of mine bought Bitcoin about 5 years ago when it was $15,000, it's now about $111,000. And of course, those who got in much earlier will have done even better than that. |  | | |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 21:56 - May 22 with 375 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 21:27 - May 22 by DJR |
A friend of mine bought Bitcoin about 5 years ago when it was $15,000, it's now about $111,000. And of course, those who got in much earlier will have done even better than that. |
Unlikely, most will have sold nowhere near today's price. I know a guy who liked tech that brought a load of them in 2012 for next to nothing and sold when they made $500 an was delighted with his returns at the time. | | | |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 22:00 - May 22 with 368 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 21:24 - May 22 by Swansea_Blue |
I’m not convinced she’s done anything particularly right. It’s not an area I’ve any experience in, so know sod all and could well be wrong. Some of the criticisms I’ve read about her include:
- Disability cuts - will make tens (hundreds?) of thousands of vulnerable people poorer
- Winter Fuel Payment - makes thousands of vulnerable pensions poorer, and she’s now having to partially roll back and find a complex solution to a problem of her own making. Political kamikaze for very little gain.
- Imposition of £6 billion “efficiency” saving from government departments = continuation of austerity approach and will require about 75,000 civil service job losses.
- Counter-intuitive policies that oppose her supposed primary target of growing the economy and that also increase inflation (e.g. the above actions that make people poorer, the below issues around interest rates, sanctioning via the regulators the recent over-inflation bill rises that have obviously now pushed up inflation, and the NI hike)
- A self-imposed “financial rule” not grounded in economic reality and that’s also underpinned by forecasts of reducing the cost of borrowing (only one slight problem - the cost of borrowing (interest rate) and amount of debt being serviced are both going up)
- Continuing a policy of elevated interest rates that harm growth (and therefore most of us Brits - especially as people have to borrow more as they’re becoming poorer) in order to attract foreign savings as a way of balancing the books.
- Reluctance/failure to even discuss the issue of government interest payments on money created and deposited in commercial banks to deal with the financial crash, the adverse impact of Brexit and the pandemic. We don’t have to pay all/any of that (some countries’ central banks don’t charge interest on such deposits).
- Little sign she’s interested in redistributing wealth based on her spring statement
She seems to be struggling with her main aim of growth. The plans/actions don’t seem to be aligned with the goal.
She’s got a difficult job though, as yes she inherited a sh*tshow and also other government department policies are attacking the potential for growth (not least the recent reduction in net immigration by several hundred thousand which has a huge hit on the economy, far more than the savings from the Winter Fuel Payments or Civil Service cuts). [Post edited 22 May 21:26]
|
We have the highest growth in the G7 despite the headwinds of inflation in the tail (the ECB has also predicted no more rate cuts after the most recent for this reason), and increasing trade barriers around the globe. That’s with reduced immigration which for years has failed to provide any per capita growth, or any real improvement to the fiscal situation. I’m not saying she’s done a fantastic job, but I don’t think anyone else would have done much more with her remit. Starmer has tied her hands with his ‘no tax rises on working people’ and refusal to consider any wealth related taxes (which is far more difficult than people think).
Edit - just to add I’ve been quite vocal in opposing the WFA cut, and also think the NI rises should have been limited to large corps, as it’s disproportionately hit SME’s. [Post edited 22 May 22:31]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 00:25 - May 23 with 294 views | Ryorry |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 21:24 - May 22 by Swansea_Blue |
I’m not convinced she’s done anything particularly right. It’s not an area I’ve any experience in, so know sod all and could well be wrong. Some of the criticisms I’ve read about her include:
- Disability cuts - will make tens (hundreds?) of thousands of vulnerable people poorer
- Winter Fuel Payment - makes thousands of vulnerable pensions poorer, and she’s now having to partially roll back and find a complex solution to a problem of her own making. Political kamikaze for very little gain.
- Imposition of £6 billion “efficiency” saving from government departments = continuation of austerity approach and will require about 75,000 civil service job losses.
- Counter-intuitive policies that oppose her supposed primary target of growing the economy and that also increase inflation (e.g. the above actions that make people poorer, the below issues around interest rates, sanctioning via the regulators the recent over-inflation bill rises that have obviously now pushed up inflation, and the NI hike)
- A self-imposed “financial rule” not grounded in economic reality and that’s also underpinned by forecasts of reducing the cost of borrowing (only one slight problem - the cost of borrowing (interest rate) and amount of debt being serviced are both going up)
- Continuing a policy of elevated interest rates that harm growth (and therefore most of us Brits - especially as people have to borrow more as they’re becoming poorer) in order to attract foreign savings as a way of balancing the books.
- Reluctance/failure to even discuss the issue of government interest payments on money created and deposited in commercial banks to deal with the financial crash, the adverse impact of Brexit and the pandemic. We don’t have to pay all/any of that (some countries’ central banks don’t charge interest on such deposits).
- Little sign she’s interested in redistributing wealth based on her spring statement
She seems to be struggling with her main aim of growth. The plans/actions don’t seem to be aligned with the goal.
She’s got a difficult job though, as yes she inherited a sh*tshow and also other government department policies are attacking the potential for growth (not least the recent reduction in net immigration by several hundred thousand which has a huge hit on the economy, far more than the savings from the Winter Fuel Payments or Civil Service cuts). [Post edited 22 May 21:26]
|
“A self-imposed “financial rule” not grounded in economic reality and that’s also underpinned by forecasts of reducing the cost of borrowing (only one slight problem - the cost of borrowing (interest rate) and amount of debt being serviced are both going up)”
Particularly that. |  |
| |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 06:08 - May 23 with 211 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 22:00 - May 22 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
We have the highest growth in the G7 despite the headwinds of inflation in the tail (the ECB has also predicted no more rate cuts after the most recent for this reason), and increasing trade barriers around the globe. That’s with reduced immigration which for years has failed to provide any per capita growth, or any real improvement to the fiscal situation. I’m not saying she’s done a fantastic job, but I don’t think anyone else would have done much more with her remit. Starmer has tied her hands with his ‘no tax rises on working people’ and refusal to consider any wealth related taxes (which is far more difficult than people think).
Edit - just to add I’ve been quite vocal in opposing the WFA cut, and also think the NI rises should have been limited to large corps, as it’s disproportionately hit SME’s. [Post edited 22 May 22:31]
|
Yes we do at the moment, despite counter-intuitive policy decisions. Ruling out future re-joining of the EU single market is again another one that’s anti-growth, but again that’s a party line rather than hers. The option’s there if growth is as important as they say (it’s not though, obviously. They’re more worried about the political threat of Reform than making decisions that will help people).
Her hands are certainly tied. She just seems to be limited in her thinking/approach as is making it harder for herself.
Oh, and just to add, I think the OBR have estimated that a reduction in immigration by 100,000 would cost the country about £7BN a year. Provisionally figures released this week suggest a drop of 300,000 or maybe 400,000 I can’t remember, but it was lots. I think that’s at least partly baked into forecasts though, so it’s not disastrous but our national xenophobia continues to make us poorer. (The WFP savings so far are looking at saving them only £1.5BN, so tiny in comparison)
But she’s still a lot better than Kwarteng! [Post edited 23 May 7:15]
| |
| |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 09:07 - May 23 with 88 views | OldFart71 |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 22:00 - May 22 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
We have the highest growth in the G7 despite the headwinds of inflation in the tail (the ECB has also predicted no more rate cuts after the most recent for this reason), and increasing trade barriers around the globe. That’s with reduced immigration which for years has failed to provide any per capita growth, or any real improvement to the fiscal situation. I’m not saying she’s done a fantastic job, but I don’t think anyone else would have done much more with her remit. Starmer has tied her hands with his ‘no tax rises on working people’ and refusal to consider any wealth related taxes (which is far more difficult than people think).
Edit - just to add I’ve been quite vocal in opposing the WFA cut, and also think the NI rises should have been limited to large corps, as it’s disproportionately hit SME’s. [Post edited 22 May 22:31]
|
But we have had tax rises. Not necessarily Reeve's fault as Sunak frozen personal allowances until 2028. This financial year I have been hit with an extra £250 tax, lost £200 in winter fuel payments. Seen just about everything to do with the daily running of my household go up so despite Labour proclaiming we have kept the Triple Lock for pensioners I am worse off than last year.
My opinion as an O.A.P. is that Government should do away with free prescriptions for those reaching 60 years of age unless they have certain conditions that require constant medication. Free prescriptions then only come in once retirement age is reached.
If a person continues working after their retirement age they should pay N.I. but the personal allowance is higher so that those on a very low income wouldn't pay tax like they do now on anything above £12,570.
The Christmas bonus, for what it's worth, should be done away with. It's only £10 and meaningless to most people or they should increase it for those getting under a certain amount and do away with it for those earning or receiving over £50,000 a year. | | | |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 09:17 - May 23 with 63 views | Churchman |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 06:08 - May 23 by Swansea_Blue |
Yes we do at the moment, despite counter-intuitive policy decisions. Ruling out future re-joining of the EU single market is again another one that’s anti-growth, but again that’s a party line rather than hers. The option’s there if growth is as important as they say (it’s not though, obviously. They’re more worried about the political threat of Reform than making decisions that will help people).
Her hands are certainly tied. She just seems to be limited in her thinking/approach as is making it harder for herself.
Oh, and just to add, I think the OBR have estimated that a reduction in immigration by 100,000 would cost the country about £7BN a year. Provisionally figures released this week suggest a drop of 300,000 or maybe 400,000 I can’t remember, but it was lots. I think that’s at least partly baked into forecasts though, so it’s not disastrous but our national xenophobia continues to make us poorer. (The WFP savings so far are looking at saving them only £1.5BN, so tiny in comparison)
But she’s still a lot better than Kwarteng! [Post edited 23 May 7:15]
|
There’s stuff in my compost bin better than Kwarteng. It’s hardly a measure unless you are comparing him and Truss to village idiots.
Re migration, the attached appraises Blair’s approach to to Starmer’s and is worth a read.
https://www.davidsonmorris.com/labour-immigration-policy/
Reeves? Doesn’t impress me. It’s no good talking about growth when you spend the first months talking the economy down at every opportunity, slapping costs on business and following that tried and trusted failure model called austerity.
I know the boneheads left an economy and infrastructure in tatters and it’s difficult, but I’m not sure more of the same is the right way forward.
Britain’s post war failure was not just a legacy of the cost of two world wars. It was a failure to invest. That still applies to this day, whether it’s capital projects (evidence: just look how many businesses sprang up alongside the M25 when it is built) or education and skills. Cuts are the only policy and it just won’t work.
Gluing yourself to an ideology as Milliband has on net zero is also flawed. A cost effective aim? Great. An at all costs? Tell it to the Luton Vauxhall people who are seeking work.
Party politics should come after what is right for the people. It hasn’t for years. |  | | |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 09:18 - May 23 with 63 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 09:07 - May 23 by OldFart71 |
But we have had tax rises. Not necessarily Reeve's fault as Sunak frozen personal allowances until 2028. This financial year I have been hit with an extra £250 tax, lost £200 in winter fuel payments. Seen just about everything to do with the daily running of my household go up so despite Labour proclaiming we have kept the Triple Lock for pensioners I am worse off than last year.
My opinion as an O.A.P. is that Government should do away with free prescriptions for those reaching 60 years of age unless they have certain conditions that require constant medication. Free prescriptions then only come in once retirement age is reached.
If a person continues working after their retirement age they should pay N.I. but the personal allowance is higher so that those on a very low income wouldn't pay tax like they do now on anything above £12,570.
The Christmas bonus, for what it's worth, should be done away with. It's only £10 and meaningless to most people or they should increase it for those getting under a certain amount and do away with it for those earning or receiving over £50,000 a year. |
You have lost the plot if you think Christmas bonus should be means tested and only paid to those with income below £50,000pa |  |
| |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 09:21 - May 23 with 54 views | Ryorry |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 09:07 - May 23 by OldFart71 |
But we have had tax rises. Not necessarily Reeve's fault as Sunak frozen personal allowances until 2028. This financial year I have been hit with an extra £250 tax, lost £200 in winter fuel payments. Seen just about everything to do with the daily running of my household go up so despite Labour proclaiming we have kept the Triple Lock for pensioners I am worse off than last year.
My opinion as an O.A.P. is that Government should do away with free prescriptions for those reaching 60 years of age unless they have certain conditions that require constant medication. Free prescriptions then only come in once retirement age is reached.
If a person continues working after their retirement age they should pay N.I. but the personal allowance is higher so that those on a very low income wouldn't pay tax like they do now on anything above £12,570.
The Christmas bonus, for what it's worth, should be done away with. It's only £10 and meaningless to most people or they should increase it for those getting under a certain amount and do away with it for those earning or receiving over £50,000 a year. |
Hospital parking charges are another, indirect, tax on sick/disabled people and their families.
Disagree with you re free prescriptions for pensioners, but agree re the Christmas bonus. | |
| |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 09:38 - May 23 with 31 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Oh dear, Calamity Reeves is at it again. on 06:08 - May 23 by Swansea_Blue |
Yes we do at the moment, despite counter-intuitive policy decisions. Ruling out future re-joining of the EU single market is again another one that’s anti-growth, but again that’s a party line rather than hers. The option’s there if growth is as important as they say (it’s not though, obviously. They’re more worried about the political threat of Reform than making decisions that will help people).
Her hands are certainly tied. She just seems to be limited in her thinking/approach as is making it harder for herself.
Oh, and just to add, I think the OBR have estimated that a reduction in immigration by 100,000 would cost the country about £7BN a year. Provisionally figures released this week suggest a drop of 300,000 or maybe 400,000 I can’t remember, but it was lots. I think that’s at least partly baked into forecasts though, so it’s not disastrous but our national xenophobia continues to make us poorer. (The WFP savings so far are looking at saving them only £1.5BN, so tiny in comparison)
But she’s still a lot better than Kwarteng! [Post edited 23 May 7:15]
|
But why not increase immigration to 5m a year then - to me that’s growth for the sake of it, if it’s not delivering per capita growth then it’s not really going to improve living standards or tax take per head. I appreciate there is a growing xenophobia driven by Reform, and the weaponisation of what is small numbers of asylum seekers, and that needs to be called out. Everyone sensible agrees we need immigration but successive governments have used it to paper over underlying structural weaknesses in the economy - centralisation, lack of diversity in terms of sectors, and being heavily reliant on imports (and therefore vulnerable to price shocks). Lazy short term governance but politicians won’t reap the rewards before the next election.
Anyway not going to die on a hill for Reeves, but there’s a lot of talk of anti growth, or poor growth (not sure if this is media driven). The reality is we’ve outpaced our peers in Q1 and other than the US we are forecast to grow faster than the rest of G7 for 2025 (including the Eurozone, France and Germany). | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
