taxman Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 I've just seen an interview on newsnight with some conservative MP who appeared to say that the tories have reneged on their promise to halt Gordon Brown's National Insurance increase, but only for employers, not employees. Is this true? I can't seem to find reference to it on the BBC news pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 I've just seen an interview on newsnight with some conservative MP who appeared to say that the tories have reneged on their promise to halt Gordon Brown's National Insurance increase, but only for employers, not employees. Is this true? I can't seem to find reference to it on the BBC news pages. this is true - the Libs made them do it (as a concession) - at least the "tax on jobs" aspect has been dropped. Just a tax rise for employees, offset by the rise in the starting level for tax. Just about neutral for most people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studentbob Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Anyone else find it a bit scary that after only 24 hours of government, they are already favouring the capitalist class? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Anyone else find it a bit scary that after only 24 hours of government, they are already favouring the capitalist class? What a very stupid post. They are encouraging employers to take on extra employees on by not placing extra burdens on them. How is this favouring "the capitalist class" (whatever that is?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studentbob Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 What a very stupid post. They are encouraging employers to take on extra employees on by not placing extra burdens on them. How is this favouring "the capitalist class" (whatever that is?) No. They are favouring those who make money from employing others, at the expense of the rest of us. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 No. They are favouring those who make money from employing others Oh Lordy Lordy! The evil swine. The VERY LAST thing we want, with unemployment rising, is some evil, mustache twirling capitalist going around employing people or worse, creating more jobs. Employing others should be MADE ILLEGAL!!!!! Only the government should be allowed to employ anyone and all private businesses should be shut down (coz they're evil you see, just plain EVIL). We can all be part of a happy, vibrant public sector employing 100% of the workforce. Quite how we're going to pay for such a bloated public sector I'm not quite sure. Hey, how about we tax those evil private businesses a bit more? Oh, wait, we've shut them all down. Still, at least they won't be creating any new jobs (the swine!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studentbob Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Oh Lordy Lordy! The evil swine. The VERY LAST thing we want, with unemployment rising, is some evil, mustache twirling capitalist going around employing people or worse, creating more jobs. Employing others should be MADE ILLEGAL!!!!! Only the government should be allowed to employ anyone and all private businesses should be shut down (coz they're evil you see, just plain EVIL). We can all be part of a happy, vibrant public sector employing 100% of the workforce. Quite how we're going to pay for such a bloated public sector I'm not quite sure. Hey, how about we tax those evil private businesses a bit more? Oh, wait, we've shut them all down. Still, at least they won't be creating any new jobs (the swine!). Employers will employ more people when their potential market increases sufficiently to make doing so, not high risk. They ain't gonna set on more people just for the good of the country. As we are already experiencing slow, but sustainable growth, why take money out of the economy with job cuts if you're then, gonna give it to the employers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 I'm pretty sure I read something recently that showed the last time we had a rise in NI for employers ("tax on jobs" in Toryspeak) it made no difference whatsoever in employment levels. I'll have a look for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studentbob Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 I'm pretty sure I read something recently that showed the last time we had a rise in NI for employers ("tax on jobs" in Toryspeak) it made no difference whatsoever in employment levels. I'll have a look for it. Hardly surprising is it. What's always more surprising is how the same numpties believe the spin time and time again. Then they jump on the bandwagon and spread the panic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 I'm pretty sure I read something recently that showed the last time we had a rise in NI for employers ("tax on jobs" in Toryspeak) it made no difference whatsoever in employment levels. How can anyone know? There's no control group. If employers had to pay extra NI and the number of jobs stayed the same, then maybe it would have gone up had employers not had that extra burden. Come to that, maybe it would have gone down without the extra burden, but given that making it more expensive to hire people tends to put employers off, not encourage them, that is highly unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.