M
Malced
Guest
We seem to be talking at cross-purposes.I'm talking about the mini-budget here. You said that the £50 extra most people will be getting will stimulate the economy, what my counter is, is that there is still a net deficit as a result of all the extra money coming out of people's once disposable income. Therefore, any growth predicted as a result of this is fantasy. I'm glad the government took action on energy bills (although they are still rising massively this month), but we can agree that people will have less money right? The drop in income tax and NI is not enough to cover everything else rising.
If your whole point is just let's wait and see, I guess there is not much point in continuing and I wouldn't have replied in the first place. I'm not trying to force you to have an opinion on the matter. That's a totally fine POV to have if you want. However, you have been painting those who oppose this mini-budget as people who don't want economic growth, and espousing its benefits because of growth. So my replies have been asking you to explain where this growth will come from, and why it is your apparent belief that just cutting corporation tax automatically leads to it (which there is no evidence to support).
The mini-budget has various things in it, one of which is extra help with energy bills costing around £60bn.
I've tried to explain the theory as to how economies grow but you seem to want something written in stone - and that's not possible to provide. That's why I said we have to let the experts come to their conclusions. You seem overly-focussed on corporation tax, but there's many things in the package of measures, and I've said before, it's the package of measures as a combination, that aim to get growth going.
And, to be clear, my intent is not to paint anyone who opposes the mini-budget as anti-growth. I've not said that. My main point is that it's wrong to overly-focus on one or two measures and use these to characterise the mini-budget.