Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To suggest that Britain risks triggering a global crisis with an "utterly irresponsible" tax plan, is ludicrous, as this is a global recession and the IMF has done very little in terms of positive action itself and has been of little help during other financial crises.
The US still has lower taxes than the UK, including the top rate, so why attack another country which still has higher taxes than the US.
As for financial money markets they are dictating the pounds level, and a lot of people are making lots of money betting against the pound, just as disgusting people like George Soros did back in 1992 when Britain was part of European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM).
It also should be noted that the US had massive tax cuts under Trump, and the world didn't complain, even during Covid, and the US logic was that cuts would increase investment and jobs, so it's okay when the US does this but not Britain.
Furthermore, the US recently raised base rates to help the dollar, whilst the Japanese are trying to secure the falling Yen, whilst the Euro has performed miserable, and stocks, shares and bonds are in crisis across the world, which is on the brink of a global recession.
By comparison to many other countries including the US, the interest rates in Britain remain much lower, and we will wait the financial storm out, although there are plans to increase rates if needed.
The real instigators are China, which destroyed economies via the Covid pandemic and Russia in relation to Ukraine, as well as the banks/financial markets and to blame a British mini budget is laughable, and just shows what a clown Larry Summers is.
Britain is not a massive country and certainly doesn't have that type of impact on global markets.
I suggest you try watching the video in my last post, when Mike Graham calls the actions of the banks and financial markets disgusting, although there is even some support for the readjustment of some markets such as the UK housing market.
As for the much criticised IMF, I suggest it puts it's own house in order.
Last edited by Brave New World; 09-30-2022 at 07:32 AM..
Liz Truss fired her finance minister that supported her policies, home secretary resigned and now she resigns after 6 weeks. This is a mess, I feel sorry for the British.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 2 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,176 posts, read 13,461,836 times
Reputation: 19472
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnirene
Truss’s mini budget didn’t even have the support of her own party.
Truss just resigned. She was prime minister for only 45 days. The next shortest time in office was 209 days by Andrew Bonar Law in 1922.
The cut from a top tax rate of 45% to 40% was criticised by Joe Biden, as being trickle down economics.
Joe Biden is the President of a country with a top tax rate of 37%.
Even Truss's was still 3% short of the US current top rate of tax.
So is it okay when you do it Joe, but not okay when Britain does it or did you forget that your own top rate of tax was 37%, as you seem to have a lot of memory problems or are you engaging in the very same trickle down economics that you accused Truss of engaging in.
The cut from a top tax rate of 45% to 40% was criticised by Joe Biden, as being trickle down economics.
Joe Biden is the President of a country with a top tax rate of 37%.
Even Truss's was still 3% short of the US current top rate of tax.
So is it okay when you do it Joe, but not okay when Britain does it or did you forget that your own top rate of tax was 37%, as you seem to have a lot of memory problems or are you engaging in the very same trickle down economics that you accused Truss of engaging in.
What does this have to do with anything? Her plan was based on faux math, and the markets reacted accordingly. End of story.
The cut from a top tax rate of 45% to 40% was criticised by Joe Biden, as being trickle down economics.
Joe Biden is the President of a country with a top tax rate of 37%.
Even Truss's was still 3% short of the US current top rate of tax.
So is it okay when you do it Joe, but not okay when Britain does it or did you forget that your own top rate of tax was 37%, as you seem to have a lot of memory problems or are you engaging in the very same trickle down economics that you accused Truss of engaging in.
Trump cut taxes with his party’s support when the U.S. economy was booming. Truss tried to cut taxes, without her party’s support and without saying how the cuts would be funded, when the world is headed into recession and the average person is having trouble making ends meet. I assume the average person would have ended up financing the tax cuts.
The cut from a top tax rate of 45% to 40% was criticised by Joe Biden, as being trickle down economics.
Joe Biden is the President of a country with a top tax rate of 37%.
Even Truss's was still 3% short of the US current top rate of tax.
So is it okay when you do it Joe, but not okay when Britain does it or did you forget that your own top rate of tax was 37%, as you seem to have a lot of memory problems or are you engaging in the very same trickle down economics that you accused Truss of engaging in.
That tax rate of 37% was a leftover after the 2017 republican so called Tax Reform, it remained unchanged from prior years going back to Obama and Bush. I recall Obama wanted to raise the top rate to 40% and they claimed he was a socialist. 2021 was not the time to be raising taxes but Biden did bring some reality back to corporations, the top income brackets fared rather well during the pandemic. Biden was lucky he got the tax bill through, Kristen Sinema wouldn't sign off on the tax bill if they got rid of the carried interest loophole, she would not buy inot a tax increase for the top bracket.
Every country is different, the wealthy here have extensive write offs and protections, not sure that is true for the British. Lowering taxes for the wealthy when people can't pay their rent and a country is running deficits makes little sense.
Last edited by Goodnight; 10-20-2022 at 10:33 AM..
Reaganomics... The compound annual growth rate of GDP was 3.6% during Reagan's eight years, compared to 2.7% during the preceding eight years. During his Administration, growth in government spending plummeted from 10% in 1982, to just over 1% in 1987.
Quote:
The numbers tell the story. Over the eight years of the Reagan Administration:
20 million new jobs were created
Inflation dropped from 13.5% in 1980 to 4.1% by 1988
Unemployment fell from 7.6% to 5.5%
Net worth of families earning between $20,000 and $50,000 annually grew by 27%
Real gross national product rose 26%
The prime interest rate was slashed by more than half, from an unprecedented 21.5% in January 1981 to 10% in August 1988
Given actual rates of inflation, through 1987, the Reagan tax cuts saved the median-income two-earner American family of four close to $9,000 in taxes from what it would have owed in 1980.
Tax cuts were only one “leg of the stool.” The second, jobs, was equally strong. Not only were there millions of new jobs, but the benefits of job creation were not limited to one segment of society. Employment of African-Americans rose by more than 25% between 1982 and 1988, and more than half of the new jobs created went to women.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
