blandy Posted August 29 Moderator Share Posted August 29 11 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said: Hope he’s not on about us builders and roofers when he talks about broadest shoulders Builders are bricking it, I guess and roofers will slate Starmer if they get hit. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 13 hours ago, Xela said: What happens is the rich simply don't sell the assets Seize them! 18 minutes ago, TreeVillan said: Their large wealth is mostly held up in assets, which you can't necessarily tax each month like a salary. Seize them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted August 29 VT Supporter Share Posted August 29 50 minutes ago, Rds1983 said: The trouble is the 'middle' already pays 'a bit more tax'. The higher rates kick in from £50k to £125k with a jump from 20% to 40%. These salaries are a lot compared to less fortunate people, but then compare it to the top tax rate (a whopping extra 5% up to 45%) and you've got people on £125k a year paying the same tax as a footballer on £125k a week. Except you don't, as the footballer will have much better accountants. That's before you even get to the Billionaires who can make £125k quicker than people in the lower brackets could realistically spend it. I'll put my hand up and admit that I'm in the middle/higher rate bracket. I'm happy to pay more tax to try and help people less fortunate than me and to help others try and get to where I am (I've certainly needed help in the past). I'm not entirely sure though why I'm basically paying the same tax percentage as someone with generational wealth who could easily drop my entire annual salary in a single hand of poker. Yeah, there are a LOT of people currently on 40% who "traditionally" wouldn't have been in that bracket. It was really supposed to be proper higher earners that got there but with the recent freeze and the margin just not shifting with the times for years I'd bet that there is a very significant number of people in "the middle" paying higher taxes than their equivalents of 20-30 years ago. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted August 29 Moderator Share Posted August 29 24 minutes ago, sidcow said: Yeah, there are a LOT of people currently on 40% who "traditionally" wouldn't have been in that bracket. It was really supposed to be proper higher earners that got there but with the recent freeze and the margin just not shifting with the times for years I'd bet that there is a very significant number of people in "the middle" paying higher taxes than their equivalents of 20-30 years ago. Hell yes, I'm in it just, so it doesn't affect me much but it sure puts a dampner on overtime 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 1 hour ago, Rds1983 said: The trouble is the 'middle' already pays 'a bit more tax'. The higher rates kick in from £50k to £125k with a jump from 20% to 40%. These salaries are a lot compared to less fortunate people, but then compare it to the top tax rate (a whopping extra 5% up to 45%) and you've got people on £125k a year paying the same tax as a footballer on £125k a week. Except you don't, as the footballer will have much better accountants. That's before you even get to the Billionaires who can make £125k quicker than people in the lower brackets could realistically spend it. I'll put my hand up and admit that I'm in the middle/higher rate bracket. I'm happy to pay more tax to try and help people less fortunate than me and to help others try and get to where I am (I've certainly needed help in the past). I'm not entirely sure though why I'm basically paying the same tax percentage as someone with generational wealth who could easily drop my entire annual salary in a single hand of poker. For me personally acceptance is key, but yes I see the problem . What did Starmer say about this, is he going to tax the wealthy more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pas5898 Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 12 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said: I’m the same if I’ve got to pay a bit more tax to help get the country in a better place so be it. There in lies the quandary. If you told me for £500 extra per month (which would be a really tough hit), we could see a doctor same day, not wait 12 hours for an xray on my sons broken arm, my kids schools are properly funded, social care is properly funded, my mom (who's on disabled benefits) has all the care she needs, we can all retire in dignity, not squalor; then absolutely fine. Problem is, we are all paying more but what we are receiving is diminishing. Where is it going? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted August 29 VT Supporter Share Posted August 29 3 minutes ago, pas5898 said: Problem is, we are all paying more but what we are receiving is diminishing. Where is it going? Yes, this is where we've been for a decade or more. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 2 minutes ago, pas5898 said: There in lies the quandary. If you told me for £500 extra per month (which would be a really tough hit), we could see a doctor same day, not wait 12 hours for an xray on my sons broken arm, my kids schools are properly funded, social care is properly funded, my mom (who's on disabled benefits) has all the care she needs, we can all retire in dignity, not squalor; then absolutely fine. Problem is, we are all paying more but what we are receiving is diminishing. Where is it going? Tough times. I said to my wife yesterday we are bleeding money everywhere and lots of it. Her reply was most people are bleeding money and struggling to stand still . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 1 hour ago, pas5898 said: Where is it going? Into the pockets of the people that will apparently leave if we dare to tax them more 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 All those benefits working people need because billionaires don’t pay them enough that they can rent a decent home off a millionaire. Unfortunately, we have been convinced this is the only system that works. We believe this, regardless of the evidence of our own eyes and our own lived experience as we sit in a hospital waiting room, worry about the mortgage, try to work out the closest town our kids can afford to live in… It’s really quite impressive. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted August 29 Moderator Share Posted August 29 17 hours ago, blandy said: The costs of housing asylum seekers, Rwanda scheme and so on are one of the elements where the true costs were hidden from everyone. Right on cue! Good work Prophet Pete! Quote Analysing three years of financial records, the IFS found the Home Office had told parliament at the start of each year it needed an average £110m to cover the UK’s asylum, border, visa and passport operations. However, it ended up spending vastly more: an average of £2.6bn a year. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/aug/29/home-office-criticised-over-woefully-understated-tory-asylum-budgets#:~:text=Analysing three years of financial,£2.6bn a year. It remains to be seen how the new Government will perform, of course, but that last lot were **** mental. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted August 29 VT Supporter Share Posted August 29 22 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: All those benefits working people need because billionaires don’t pay them enough that they can rent a decent home off a millionaire. Unfortunately, we have been convinced this is the only system that works. We believe this, regardless of the evidence of our own eyes and our own lived experience as we sit in a hospital waiting room, worry about the mortgage, try to work out the closest town our kids can afford to live in… It’s really quite impressive. We're still of an age where people see being a millionaire as very rich. But whilst this certainly isn't poor, it's not really rich compared to others anymore. A million seconds is about 12 days. This seems like a lot. But a billion seconds is 31 years and 8 months. You then have people who are worth over a 100 billion. Nobody needs that level of wealth and even giving up 10% of it would help so many people. Tax them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 7 minutes ago, Rds1983 said: We're still of an age where people see being a millionaire as very rich. But whilst this certainly isn't poor, it's not really rich compared to others anymore. A million seconds is about 12 days. This seems like a lot. But a billion seconds is 31 years and 8 months. You then have people who are worth over a 100 billion. Nobody needs that level of wealth and even giving up 10% of it would help so many people. Tax them. for what its worth, my definition of very rich is owning 2 homes when others have none, but I appreciate that’s where my politics begin to look a bit radical. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 38 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Unfortunately, we have been convinced this is the only system that works. We believe this, regardless of the evidence of our own eyes and our own lived experience as we sit in a hospital waiting room, worry about the mortgage, try to work out the closest town our kids can afford to live in… It’s really quite impressive. Amazing conditioning, isn't it? The moron and forelock tugger alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeVillan Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 3 hours ago, Wainy316 said: Seize them! Seize them! You'll be telling us Farmers are the enemy of the people next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeVillan Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 19 minutes ago, Rds1983 said: We're still of an age where people see being a millionaire as very rich. But whilst this certainly isn't poor, it's not really rich compared to others anymore. A million seconds is about 12 days. This seems like a lot. But a billion seconds is 31 years and 8 months. You then have people who are worth over a 100 billion. Nobody needs that level of wealth and even giving up 10% of it would help so many people. Tax them. How many of them are British? And what do you tax exactly? It's not that they just have cash in a bank account waiting to be taxed. Do you force them to sell assets? Do you do that every month? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted August 29 VT Supporter Share Posted August 29 23 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: for what its worth, my definition of very rich is owning 2 homes when others have none, but I appreciate that’s where my politics begin to look a bit radical. If owning 2 homes is very rich, how do you define someone who owns 200 homes? Billionaires and multiple millionaires would view someone who owns two homes as a peasant. Compared to the ultra rich, two homes is nothing. You could probably add the collective wealth of every person on VT together and still not have as much as Edens, let alone as much as Sawaris. Owning a home, let alone two is an achievement, but having the lower and middle classes fight it out over scraps is how the elite win. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted August 29 VT Supporter Share Posted August 29 20 minutes ago, TreeVillan said: How many of them are British? And what do you tax exactly? It's not that they just have cash in a bank account waiting to be taxed. Do you force them to sell assets? Do you do that every month? What happens if me or you don't pay our taxes? HMRC send debt collectors along and seize assets. Who cares if they aren't British, if they have investments in this country, tax it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted August 29 VT Supporter Share Posted August 29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted August 29 Share Posted August 29 15 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said: I’m the same if I’ve got to pay a bit more tax to help get the country in a better place so be it. Kamala's idea is to tax the unrealised increase in the value of assets, so whenever your house/assets increase in value they send you a bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts