As the smoke clears from last week’s budget, serious analysis can begin. Who were the winners and losers? Who came out on top? Who lost out? How did you do? Will you be up a creek, or come out smelling of roses? Find out now, in my in-depth analysis of what I like to call “Budget 2014”. Let’s do this thing!
“Some people with too much money will have less now”, said the government man. “There are unfair types not giving enough back. So we’re taking it”. When asked whether this would hurt our fragile economy’s tender green shoots the government man said, “No, you silly sausage. We’ve consulted tea leaves and animal entrails and determined this amount we’re taking is exactly the right amount.”
But opposition politicians we’re quick to pooh-pooh the policy. “It’s a bad policy. It’s not exactly the right amount at all”, one jeered. When asked what was the right amount, the man replied “Dunno. A bit more probably, I reckon.” On a television programme a journalist agreed. “Take more from them. And then some more. What are they gonna spend it on anyways? Just more diamonds for their gold-plated jacuzzis filled with drugged up prostitutes most likely”.
“Some people with not enough money will think they have more now”, said the government man. “This looks like a bold decision, and is calculated to look like a step in the right direction for modern Britain”, he said. When asked whether stealing slightly less from the poor would hurt our fragile economy’s succulent green shoots, he whispered “Yes. Don’t worry though, because we’re just stealing it from them in other ways now, so everything’s fine”.
Friendly journalists writing in newspapers applauded the government man’s “bold decision”. Sources close to the government called the move “a step in the right direction for modern Britain”.
“Some people we like but you don’t will get more of your money now”, said the government man. “If you’d spend your money properly in the first place we wouldn’t have to do this, would we?” he chided. “Besides, it’s vital. Bold step. Right direction. Tender succulent green shoots”, he mumbled.
Defending the highly controversial policy, the government man told ordinary hard working people, “This is for your own good”. Opposition politicians of all parties were quick to agree. “This is for your own good”, they agreed. Sources close to the government confirmed, “This is for your own good.” Writing in newspaper columns, newspaper columnists were completely behind the bold move, reminding their readers, “This is for your own good”. And on television programmes journalists informed their viewers that this was a step in the right direction for modern Britain, saying “This is for your own good”.