- The Debate Daily
- Posts
- Will The Budget Fix the UK Economy?
Will The Budget Fix the UK Economy?
Welcome to today’s issue of The Debate Daily!
In today’s email: We will look at last week’s autumn budget, which was given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves. It was the first budget by a Labour Government in 14 years. It has garnered mixed reactions from the British people. The budget benefitted minimum wage workers with a pay rise compared to higher business taxes, which has upset business owners.
By Tasha Vagadia
The Headlines
Kemi Badenoch
Kemi Badenoch Wins Conservative Leadership: Kemi Badenoch is elected as the new Conservative Party leader, appointing Rebecca Harris as chief whip and beginning her shadow cabinet assembly.
US Space Force Chief Warns of China’s Space Advances: General Chance Saltzman highlights China’s rapid space-based military development, urging US cooperation with European allies to mitigate conflict risks.
“Infinite Monkey Theorem” Disproved: Australian mathematicians find that monkeys typing randomly would need more than the universe's lifespan to reproduce Shakespeare’s works, debunking the "infinite monkey theorem."
Debate #036
Will The Budget Fix the UK Economy?
Generous investments in crucial public services such as schools and hospitals, alongside targeted tax rises, lay the foundation for long-term growth in the UK.
Long-term Investment - Reeves believes that the key to growth is to “invest, invest, invest”. She promised £22.6b for the health budget, helping the NHS and increased spending on schools and the Department of Education. These investments could support sectors that have been struggling for years. Investing in better healthcare and education creates a better workforce to help the UK achieve sustainable growth.
Helping workers - Labour promised that their budget would protect ‘working people’. A significant increase in the National Living Wage will help millions of low-income families cope with the higher cost of living. This increase also applies to young people between the ages of 18 and 20 who are choosing full-time employment over university. These changes should boost disposable income, promote growth, and benefit workers.
Investing in better healthcare and education creates a better workforce to help the UK achieve sustainable growth.
Fairer distribution of income - The budget will raise £40b through tax rises. Most of which were aimed at businesses and society’s richest. Reeves took measures to balance the tax burden across income groups by hiking up Capital Gains Tax and officially announcing the VAT on private school fees, which addresses financial disparities in Britain.
However…
While Reeves's policies are designed to promote growth and help workers, they seem to forget about the businesses that are paying them, relying on even more government borrowing and increase certain taxes that hurt some classes.
Borrowing and Inflation - Despite the Budget displaying one of the largest increases in tax revenue, Labour’s planned expenditure still exceeds this by billions. Upon taking office, they claimed there was a ‘£22 billion black hole’ in the finances, and a borrowing spree certainly will not resolve this. Additionally, borrowing to invest tends to have inflationary pressures. Our inflation rate has finally come back down, so why is Reeves risking it rising again by increasing borrowing?
Businesses - UK Businesses face challenges under the new budget. Increasing employer National Insurance contributions and the National Living Wage may appear good from a worker’s perspective but raise labour costs for businesses. These could lead to prices rises for customers or prompt firms to employ more capital than labour. Given the already slow economic growth in the UK, these policies may not have the beneficial effect that Reeves intended.
Increasing employer National Insurance contributions and the National Living Wage may appear good from a worker’s perspective but raise labour costs for businesses.
Hurts the Middle-Class - The Budget aimed to redistribute income and opportunity, which the investment in schools and hospitals should do. However, other policies like the VAT on Private School and the freeze on Inheritance Tax bands may harm middle-class families who do not consider themselves wealthy, rather than the affluent, for whom schools fees and assets are not a massive expense
Summary
In the general election, Labour claimed to be a party for business and growth and would fix the economy after 14 years of Tory austerity. The budget has been a win and loss for the British people. But that is the nature of all budgets, where specific measures won’t sit well with certain groups. Increased spending on public services is a positive aspect of the budget and is a rational attempt to save a struggling NHS and the education system. Investors stated that the budget did not induce anxiety as Liz Truss’s ‘mini-budget’ in 2022 and is overall positive and safe. However, business owners’ expectations for a pro-business budget may have been subdued by increased taxes, which may increase the prices of goods. Nonetheless, the impact of the budget on the overall economy will not be clear anytime soon. It will take time before we can properly determine whether the budget has been beneficial for the UK overall.
What do you think?
Is the UK budget positive?
Can high taxes compensate for the increased borrowing?
Could higher business taxes deter investment in the UK?
To Vote, Comment, or Leave Feedback, Visit Our Instagram
What’s on earth is going on?
Misunderstanding Trump’s Violent Rhetoric Against Press?
On Sunday, Former President Trump spoke at a Pennsylvanian rally, targeting the media present near him. He said he would not mind if someone had to shoot through the fake news to get to him.
On the one hand, this statement seems yet again another display of Trump’s hatred for American free media, as he has for years before. Such rhetoric aligns with recent trends from Trump’s rallies to be very incinerating democratic values. These attacks have included targets beyond the press to minority racial identities.
On the other hand, the Trump campaign disagrees with the interpretation above. According to a spokesperson, Trump was trying to indicate the need for protective glass for the press in the age of increasing violence against politicians. If this clarification is to be believed, the statement makes Trump seem more considerate towards the press and presents him as more moderate under the eyes of voters.
What does this mean:
US politics is so polarised that the same statement can offer two opposing interpretations. Similarly, Trump’s statement is perceived on one side as a danger to democracy or as a man being misunderstood by the general media and the Democrats.
Such a difference in the interpretation of a statement also transcends the American political landscape and its extreme political division over where the country should head next.
This newsletter was brought to you by writers: Tasha Vagadia and Ozan Selcuk
Was this email forwarded to you? Sign up here.
Feedback
If you have have any questions or feedback, feel free to reach out to us directly on any of our social media, or at [email protected]
Reply