Iain Young

(p.s. I didn't mean that to sound like I support labour - I hate them both equally)

Chip

Gone UP 1 band.

Chip

Chip

Dracoro,
Not so. See here:

Current bands New Bands

A £30,001 to £39,000 A £44001 to £65000
B £39,001 to £51,000 B ££65001 to £91000
C £51,001 to £66,000 C £91001 to ££123000
D £66,001 to £90,000 D £123001 to £162000
E £90,001 to £120,000 E £162001 to £223000
F £120,001 to £240,000 F £223001 to £324000
G £240,001 and above G £324001 to £424000

Bear in mind that prices have more than doubled in mnost areas of Wales since the last valuation.

Chip

Vegescoob

You should all look up to see how much your local councillors have increased their "allowances" this year.
Remember "some animals are more equal".

Dracoro

And the bands have almost doubled too. So if you had a property at, say, £55k you'd be in band C. If now the property was doubled to £110k you'd now be in band, err, C.

Undoubtedly there'll be some that have crept up a band if they started at the top of the band. This may be to outperforming the market or the authorities trying to get a few more quid However, most people will be in the same band.

starstruck

In Cardifff "some" equates to 14,436 homes. That's just those moving from band D to E. The increase to those homeowners is 22%.
I've gone from E to F and am now paying an ADDITIONAL 26% (the amount of like shagged homeowners is yet to be released).

When I first heard of the Rebanding exercise I thought that it may go up a few quid, but 26%!!!!!
Get used to it, coming to a lot of Snet members soon.
I must though emphasize the vastly improved services I have received for my additional cash and have listed them below









Bit stuck on that one, but I'm sure there must be some

Chip

Well the fact is that most people that I have spoken to have gone up at least one band which I suppose was the object of the whole exercise in the first instance.

Chip

GCollier

If you have successful businesses, nice house and cars, then kudos to you...it's nice to see people who are successful and contribute to our society rather than leech from it.

But to have all this and still complain that the country is cr4p and you can't afford to move is untrue. It is not the government taking all your money which is preventing you from leaving, it's YOU.

In truth all you are really saying is that the lifestyle and opportunities provided by this country are currently superior to what you could have elsewhere...even if your measurement is how quickly you can retire. So stop bloody moaning!

Gary.

Vegescoob

So, G collier, does that mean you approve of those who "leech" from society?
Leaving this country isn't, for many, as easy as you imply.

GCollier

It depends what your definition of "leech" is. I have no problem paying taxes to support people who are in genuine need. Of course I resent people who are quite cable of contributing to the country, but who instead choose to simply consume from it at others expense.

And I know first hand that leaving your mother country is not easy. My wife's Dutch and moved to England to live with me. But with the anti-government, anti-UK vitriol poured out by some individuals in this forum, I would have thought the choice for them would be relatively easy.

If it was as bad here as they say. Which of course it isn't, and that's why they stay.

Gary.

NotoriousREV

Hmm, if the bands in our area are the same as yours, we'll be going up 2 bands

VTEC to Turbo

Firstly I feel we have highjacked this thread a little, so this will be my last post (feel free to reply though, not saying that to get the last word)

Spin is a invention/trate of Labour. You'll never get an ependix of where the source information comes from. The fact that they are willing to tackle these issues with common sense, is a breath of fresh air.

If the Cons were to announce all their ideas now, then Labour would implement them the following week and take credit for the ideas... seen it happen time and time again.

By your smilie face you know that is a crock of ****e! The country was working a 3 day week because the Unions had a strangle hold on the economy. We would not be where we are now if it was not for Maggie. Simple facts are that the industry was too heavily subsidised to exist and something had to give.

So you agree that the majority of Labours voters are "idle and thick".

Apart from you parents! The Labour party are in power, only they can be blamed for the state of the pension system (which has been expenentially weakened by this government). Tax and NI (sorry the big pot) being paid now, always pays for the generation claiming now! As you say we have an ageing population at the moment!

In 1 to 2 years my debts will be cleared. I'll then be able to save, the fact that we are getting so heavily tax and have such high debt per head is the fault of labours policies and only slows this process down.

I am paying into both NI (which should be ear market for pensions/NHS etc) and a private pension so I hope/should be able to live off my state and private pension without the need for savings (that is presumming I ever get on to the housing market to pay that off before I retire). I am not holding out for a state pension when I retire because I think all people who have a private pension will be told to take a running jump!!!

We all have to manage our own finances and plan for the future, people expect and have got used to this government holding their hand and wiping their **** (micro managing from the top). It is always hard when you start out, things settle down over the years, Labour however have done nothing to help matters though.

Right I've said my piece, have a good weekend (I'm house hunting).

Iain Young

No it's not. It's a trate of politicians regardless of party. It's been going on for as long as parliment has been around.

And if labour were to announce a good idea, then the cons would nick it as well. Happens all the time. They're all as bad as each other.

No, I think the majority of voters are idle and thick. It's not party specific, but a reflection of the general population.


My point exactly. In 30 years or so, there are going to be far more retired people than working (if the current trends continue), and so the tax burden being placed on the younger generation is going to be far higher than it is now, especially if these benefits come into effect.

Lucky you. Not everyone is in as good a position as you. For example, I never went to university. Not because I didn't want to, but because I couldn't afford to, (under the maggies conservative government). Since labour have come into power, yes I would have built up a student loan debt, but at least it would have meant I could have gone.

Enjoy your house hunting

Dracoro

I think you'll find it was the Tories that bought in student loans.

Then labour bunged in tuition fees.

It was cheaper to go to uni 10 years ago than it is now.

Iain Young

Didn't realise that (memory is playing tricks), but they must have done it too late for me to take advantage of it, (there was certainly nothing like it available at the time - only grants which I wasn't eligable for).

I have no problem in making people pay for further education, and in fact I totally agree with it. Further education is optional, and is undertaken at the choice of the student, so I don't see why our taxes should pay for it. Mind you I feel the same way about numerous other benefits etc. For example take benefits for new mothers / families etc. They chose to have kids, it was a lifestyle choice (nobody forced them to have kids), so why should my hard earned wages be taxed go to to pay for them?

But that's another argument

Chip

Better start saving then hadn't you!

Chip

GCollier

That's a very short sighted view which focuses on the individual and fails to see the bigger longterm picture.

The future prosperity of the country and YOUR future lifestyle is dependent upon (a) the next generation of youngsters and (b) having an educated workforce.

And before you say you're making sufficient provisions for your future, stop and think for a second how much your investments and cash will turn out to be worth if we no longer have advanced industries or people to work them, or there's no young nurses to tend to you when you're old and fall ill.

So you could easily argue that people who make the lifestyle choices of having kids should receive healthy tax breaks for the investment they're making in the future of the country!

Gary.