A budget wishlist for the chancellor | Letters

"Budget wishlist for a better Britain"

In response to Chancellor Rachel Reeves' recent budget speech, many experts are calling for a more comprehensive and progressive fiscal policy. One such advocate is Phil Tate, who urges the chancellor to prioritize social housing by allocating sufficient funds to expand programs and deliver well-paid jobs. This would not only alleviate homelessness but also reduce the burden on private rents.

However, Tate also suggests that capital gains tax rates should be equalized with income tax rates, which could generate an additional £14-£15 billion in revenue. While this proposal has merit, it is nothing compared to the bold measures proposed by Richard Mountford and Ruth Lister.

Mountford advocates for a tiered-reserve system to save £20 billion per year and restricting pension contribution tax relief to the basic rate, which could raise an additional £15 billion. This would be a progressive measure that wouldn't affect anyone's take-home pay. Lister also emphasizes the importance of addressing child poverty, calling on the chancellor to give due priority to the upcoming strategy.

On the other hand, Tony Samphier criticizes the proposed policies, arguing that clipping the Bank of England's wings in relation to inflation is a problematic idea that would extend the cost of living crisis and disproportionately affect the poor. Instead, he suggests that restricting pension contribution tax relief could be a more progressive solution.

Ultimately, the government must adopt a more comprehensive approach to tackle Britain's financial challenges. By prioritizing social housing, addressing child poverty, and implementing progressive fiscal policies like tiered-reserve systems, they can ensure a better future for all citizens.

I think its time for the gov to stop playin with peoples heads over here. Phil Tate is right on point about social housing tho . If they wanna talk about makin money, lets do somethin about addressin child poverty 1st, you feel? £20 billion in reserves sounds like a pretty good start for that. And Tony's got some valid points too, I get why he's worried 'bout inflation, but its not fair on the poor fams

I think it's time for the UK to rethink its priorities . Social housing is always the most impactful way to tackle homelessness. It's not just about throwing money at the problem, but about creating real change. And why should we have to choose between paying rent or paying bills? The government needs to stop worrying about inflation and focus on making sure everyone has access to basic necessities. We need a system that benefits people, not just corporations .

so i think we need to visualize this... imagine britain as a puzzle
we have the social housing pieces (helping homeless ppl)
the pension contribution tax relief pieces (not affecting take-home pay)
and the income tax rates and capital gains tax rates pieces (generating revenue )

now, if we connect these pieces, we get:
social housing + tiered-reserve system = more revenue
social housing + progressive fiscal policies (like reducing child poverty) = a better future for all

but, what about the inflation issue? let's draw a simple graph:
inflation vs. tax relief
if we restrict pension contribution tax relief, it might affect inflation (less expensive living)

so, the government needs to find that balance and make a comprehensive approach

I'm loving this conversation about budget wishlist ! I think it's time for the government to get real about tackling homelessness . Social housing is not just a matter of throwing money at a problem, but also about creating opportunities for people to build a life without being trapped in the cycle of poverty. Phil Tate's suggestion to allocate funds for well-paid jobs is genius ! And I'm all for equalizing capital gains tax rates with income tax rates - it's only fair that everyone contributes based on their means . Richard Mountford and Ruth Lister are absolutely right about addressing child poverty too . It's time for the government to take bold action and not just tinker around the edges !

I think Tate's idea about equalizing capital gains tax rates with income tax rates has some merit but I'm not sure if it would be that easy to implement . I mean, wouldn't that just create more confusion and compliance issues? And £14-£15 billion is a lot of money but we need to think about the bigger picture here. What's the point of raising revenue if we're not addressing the root causes of homelessness and poverty in the first place?

I gotta say, it's about time the gov't starts thinkin' 'bout the people, not just the rich folks . I mean, social housing is like, a basic human right, innit? It's crazy that we're still seein' people sleepin' on the streets or gettin' evicted from their homes because of rent prices. And then there's this pension thing... it's like they're tryin' to squeeze every last penny outta us . A tiered-reserve system sounds like a solid idea, but we gotta make sure it doesn't just benefit the wealthy few. I'm all for clippin' the wings of the Bank of England, too - that's just another way of sayin' they're more worried about keepin' prices up than helpin' us common folks . We need a gov't that's gonna prioritize our well-bein', not just line the pockets of the elite .

I don't know about you guys but I'm thinking if they're going to give people a better life, shouldn't the government at least spring for some new toilets ? Just kidding sort of. But seriously, expanding social housing and tackling child poverty is like the UK's financial equivalent of getting a second mortgage... it's long overdue! On a more serious note, I think equalizing capital gains tax with income tax is like splitting a pizza - everyone gets a slice, no one goes hungry. And let's be real, £14-£15 billion could buy a lot of new homes and not as much fancy office furniture

I'm so done with these politicians promising us the world in their budgets ! I mean, £14-£15 billion from equalizing capital gains tax rates? That's peanuts compared to the £20 billion Mountford is proposing, which actually makes sense. And don't even get me started on child poverty – it's ridiculous that we still have people struggling to make ends meet in this country . We need more than just empty promises from our leaders. The government needs to step up and provide real solutions, not just a bunch of piecemeal measures that might not even work as planned . And what about the poor who are already feeling the pinch? You can't just cut their pension contribution tax relief without considering the impact on everyday people . We need a comprehensive approach, not just a few half-baked ideas that will do more harm than good .

i think rachel reeves has made some good steps in this budget but we need more to be done . expanding social housing is a no-brainer - its not just about homelessness, its about giving ppl a decent place to live. and phil tates idea of equalizing capital gains tax with income tax rates makes total sense. £14-£15 billion extra revenue would really make a difference.

richard mountfords tiered-reserve system is another good idea but we need to be careful not to hurt pensioners too much . and rachel reeves should defo prioritize child poverty - its one of the biggest social issues we're still struggling with today.

the problem is, govts are always finding ways to balance the books but sometimes you gotta spend a bit more on people rather than just cutting taxes . tony samphier has a point about clipping the boe's wings but maybe we can find a compromise?

I'm not sure about Phil Tate's idea on equalizing capital gains tax with income tax... where does he get that £14-£15 billion from? I need to see the source on this one... it sounds too good (and expensive) to be true. And what's up with Richard Mountford and Ruth Lister's tiered-reserve system? How would that work in practice? Wouldn't that just create more bureaucratic red tape?

idk man, I think Phil Tate's idea about increasing funding for social housing is fire but at the same time, I'm not sure if equalizing capital gains tax rates with income tax rates would be that effective... i mean, wouldn't it just encourage people to sell their houses and avoid paying taxes in the first place? also, Richard Mountford's proposal for a tiered-reserve system sounds like a good idea but is it really fair to restrict pension contribution tax relief at all? what about those who are already living paycheck to paycheck?

I'm thinking we need to step up our game over here . I mean, expanding social housing and making sure people don't have to live in crap conditions is a no-brainer, right? And yeah, equalizing capital gains tax rates with income tax rates would be awesome, that's like £14-£15 billion for a good cause! But what really gets me is this tiered-reserve system, saving 20 billion a year... that's huge! It's all about being fair and not leaving the poor behind. And can we please address child poverty? That's just heartbreaking . I don't know what's wrong with these people in charge, it's like they're trying to make things worse . We need some real change, not just tweaks around the edges .

Ugh, I'm just so done with the complexity of it all Like, can't we just have a clear plan to tackle homelessness already? Social housing is literally the bare minimum, but the more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that we need to get our act together as a nation. And those experts are right – we can't keep relying on piecemeal solutions when we need something more substantial.

I mean, I love Phil Tate's idea of equalizing capital gains tax rates with income tax rates – it makes total sense! But it's like, why not go big or go home? Richard Mountford and Ruth Lister are proposing some serious moves, but it's all just so... complicated. And then there's Tony Samphier being the voice of reason, saying that we need to prioritize progressive solutions over clipping the Bank of England's wings.

Can't we just have a clear plan to make Britain a better place for everyone? It feels like every time something gets proposed, it's like trying to solve a puzzle with missing pieces.

I'm not sure about this idea of equalizing capital gains tax rates with income tax rates . It sounds good on paper, but what's the point of taxing profits from selling assets at a lower rate than paying taxes on regular income? Wouldn't that just encourage people to hold onto their assets longer and make even more money in the long run?

I think we need to talk about this budget wishlist being presented as a solution . I mean, it sounds great on paper, but have you considered the impact of inflation on these proposals? If the government is going to clip the Bank's wings, what does that mean for our economy in the long run? We need to think about how this will affect the poor and vulnerable, not just the well-off. And let's be real, who gets to decide what constitutes "progressive" policy? It's always a game of politics and power struggles . The government needs to listen to experts like Phil Tate and Richard Mountford, but also consider alternative views from critics like Tony Samphier. We need to have an open discussion about what really matters here - is it just about saving money or is it about creating real change for the people?

the idea of equalizing capital gains tax rates with income tax is actually not that hard to implement ... just think about it, if you're making millions from stocks, shouldn't you be paying the same rate as someone who's making £20k?

and another thing, what's up with the restriction on pension contribution tax relief being a "progressive" solution ... I mean, isn't that just gonna cut into people's retirement savings? wouldn't it be better to actually help them out instead of finding ways to clip their wings?

and honestly, £20 billion a year from a tiered-reserve system sounds like a pretty sweet deal ... but we need more info on how that's gonna work and who exactly will benefit from it

I'm totally stoked about this budget wishlist idea ! It's like, we need some real change in the way our government thinks about money and how it affects people's lives. I mean, prioritizing social housing is a no-brainer – who wouldn't want to be able to afford a decent place to live without breaking the bank? And equalizing capital gains tax rates with income tax rates would be a huge win for the economy too .

But what really gets me excited is that people are pushing back against these 'problematic' ideas about clipping the Bank of England's wings. I mean, we don't want to hurt the poor and vulnerable anymore than we have to – it's not fair that they're already struggling just to get by. And restricting pension contribution tax relief? That's like, a super smart way to make sure everyone contributes their fair share without messing with people's take-home pay.

The thing is, though, we need more voices in this conversation. I mean, experts are all great and all, but we need to hear from everyday people too – what they're struggling with, how they're coping, and what they think the government can do better. Because at the end of the day, it's not just about numbers and fiscal policy – it's about creating a society that works for everyone .

idk about this idea of clipping the BOE's wings... sounds too tight-fisted for me i mean, we're already struggling with inflation, but then you wanna restrict pension contributions? that'd just make things worse, especially for those on lower incomes what they should be doing is finding ways to increase affordable housing options, not making it harder for people to save for the future

I'm low-key obsessed with the idea of equalizing capital gains tax rates with income tax rates . It's about time we get our priorities straight and start tackling homelessness in this country . I mean, £14-£15 billion is no joke, but think of all the people who would be lifted out of poverty if we did this . And yeah, Tony Samphier's criticism about clipping the Bank of England's wings might have some merit , but I still think restricting pension contribution tax relief could be a solid alternative . Either way, it's time for our leaders to step up and create a more progressive fiscal policy that benefits everyone, not just the wealthy elite .