The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[The Camel]

Brexit negotiations are going to prove nigh on impossible. Half the country will be furious at the outcome whatever it is.

Labour should play the long game and let the Tories fuck up Brexit and only go for another election after it's a done deal. Tories will be unelectable for a generation.

Must of the stuff which frightens me about Brexit won't be an issue under a left wing government, so let the Tories get on with committing electoral suicide and I can look forward to socialism for the rest of my life.

Socialism for the rest of your life is a little optimistic.

I give myself 20 years tops.

Labour will win the next 3 elections unless they shoot themselves in the foot. Not impossible on past form, I grant you.

Surely even if they get in, they don't last if they keep that manifesto.  They either cause economic problems* or massively let down big groups of people, who will then turn on them.  People still go on about the Lib Dems and Univesity Fees even though they were the minority partner.

Can't see how it ends well for either party.

* and your premis is that we are already in a state because of Brexit.
   

I think it's far more likely they increase tax more for the rich than fail to deliver their manifesto pledges.

Don't you think it's most likely that to deliver their manifesto pledges they have to increase taxes for everyone?

And prices go up to pay for the increased corporation taxes?

So everyone has less money in their pocket and everything is less affordable. Is that going to win multiple consecutive elections?

The poor will have more money in absolute terms anyway, as the minimum wage will have risen. So they can afford to pay slightly more tax.

But on the whole, I'm sure it will be the top 5% who will be expected to pay the bills.

Even if you smash the top 5% it is just tinkering around the edges.  The reality is if you want to have (for example) free tuition fees and a good social care programme then we all need to pay.  I guess and alternative is abolishing the State pension.

If it was my choice, I would raise inheritance tax to pay for the increased public spending.

Dementia tax was a decent start, need to go further though

Inheritance tax raises hardly anything - if you change it enough to make it raise more you can't stop people getting around it. It's a pretty useless tax in every way.

We are hurtling to a social care funding crisis which will make tuition fees and nationalisation look like loose change.

When the sums were done, people were expected to live til about 75. Now they living 20 years longer, someone is going have to pay.

Surely fairer to tax the wealth of old people who have lived longer than expected than force young people to carry the burden?

[RED-DOG]

Won't that just make people ensure that they have no visible taxable wealth when they get old?

[Doobs]

Brexit negotiations are going to prove nigh on impossible. Half the country will be furious at the outcome whatever it is.

Labour should play the long game and let the Tories fuck up Brexit and only go for another election after it's a done deal. Tories will be unelectable for a generation.

Must of the stuff which frightens me about Brexit won't be an issue under a left wing government, so let the Tories get on with committing electoral suicide and I can look forward to socialism for the rest of my life.

Socialism for the rest of your life is a little optimistic.

I give myself 20 years tops.

Labour will win the next 3 elections unless they shoot themselves in the foot. Not impossible on past form, I grant you.

Surely even if they get in, they don't last if they keep that manifesto.  They either cause economic problems* or massively let down big groups of people, who will then turn on them.  People still go on about the Lib Dems and Univesity Fees even though they were the minority partner.

Can't see how it ends well for either party.

* and your premis is that we are already in a state because of Brexit.
   

I think it's far more likely they increase tax more for the rich than fail to deliver their manifesto pledges.

Don't you think it's most likely that to deliver their manifesto pledges they have to increase taxes for everyone?

And prices go up to pay for the increased corporation taxes?

So everyone has less money in their pocket and everything is less affordable. Is that going to win multiple consecutive elections?

The poor will have more money in absolute terms anyway, as the minimum wage will have risen. So they can afford to pay slightly more tax.

But on the whole, I'm sure it will be the top 5% who will be expected to pay the bills.

Even if you smash the top 5% it is just tinkering around the edges.  The reality is if you want to have (for example) free tuition fees and a good social care programme then we all need to pay.  I guess and alternative is abolishing the State pension.

If it was my choice, I would raise inheritance tax to pay for the increased public spending.

Dementia tax was a decent start, need to go further though

Inheritance tax raises hardly anything - if you change it enough to make it raise more you can't stop people getting around it. It's a pretty useless tax in every way.

We are hurtling to a social care funding crisis which will make tuition fees and nationalisation look like loose change.

When the sums were done, people were expected to live til about 75. Now they living 20 years longer, someone is going have to pay.

Surely fairer to tax the wealth of old people who have lived longer than expected than force young people to carry the burden?

I don't see why anyone doesn't propose taxing it as income for the recipient.  Maybe reduce the tax rates, but it does feel weird to get a lump sum you haven't even earned and be taxed on it.

Mpst countries have wealth taxes too.  Pensioners who get by on the state pension  whilst living in million pound houses are not poor.

[Sheriff Fatman]

My parents bought a plot of land in 1977. My Dad designed and contracted builders to make a house.

The entire project cost about £20,000.

That house is now worth northwards of half a million pounds.

Allowing for inflation, that's over £400,000 of untaxed wealth that has been created which will be divided between me and my siblings.

Ridiculous and unfair. No wonder young people cannot afford to buy a house.

The problem is that it's unrealised wealth until such time as the house get's sold, which is fundamentally why the Mansion Tax idea was so flawed last time around.  Are you saying that your parents should pay a huge tax burden during their lifetime on a 'paper profit'?  Chances are they'd need to sell the house to cover it, or at least most families would in these circumstances, taking away the individual case in point.

It also would become taxed wealth at the time of any inheritance, as that's precisely why Inheritance Tax exists as a concept.  The issue is that historic Tory policy has been to reduce the tax burden of Inheritance Tax, which fundamentally benefits the more wealthy, so whether it would be taxed sufficiently is open to interpretation, but the tax system already exists to encapsulate the situation you describe.

[The Camel]

Won't that just make people ensure that they have no visible taxable wealth when they get old?

Yes.

Need to crack down harshly on tax avoidance

A change of public perception would be nice. The "taxman" is demonised and avoidance schemes are championed.

[Longines]

Need to crack down harshly on tax avoidance

Really? Avoidance, not just evasion? Blimey.

[DungBeetle]

Won't that just make people ensure that they have no visible taxable wealth when they get old?

Yes.

Need to crack down harshly on tax avoidance

A change of public perception would be nice. The "taxman" is demonised and avoidance schemes are championed.

If I have a 1 million property and you are going to confiscate a much bigger chunk than it is already then I'll just downsize and spend more of it before I die.  At least it will stimulate other country's economies on all the overseas jollies I guess!  And the equity release industry will have a boom.

[titaniumbean]

Very true, taxing the top 5% raises very little. We will all need to pay lumps to deliver the Labour proposals. My view is we pay a bit more tax but also suck up the hard times until the govt debt is paid off, then we are in a position to start spending more again.

So then why do they care so much to funnel tonnes of money to fight against it   


Think the back and forth here shows a) it's all exceptionally complicated b) it will take a lot of work and there will undoubtedly be people who feel hard done by c) the Tories are more often than not just self serving  d) no one golden fix will sort out imbalances of wealth


having said that continuing with policies specifically designed to protect wealth that will have the direct consequence of increasing the imbalance hardly seems a great start. that seems to be all the Tories have. The other side being free money for all and cross fingers and hope.



I do enjoy the idea that so many older people have just 'understood' that it's the Tories who will fix it and aren't just part of a generation that were given a tonne of shit for free and are now being greedy. I have absolutely no idea how you go about stopping people voting solely on greedy principles though, calling them all unintelligent is hardly going to work well   



there's always the huge 'problem' (problem if you are not wealthy, unspeakable item if you are) of our regulations and policies constantly strengthening tax havens (which we control hugely). they do so much harm but are so cleverly set up by people that play the system and pushed them globally that if we undo our 'skanky policies' other people will money grab and we'll be even worse off. a brilliantly masterminded fraud/theft/bamboozle whatever you want to describe it as. The only way to make inroads into that would be a global agreement and there will always be one sneaky fker who goes against it to bring in liquidity so we are stale-mated and the rich will just keep using it to get rich. marv.

[SuuPRlim]

My biggest issue with the labour sentiment of "taxing the rich" is that I don't believe they know who "the rich" are. They seem to think the main way to do this is through a corporation tax increase, these rich guys living in big houses abusing their poor workforce. The public image of this is completely warped by companies like google and vodafone.

I have a big issue with this mentality, because what happens in reality is that the majority of the businesses in the UK are SME businesses and the people running them are not "Rich" people, they are taking big (even bigger in this current economic climate) financial risks to go it alone running their own business, and despite being big net contributors to the tax system they receive nothing in tax benefits and as a % of earnings end up paying more than people who work for them. I this is as unfair as the like of google etc only pay 1%. The Labour plans for corporation tax increase hit these guys harder than anyone else.

Should be encouraging enterprise and growth in this area, not dissuading people from starting businesses or just making them cheat the tax system in order to make it viable.

If people want things to be fair, then they need to be fair to everyone equally. The Tories obviously aren't the fair option, and I voted labour first time in my life this time gone, but "being fair" is also letting ALL THE people who working hard for their money keep the majority of it, and not just protecting the poorest people from inequality but all people who might be victim to unfair circumstances, it's there taxes too.

[Jon MW]

Very true, taxing the top 5% raises very little. We will all need to pay lumps to deliver the Labour proposals. My view is we pay a bit more tax but also suck up the hard times until the govt debt is paid off, then we are in a position to start spending more again.

So then why do they care so much to funnel tonnes of money to fight against it   


Think the back and forth here shows a) it's all exceptionally complicated b) it will take a lot of work and there will undoubtedly be people who feel hard done by c) the Tories are more often than not just self serving  d) no one golden fix will sort out imbalances of wealth


having said that continuing with policies specifically designed to protect wealth that will have the direct consequence of increasing the imbalance hardly seems a great start. that seems to be all the Tories have. The other side being free money for all and cross fingers and hope.

...

Taxing the top 5% raises lorry loads of cash - in the context of Labour's proposals though the problem is taxing them extra won't make much of a dent in the extra amount of cash needed to pay for what they propose.

And haven't the Tories suggested means testing winter fuel payments and other benefits which benefit the wealthy, as well as (albeit briefly) trying to suggest rich old people should pay for their own care to a greater extent? A lot of Tory policy does seem to be more concerned about balancing the books rather than being self serving.

[titaniumbean]

Very true, taxing the top 5% raises very little. We will all need to pay lumps to deliver the Labour proposals. My view is we pay a bit more tax but also suck up the hard times until the govt debt is paid off, then we are in a position to start spending more again.

So then why do they care so much to funnel tonnes of money to fight against it   


Think the back and forth here shows a) it's all exceptionally complicated b) it will take a lot of work and there will undoubtedly be people who feel hard done by c) the Tories are more often than not just self serving  d) no one golden fix will sort out imbalances of wealth


having said that continuing with policies specifically designed to protect wealth that will have the direct consequence of increasing the imbalance hardly seems a great start. that seems to be all the Tories have. The other side being free money for all and cross fingers and hope.

...

Taxing the top 5% raises lorry loads of cash - in the context of Labour's proposals though the problem is taxing them extra won't make much of a dent in the extra amount of cash needed to pay for what they propose.

And haven't the Tories suggested means testing winter fuel payments and other benefits which benefit the wealthy, as well as (albeit briefly) trying to suggest rich old people should pay for their own care to a greater extent? A lot of Tory policy does seem to be more concerned about balancing the books rather than being self serving.

that's not a lot of tory policy though is it 


I do not disagree with any other part of your post either that it happens or even that it would be good. I agree with the idea to means test older people and other similar things but again they aren't going to make a 'big' dent (doing lots of these smaller things could though).

[neeko]

It's ironic the labour headline proposal to cut university student fees is effectively a giant tax cut to the rich and middle class who are the ones who go to university anyway.

If labour want to encourage students from poorer backgrounds then give them a subsidy cutting the fee, if they want to have graduates who have a low income not pay the fee then don't do anything, effectively 50% of student debt is not needed to be paid off anyway.

Labours policy of scrapping all student fees is a bribe to the middle class, regressive, and should be scrapped. (Not that they are in power anyway)

[titaniumbean]

https://twitter.com/MatthewBevan/status/874201169400287232

[PokerBroker]

I'd clamp down in tax evasion and tax avoidance or at least limit some tax avoidance schemes further.
Increase the NMW - to a level beyond the current living wage.
Tax Law has to be scrapped and recreated, there are too many laws and loupholes. 
I'd plough more money into banks/taxman working together so that those creaming the system can be got after.  (Buy to Let landlords not self assessing in such like comes to mind)
Make sure the big companies who are ripping the country off are punished harshly, if that means removing their licenses for trading so be it.

Controversial one, but those bed blockers have been in a coma or who are brain dead and have no quality of living I'd turn the machine off.  We have a relative, who the doctors have said is brain dead and non responsive, he's been in hospital for 14 months, he's is moving to a care home next week.  I'd guess there hundreds of people in similar position across the country costing an absolute fortune. 

I'd cut back the number of MP's/Councillors etc and even consider paying extra money for something better organised.  There are billions pumped into local government every year that is unnecessary waste and the net result is that local services struggle or are underfunded to keep someone in a job that is not required.

I would educate people about where there tax goes to and why it is paid.  There are so  many folk who don't understand the concept. 

I'd decriminalise many drugs and legalise them and then tax them.

[SuuPRlim]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10106437/Revealed-how-much-you-pay-towards-benefit-bill.html

IDK how credible it is but kind of interesting £50k p/yr wage pays £13k in his 43-yr career on "administration" and £1200 to the EU.

Pretty glad we got out of that money pit!