General Election - 4th July 2024

[Brewster's millions]

Probably the most misleading Sunak claim was that every tax paying household would be paying £2k more when their own figures based on Tory interpretations of Labour policies say that it would be an average of £2k. It’s always been Labour’s position that the vast majority of the population would not pay more tax and any additional burden would be hugely skewed to the richest 1%, non-doms and on companies given unfair tax breaks.

Do you seriously believe that the vast majority of the population won't be paying higher taxes if Labour wants to implement their policies in full? Particularly if they do actually commit to balancing the current budget?

So far they've committed to non-doms, VAT on school fees - the revenue from which is highly uncertain - and a windfall tax which would replace one that's already in operation. If you add all of that up, even on optimistic estimates, your probably talking about less than GBP10bn per annum, and probably a fair bit less. Given that annual tax revenue is now 1 trillion, do you think that a less than 1% increase will suffice?

 

[hcblue95]

Do you seriously believe that the vast majority of the population won't be paying higher taxes if Labour wants to implement their policies in full? Particularly if they do actually commit to balancing the current budget?

So far they've committed to non-doms, VAT on school fees - the revenue from which is highly uncertain - and a windfall tax which would replace one that's already in operation. If you add all of that up, even on optimistic estimates, your probably talking about less than GBP10bn per annum, and probably a fair bit less. Given that annual tax revenue is now 1 trillion, do you think that a less than 1% increase will suffice?

Bit like the Tories then?

 

[bluenova]

Probably the most misleading Sunak claim was that every tax paying household would be paying £2k more when their own figures based on Tory interpretations of Labour policies say that it would be an average of £2k. It’s always been Labour’s position that the vast majority of the population would not pay more tax and the additional burden would be hugely skewed to the richest 1%, non-doms and on companies given unfair tax breaks.

£2k more tax per household over the course of a whole Parliament. So, even if it wasn't made up, it's still an average of nearer £250 per tax payer.

And of course not all tax comes from individuals, and as many taxes are progressive, the "average" person won't pay anything like that.

And then it pales into insignificance when compared with the projected freeze on personal allowances, which will cost many tax payers significantly more.

It's nonsense upon nonsense upon lies.

 

[Toney’s bookie]

Bearing in mind we have the highest tax burden for 70 years, what exactly do we have to show for it? If we had a high tax burden but excellent public services, a flourishing education system, cheap and reliable public transport, a well functioning NHS etc etc then people would be less pissed off. Even if Labour spend our current tax take in a better way (instead of syphoning billions off to their mates and pub landlords) then that would be an acceptable start.

 

[inbetween]

Do you seriously believe that the vast majority of the population won't be paying higher taxes if Labour wants to implement their policies in full? Particularly if they do actually commit to balancing the current budget?

So far they've committed to non-doms, VAT on school fees - the revenue from which is highly uncertain - and a windfall tax which would replace one that's already in operation. If you add all of that up, even on optimistic estimates, your probably talking about less than GBP10bn per annum, and probably a fair bit less. Given that annual tax revenue is now 1 trillion, do you think that a less than 1% increase will suffice?

The most important thing is not the amount of taxes that we pay but where those taxes go. Currently I pay a lot of tax and it seemingly goes towards nothing because everything is broken.

If somebody argued that we could fix the entire country but I have to pay 10% more tax then yes sign me up. The current system where I pay almost as much and get absolutely nothing back doesn't work. The only benefit the Tories can offer is I might pay less tax which is great but it isn't great if even more gets broken.

The question for me is pretty clear. I don't want to waste my money sending migrants to Rwanda or changing equality laws because that makes no difference to me. I want our money to be spent on fixing the things that matter.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

This will all be forgotten when Sunak’s next press engagement is sliding down a slide called The Swanny whilst the They think it’s all over, it is now commentary blaring out in the background.

 

[MCFC Wirral]

Not really.
There’s a whole thread on Starmer which mostly consists of 3 or 4 Labour supporters who spend most of their time slagging him off. Although to be fair most have probably left the party and joined Socialist Worker or the revolutionary communists after Corbyn’s departure.

I don’t really take too much interest but I watched the debate last night and fancied gauging feedback.

I believe I can name one of those posters already…

 

[west didsblue]

Do you seriously believe that the vast majority of the population won't be paying higher taxes if Labour wants to implement their policies in full? Particularly if they do actually commit to balancing the current budget?

So far they've committed to non-doms, VAT on school fees - the revenue from which is highly uncertain - and a windfall tax which would replace one that's already in operation. If you add all of that up, even on optimistic estimates, your probably talking about less than GBP10bn per annum, and probably a fair bit less. Given that annual tax revenue is now 1 trillion, do you think that a less than 1% increase will suffice?

The vast majority won’t be paying an extra £2k which was Sunak’s lie.

 

[bluethrunthru]

The vast majority won’t be paying an extra £2k which was Sunak’s lie.

Not the only one either

DWP data challenges Sunak's pension tax claim as 1.5m older Brits already liable

During the first general election debate between Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer, held by ITV in front of a live Salford audience, the Prime Minister repeatedly claimed that Labour would tax pensioners

www.mirror.co.uk

 

[Worsleyweb]

Bearing in mind we have the highest tax burden for 70 years, what exactly do we have to show for it? If we had a high tax burden but excellent public services, a flourishing education system, cheap and reliable public transport, a well functioning NHS etc etc then people would be less pissed off. Even if Labour spend our current tax take in a better way (instead of syphoning billions off to their mates and pub landlords) then that would be an acceptable start.

Did Covid not happen?