General Election - December 12th, 2019

[Chippy_boy]

For sure a wealth tax needs some thought but there are so many ways to offset income that it’s got to be a good idea.
I’m not necessarily advocating this but UK millionaires have a net worth of over £6.5 trillion. The UK net debt, which everyone keeps saying is holding us back, is about £1.8 trillion. Could be a solution there if people think a bit more laterally than just doing the same things over and over.

I don't think there's a solution there in any country we want to be part of. A fundamental human right is to be able to acquire and own assets (including monetary ones), and it would be completely unacceptable for any government in a civilised society to simply take legally acquired wealth off law-abiding citizens. In fact I would not be surprised if it was illegal under international law.

It would certainly be extremely counter-productive, since if there was ever any sniff of it, much of the wealth would bugger off, and with it the tax receipts and the spending.

 

[inbetween]

don’t forget when John McDonnell has his finger on the on off switch to the uk broadband button.

single state controlled and operated broadband sounds like a great way to control the economy and the system as you please.

don’t agree to that pay rise , hey john turn that broadband off .

Indeed and hasn't Corbyn said he plans to regulate the media more?

Alarm bells are ringing loud and clear.

 

[Blue Hefner]

probably because he wants a hung parliament so we stay in the eu, which is his latest crusade since he failed miserably as the Middle East peace envoy.

I expect he will be being paid by the eu for all this bollox he spouts.

Has he failed as Peace Envoy, I've not followed it. What makes you think he's being paid by the EU?

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

Indeed and hasn't Corbyn said he plans to regulate the media more?

Alarm bells are ringing loud and clear.

that’s why they are doing it . It’s not just free to ALL people but free to ALL businesses.

what a great way to control society .

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

Has he failed as Peace Envoy, I've not followed it. What makes you think he's being paid by the EU?

You have not followed what has happened to the Middle East, you need to watch the news more .

it’s what I think, it does not matter whether he is or not he is rich enough, but he is very pro eu and sees staying in the eu as more important than a labour government and he knows rubbishing the two biggest parties who could win as the best outcome for his beliefs as that is his best chance of staying in the eu. A hung parliament doesn’t do anything it just blocks, ergo Boris would not get his deal through.

 

[Metal Biker]

They’re both bad, but they aren’t as bad as each other.

They are, but in different, equally awful ways.

They both take from others, they both denigrate the others stances, they both have an air of hatred against specific groups.

 

[inbetween]

For sure a wealth tax needs some thought but there are so many ways to offset income that it’s got to be a good idea.

I’m not necessarily advocating this but UK millionaires have a net worth of over £6.5 trillion. The UK net debt, which everyone keeps saying is holding us back, is about £1.8 trillion. Could be a solution there if people think a bit more laterally than just doing the same things over and over.

Why don't we all give 25% of equity away from our houses to the state to sell to raise the money? All is fair and all that?

I thought not.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

I don't think there's a solution there in any country we want to be part of. A fundamental human right is to be able to acquire and own assets (including monetary ones), and it would be completely unacceptable for any government in a civilised society to simply take legally acquired wealth off law-abiding citizens. In fact I would not be surprised if it was illegal under international law.

It would certainly be extremely counter-productive, since if there was ever any sniff of it, much of the wealth would bugger off, and with it the tax receipts and the spending.

I’m not sure it’s a fundamental human right to acquire and own assets and Governments can pretty much do whatever they like. As for it being against international law? If they can pass a law to execute you I’m pretty sure they can pass one to take 20% of your worth. I appreciate that they might leave but I’m not sure where they would go?
The USA can chase their citizens all over the world for tax. The only way out of it is renouncing US citizenship which costs 40% of everything you own!
As I said, I’m not advocating it but it is possible.

 

[BobKowalski]

I don't think there's a solution there in any country we want to be part of. A fundamental human right is to be able to acquire and own assets (including monetary ones), and it would be completely unacceptable for any government in a civilised society to simply take legally acquired wealth off law-abiding citizens. In fact I would not be surprised if it was illegal under international law.

It would certainly be extremely counter-productive, since if there was ever any sniff of it, much of the wealth would bugger off, and with it the tax receipts and the spending.

It’s called ‘tax’.

 

[BobKowalski]

Sad git that I am I found this funny

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Why don't we all give 25% of equity away from our houses to the state to sell to raise the money? All is fair and all that?

I thought not.

You’ll be suggesting we give the government 3% of the purchase price of a property next. Maybe 7.5% if over £2M , 10% if over £4M or 11% over £8M? We could put it up to 14% if buying subsequent properties?

 

[Chippy_boy]

I’m not sure it’s a fundamental human right to acquire and own assets and Governments can pretty much do whatever they like. As for it being against international law? If they can pass a law to execute you I’m pretty sure they can pass one to take 20% of your worth. I appreciate that they might leave but I’m not sure where they would go?
The USA can chase their citizens all over the world for tax. The only way out of it is renouncing US citizenship which costs 40% of everything you own!
As I said, I’m not advocating it but it is possible.

The European Convention on Human Rights, in Protocol 1, article 1, acknowledges a right for natural and legal persons to "peaceful enjoyment of his possessions", subject to the "general interest or to secure the payment of taxes".

Any government deciding to simply take someone's legally acquired wealth off them, would face legal challenge I think.

It would have grave implications for the whole of our society as well. If people felt that were they to acquire wealth, it might be taken away from them, would have terrible unintended consequences and a mass exodus of funds and investments from our country.

 

[Chippy_boy]

It’s called ‘tax’.

No, it's called "theft".

Money obtained perfectly legally is YOUR money. If it has been obtained illegally then you would have a case, and indeed you might argue about whether the rules as to what is legal, need changing.

But once someone has legally acquired what is theirs, taking it off them without their consent is not "tax", it is theft.

 

[Blue Hefner]

You have not followed what has happened to the Middle East, you need to watch the news more .

it’s what I think, it does not matter whether he is or not he is rich enough, but he is very pro eu and sees staying in the eu as more important than a labour government and he knows rubbishing the two biggest parties who could win as the best outcome for his beliefs as that is his best chance of staying in the eu. A hung parliament doesn’t do anything it just blocks, ergo Boris would not get his deal through.

Of course I can see what has gone on in the Middle-East, I asked about Blair's failure in his capacity as Peace Envoy. I'm sure you do not think that him and his company are in a position to stop what happened in Syria and the like are you? I think his role is more educational than anything

He's not the only one rubbishing the 2 main parties, quite a lot of people on here do it and we don't get paid by the EU. He wants us to stay in for reasons he and many people have explained, which people are free to disagree with. I don't think his motives are particulars EU motivated, as you say he's rich enough so it won't matter one jot to him - I think he just genuinely disagrees with both Johnson and Corbyn's vision of Britain

 

[Chippy_boy]

Of course I can see what has gone on in the Middle-East, I asked about Blair's failure in his capacity as Peace Envoy. I'm sure you do not think that him and his company are in a position to stop what happened in Syria and the like are you? I think his role is more educational than anything

He's not the only one rubbishing the 2 main parties, quite a lot of people on here do it and we don't get paid by the EU. He wants us to stay in for reasons he and many people have explained, which people are free to disagree with. I don't think his motives are particulars EU motivated, as you say he's rich enough so it won't matter one jot to him - I think he just genuinely disagrees with both Johnson and Corbyn's vision of Britain

He's in a hole. He desperately wants us to remain in the EU, but his only tangible route to that is to support Corbyn and his lunatic ideology, and since he is not totally stupid, he realises doing so would be absolutely bonkers.

It's a dilemma shared by millions, I would imagine.

 

[BobKowalski]

No, it's called "theft".

Money obtained perfectly legally is YOUR money. If it has been obtained illegally then you would have a case, and indeed you might argue about whether the rules as to what is legal, need changing.

But once someone has legally acquired what is theirs, taking it off them without their consent is not "tax", it is theft.

No. It’s called tax. If Govt imposes a one off windfall tax or changes the tax rules or tax brackets or makes holdings and investments previously exempt from tax subject to tax and/or imposes currency controls making it impossible to transfer monies above a certain threshold out of the country or only make it possible subject to punitive tax rates or well you get the idea.

Point is it isn’t difficult to dress up the acquisition of money or assets as tax. Whether it is advisable or not is a different matter.

 

[Chippy_boy]

No. It’s called tax. If Govt imposes a one off windfall tax or changes the tax rules or tax brackets or makes holdings and investments previously exempt from tax subject to tax and/or imposes currency controls making it impossible to transfer monies above a certain threshold out of the country or only make it possible subject to punitive tax rates or well you get the idea.

Point is it isn’t difficult to dress up the acquisition of money or assets as tax. Whether it is advisable or not is a different matter.

No, it's called theft. Governments cannot simply turn around and say "you know that money you acquired perfectly legally, we are now simply going to take some of it off you because we can". That is theft.

I am increasingly dismayed by your true colours being ever clearer. You are borderline communist in some of your views Bob. You hid it well for a while, but no longer. What you describe could be taken straight out of Das Kapital.

 

[Len Rum]

No, it's called theft. Governments cannot simply turn around and say "you know that money you acquired perfectly legally, we are now simply going to take some of it off you because we can". That is theft.

I am increasingly dismayed by your true colours being ever clearer. You are borderline communist in some of your views Bob. You hid it well for a while, but no longer. What you describe could be taken straight out of Das Kapital.

U calling three beemas Bob a commie?
Nah.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

No, it's called "theft".

Money obtained perfectly legally is YOUR money. If it has been obtained illegally then you would have a case, and indeed you might argue about whether the rules as to what is legal, need changing.

But once someone has legally acquired what is theirs, taking it off them without their consent is not "tax", it is theft.

Why not ask for a voluntary contribution then? Or link it to a single flat tax rate of, say, 30%? Tax on wealth is much more preferable to tax on earnings especially if we are ever to close this productivity gap we have. A flat tax, with no marginal rates acting as a disinsentive, would be a great thing. Imagine if the 2 manifestos said we will reduce flat tax to 28p and one said we will increase it to 32p. This is what you will get/not get, depending on how you vote. I am not saying it is the answer but all of us trying to think differently might not be a bad place to start.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Sad git that I am I found this funny

Liked that!