Forum Topic

The Budget

Suggestions from MailOnline.ALEX BRUMMER: 13 things Reeves could do in the Budget to fire growth - but won't because Socialists don't understand economicsBy ALEX BRUMMER, CITY EDITORPublished: 23:20, 24 November 2025 | Updated: 23:20, 24 November 2025https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-15322467/ALEX-BRUMMER-Reeves-Budget-fire-growth-wont-Socialists.htmlAnyone willing to provide Chancellor Reeves with further advice ?

John Hawkes ● 29d46 Comments

@M Ixer 29/11/25 16.08Perhaps the following report will help you to understand why lifting the 2 child cap is just encouraging those already on benefits to not get a job, and start contributing to the economy, instead of constantly draining it.https://mol.im/a/15339163 Conversely, I am childless (by choice) so I, and all other childless women have a positive impact on the economy, ergo we do not have kids who need State education or who use the NHS, including dentistry.  Therefore in my opinion us *nulliparous women deserve a tax refund for every year that we remain childless! *aka mad cat ladies😉

Sue Hammond ● 24d

Rachel Reeves' uncle brands niece's Budget as 'the worst I've ever seen'Terry Smith, 73, joined a number of opponents after the Chancellor announced a £30 billion package of tax rises.The uncle of Rachel Reeves has blasted the new Budget - calling it a "disgrace".Terry Smith, 73, joined a number of opponents after the Chancellor announced a £30 billion package of tax rises.Critics claimed the Chancellor made the "wrong choices" in her Budget by hiking taxes alongside increased welfare spending, and that people should consider their finances when deciding the size of their family.Mr Smith, whose sister Sally is Ms Reeves’ mother, publicly criticised the Budget, he told The Sun: “It is going to cost the working class billions of pounds and leave the country worse off.“It’s the worst Budget I’ve ever heard - and I’m 73, so I have been around for quite a few.“Rachel is my niece and is a lovely person, but government is totally out of their depth.”

Sue Hammond ● 25d

Well you’re the scientific and maths genius on here Micheal so perhaps you can do the maths and work it out?

Sue Hammond ● 25d

A reel by "niceboysinthecountry" doesn't sound like a very authoritative source, does it, Sue? Can't listen to is as on a train and have no headphones. Given all the crap on social media I wouldn't trust it. AI bots are getting quite good these days ...

Michael Ixer ● 25d

Sorry to drag this back to the Budget but the following came through on my IG feed, and it is alarming to say the least.  I have no clue if all the figures quoted are accurate, but I would assume that they were researched by the poster. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DRkR9qljE7x/?igsh=MWd2a2c5YnNjY2I4bg==

Sue Hammond ● 25d

Boycie'So, yes, we are deep in the doo dah, largely thanks to your beloved Tories, in my opinion.' I am sure like me you can see our economic mess is in fact all Margaret Thatcher's fault.Yet snivelling Reeves gets takes all the flack !

John Hawkes ● 25d

Boycie'How can Reeve’s be both a boom and bust chancellor and simultaneously have no understanding of growth?'Sorry but I seem to have missed the boom and no one seems to be forecasting one in the future.

John Hawkes ● 25d

I don't think her raising of taxes has anything to do with growing the economy. It has everything to do with appeasing the Labour back benches and redistributing money.If she was a boom and bust chancellor she would probably cut taxes to boost growth quickly and then rack up enormous debt as a consequence; the kind of move typically associated with the Tories.I think everyone has been scratching their heads about where growth can come from, particularly post Brexit and with the huge spike in energy costs as a result of Russia attacking Ukraine. The massive debt racked up during Covid and the ongoing consequences of the mishandling of it by Boris and his cabinet of clowns, has made matters far worse.So, yes, we are deep in the doo dah, largely thanks to your beloved Tories, in my opinion. As I said before, I am no fan of Starmer's Labour Party, but please, let's have some reality and perspective.

Gerry Boyce ● 26d

Because Reeves is trying to grow the economy through taxes and in case you haven’t noticed the number of companies that have cut workforces this is where the UK will go bust.  You can’t grow an economy through public sector.They are now like fighting like rats in a sack.

Robert Wheeler ● 26d

How can Reeve’s be both a boom and bust chancellor and simultaneously have no understanding of growth?

Gerry Boyce ● 26d

@Michael BrigoI wouldn’t worry too much because in one swoop they did manage to increase the burden of taxes, unemployment numbers and inflation.  Boom and bust Reeves and this shambles of a Government haven’t even started yet l feel.They have absolutely no understanding of growth whatsoever.

Robert Wheeler ● 26d

So no Brexit benefits anywhere to be seen then.I do agree with you though @Robert - nothing in the budget for growth which is ridiculous for a government that was 'going all out for growth'

Michael Brigo ● 26d

I think with John Major it is the hypocrisy rather than the affair with Edwina Currie. He exuded moral rectitude, advocating 'back to basics' when PM, having betrayed his wife with a cabinet member when Foreign Secretary (an extraordinarily reckless act given his office of state). Later he was foolish and arrogant enough to publish his autobiography but failed to mention Edwina. She obviously took the affair more seriously than he did, was upset when he dumped her, was even more upset when he ignored her part in his life and took revenge by telling all to the newspapers. I watched him denounce Boris Johnson for lying several times on television and how he had the nerve to castigated others given his own failings.

Steven Rose ● 27d

Ms Grant' I give you Boris and his numerous ones with countless children to boot.'One can criticise Boris over manty matters, but surely not kicking his children !

John Hawkes ● 27d

Ms Holliday'I am being cheeky here, but the new Heathrow runway?'There will not be one.'The Mayor of London, Sir Sadiq Khan, said he thought the government's backing of a new runway was a mistake."I want a better Heathrow, not a bigger one... I'm unclear how you get a new runway at Heathrow and it doesn't cause environmental damage, noise pollution, air pollution being exacerbated."'

John Hawkes ● 27d

@AndyConsiderably more than a few cans and packets of fags Andy!The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimates that by the 2029-30 financial year, approximately 560,000 families will see their Universal Credit increase by an average of £5,310 annually. Other estimates suggest an increase of around £3,500 per year for each additional child the limit previously applied to.Kemi Badenoch was on LBC for an hour yesterday evening with Iain Dale and she confirmed that if elected the Conservatives would reverse the decision.  Conversely, Reform has endorsed it.  Time for me to think about the implications of this.

Sue Hammond ● 27d

Glad I haven't smoked for about 35 yrs. Need to be a millionaire to smoke now. Anybody who smokes as says their hard up needs to stop smoking and eat or heat.

Barbara Stevens ● 27d

Its an extra packet of fags a week and a couple of cans of beer . Or save it up for a new tattoo every 6 months. I doubt many kids will see the benefit of this money.

Andy Pike ● 27d

I agree with you, Lucille and Gerry.Major was very effective during his premiership and won the 1992 election increasing the conservative vote by 14 million.  A rather successful PM I would have thought!

Ivonne Holliday ● 27d

I agree. Major was a far better PM than any Conservative who followed him. As for his affair, I give you Boris and his numerous ones with countless children to boot.

Lucille Grant ● 27d

Major was PM until 1997; he resigned as Tory party leader in ‘95. Anyway, sounds like you’re traumatised by these hallucinations of Major and Currie and whatever gross activities your imagination serves up. Perhaps, at this stage, a little trip to a counsellor would be worth considering, it’s almost thirty years ago and you’re still appalled. Major was and is a very respectable politician, not the most exciting or charismatic person in the world, but a safe pair of hands; got the peace process underway in Ireland, and him and Clarke handed over a pretty solid economy to Blair and Brown. Not too shabby at all.

Gerry Boyce ● 28d

Well done Ivonne but it is actually still under review so don’t hold your breath for at least 10 years or more.

Robert Wheeler ● 28d

Hello Robert,I am being cheeky here, but the new Heathrow runway?

Ivonne Holliday ● 28d

Reeves has blamed everyone and everything else but herself.  The Chancellor constantly said today these were her choices they were also her choices in the last budget. Again l ask the question where is the growth in this budget?Total dogma but yes let’s blame everything else.

Robert Wheeler ● 28d

Hello Michael I,I agree with you.Also, we hear repeatedly that the UK has an ageing population with all the problems that brings.  Let us not forgeet that disability is not age related.So the question must be, does the country help people with children or alternatively, heaven forbid, introduce the Soylent Green idea?

Ivonne Holliday ● 28d

Feel free to provide an alternative source that says Brexit was the huge economic success we were all promised.I can wait.

Michael Brigo ● 28d

Oh wow the ‘wisdom’ of the Grey Man, Major who achieved little of note when in power and had to resign in 1995 because of all the sleaze scandals.  The only thing he is remembered for now is bonking Edwina Curry.  The mental image that conjures is truly disturbing!

Sue Hammond ● 28d

@M IxerI wonder how many of these children have a parent or parents who wear designer brands like Nike, Adidas North Face etc and have iPhones or any other expensive smartphone?  Throwing more money at them will not necessarily be spent on food and clothes for the children.

Sue Hammond ● 28d

@Lucille 13.34Lifting the 2child benefit cap will be greatly welcomed by Labour’s Muslim voters, particularly those ‘men’ with several wives who are knocking out children every year.  The ‘men’ will instruct their wives to vote Labour too. The feckless, unemployed breeders will be cracking open the cans of Fosters tonight!  This move is all about protecting Labour votes.

Sue Hammond ● 28d

The problem is it's the children who will become victims by being brought up in poverty and suffer because of their parents' decisions - or accidents. There should be mandatory sex education for all with all religious objections overruled - and perhaps free abortions for women who want it - to avoid the problem. 

Michael Ixer ● 28d

According to John Major, £100 billion of trade a year and over a million jobs since Brexit have been lost. So all you Brexiteers can now apologise for creating such a messed up country. All you Boris loving Tories can also apologise for imposing such an incompetent buffoon in charge of this country causing unnecessary deaths and avoidable hardship on so many. Don’t forget the years of underinvestment and austerity or  Liz the Lettuce’s driving us over the cliff.Labour are trying to deal with the catastrophic chaos that the Tories left, with the few cards available. I think Rachel has done pretty much all she can do from where things stand.

Gerry Boyce ● 28d

I don't disagree with you Lucille but if we can lift kids out of poverty that can only be a good thing. I think I said once before that perhaps it should have been introduced as a 'going forwards, if you have more than 2 kids then that is on you - we wont be paying for it' rather than penalising people who already had more than 2 when the policy was brought in.

Michael Brigo ● 28d

If you can't afford to bring up more than two children then don't have them. It's not like there isn't contraception available now, unlike 100 years ago. So many children are being born into poverty, which just shouldn't be happening.

Lucille Grant ● 28d

No one on the Forum actually admits to having voted for Labour. Questions are answered either by 'Not me, Guv' or silence. Rachel Reeve's shambolic tenure as Chancellor is not just due to her inexperience and incompetence. The fault lies in the void in the ideology of the modern Labour party which, having abandoned the idea of a command economy, is left with a vague notion that poverty can be cured by taxing the rich. Unfortunately there aren't enough rich people to go around, so they end up by taxing 'working people' to foot an ever increasing welfare bill.

Steven Rose ● 28d

Where on earth is the growth?

Robert Wheeler ● 28d

I'm a bit mystified as to what the fuss is about. I just read it and couldnt find anything so horrific. The fiscal drag thing is from 2028 and just carries on with the Tory policy that was probably carried on by Labour before that and introduced by the Tories before that. Lifting the 2 child benefit cap is supported by Reform of all people and seems likely to reduce child poverty - surely we are all in favour of that?What else is there to make a fuss about?

Michael Brigo ● 28d

I did forewarn everyone about this terrible lot. You can always guarantee they will be 100 times worse than the Conservative Party. It seems this has happened sooner than expected this time.

Nick Gulliford ● 28d

Totally agree.  This is a budget for people on benefits and large families, just what you need for growth.  In my opinion a total shambles leading up to the budget and now this freeze on tax thresholds is cruel as more pensioners will be dragged into paying income tax.  Has anyone found anything that encourages real growth in this budget?  Will the last Labour voter turn off the lights as nobody recognises this country any more and certainly can’t afford to live in it.

Robert Wheeler ● 28d

And  large families wil be happy with the two child benefit cap being abolished. FFS.

Lucille Grant ● 28d

She has frozen tax income thresholds until 2030/31. This is an actual increase in tax for the majority of people, both working and retired, as income increases either by pay for workers or pensions for retirees, thereby breaking the pre Election manifesto, surely 🤔

Lucille Grant ● 28d

"No human could hold such bizarre views and post them in such peculiar and unatural language."Busted me, you have.

Michael Brigo ● 29d

Mr Brigo'Do you actually believe that this specific policy change was made just to get those two out of paying the tax?You seriously are gullible if so, was it a Russian bot that told you?'Mr Rose can answer for himself but I have no doubt that whatever he writes are his own considered opinions or beliefs.But regarding you, I have always considered you were a figment of ChatGP or some other AI creation.No human could hold such bizarre views and post them in such peculiar and unatural language.

John Hawkes ● 29d

Steven'Apparently Rachel will raise the limit at which mansion tax is imposed to £2 million, ensuring that the homes of Keir Starmer and David Lammy, valued at around £1.7 million, will avoid tax. Did you not say, John, that socialism means advocating tax increases for people richer than yourself?'I certainly stand by my definition of socialism.Another example is the fact that in any country claiming to be 'socialist' those that espouse the philosophy and enforce it always seem to live a richer and better life than those they govern.I wonder what Jeremy's town house is worth in Islington or has he downsized to a  Council flat ?!To be honest I don't think the speculative figure of £2M at which the tax would cut in was set to favour Starmer in Islington or Lammy in Tottenham.Who would pay £2M to live in Tottenham !!And of course Angela Raynor only purchased a second home for a reputed £600K.A more serious point is the planned (is it ?) process to ascertain which homes will be liable for the tax.Lot's of valuation work for the one surviving group of suit wearing workers, namely Estate Agents, one assumes.Who will pay them for their labour, the home owner or the general taxpayer who might be living in rented accommodation ?Will all homes have to be valued ?Will there be an appeal system if one's home is said to fall within the requirement to pay the tax ?What if your home is said to just fall inside or outside the limit but then some body like Rightmove says house prices have just risen or fallen ?It's not just that 'socialism means advocating tax increases for people richer than yourself' it also means socialism will always come up with expensive and bureaucratic processes and controls in order to raise taxes and take money from the 'hard working British worker'.I am not absolutely sure she means to introduce this tax, but I am sure their are many readers of this Forum in West Putney who are temporarily turning attention from the dispossed in Gaza to themselves !

John Hawkes ● 29d

Well the freebies scandal and their tendency to forget about paying tax would suggest  that the Labour front bench  are keen on feathering their nests. So I wouldn't entirely discount the possibility that personal considerations may have affected the decision to raise the limit from £1.5 million to £2 million. But my main objection is that tax increases specifically aimed at the rich raise little revenue (because there are not enough  rich people to go around)  disincentivise aspiration, encourage entrepreneurs to leave the country and slow economic growth. It is clear that the mansion tax, if it actually forms part of the budget , will only have been included as a sop to the left of the party, for whom socialism means soaking the rich, defined as people richer than themselves.

Steven Rose ● 29d

Do you actually believe that this specific policy change was made just to get those two out of paying the tax? You seriously are gullible if so, was it a Russian bot that told you?

Michael Brigo ● 29d

Apparently Rachel will raise the limit at which mansion tax is imposed to £2 million, ensuring that the homes of Keir Starmer and David Lammy, valued at around £1.7 million, will avoid tax. Did you not say, John, that socialism means advocating tax increases for people richer than yourself?

Steven Rose ● 29d