National Politics 🔴 The Labour Party

[Marston Road Yellow]

If you fix tax evasion you’ll fix a lot of the welfare problems.
I suspect a lot of people are double dipping, in so much as not paying tax and claiming benefits.
People doing 2 or 3 side hustles not declaring it and claiming every benefit going. If you fix the taxation properly people have to pay tax and loose their benefits.

PAYE resolves avoidance, but even small business owners can find lots of ways of paying very little tax.

For me paying tax is a mindset and not paying it is selfish.

 

[Peterdev]

I see Reeves is denying she has broken promises although working people will pay more.
Paying more for other families who opt to have more children than they can afford.
Again nothing to help house builders build the 1.5 million homes they claim are needed. Over a quarter of the way through parliament and that pledge has gone up in smoke.
Tax by stealth is still tax. Voters will remember that at the next election, just as they did when yachtsman Ted went to the polls in 1974 and lost.
Starmer will lose but might well be hounded out by his disgruntled backbenchers before long.
Bring it on.
If he is around in 2029 he will still be blaming the Tories for the mess left…broken record if ever there was one….

 

[Marston Road Yellow]

@Marston Road Yellow your original argument did not include any definition of what rich was.

That IS an important definition to make. You need people to want to become rich for a society to function.

I think you're talking about people so rich they live off of passive income or have no need to earn a salary.

It didn’t you are right.

Only 5% of the world’s population have a bank account. Does having one make you rich?

Someone I know bought their house in Summertown for £400k, probably double what a 3 bed semi in headington would have been years ago and it’s worth millions now does that make them rich? ( he is but nothing to do with property ownership, that was just luck by his own admission)

Rich is a personal definition and it’s up to government to define what we as a nation decide is rich.

Taxation for highest earners should be (if it isn’t already)on all perks, including all bonuses, shares, gifts etc at the full retail value of the award.

 

[Basham Wonderland]

What the f**k has happened to you today?

You want some I'll give it ya

 

[Londox]

No, it is a privilege based on what you can get away with for your role.

There is no formula you can present that can demonstrate anyone in the private sector works harder per hour than anyone in the public sector. The difference is what society is willing to pay for either.

As you get lawyers in both public and private sector, do you think one works harder than the other, because the private sector lawyer will potentially earn multiples of the salary of a public sector lawyer. Are they more qualified? No! Do they work harder? Not in my experience!

The difference is that those going into public sector law roles often do so out of a sense of duty or as something they want to do for wider society. Are they mugs for doing so, given how much more they could earn in private chambers? Possibly in some people's eyes, but then again value and worth is more than just a monetary figure. And thank god for the rest of us there are still a few people around who think and act this way, rather than putting their own bank balance ahead of all else.

And once you have enough to live extremely comfortably and you are set up for life, then you should expect to shoulder a heavier tax burden on everything else, that is proportionate to the disproportionate amount of wealth you are accumulating.

Bash has already pointed this out, but you're agreeing with that I'm saying and actively contradicting what you've written in previous posts.

 

[LowerSouth]

The pension triple lock has to go, other benefits need review and a crackdown on fraud is long overdue.
It won't be enough because we're an ageing population with a diminishing birth rate, so...

You have to incentivise people to have more children who will in all probability turn out to be met contributors to the tax take when they are old enough
And/or
You have to allow more people of working age to work here and contribute to the huge burden that the welfare bill presents to already over burdened tax payers of lower and middle incomes.

On the subject of "what is rich?" I'm sure we could come up with a formula which takes into account how many multiples of average national income you earn compared in ratio to average property prices in your area....

So what type of pension “ lock “ should we have , single, double or some other formula, even means tested ?
Without additional income, the current level of pension is still woefully low .

 

[Londox]

Are they your friends now then?

I thought you hated them and their centrist politics?

I don't care what class anyone is, I have friends from all classes (well maybe not Upper or middle upper)

The thing is, my working class friends had kids often very young (16-24) and just expected the state to look after the finance, many did it seemingly directly because it seemed to make you more likely to get housing.

Almost all of my middle class friends are approaching 30 and childless. Quite a few are married. Two reasons are mainly given, career and 'we can't afford it'.

I appreciate this might be different in London to the rest of the country.

 

[Peterdev]

So what type of pension “ lock “ should we have , single, double or some other formula, even means tested ?
Without additional income, the current level of pension is still woefully low .

Compared to other countries the state pension has always been very low. Is the suggestion that pensioners on the triple lock don’t need it as much as working people? I still have no idea what this generic term working people means. Does it include self employed people as Two Tier Kier believes it’s only those who receive a pay slip at the end of each month. Does it include those on universal benefits with many children as they don’t contribute much but often extract much.

 

[Londox]

It didn’t you are right.

Only 5% of the world’s population have a bank account. Does having one make you rich?

UK taxation is UK based. The rest of the world is totally irrelevant to the tax thresholds we decide on.

Someone I know bought their house in Summertown for £400k, probably double what a 3 bed semi in headington would have been years ago and it’s worth millions now does that make them rich? ( he is but nothing to do with property ownership, that was just luck by his own admission)

They're asset rich, I don't know the rest of their financial situation but until they sell the house they are likely not rich.

This is all irrelevant though anyway. The government needs to make it so people have ambition, society needs that to function. If you tax the ambitious too much many will sod off to Dubai.

Rich is a personal definition and it’s up to government to define what we as a nation decide is rich.

Obviously.

Taxation for highest earners should be (if it isn’t already)on all perks, including all bonuses, shares, gifts etc at the full retail value of the award.

I think you're barking up the wrong tree thinking high earners need to be squeezed more.

It's people who live off of compound interest alone that need to be targeted more. But those are the people who can hide money offshore.

 

[Carpy]

No, it is a privilege based on what you can get away with for your role.

There is no formula you can present that can demonstrate anyone in the private sector works harder per hour than anyone in the public sector. The difference is what society is willing to pay for either.

As you get lawyers in both public and private sector, do you think one works harder than the other, because the private sector lawyer will potentially earn multiples of the salary of a public sector lawyer. Are they more qualified? No! Do they work harder? Not in my experience!

The difference is that those going into public sector law roles often do so out of a sense of duty or as something they want to do for wider society. Are they mugs for doing so, given how much more they could earn in private chambers? Possibly in some people's eyes, but then again value and worth is more than just a monetary figure. And thank god for the rest of us there are still a few people around who think and act this way, rather than putting their own bank balance ahead of all else.

And once you have enough to live extremely comfortably and you are set up for life, then you should expect to shoulder a heavier tax burden on everything else, that is proportionate to the disproportionate amount of wealth you are accumulating.

In the world of Sheik, everyone goes to work and does different jobs, but everyone gets paid the same. Who needs creativity and ingenuity anyway.

 

[Sheik Djibouti]

In the world of Sheik, everyone goes to work and does different jobs, but everyone gets paid the same. Who needs creativity and ingenuity anyway.

WTF are you Carping on about!

Get a grip man!

 

[Londox]

In the world of Sheik, everyone goes to work and does different jobs, but everyone gets paid the same. Who needs creativity and ingenuity anyway.

In a globalised world where people on high salaries can quite comfortably move abroad and pay little to no tax, the consequences of squeezing high earners is catastrophic.

And that's before we consider that people will be more and more loathe to set up businesses based in the UK.

 

[Sheik Djibouti]

In a globalised world where people on high salaries can quite comfortably move abroad and pay little to no tax, the consequences of squeezing high earners is catastrophic.

And that's before we consider that people will be more and more loathe to set up businesses based in the UK.

So why are any of you still here if that's the case?

 

[Londox]

So why are any of you still here if that's the case?

I'm not a high earner!

Many high earners and millionaires have already left by the way.

 

[Bicester Yellow]

The birthrate is diminishing amongst the middle class because they can't afford to have kids. If they were allowed to keep more of their money it would change that.

The state supporting 2 children is enough, if you want more than 2 children you should be in a position to support them yourselves & not rely on the working class to support them because they can’t.

What will happen is people will keep having kids as they know the benefits will keep coming in.

 

[Sheik Djibouti]

I'm not a high earner!

Many high earners and millionaires have already left by the way.

And many more haven't, by the way.

You yourself aid that individuals of high wealth/net worth are extremely mobile and virtually stateless for tax reasons anyway. This changes very little in reality. Whether the UK is an attractive prospect for investment is the question you should be asking.

Huge market? - Yep!
Relatively Rich customers? - Yep - very on a global scale!
Developed infrastructure? - Yep!
A government willing to kick start big infrastructure projects and attract investment? - Yep!
A government willing to do trade deals and forge closer ties with the huge market on our doorstep? - Yep!

About time people stopped talking us down as an investment prospect!

 

[Marston Road Yellow]

God it’s like arguing with a a dog that grabbed a dildo thinking it’s very clever for picking up a stick.

People living off of interest either pay tax if it’s earned in the UK or they are part of the international problem you’ve already spoken about.

 

[Nadi-]

For those of you, who have an average working family. Will now contribute upto £2000 a year towards the new welfare bill.

And for those of you expecting your state pension from April 2027. Having just retired from tax paying employment, you’ll walking straight into a tax paying state pension.
Seems like broken promises to the working class to me.

 

[Londox]

The state supporting 2 children is enough, if you want more than 2 children you should be in a position to support them yourselves & not rely on the working class to support them because they can’t.

What will happen is people will keep having kids as they know the benefits will keep coming in.

Agreed.

 

[Village-Yellow]

For those of you, who have an average working family. Will now contribute upto £2000 a year towards the new welfare bill.

And for those of you expecting your state pension from April 2027. Having just retired from tax paying employment, you’ll walking straight into a tax paying state pension.
Seems like broken promises to the working class to me.

This is inaccurate.

The fact that state pension is taxable is nothing new, but those who have the basic state pension as their only source of income will have small tax liabilities arising as a result of fiscal drag written off.

 

[Londox]

God it’s like arguing with a a dog that grabbed a dildo thinking it’s very clever for picking up a stick.

People living off of interest either pay tax if it’s earned in the UK or they are part of the international problem you’ve already spoken about.

As usual, I have little idea the point you are trying to make.

 

[Nadi-]

This is inaccurate.

The fact that state pension is taxable is nothing new, but those who have the basic state pension as their only source of income will have small tax liabilities arising as a result of fiscal drag written off.

State pension exceeds the tax allowance for the full pension April 27, some will be drawn in next year.

 

[Village-Yellow]

State pension exceeds the tax allowance for the full pension April 27, some will be drawn in next year.

Budget 2025: Income tax written off for those relying on state pension

Pensioners will have their income tax liabilities written off if their sole income comes from the state pension.

www.ftadviser.com

 

[Carpy]

nObOdY iS lEaViNg

 

[Londox]

nObOdY iS lEaViNg

Many people on good salaries will leave and will be replaced by people dependant on the nation state.

 

[Nadi-]

Budget 2025: Income tax written off for those relying on state pension

Pensioners will have their income tax liabilities written off if their sole income comes from the state pension.

www.ftadviser.com

Sorry, have always been working class.
Did the right thing for the family and myself the best I could.
Labour have yet again proved, their for the workshy not the working class.

 

[SteMerritt]

Many people on good salaries will leave and will be replaced by people dependent on the nation state.

...which reminds me, anyone catch '2+2=5' on the Radiohead tour? Awesome song. Seen it live a couple of times.

 

[Londox]

...which reminds me, anyone catch '2+2=5' on the Radiohead tour? Awesome song. Seen it live a couple of times.

Is what I've said not true?

 

[SteMerritt]

Is what I've said not true?

I don't know. You are making an assumption

 

[OUFCGav]

Compared to other countries the state pension has always been very low. Is the suggestion that pensioners on the triple lock don’t need it as much as working people? I still have no idea what this generic term working people means. Does it include self employed people as Two Tier Kier believes it’s only those who receive a pay slip at the end of each month. Does it include those on universal benefits with many children as they don’t contribute much but often extract much.

For G7


replacement rate is the percentage of working salary an average person can expect to receive in retirement via the state pension.

It is important to also look at the old-age dependency ratio, ie the number of people of pension age v the working population to pay for them (ie UK has 34.8 people of pensionable age per 100 of working age.