Philip Creegan
@philipcreegan.bsky.social
The higher rate was only 25% for a very short time. It was then reduced to 12.5%.
November 8, 2025 at 2:00 PM
The higher rate was only 25% for a very short time. It was then reduced to 12.5%.
VAT has gone from 8% to 20%. Thats quite a hike.
November 8, 2025 at 1:48 PM
VAT has gone from 8% to 20%. Thats quite a hike.
And without analysing a lot of data- council tax v rates, national insurance, VAT other indirect taxes etc, real terms salaries, inflation etc its impossible to say definitively. I suspect some groups eg pensioners who dont pay NI are doing better out of the current arrangements.
November 8, 2025 at 1:47 PM
And without analysing a lot of data- council tax v rates, national insurance, VAT other indirect taxes etc, real terms salaries, inflation etc its impossible to say definitively. I suspect some groups eg pensioners who dont pay NI are doing better out of the current arrangements.
In practice, very few people paid the 83% rate whereas a lot pay the 45% rate.
The most meaningful way to compare is to look at tax to GDP ratio and that certainly isn't lower today than in the 1970s.
The most meaningful way to compare is to look at tax to GDP ratio and that certainly isn't lower today than in the 1970s.
November 8, 2025 at 1:22 PM
In practice, very few people paid the 83% rate whereas a lot pay the 45% rate.
The most meaningful way to compare is to look at tax to GDP ratio and that certainly isn't lower today than in the 1970s.
The most meaningful way to compare is to look at tax to GDP ratio and that certainly isn't lower today than in the 1970s.
Its only one part of tax take. National insurance and VAT have gone up.
November 8, 2025 at 11:34 AM
Its only one part of tax take. National insurance and VAT have gone up.
Ah yes the answer to everything!
November 7, 2025 at 9:33 AM
Ah yes the answer to everything!
Correct choice unfortunately
November 7, 2025 at 9:32 AM
Correct choice unfortunately
Absurd. I regret voting for her now.
November 6, 2025 at 5:12 PM
Absurd. I regret voting for her now.
Reposted by Philip Creegan
The private sector is supposed to be better value for money because it has a profit incentive. But if not regulated properly - and often it's impossible to regulate properly - the profit incentive makes it less efficient to the state.
October 27, 2025 at 8:52 AM
The private sector is supposed to be better value for money because it has a profit incentive. But if not regulated properly - and often it's impossible to regulate properly - the profit incentive makes it less efficient to the state.
Reposted by Philip Creegan
Journalists should not be looking at this and going 'Ooh yeah, but look there was a nice lady called Doris on the march which disproves the far right theory.' They should be chastising Doris for being naive or much worse.
September 17, 2025 at 3:59 PM
Journalists should not be looking at this and going 'Ooh yeah, but look there was a nice lady called Doris on the march which disproves the far right theory.' They should be chastising Doris for being naive or much worse.
Reposted by Philip Creegan
Christopher Hitchens did not just accept a sliding Overton window. He kicked it f***ing hard in the other direction, taking no prisoners and making no apology for doing so. Awesome stuff.
Remember that while the media sanitises the Tommy Robinson marchers.
Remember that while the media sanitises the Tommy Robinson marchers.
September 16, 2025 at 7:44 AM
Christopher Hitchens did not just accept a sliding Overton window. He kicked it f***ing hard in the other direction, taking no prisoners and making no apology for doing so. Awesome stuff.
Remember that while the media sanitises the Tommy Robinson marchers.
Remember that while the media sanitises the Tommy Robinson marchers.
It would be good if various people on the right were investigated over their tax affairs with equal vigour.
September 6, 2025 at 7:20 AM
It would be good if various people on the right were investigated over their tax affairs with equal vigour.
She who should not be named
September 5, 2025 at 5:30 PM
She who should not be named
Reposted by Philip Creegan
I get that she had to go once the ministerial code was broken, but that's the context of it, for all those elsewhere hoiking up bile while trying to exploit every tax wheeze going
September 5, 2025 at 12:20 PM
I get that she had to go once the ministerial code was broken, but that's the context of it, for all those elsewhere hoiking up bile while trying to exploit every tax wheeze going
Reposted by Philip Creegan
Instead it was an oversight in the midst of being deputy Prime Minister, secretary of state for housing communities and local government, leading on multiple key Bills, being Labour deputy leader, a constituency MP and raising a family.
September 5, 2025 at 12:19 PM
Instead it was an oversight in the midst of being deputy Prime Minister, secretary of state for housing communities and local government, leading on multiple key Bills, being Labour deputy leader, a constituency MP and raising a family.