Only way I see anything other than a Tory victory is if an anti-Tory coalition be formed and come across as credible. More people don't vote Tory than do, so it's got legs as an idea, but needs work that no one has been prepared to put in before.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Conservative Party
- Thread starter dave_blue12
- Start date
Only way I see anything other than a Tory victory is if an anti-Tory coalition be formed and come across as credible. More people don't vote Tory than do, so it's got legs as an idea, but needs work that no one has been prepared to put in before.
It would take a hell of a lot of work and you’d need the SNP on board, which I cannot see happening.Only way I see anything other than a Tory victory is if an anti-Tory coalition be formed and come across as credible. More people don't vote Tory than do, so it's got legs as an idea, but needs work that no one has been prepared to put in before.
Labour-Libs-Green maybe but not SNP unless something radically changes, such as an independence vote that is a NO result.
The former isn’t enough to win either.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
All Labour MP's attending todays debates wore masks in the chamber - only 6 Tories did thus showing their selfish and callous disregard for their colleagues health and welfare
It would take a hell of a lot of work and you’d need the SNP on board, which I cannot see happening.
Labour-Libs-Green maybe but not SNP unless something radically changes, such as an independence vote that is a NO result.
The former isn’t enough to win either.
Lab - Lib - Green polled more votes in England than the Tories, but that doesn't take into account FPTP, so it might not have resulted in electoral success. As you say, would need a lot of work on how to campaign effectively which I don't see happening. Pity, as it would probably be the best route out of an FPTP system.
M
M
mat
Guest
Tories being selfish pricks?All Labour MP's attending todays debates wore masks in the chamber - only 6 Tories did thus showing their selfish and callous disregard for their colleagues health and welfare
Well I never....
journolud
Well-Known Member
When tories speak it’s usually poisonous bile, I can understand they wouldn’t want to ingest it, better out than in is probably their thinkingAll Labour MP's attending todays debates wore masks in the chamber - only 6 Tories did thus showing their selfish and callous disregard for their colleagues health and welfare
hilts
Well-Known Member
There was a story on the news today about a chap whose father had died and mother had dementia. The house will have to be sold to pay for her care. Initial thought was sympathy then I thought it’s probably the way we may have to go and the son was obviously pissed his inheritance is getting battered. Maybe instead of inheritance tax we should have a max inheritance amount.
Spend it or lose it.
Spend it or lose it.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
There was a story on the news today about a chap whose father had died and mother had dementia. The house will have to be sold to pay for her care. Initial thought was sympathy then I thought it’s probably the way we may have to go and the son was obviously pissed his inheritance is getting battered. Maybe instead of inheritance tax we should have a max inheritance amount.
Spend it or lose it.
Or find a way to move it offshore - those who can afford to pay creative accountants and tax advisers will always find a way. The reason wealth taxes can work is because you can't physically lift a £5m house or a £50m factory off shore. Just make it illegal to move the value of the asset surely?
Kompany Car
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Sep 2015
- Messages
- 4,227
The problem is that it again plays into the hands of those who are already wealthy. There are too many wrappers e.g trust funds and more complex avoidance schemes are available which perpetuate inter-generational family wealth.There was a story on the news today about a chap whose father had died and mother had dementia. The house will have to be sold to pay for her care. Initial thought was sympathy then I thought it’s probably the way we may have to go and the son was obviously pissed his inheritance is getting battered. Maybe instead of inheritance tax we should have a max inheritance amount.
Spend it or lose it.
What it would do is drive the wealth divide even further apart. If they had a threshold it would inevitably be set at a level which catches the average earners net worth at death.
hilts
Well-Known Member
Or find a way to move it offshore - those who can afford to pay creative accountants and tax advisers will always find a way. The reason wealth taxes can work is because you can't physically lift a £5m house or a £50m factory off shore. Just make it illegal to move the value of the asset surely?
My instinct has always been against wealth taxes on houses but social care is such a huge issue that has been left to ruin then I don’t believe anything but a pretty big change will be enough. You would need to bypass the 7 year rule but the main problem is how can any government have such a policy when it will mean losing an election.
Theresa May tried to address the problem and middle England and above lost their minds.
Kompany Car
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Sep 2015
- Messages
- 4,227
How do you define how much wealth someone has ?Or find a way to move it offshore - those who can afford to pay creative accountants and tax advisers will always find a way. The reason wealth taxes can work is because you can't physically lift a £5m house or a £50m factory off shore. Just make it illegal to move the value of the asset surely?
That Rembrandt hanging in the hallway that nobody knows about or the £5m house which is not owned but leased from a company which you and the rest of your family own for which you pay a peppercorn rent.
hilts
Well-Known Member
Well if the rich can avoid it and the poor can’t afford it then are we relying on the paye stiffs on okay to half decent wages to fund it all?The problem is that it again plays into the hands of those who are already wealthy. There are too many wrappers e.g trust funds and more complex avoidance schemes are available which perpetuate inter-generational family wealth.
What it would do is drive the wealth divide even further apart. If they had a threshold it would inevitably be set at a level which catches the average earners net worth at death.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
How do you define how much wealth someone has ?
That Rembrandt hanging in the hallway that nobody knows about or the £5m house which is not owned but leased from a company which you and the rest of your family own for which you pay a peppercorn rent.
In the case of the Rembrandt the whereabouts of these are often known anyway - in the event of sale or declaration of part of an estate the new owner becomes liable for the tax. The £5m house owned by a company and leased for a peppercorn rate - some entity owns it - the land registry will tell you that - the company is liable for the tax. Its the lack of political will that makes it impossible.
Kompany Car
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Sep 2015
- Messages
- 4,227
And thus it ever was. The song stuck in the middle with you is very apt.Well if the rich can avoid it and the poor can’t afford it then are we relying on the paye stiffs on okay to half decent wages to fund it all?
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
My instinct has always been against wealth taxes on houses but social care is such a huge issue that has been left to ruin then I don’t believe anything but a pretty big change will be enough. You would need to bypass the 7 year rule but the main problem is how can any government have such a policy when it will mean losing an election.
Theresa May tried to address the problem and middle England and above lost their minds.
Yeah - I recall all the bankers were gonna fuck off to Frankfurt and Paris and Amsterdam coz of it - then the thick dicks voted for Brexit and ruled themselves out of that move
Kompany Car
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Sep 2015
- Messages
- 4,227
The Rembrandt is a bit of an over the top from me, but there are many other items of high value which would not be so well known about, be it jewellery, fine wine etc.In the case of the Rembrandt the whereabouts of these are often known anyway - in the event of sale or declaration of part of an estate the new owner becomes liable for the tax. The £5m house owned by a company and leased for a peppercorn rate - some entity owns it - the land registry will tell you that - the company is liable for the tax. Its the lack of political will that makes it impossible.
I don’t disagree that if the government wanted to stop it and get the money they could, but we’ve had successive conservative and labour governments that just let it slide, because money buys influence whether we like it or not.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
The Rembrandt is a bit of an over the top from me, but there are many other items of high value which would not be so well known about, be it jewellery, fine wine etc.
I don’t disagree that if the government wanted to stop it and get the money they could, but we’ve had successive conservative and labour governments that just let it slide, because money buys influence whether we like it or not.
As I say - anything like that will eventually have to be declared in a will of when sold and be liable for the tax - its not hard. In fact as the value climbs the more tax would be owning to the more tax efficient way will be to declare it and pay tax before it goes up too far in value. Of course taking steps to avoid that tax is a criminal offence aas always and will be treated as such.
hilts
Well-Known Member
That and they wouldn’t get voted in and more importantly they have plenty of assets themselves. Remember even the caring party Labour:-) wanted to put up taxes just above MPs salary. People don’t vote to be poorer by anything other than a nominal amount.The Rembrandt is a bit of an over the top from me, but there are many other items of high value which would not be so well known about, be it jewellery, fine wine etc.
I don’t disagree that if the government wanted to stop it and get the money they could, but we’ve had successive conservative and labour governments that just let it slide, because money buys influence whether we like it or not.
They will raise a bit and it will get kicked down the road as per everything else.
Alan Harper's Tash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 69,512
It’ll become more common for parents to put their houses in their children’s name(s) at the age of c.55.There was a story on the news today about a chap whose father had died and mother had dementia. The house will have to be sold to pay for her care. Initial thought was sympathy then I thought it’s probably the way we may have to go and the son was obviously pissed his inheritance is getting battered. Maybe instead of inheritance tax we should have a max inheritance amount.
Spend it or lose it.
Then they aren’t liable for any care costs and inheritance tax would be negated after 7 years.
hilts
Well-Known Member
It’ll become more common for parents to put their houses in their children’s name(s) at the age of c.55.
Then they aren’t liable for any care costs and inheritance tax would be negated after 7 years.
Yeah it’s why I mentioned the 7 year rule. I don’t know how we get round the fact people know it’s a problem but want everyone else to pay for it.
These threads just turn into bankers bonuses posts. It’d been done over and over again for everything the country needs. There is probably a small % of voters that decide our election results. Tax them enough and it’s bye bye time.