Osborne’s budget message: government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich

Osborne’s shamelessness knows no bounds.   Having generated the most polarised society in class terms since the Edwardian era, he has the gall now to be focusing  Tory electoral appeal on a brazen tax giveaway confined to the extremely rich.   It’s an outrage that with only 50 days to the election he’s now giving notice that, if re-elected, the Tories will cut the inheritance tax bill on properties worth up to £2 million by £140,000.   This will be overwhelmingly concentrated on estates in London and the South-East, when at the same time there are now a fifth of the population living below the official poverty line of around £240 a week (depending on household size).   For Osborne it is the southern propertied middle classes that matter, not the northerners who have been forced out of their homes in which they may have lived for 30 years or more by the hated bedroom tax.

Only the 4.9% wealthiest persons pay inheritance tax, so this is a tax bribe limited to the top 5%.   It’s a big bribe too when the present inheritance tax threshold for married couples is already £650,000, and Osborne is proposing to raise this to £1 million.   By 2020 this will remove 22,000 rich families from inheritance tax altogether and offer a huge reduction for those with the most expensive properties.   This enormous tax giveaway will cost taxpayers nearly £1bn – a sum that could have been far more equitably expended on raising the minimum wage to  £10 an hour or (better still) fixing it at two-thirds of the average wage, or providing free bus passes for all under-25s to help their search for jobs, or capping rents.

This Tory resurrection of Victorian/Edwardian class society now boasts at one end of Martin Sorrell, boss of the advertising conglomerate WPP, paying himself £36 millions this year (£692,308 a week!) and Shell’s CEO taking home £17 millions (£326,923 per week), at the same time as at the other end 6.5 million persons in work are paid so little that they are officially categorised as being in poverty.   There are still nearly 2 million people unemployed on job-seekers’ allowance, a million of whom in this last year have been ‘sanctioned’ (i.e. deprived of all their benefit income for 4 weeks or 3 months) for trivial failings (e.g. being 5 minutes late for an appointment – compare that with the bankers getting off scot-free), and over a million people compelled largely because of government-enforced sanctioning to depend on foodbanks for their survival.

This is a disgusting reversal of all moral principles – stuff the mouths of the richest with gold, and kick the poor into oblivion.

9 thoughts on “Osborne’s budget message: government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich

  1. Speaking today from the, “staff kitchen,” of his £2 million London mansion, multimillionaire Ed Milliband, leader of the British Labour Party, famously the brother of David Milliband, (who is also a multimillionaire,) has accused the Conservative party of, hypocrisy!

    The conservatives have promised to respond to his accusations just as soon as they can stop laughing.

  2. Wasn’t it Blair and Mendleson who were quite at ease with people getting filthy rich ? Mendleson was pleading poverty a decade ago and now has a £11.2 million mansion and is dead against a mansion tax. Wasn’t it Bevin (or Bevan) who said he stuffed the doctors mouths with gold to buy off their opposition to the NHS ?

  3. JP –
    Cameron spent £680,000 of PUBLIC money renovating Downing Street, including £30,000 on the flat at No.11. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

  4. Roger –
    There’s nothing wrong with people becoming filthy rich, as long as they pay their taxes, don’t become rich at the expense of poorly paid employees and contribute their fair share to society.

  5. “Cameron spent £680,000 of PUBLIC money renovating Downing Street, including £30,000 on the flat at No.11. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones ?”

    Cameron doesn’t own the Downing Street properties , the state does and it’s perfectly reasonable for an incumbent to change things when they move in.

    So what exactly was your point again ?

    Other than perhaps the obvious one, that MPs should all be provided with decent public funded and state owned accommodation when they’re in London and not subsidized to buy property for themselves and their families at tax payers expense.

  6. Also, whilst I have no fundamental problem with Blair and Mandleson being, “at ease,” with people getting filthy rich, I have nothing but contempt for them being similarly, “at ease,” with the growing levels of poverty, inequality, exploitation and injury being inflicted on the poorest and most vulnerable in our society.

    This is British socialism now being run as a nasty racket, only for personal and financial interests of the connected, well the heeled middle classes, and their often unpleasant families and to hell with everyone else, be they the, “scrounging,” unemployed, the disabled, the sick or the simply old.

  7. This is British socialism now being run only as a nasty racket, for the personal and financial gain of the well connected and well heeled middle classes, (and their too often equally unpleasant families,) and to hell with everyone else; be they the, “scrounging,” unemployed, the “lying,” disabled, the, “thieving,” sick or the simply, old.

  8. Hi Michael

    would it be possibly for you to blog about why you remain in the Labour Party, despite disagreeing with many of your polices?

    I think this might answer a number of questions for disillusioned members?

    Just a thought x

  9. This too requires open debate:

    http://www.ukcolumn.org/article/tory-mp-sajid-javids-eu-takeover-british-military-gaff-exposes-dark-actors-defence?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ukcolumn+%28The+UK+Column%29

    It would be appreciated if you Mr Meacher would address these issues. Certainly treason is involved here.

    The US is a signatory to the UN disarmament agenda believe it or not. The aim of this agenda which is a tentacle of the “sustainability” agenda 21 (not that I disagree with sustainability, when that word is not used as a political euphemism), which aims eventually to coalesce the control of the worlds armed forces under the control and authority of the United Nations (a Bankster front company). World Government de Facto if you have the only lethal force in town. Coupled with the TPP/TTIP etc this is Corporate world Government writ large.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *