2006-09-25 10:40:04 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
that is a taxing question
2006-09-25 22:14:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Independence of the Bank of England was a good idea - sadly the goalposts are a bit mobile for the Bank of England in stripping out inflationary items (house prices in the move to HCCUP) from the calculations.
He does a good job of disguising new taxes (of which there have been many) by announcing them at one time and then implementing them six months later.
If you mean has he been good at taking more and more money from the British people - the answer is yes. The proportion of people's income that is taken by the state is at an all time high.
If you think that this money hasn't been well spent then the answer is no he hasn't been a good chancellor after he abandoned just following Conservative targets for the first three years.
He hasn't been as bad as previous Labour Chancellor's - for instance when Wilson had Callaghan but also set up a competing Economic ministry(DEA) under George Brown which just fought each other to a standstill.
That doesn't really make him a good one. He has stored up problems for the future - like the unprecedented debt levels that people have accumulated on the back of house price rises or the money that has been removed from people's pensions - which correlates with the pension 'black holes' pretty closely.
He also quickly takes back anything that he gives out- removing money as equity release from houses for example is taxed as income and he even backdated this to 1986 which is actually long before Labour came to power. Also the Tax Credits system which has consigned the cronically poor to an awful fate by clawing back thousands of pounds of overpayments.
This also leads us to the stigmatisation of the benefit system by means testing rather than the classic socialist measure of Universal benefits but ...then again he isn't much of a socialist either.
2006-09-25 11:00:06 · answer #2 · answered by LongJohns 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If You are Happy to Taxed off the Planet , have your Pension Stolen , be Taxed when you Die , and have "Stealth Taxes" introduced on a Dailey Basis , you might say he has been a "Good Chancellor" = in reality He,s been a Bloody Disaster , with more to come if he suceeds Blair ==Wait for it ,, It,s on the way.
2006-09-25 21:30:54 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He has been good for New Labour.
He has increased enoromously the costs of business and massively increased taxation, as well as making taxation far more complex to favour his own likely voters with welfare handouts (child benefit etc).
Manufacturing has, in particular, suffered under his management of the economy, and there ha been a huge growth in the state sector.
There are a great many more civil servants required to process his central policy idea "Working Tax Credit", which has been a costly shambles.
He is an old-fashioned statist: there is nothing remrkable about his stewardship whatsoever.
2006-09-25 11:07:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
All taxes increased by 10% except income tax,council tax going through the roof and pensions ruined for many people.Yes 'Mr Glenn' a wonderful Chancellor.
2006-09-25 17:45:42 · answer #5 · answered by Rob Roy 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
He's done a reasonably good job of putting right 17 years of Tory mismanagement...not perfect by a very long way, but commendable nonetheless.
2006-09-25 10:45:02 · answer #6 · answered by Mr Glenn 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
you have got to be kidding
2006-09-25 10:42:40 · answer #7 · answered by timone 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋