That Other Guys opinion on… The Budget


Well, i said i would do it and so here it is. If you’r still waiting for my review of Oz by that same logic…. it’s coming. Anyway, onto the Budget for the UK as announced on Wednesday the 20th of March.

Right, lets start with the bits that are easiest to understand; the tariffs. Number 1) Fuel prices have been frozen again, reducing the price of fuel by a whooping 13p. That is A LOT… but it’s been frozen now for almost an entire year. Eventually, somethings gonna give and then the cost will go up no end and i fear the coming of that day but until then, where getting away with it.

2) Price of all tobacco to increases by 25p. That’s A LOT. Now, i don’t smoke and think it’s a dirty horrible habit, but i know it relives stress and that people feel better after they’ve satisfied there need for it (A need they wouldn’t have if they had never had started…). So, 25p increase is yet another blow to smokers by an smoke unfriendly government.

3) Penny of pints. YAY! 1p of every pint. It’s a desperate and feeble last ditch attempt to try and stop the traditional British pubs all over the country going out of business. They have been suffering from the cheep prices of alcohol at supermarkets and the majority of the British youth culture would rather go to a night club than a pub. Although i’m in favor of the tariff, i doubt it will make any difference.

Next we have something new in the budget. It’s a housing plan. Basically, houses in Britain are very very expensive. Everything from new builds, thatched cottages, tersest houses to mansions, have all gone up in price to scary amounts over the past ten years, and people are finding it very hard to move up the property ladder. At the moment, people are moving from say, a two bedroom apartment into another two bedroom apartment, because, although there getting more money from selling, there still not getting enough to buy the next type of property up the ladder. People have even been moving down it and a lot of youngsters can’t get on, even when helped by parents. It’s a nightmare!

So, the chancellor has moved the motion to try and help people move up or get on the property ladder. What he’s done is he has changed mortgages so that they come with a guarantee. Basically, you agree (by signing) to guarantee the bank repayments on your mortgage of x amount by date y, and in return they’ll let you have more money. So:

Bank Man: “I’ll let you borrow £5000 as a normal mortgage, or, i’ll let you borrow £6000 if you can guarantee to pay me back half of it in two years time.”

That’s not exactly how it works, but that’s the principle. This will help people move up the property ladder by giving them more money. As for people trying to get on, the other thing he has created is a community money fund. A house buyers pot if you will, which eager young house buyers can dip into and take money out of.

Now obviously, this isn’t free! They have to pay it back, and do in there mortgage repayments, but the money is not classed as part of there mortgage, so not subject to the banks rules and regulations for borrowing. I’m not sure how he will regulate it, but people can take money from the pot as a cushion for the market. It helps them get a place (this is specifically for people who can’t afford a house AT ALL, and single mums) and then they just have a higher mortgage monthly repayment,

This plan has already come under scrutiny from the opposing party, who say it’s not complete, it leaves people out and can’t withstand complicated situations. The plan doesn’t cover houses over £600,000 because if your aiming for a house that expensive and can’t afford it, it won’t hurt you too much to lower your sights a bit. This is fair, and i can smell a little of the Lib Dem’s in there somewhere, but mainly it’s a conservative policy in this, now called “Conservative lead” government.

The rest of the speech was all just stats and numbers. I would bore you all to death if i went through them, so to sum up….

Tabacco, more expensive, pints and fuel, less expensive. Everything else is increasing in price as planned and houses might be easier to buy. Don’t know yet, still testing this new policy. So overall, i like this Budget. It’s aimed at sensible, driving, pub going non smoking young people like me! 🙂

That Other Guy

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “That Other Guys opinion on… The Budget

  1. It’s the spare-bedroom tax that’s concerning me the most, even if that was announced before the budget. It just doesn’t seem fair to charge EVERYONE with a spare room, the same price. There has to be a better regulatory method…

    • First off, can i just say, only Labor are calling this new welfare reform a tax. A tax is when you earn money and then the government take some of it off you.

      This is a welfare reform that is charging people in social housing for having more rooms than they need or use. This is because there are people waiting for bigger social houses to become available who need the extra space.

      It’s been put in place to encourage people in social housing, who live in houses too big for them to move out so people who need the space can move in. That’s all it’s been intended to do.

      The thing is, it shouldn’t effect disabled people who need the extra room because:
      1) They NEED the room(s) and
      2) All disability welfare benefits are unaffected by these reforms.

      And for all those people who are complaining it will affect them, i have an awnser for you…

      MOVE!

      • So, you’re telling me personally, to move out of my three-bedroom house that I live in with my Dad, even though the third room is occupied just shy of half of the year by my two sisters? We’re going to be charged an extra, I think, £12 a week. Not a lot, I know, but that’s almost an 1/8th of my wage…

  2. Well, the request, written like a demand to reflect my anger at the unfairness on which this issue is based was aimed at generally the whole population of Britain living in social housing and in your cases, yes… I am telling you, but not personally in the direct sense, to leave your house, unless excessively difficult circumstances prevent you from doing so as decided by the social housing ombudsman and the government civil service for the home Secretary.

    (On another note…. i would make an outstanding thief, liar and rich git…i-i-i mean…. Politician)

    • Given the situation I am in, I refuse OUTRIGHT, to agree with what you’ve said. Sorry.

      • I like that I’ve found someone of the opposed opinion; or at least just in the opposed situation. Stick to your guns, i respect that! Refuse what i said outright, i encourage you to. State your case with the importance it deserves!

        I will stick to my own guns as well though and on that note, i still think you and your dad should move to a two bedroom house and give your three bedroom house to a family who need it, like my friends, the Frakes. There are two daughters with a wide age gap and a three year old boy, there mum and her boyfriend all living in a two bedroom house…..

        See, don’t you want to give your bigger, spacious house to them? There bursting at the seems where they are. This is the point the government is making. It’s not really family’s like your that are the problem, your more a minority. It’s mostly stubben old people “I’ve lived here all my life and i’m not leaving!”. It’s just not fair on those who need the space.

        As for your sisters, you say there at yours shy of half the year. I don’t know enough of your personal life to make a decision for you, and even if i did, i would NEVER broadcast it on the internet; it’s just my moral and political standing that you COULD move…. not that you should.

      • As far as we’re concerned, they are here enough to mean we shouldn’t give up their room. It is their room. It was when they lived here and it is when they spend most of their time in Peterborough. Sure, in the opinion of the rules, we should pay for the room or move, but I think the rule is wrong. Think of how many single-parents are going to be in the same situation because of their circumstances. It just isn’t right that those that have limited access to their kids should suffer yet again because their partner left them.

        I accept, in a fair few circumstances, the divorce happens because of abuse of some sort, but it’s not every case – sometimes it just breaks down. Those in that case shouldn’t be punished any more. They just shouldn’t, and it sickens me that they are being/will be.

  3. Ok, you say they are there enough, then that’s fair enough. Plead your case and i wish you luck with paying that 1/8th of a wage “extra room privilege charge” (that’s what i call it. Not as catchy as ‘Bedroom tax’, but more accurate i think.).

    As for single parents who will suffer because of this due to sharing of children, i do offer my sympathies. It is classic Conservative to favor the ‘Traditional family’ over the split one but split family’s are the ones that need more support, in my opinion.

    But there is still an issue of fairness to be dealt with here. Is it fair that a person who see’s there kid(s) every weekend, a minority of the year, should be allowed to stay in a house accommodating him/her and there kid(s) as if they were there 24/7 when there is another family stuffed into there house who do have to accommodate there kid(s) 24/7 and don’t have the room?

    I don’t want the parent to stop seeing there child(ren) and hopefully something can be arranged. If the move forces them to have to stop there child(ren) staying over, then obviously that isn’t fair at all! But as a Utilitarian, i say sometimes the needs of a parent and one or two children must be put aside for the needs of a whole family.

    • I’m going to stop responding to this. I find myself getting frustrated.

      • Well then, normally when your opponent gets frustrated it means you’ve won, but here i think i shall conceded to a draw…. no, no i insist and it’s not from pity for you or out of some misguided logic that i must not beat my friends at a debate. In fact i rather enjoy doing just that, but i’m discarding my own argument for three simple reasons:

        1) I am not now, nor have i ever lived in social housing. I don’t know what that’s like and i sit here in my family’s extended semi-detached house which we own and find myself in the same position as an out of touch conservative.

        2) I live with parents who have been together over 35 years. I have been living in the family demography of two parents, two children my whole life. I know that in modern society that is becoming rarer and rarer, so i am grateful for that, but it means i can’t understand the hardships of a single parent. All my friends with children are married or with a partner/boyfriend/girlfriend, so i can’t even get the idea of the experience second hand, except of of you.

        3) Despite my ideals, i believe all cases should be handled individually, no matter how impractical and slow that would make the process. Something the current, or dare i say, any government would agree with, so on that basis, unless i form my own party, i have no political party standpoint on this matter.

        So there, neither of us really win, because my argument is fundamentally invalid and flawed and you were getting frustrated. I’m sorry for that by the way.

      • Ha. Now no-one wins.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s