Ed Bollocks talks balls about VAT

Ed balls (small b for small balls) says:

“Next Monday – the day before the budget – George Osborne must come clean to parliament about the impact of his budget plan to raise the standard rate of VAT on the poorest households, pensioners and families with children.”

Now while I am totally horrified at suggestions that in his budget next week Chancellor “Let’s do another line” Osborne migh be considering putting VAT on food as that would really hit the poor very hard, a 2.5% increase on goods liable for VAT at the moment will not hit the poorest households hard at all.

The thing about VAT is the less you spend the less you pay. Truly poor people tend to buy mostly essentials and many essentials, food for example, are zero rated.

An extra 2.5% on a bottle of wine will not make me buy one thimbleful less wine just as the 2.5% reduction did not persade me to run out and buy anything I would not have bought anyway. All Ed balls has done here is show once again how out of touch the would be leaders of “the peoples’ party are with the people.

If Osborne’s proposed increase is on VAT liable goods only it may make some people think a little more carefully about how they spend their money.

On the other hand if Osborne does put VAT on food we must fill his pants with VAT liable custard.

Simples.

RELATED POSTS:
Curbing Public Debt

9 thoughts on “Ed Bollocks talks balls about VAT

    1. Yes, you’d think a Leeds MP would be getting more than enough iron from having to eat all those pie and peas suppers. He needs to call in John Prescott as a nutritional adviser.

      Like

  1. I’ve heard a lot recently about how VAT increases affect the poorest households most, and it has left me scratching my head. I have always felt that the more you can afford to spend, then the more tax you will pay, and so consequently VAT rises should affect affluent households the most. I’m glad that I’m not the only one who understands it this way.

    Like

    1. I remember when VAT was introduced, the case was made on its being a tax that big spenders would pay most of. That’s why food and kids clothes (and I think domestic fuel) were excluded.

      As I said if they put it on food that’s brutal, kids clothes should stay at zero and fuel should go down to zero too because it is a necessity but that isn’t on the cards any time soon.

      Apart from that, yeah if I can choose whether to pay tax or not I’m not the type to deny myself something for the sake of avoiding a few quid purchase tax.

      Like

  2. Ed Balls knows less about finance than a beggar who finds a fifty pound note. What the hell am I going to do with this?

    He did very little as education Secretary and fucked up Social Services.

    He should be flipping burgers at a McDonalds. The man has an ego the size of a Volcanic eruption and the sense of a caveman. Yvette Cooper has more brains than he has balls!

    Like

  3. Charlie Sheen spoke on live on Today this morning admitting, “At this moment, on live TV, I do not know where my children are.” His 23-month-old twins were removed by police from Charlie’s home late Tuesday ni continuous economic demonstrations. Local media is reporting that demonstrators have set fire to a supermarket, cars, a police station, houses, and the governor’s residence amid protests http://123144.csmonitor.com – calling for economic hswhfjweidjwejdjan21123h12 calling for economic improvements and government reform .

    Like

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s