The Labour Government

[blueinsa]

It's a weird situation when tories decry benefit cuts and attempts to get 'the workshy' off their arses..

I voted Labour as I have all my adult life except for one occasion but you keep convincing yourself “if they think differently, they must be Tories”.

 

[blueinsa]

Exactly. More white noise from Big Joe. My guess is he's Reform.

I tried to reply to you the other day but posts got removed.

I’m a British citizen, living and working in Scotland and I’ve voted in every general election since 92, that’s what its got to do with me and every election except one I’ve voted Labour.

You’re welcome.

 

[hilts]

Austerity 2.0 although that is what you voted for right?

Or should I say you voted for the right:-)

I look forward to those owning their vote on here in the coming days.

 

[blueinsa]

Austerity 2.0 although that is what you voted for right?

Or should I say you voted for the right:-)

I look forward to those owning their vote on here in the coming days.

I’m intrigued to know what jobs the government is going to get all the economically unproductive into?

The numbers of vacancies and those not contributing for whatever reason just do not work but then again, most of Reeves numbers don’t work or stack up so we shouldn’t be surprised and don’t forget, she is busy adding by the thousands to the jobless total with her policies for so called growth.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Yes probably but what is unfathomable to me is not seriously going after the billions and billions spent on PPE (much unusable) through Tory corruption.
Or going back into the customs union under similar conditions to some other countries to stop the loss of trade billions.

The difference is those things have already happened/been spent. Overseas aid can be cut

 

[Postman Pep]

Austerity 2.0 although that is what you voted for right?

Or should I say you voted for the right:-)

I look forward to those owning their vote on here in the coming days.

Isn't 9 years the current precedent for haranguing people to repent for their sins? After all we can never move on until these people admit they were wrong ... :-)

 

[.db.]

Labour are having an absolute mare. Everything they’re doing seems to go against what most who voted for them would want.

They could have all gone on a big fuck off holiday since they got into power and done nothing, and be more popular than they are at the moment.

Tax those who operate businesses in this country yet pay no tax, tax the super rich, tax high-end luxury goods… stop targeting the wrong people!

 

[Kompany Car]

Taxes are already at a post war high. As for the rich..
The Top 1% already pay 28.2% of all income tax. In 2005/6 that figure was 22.7%
The Top 10% already pay 60.2 % of all income tax. In 2005/6 that figure was 52.9%
And they don't pay their fair share ?
It could be said that part of that is reflection of widening wealth disparity and there may be an argument for some additional levy on the Super rich but as the government have found out with the Non - Dom debacle, these things tend not to pan out as now more than ever before the most wealthy can simply move their affairs to somewhere else in the world with a more relaxed tax regime.

No they dont pay their fair share relative to their ability to pay. You are talking about income tax which is not really a discussion when it comes to total income. I pay shit loads of tax, as Im lucky enough to have a very good salary but for many in the top 1%, salary isnt important. I only had this conversation with our CEO over dinner the other week, who not unsurprisingly wondered why everyone further down the tree wasn't excited about the share price and were disappointed by the pay awards (which were ok but unspectacular) until I made him aware that only those in the senior leadership team had share options. To many at the top of the tree they are completely out of touch from reality and being payed a percentage of your salary in share options gives you a massive tax break which really shouldn't exist in a society where we are "all in it together". Even if you take aside the share options for others its about income gained from other assets which are only subject to CGT which remains significantly out of step with income tax. To cap it off being able to put £60k into a pension is also a very large tax break for the well paid, great for those of us who can because its not required to pay the bills and put food on the table, but hardly fair when you look at people struggling.

The system is completely out of kilter and that's coming from someone who benefits from it. Don't get me wrong people should be rewarded for excellence and great business acumen, but it should be done in a way that still means they pay their share of tax relative to their ability to pay.

As regards wealthy non doms, you can move your affairs but you cant move you physical assets like property. As I said before why they gave them a warning and stay of execution followed by watered down proposals before hitting them with taxes is beyond me, some of the more suspicious might say it was by design as a gentleman's agreement, as its "not the done thing". Personally they should have been hit with immediate effect the day after the last budget and the ability to use the CGT bed and breakfast rules should have been suspended. If you're only getting one bite of the cherry you better make it a big one.

Am I being an idealist, yes, but I also know what its like to have sod all and can see what's fair and what's isnt. We shouldn't live in a society where you need organisations like the Trussell Trust to feed people but sadly we do.

 

[TinFoilHat]

It's no longer left v right.

It's the people vs the oligarchy. whilst were beating fuck out of each other these cunts are being enabled by our government to take everything from us.

 

[meltonblue]

No they dont pay their fair share relative to their ability to pay. You are talking about income tax which is not really a discussion when it comes to total income. I pay shit loads of tax, as Im lucky enough to have a very good salary but for many in the top 1%, salary isnt important. I only had this conversation with our CEO over dinner the other week, who not unsurprisingly wondered why everyone further down the tree wasn't excited about the share price and were disappointed by the pay awards (which were ok but unspectacular) until I made him aware that only those in the senior leadership team had share options. To many at the top of the tree they are completely out of touch from reality and being payed a percentage of your salary in share options gives you a massive tax break which really shouldn't exist in a society where we are "all in it together". Even if you take aside the share options for others its about income gained from other assets which are only subject to CGT which remains significantly out of step with income tax. To cap it off being able to put £60k into a pension is also a very large tax break for the well paid, great for those of us who can because its not required to pay the bills and put food on the table, but hardly fair when you look at people struggling.

The system is completely out of kilter and that's coming from someone who benefits from it. Don't get me wrong people should be rewarded for excellence and great business acumen, but it should be done in a way that still means they pay their share of tax relative to their ability to pay.

As regards wealthy non doms, you can move your affairs but you cant move you physical assets like property. As I said before why they gave them a warning and stay of execution followed by watered down proposals before hitting them with taxes is beyond me, some of the more suspicious might say it was by design as a gentleman's agreement, as its "not the done thing". Personally they should have been hit with immediate effect the day after the last budget and the ability to use the CGT bed and breakfast rules should have been suspended. If you're only getting one bite of the cherry you better make it a big one.

Am I being an idealist, yes, but I also know what its like to have sod all and can see what's fair and what's isnt. We shouldn't live in a society where you need organisations like the Trussell Trust to feed people but sadly we do.

Completely agree with this. I’m fortunate enough to have a good salary too but I dont think people realise the discrepancy between senior management and those at the real top end, let alone those further down the chain.

Salary distribution and the tax system are both way out of kilter.

 

[hilts]

Isn't 9 years the current precedent for haranguing people to repent for their sins? After all we can never move on until these people admit they were wrong ... :-)

I think they are hanging out in the politicians are incompetent thread telling people how competent their politicians are compared to others rather than justifying today.

I'm sure they will be along in a mo to tell us how they have always been in favour of austerity, cold old folk, taking money from the disabled and their kids etc.....

That or we've never had it so good:-)

 

[Hertzblue]

No they dont pay their fair share relative to their ability to pay. You are talking about income tax which is not really a discussion when it comes to total income. I pay shit loads of tax, as Im lucky enough to have a very good salary but for many in the top 1%, salary isnt important. I only had this conversation with our CEO over dinner the other week, who not unsurprisingly wondered why everyone further down the tree wasn't excited about the share price and were disappointed by the pay awards (which were ok but unspectacular) until I made him aware that only those in the senior leadership team had share options. To many at the top of the tree they are completely out of touch from reality and being payed a percentage of your salary in share options gives you a massive tax break which really shouldn't exist in a society where we are "all in it together". Even if you take aside the share options for others its about income gained from other assets which are only subject to CGT which remains significantly out of step with income tax. To cap it off being able to put £60k into a pension is also a very large tax break for the well paid, great for those of us who can because its not required to pay the bills and put food on the table, but hardly fair when you look at people struggling.

The system is completely out of kilter and that's coming from someone who benefits from it. Don't get me wrong people should be rewarded for excellence and great business acumen, but it should be done in a way that still means they pay their share of tax relative to their ability to pay.

As regards wealthy non doms, you can move your affairs but you cant move you physical assets like property. As I said before why they gave them a warning and stay of execution followed by watered down proposals before hitting them with taxes is beyond me, some of the more suspicious might say it was by design as a gentleman's agreement, as its "not the done thing". Personally they should have been hit with immediate effect the day after the last budget and the ability to use the CGT bed and breakfast rules should have been suspended. If you're only getting one bite of the cherry you better make it a big one.

Am I being an idealist, yes, but I also know what its like to have sod all and can see what's fair and what's isnt. We shouldn't live in a society where you need organisations like the Trussell Trust to feed people but sadly we do.

Indeed I was talking about income tax which as far as the most wealthy are concerned you are correct , this is far from the whole picture but isn't it the case that they pay the vast majority of capital gains etc to .
That said, as you can see from my quote below, I agree with you that there is a case for some additional levy on the Super rich . The dial has been pushed too far in their favour in recent years and a good deal of it has not been hard earned but a result of inflation of existing asset prices due to QE.

It could be said that part of that is reflection of widening wealth disparity and there may be an argument for some additional levy on the Super rich but as the government have found out with the Non - Dom debacle, these things tend not to pan out as now more than ever before the most wealthy can simply move their affairs to somewhere else in the world with a more relaxed tax regime.

So no issue really on the sentiment however I remain unconvinced as to whether there is any merit in advancing what would be a Wealth tax.
The most recent example I can recall of a Wealth tax backfiring is in Norway where they ended up completely shooting themselves in the foot and that was over an increase on existing wealth tax. It does go to show how mobile these people can be if they choose to.

 

[Don Karleone]

Except he didn't.

He used it as an analogy to explain how the impact assessment worked.

That doesn't make the analogy any better. They're fucking over the poorest in society and you're making excuses for them.

 

[Hertzblue]

A couple of points. Public sector workers pay tax. A lot of Pensioners pay tax and some have received additional tax demands for interest earned on savings accounts for the 24/25 tax year - my 87 year old mum is still outraged by this. My pointing out that income tax is based on what you earn did not go down well.

Head count in the Civil Service was inevitably going to increase after Brexit as Brexit requires a larger state to manage a reduced economy. It’s what people voted for and what they got. Making Civil Servants go into the office is performative politics. The illusion of doing something which makes no difference. Ditto whipping them at their desks for greater efficiency.

Some of the nine million economically inactive still pay tax. I should know as technically I am one. Too young to qualify for state pension and not actively looking for work. This obviously doesn’t mean no income hence I pay tax. I also pay tax on things I buy or for services.

We have migration because we have a labour shortage. You may decry the ‘economically inactive’ and ‘idlers’ for this labour shortage, but it exists and industry, both private and public, requires foreign labour. That’s the reality.

Finally, good luck in distinguishing between the idlers and the genuinely sick. People dodging work and scamming the system is the price we pay for a Welfare State. The only real solution is to abolish the Welfare State and Healthcare. The sick will die and the healthy will work. It will be a key economic plank of Reform. They will even have a catchy slogan like ‘Work is Freedom’ or something like that.

Hi Bob,
In reply,

A couple of points. Public sector workers pay tax. A lot of Pensioners pay tax and some have received additional tax demands for interest earned on savings accounts for the 24/25 tax year - my 87 year old mum is still outraged by this. My pointing out that income tax is based on what you earn did not go down well.

Yes, they do pay tax but their jobs are funded by the wealth generated by the private sector.

Head count in the Civil Service was inevitably going to increase after Brexit as Brexit requires a larger state to manage a reduced economy. It’s what people voted for and what they got. Making Civil Servants go into the office is performative politics. The illusion of doing something which makes no difference. Ditto whipping them at their desks for greater efficiency.

I agree headcount would increase due to Brexit and Covid but I also believe the last government lost control. I also believe that the prevailing WFH culture in the Civil service is the biggest contributor to their loss of productivity . I am not opposed to WFH per se however I can see that many of the largest private companies are seeing the need to row back on this and move to at least 3 days in the office. Even the Governor of the Bank of England is talking about public sector productivity dragging on the economy. I heard Pat McFadden on TV a couple of weeks ago talking about this and he was clear about his reservations on WFH and productivity. I think change will happen here though given Labour will struggle with the unions it won't happen fast enough.

Some of the nine million economically inactive still pay tax. I should know as technically I am one. Too young to qualify for state pension and not actively looking for work. This obviously doesn’t mean no income hence I pay tax. I also pay tax on things I buy or for services.

Me to.

We have migration because we have a labour shortage. You may decry the ‘economically inactive’ and ‘idlers’ for this labour shortage, but it exists and industry, both private and public, requires foreign labour. That’s the reality.

It's not a reality we can afford or accept. The levels of worklessness and immigration we have are the product of our version of welfare. Doing nothing isn't an option as even Reeves and Starmer are finding out. We cannot afford the Welfare and the electorate will no longer tolerate the migration . If this government will not deal with it the next one surely will.

Finally, good luck in distinguishing between the idlers and the genuinely sick. People dodging work and scamming the system is the price we pay for a Welfare State. The only real solution is to abolish the Welfare State and Healthcare. The sick will die and the healthy will work.

Again, how can we be so complacent to accept that. The genuinely sick and disabled have to suffer because as a society we do not have the resolve to mobilise ourselves to identify benefit cheats .
We need to, otherwise Bob the end will be the IMF and where will our welfare , pensions etc be after that ?

 

[Hertzblue]

Watching her today my first thought was she is utterly deluded. Then the more she went on I thought no , utterly shameless.
Actually she is utterly deluded and shameless!
Surely has to go in the new year !

 

[Gray]

I think people would be more acceptable to cuts to welfare and increase prices and taxes if they didn’t witness disgraceful waste of our money first hand.

In Altrincham we have a hotel full of asylum seekers getting fed and watered at our expense. They also get free internet at local libraries and now are being given driving lessons. They have contributed zero to the tax system.

The conservatives could not get to grips with this problem and the signs are that the Labour party can’t either.

 

[bluenova]

That doesn't make the analogy any better. They're fucking over the poorest in society and you're making excuses for them.

The analogy is supposed to be about something totally different - it's not a comparison at all.

You posted a tweet that deliberately misinterpreted it to make the guy sound callous, when the actual interview is nothing of the sort.

As for personal insults. I could say that you're happy for some of the poorest in our society to be fucked off and forgotten, instead of given the support and medical help they need to get back to work. That you're happy to make excuses for the Tories, who didn't care that people in some parts of the country were five times more likely to be ill to work than in others.

I wouldn't say that, because, of course we both know that life's a bit more complex.

 

[BobKowalski]

I think people would be more acceptable to cuts to welfare and increase prices and taxes if they didn’t witness disgraceful waste of our money first hand.

In Altrincham we have a hotel full of asylum seekers getting fed and watered at our expense. They also get free internet at local libraries and now are being given driving lessons. They have contributed zero to the tax system.

The conservatives could not get to grips with this problem and the signs are that the Labour party can’t either.

Define ‘get to grips with’? Should they starve or live on the streets? Does that help you or anyone else?

Instead of meaningless phrases, spell out your solution. Go.

 

[bluenova]

I think people would be more acceptable to cuts to welfare and increase prices and taxes if they didn’t witness disgraceful waste of our money first hand.

In Altrincham we have a hotel full of asylum seekers getting fed and watered at our expense. They also get free internet at local libraries and now are being given driving lessons. They have contributed zero to the tax system.

The conservatives could not get to grips with this problem and the signs are that the Labour party can’t either.

They're contributing zero because they're not allowed to.

I've met many hundreds of asylum seekers, and frankly, most are desperate to be doing something. At least using the internet and having driving lessons means that if their claims are successful, they'll be able to contribute to our society a little quicker.

While it might be tempting to look at young, healthy looking men from poor countries as simply economic migrants, here to take advantage, that's far from the truth. There are a few countries which make up the majority of refugees in the UK, and who are almost always granted refugee status - Afghanistan, Iran, Eritrea, Sudan and Syria. These are countries which have been torn apart by war, or have oppressive regimes, where life can be very dangerous.

Once you've listened to a few dozen stories of the "authorities" turning up with guns and throwing someone out of their house, or of the rest of their family being put in prison, had people trying to show you the scars from whip marks and other torture to prove what happened, because they're used to not being believed, it's very difficult to mesh that with the way they're described by some politicians.

Bear in mind that many of these countries are fighting wars that we have been involved in at some point, and using weapons made in the UK and other parts of the western world - Yet still, the vast, vast, majority of people who flee a country or are displaced due to war don't come anywhere near the UK, but end up in a neighbouring country. We do pretty much the bare minimum already.

 

[Gray]

They're contributing zero because they're not allowed to.

I've met many hundreds of asylum seekers, and frankly, most are desperate to be doing something. At least using the internet and having driving lessons means that if their claims are successful, they'll be able to contribute to our society a little quicker.

While it might be tempting to look at young, healthy looking men from poor countries as simply economic migrants, here to take advantage, that's far from the truth. There are a few countries which make up the majority of refugees in the UK, and who are almost always granted refugee status - Afghanistan, Iran, Eritrea, Sudan and Syria. These are countries which have been torn apart by war, or have oppressive regimes, where life can be very dangerous.

Once you've listened to a few dozen stories of the "authorities" turning up with guns and throwing someone out of their house, or of the rest of their family being put in prison, had people trying to show you the scars from whip marks and other torture to prove what happened, because they're used to not being believed, it's very difficult to mesh that with the way they're described by some politicians.

Bear in mind that many of these countries are fighting wars that we have been involved in at some point, and using weapons made in the UK and other parts of the western world - Yet still, the vast, vast, majority of people who flee a country or are displaced due to war don't come anywhere near the UK, but end up in a neighbouring country. We do pretty much the bare minimum already.

You are 100% correct, but it doesn't hide the fact that unlike myself they have paid no taxes whatsoever and are costing taxpayers a fair amount of money.

That is the reason that the likes of Nigel Farage are gaining so much support.