Labour spending plans

Dualling of the A1 cancelled. Again. We’ve only been waiting 40 years….

Basically the budget was a political kicking meted out to those who Labour dislike or who can't vote them out.

People most likely to vote Tory or right of centre - farmers, landowners, landlords, business owners, buyers of bigger cars, people with estates subject to IHT, who hold shares, property, work hard, self employed, managerial class etc etc.

People who can't vote - companies.

After all, this is a woman who has put a picture of the founder of the Scottish Communist Party on her wall.

I have not met one person who has one decent thing to say about the budget. Or this appalling Labour government.

And as said already, any extra raised will just be spaffed up the wall or into the vast hole that is the public sector. After all, if you give the NHS £22 billion they will need a lot more managers to help it not get to the people actually doing the real work. 

I hope the markets do react badly and it all blows up in her smug face. She deserves it. 

The problem is the utter polarisation of the political arena, in part driven by the media and in part by the utter panic of mainstream, career politicians (ie those that have joined politics as a late teen / early 20s and MUST remain in politics or become one of those sofa-surfing jobless theorists that expect sympathy and social support) who feared for their income by extreme non-politicians entering their arena.

This has driven Labour to its insane leftist levels of public spending and authoritarianism and the Conservatives to a foaming mess of tax reduction promises and the demonisation of “woke” which includes everything that isn’t in an Enid Blyton story. To cover up this the Conservatives have decided an Indian billionaire and a black woman are the best “face of the party” leaders to a core membership of pale faced, pale eyed people who’s interest in politics is that nothing should ever change and it’s been change that’s driven the country to the dire state it is in.

So to teach the Conservatives a lesson swing voters voted Labour or Reform to let the party know what their feelings were. Then Conservative voters voted Reform, LibDem or abstained to let the party know what their feelings were. Ally all this to a core of Labour voters that will vote Labour if a sick giraffe were leader and a number of Conservative voters that would normally do the same for their party but refused to this time around we end up with a Labour Party government that thinks it’s been given an open mandate to behave like Stalin and is doing so. However they don’t have that mandate so the country that fucked about with voting because the politicians had fucked around with politics get half a decade of this bollocks.

I have written to The Inland Revenue to complain but this was the response I got:

Dear Mr Sacamano, I am writing to you to express our thanks for your more-than-prompt reply to our latest communication, and also to answer some of the points you raise.

I will address them, as ever, in order.

Firstly, I must take issue with your description of our last as a "begging letter". It might perhaps more properly be referred to as a "tax demand". This is how we, at the Inland Revenue, have always, for reasons of accuracy, traditionally referred to such documents.

Secondly, your frustration at our adding to the "endless stream of crapulent whining and panhandling vomited daily through the letterbox on to the doormat" has been noted. However, whilst I have naturally not seen the other letters to which you refer, I would cautiously suggest that their being from "pauper councils, Lombardy pirate banking houses and pissant gas-mongerers" might indicate that your decision to "file them next to the toilet in case of emergencies" is at best a little ill-advised.

In common with my own organisation, it is unlikely that the senders of these letters do see you as a "lackwit bumpkin" or, come to that, a "sodding charity". More likely they see you as a citizen of Great Britain, with a responsibility to contribute to the upkeep of the nation as a whole.

Which brings me to my next point. Whilst there may be some spirit of truth in your assertion that the taxes you pay "go to shore up the canker-blighted, toppling folly that is the Public Services", a moment's rudimentary calculation ought to disabuse you of the notion that the government in any way expects you to "stump up for the whole damned party" yourself. The estimates you provide for the Chancellor's disbursement of the funds levied by taxation, whilst colourful, are, in fairness, a little off the mark. Less than you seem to imagine is spent on "junkets for Bunterish lickspittles" and "dancing whores", whilst far more than you have accounted for is allocated to, for example, "that box-ticking facade of a university system".

A couple of technical points arising from direct queries:

1. The reason we don't simply write "Muggins" on the envelope has to do with the vagaries of the postal system;

2. You can rest assured that "sucking the very marrows of those with nothing else to give" has never been considered as a practice because even if the Personal Allowance didn't render it irrelevant, the sheer medical logistics involved would make it financially unviable.

I trust this has helped. In the meantime, whilst I would not in any way wish to influence your decision one way or the other, I ought to point out that even if you did choose to "give the whole foul jamboree up and go and live in India" you would still owe us the money. Please forward it by Friday.

Yours sincerely,
H J Lee, Customer Relations.

Nursing homes are the ones we are seeing who are going to suffer the most in terms of the percentage of profit lost.

It all depends on the amount of borrowed money but the average 50 to 60 bed homes have profits somewhere in the region of £200K to £400K - the breakeven for these homes is between 80% and 90% occupancy.

The increases in National Insurance and the National Minimum Wage are going to cost between £150K and £210K for the ones we have looked at so far, so their profits are going to tumble and potentially some of them could breach the mandates they have with the banks for their loans.

As can be seen from the occupancy levels needed for breakeven, they can easily find things tough if they lose 4 or 5 residents through a breakout of flu or similar. The staffing levels are largely dictated by the Care Commission so cutting staff isn't possible and raising prices significantly is the only option. We will need to wait until next year to find out how much the Councils are going to increase the amount they pay for residents who don't have the means to pay for the care themselves but the feeling is the increase is going to be pitiful in comparison to the increased costs.

Many nursing homes which are heavily geared (have a lot of borrowing) might find these NI and NMW changes too much to take.