Immigration and Asylum (6 Viewers)

[Mucca Mad Boys]

And the country’s where wealth taxes work? Of which there are plenty.

So you’re arguing the case again for a wealth tax as the voluntary scheme clearly doesn’t work.

And then to go full cap doffing boot licking pleb regurgitating the long dispelled myth that Osborne increased tax receipts by lowering the highest rate of taxes. It’s been long established that what actually happened was that high earners deferred earnings from the 2012/13 tax year to the 2013/14 tax year to take advantage meaning that tax receipts in 2012/13 were artificially low while tax receipts in 2013/14 were artificially high, hence the difference. Every year that’s followed since has cost tax receipts by about 4%. If the cap fits doff it in your case.

Zero facts to support your arguments, zero credibility Tony.

Everywhere that applies a wealth tax ends up losing tax revenue elsewhere, therefore, are actually net

Wealth taxes may be a new shiny toy for the Labour Left, Green Party and Gary Stevenson, but not for the rest of Europe.

 

---

[Mucca Mad Boys]

A wealth tax might generate a few billion but unless the government sorts its spending out it’s irrelevant. The markets are still charging a premium and unlikely to change this unless they see some control. Said before since welfare reform and WFP were unwound I bet its probably cost us another £5-10bn per year in interest, so less to spend on public services. Sickness related benefits are due to rise from £65bn (it was £43bn pre pandemic) to £100bn by end of parliament

So a wealth tax which may help bridge some of the gap but claiming it suddenly resolves our issues is disingenuous, which is Polanski all over - saying mahmoods policy proposal was reminiscent of nazi germany sums him up…the young are lapping this up though, even though his deputy was pushing back on migrants in her constituency - this was the reason Polanski was on tv the other night, replaced her planned appearance ! Chancers

What Zach Polanski or the Labour Left doesn’t tell you is the following:
- How is wealth actually defined?
- Will there be any exempted asset classes?
- What are the costs to administer this new levy?
- Why have such taxes been repealed in 9 European countries as well as India?

‘Exit taxes’ come follow wealth taxes (as with Norway) and the implication is that it’s because net-worth individuals leave. This point is significant because it highlights that wealth taxes actually have a ‘net cost’ because whilst wealth taxes may raise ‘x’, the decline in revenues elsewhere is higher and this was true in every country that implemented it.

These people just aren’t serious and Tony shows this when calling people ‘boot lickers’ rather than interacting with arguments.

 

[Grendel]

Zero facts to support your arguments, zero credibility Tony.

Everywhere that applies a wealth tax ends up losing tax revenue elsewhere, therefore, are actually net

Wealth taxes may be a new shiny toy for the Labour Left, Green Party and Gary Stevenson, but not for the rest of Europe.

Tony voted for Cameron and Osborne

 

[fernandopartridge]

The critique was on the concept of a wealth tax. It promises to reduce ‘wealth inequality’ but in reality, even the most optimistic outcome barely touches public expenditure. The cost of migrant benefits and hotels totals around £13.5bn a year.

Considering the total welfare bill is set to raise to £300bn, this wealth tax raises pennies on the pound.

Where have you got that £13.5bn figure from out of interest? and by migrants do you mean illegal immigrants only or all migrants?

 

[CCFCSteve]

What Zach Polanski or the Labour Left doesn’t tell you is the following:
- How is wealth actually defined?
- Will there be any exempted asset classes?
- What are the costs to administer this new levy?
- Why have such taxes been repealed in 9 European countries as well as India?

‘Exit taxes’ come follow wealth taxes (as with Norway) and the implication is that it’s because net-worth individuals leave. This point is significant because it highlights that wealth taxes actually have a ‘net cost’ because whilst wealth taxes may raise ‘x’, the decline in revenues elsewhere is higher and this was true in every country that implemented it.

These people just aren’t serious and Tony shows this when calling people ‘boot lickers’ rather than interacting with arguments.

Im all for doing whatever might help improve the country but its shit like this that annoys me

And if the effect of raising taxes on super-rich individuals was that the government made less in tax revenue because super-rich individuals chose to leave the UK to avoid having to pay the tax rises, would you support or oppose raising such taxes? |

And if the effect of raising taxes on super-rich individuals was that the government made less in tax revenue because super-rich individuals chose to leave the UK to avoid having to pay the tax rises, would you support or oppose raising such taxes?

yougov.co.uk

A majority of people wanting a wealth tax even if it brings in net less revenue ?! Madness.

But that’s the country at the moment, culturally it just seems a bit ‘off’. Reliance on the state increasing and hard workers not believing they are seeing their lives improving. This is a dangerous combination. I’ll be interested to see if emigration numbers continue to increase as this concerns me as much as the lack of control of numbers/who is coming in.

I’ve said before this government feels like it’s one of unintended consequences (good intentions but failing to/not being allowed to deliver). Only time will tell if this changes

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Where have you got that £13.5bn figure from out of interest? and by migrants do you mean illegal immigrants only or all migrants?

All. It’s the sum of migrant hotels (15bn over 10 years) £1.5bn and the cost of welfare benefits to foreign nationals, which sits at £941m per month as of March 2025, doubling from £461m per month in March 2002 (source: DWP). Around a 6th of all UC payments.

It applies to all migrants and the reason for that is because ILR is granted after 5 years irrespective of immigration status.

We know from the ONS that around 1.9m foreign nationals made benefit claims with a 54:46 ratio of EU:non-EU claimants. Which is pretty startling given that EU migration has been significantly higher pre-Brexit, vice versa post-Brexit which means this ratio will tilt towards non-EU migrants out claiming EU migrants once the ‘Boriswave’ migrants get ILR. That £1bn figure reference earlier will increase by the end of 2029 parliament.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Im all for doing whatever might help improve the country but its shit like this that annoys me

And if the effect of raising taxes on super-rich individuals was that the government made less in tax revenue because super-rich individuals chose to leave the UK to avoid having to pay the tax rises, would you support or oppose raising such taxes? |

And if the effect of raising taxes on super-rich individuals was that the government made less in tax revenue because super-rich individuals chose to leave the UK to avoid having to pay the tax rises, would you support or oppose raising such taxes?

yougov.co.uk

A majority of people wanting a wealth tax even if it brings in net less revenue ?! Madness.

But that’s the country at the moment, culturally it just seems a bit ‘off’. Reliance on the state increasing and hard workers not believing they are seeing their lives improving. This is a dangerous combination. I’ll be interested to see if emigration numbers continue to increase as this concerns me as much as the lack of control of numbers/who is coming in.

I’ve said before this government feels like it’s one of unintended consequences (good intentions but failing to/not being allowed to deliver). Only time will tell if this changes

This polling betrays a fatal flaw with taking a policy position at face value.

Wealth taxes are superficially v popular, but pollsters don’t ask the question: if these taxes lead to shortfalls of revenue, will you be willing to pay more tax?

Germany modelled a wealth tax and reckoned it would raise €15bn (0.8% on net wealth above €1m). Sounds great, doesn’t it?

The models reckoned the following:
- employment reduced by 2%
- GDP shrinkage of 5% ‘in the long run’
- lack of growth = €46bn shortfall
- wealth taxes net revenue = minus €31bn

The Top 1% pay around 25-30% of tax revenues, policies that chase away these people is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Im all for doing whatever might help improve the country but its shit like this that annoys me

And if the effect of raising taxes on super-rich individuals was that the government made less in tax revenue because super-rich individuals chose to leave the UK to avoid having to pay the tax rises, would you support or oppose raising such taxes? |

And if the effect of raising taxes on super-rich individuals was that the government made less in tax revenue because super-rich individuals chose to leave the UK to avoid having to pay the tax rises, would you support or oppose raising such taxes?

yougov.co.uk

A majority of people wanting a wealth tax even if it brings in net less revenue ?! Madness.

But that’s the country at the moment, culturally it just seems a bit ‘off’. Reliance on the state increasing and hard workers not believing they are seeing their lives improving. This is a dangerous combination. I’ll be interested to see if emigration numbers continue to increase as this concerns me as much as the lack of control of numbers/who is coming in.

I’ve said before this government feels like it’s one of unintended consequences (good intentions but failing to/not being allowed to deliver). Only time will tell if this changes

Maybe but I’ve read history books that talk about the gaps between the haves and the have nots being a major source of social unrest and bringing down empires

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Maybe but I’ve read history books that talk about the gaps between the haves and the have nots being a major source of social unrest and bringing down empires

I wonder if you’ve ever looked into the fall of the Western Roman Empire…

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Im all for doing whatever might help improve the country but its shit like this that annoys me

And if the effect of raising taxes on super-rich individuals was that the government made less in tax revenue because super-rich individuals chose to leave the UK to avoid having to pay the tax rises, would you support or oppose raising such taxes? |

And if the effect of raising taxes on super-rich individuals was that the government made less in tax revenue because super-rich individuals chose to leave the UK to avoid having to pay the tax rises, would you support or oppose raising such taxes?

yougov.co.uk

A majority of people wanting a wealth tax even if it brings in net less revenue ?! Madness.

But that’s the country at the moment, culturally it just seems a bit ‘off’. Reliance on the state increasing and hard workers not believing they are seeing their lives improving. This is a dangerous combination. I’ll be interested to see if emigration numbers continue to increase as this concerns me as much as the lack of control of numbers/who is coming in.

I’ve said before this government feels like it’s one of unintended consequences (good intentions but failing to/not being allowed to deliver). Only time will tell if this changes

There are extremes to this on both sides, for instance the OTT reaction to Zohran Mamdani proposing a 2% tax increase on high earners in New York. The people leaving the city however are not the wealthy but average people who can no longer afford to live there. There is a balance to be struck and we have seen enough examples from history to know that trickle down economics never actually trickles down as people argue it will. You allow people to pay low or no tax they'll say thank you very much and keep the proceeds for themselves.

However I can believe that people want some kind of 'revenge' on the very wealthy and big corporations even if it were cutting off the nose to spite the face. People are generally pissed off and unhappy with how things are and those who have hoarded obscene wealth are going to be a target for criticism. For instance I want to see energy companies being taxed to the hilt but can recognise it wouldn't raise enough to solve all our problems.

I will say lastly, the sneering two page response we recently got from a minister on working people's childcare is the final straw for me as far as this current Labour government is concerned. We have been told that we will qualify for access if we get divorced or I get unemployed, but not if I continue with a doctorate. Want to work hard and build a nuclear family? Get stuffed.

 

[CCFCSteve]

Maybe but I’ve read history books that talk about the gaps between the haves and the have nots being a major source of social unrest and bringing down empires

But if tax revenue is less, everyone else would have to pay more in tax or there would be cuts to public services*. I think those polled probably missed that next logical step.

I’d imagine most people (apart from maybe some on ideological left) don’t really give a toss what someone else earns, if they’re lives are good. At the moment a lot of people are being squeezed and public services are bad so will look at others to blame whether that’s wealthy, migrants etc


*or we borrow more, pay even more in interest and/or eventually pay more indirectly through debasement (via QE)

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

There are extremes to this on both sides, for instance the OTT reaction to Zohran Mamdani proposing a 2% tax increase on high earners in New York. The people leaving the city however are not the wealthy but average people who can no longer afford to live there. There is a balance to be struck and we have seen enough examples from history to know that trickle down economics never actually trickles down as people argue it will. You allow people to pay low or no tax they'll say thank you very much and keep the proceeds for themselves.

However I can believe that people want some kind of 'revenge' on the very wealthy and big corporations even if it were cutting off the nose to spite the face. People are generally pissed off and unhappy with how things are and those who have hoarded obscene wealth are going to be a target for criticism. For instance I want to see energy companies being taxed to the hilt but can recognise it wouldn't raise enough to solve all our problems.

I will say lastly, the sneering two page response we recently got from a minister on working people's childcare is the final straw for me as far as this current Labour government is concerned. We have been told that we will qualify for access if we get divorced or I get unemployed, but not if I continue with a doctorate. Want to work hard and build a nuclear family? Get stuffed.

Prosperous societies increase living standards,

It’s quite ironic to see the left of the political spectrum talk about ‘tickle down economics’ but ignore that its policies around redistribution is ‘trickle down’ via the state.

Redistributive policies do not transfer ‘wealth’ from one group to another directly, it’s all abstract because it’s done via government welfare programs or public services. In short, if you don’t claim benefits or use public services, you’re not getting anything from ‘redistribution’. It appears that many people talking about ‘inequality’ seem to miss this entirely.

Taxing energy companies ‘to the hilt’ has lead to divestment and in the long run, will lead to more expensive energy because who maintains the infrastructure or invests in North Sea? A government could reduce energy bills by around 25% tomorrow if it scrapped green subsidies and VAT.

 

[Ccfcisparks]

I don’t really get the objection to investigate the potential of a wealth tax in some form.

We either have some serious bootlickers or secret millionaires on SBT

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I don’t really get the objection to investigate the potential of a wealth tax in some form.

We either have some serious bootlickers or secret millionaires on SBT

It has been investigated in numerous countries, including our own country in the 1970s…

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Prosperous societies increase living standards,

It’s quite ironic to see the left of the political spectrum talk about ‘tickle down economics’ but ignore that its policies around redistribution is ‘trickle down’ via the state.

Redistributive policies do not transfer ‘wealth’ from one group to another directly, it’s all abstract because it’s done via government welfare programs or public services. In short, if you don’t claim benefits or use public services, you’re not getting anything from ‘redistribution’. It appears that many people talking about ‘inequality’ seem to miss this entirely.

Taxing energy companies ‘to the hilt’ has lead to divestment and in the long run, will lead to more expensive energy because who maintains the infrastructure or invests in North Sea? A government could reduce energy bills by around 25% tomorrow if it scrapped green subsidies and VAT.

Energy companies continue to rack up enormous profits while insisting that they have no choices but to charge people through the nose. Something doesn't add up there and it just looks like British Gas stick their fingers in the air and pluck a number out of the ether.

As for redistribution...Elon Musk is set to be made a trillionaire. Tell me with a straight face that anyone needs that amount of money. In fact, tell me with a straight face why anyone needs more than £1 billion.

 

[Grendel]

I don’t really get the objection to investigate the potential of a wealth tax in some form.

We either have some serious bootlickers or secret millionaires on SBT

There was an 83% super tax under the Labour government in the 70’s and combined with an asset tax added up to 98% - it didn’t end very well

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Energy companies continue to rack up enormous profits while insisting that they have no choices but to charge people through the nose. Something doesn't add up there and it just looks like British Gas stick their fingers in the air and pluck a number out of the ether.

As for redistribution...Elon Musk is set to be made a trillionaire. Tell me with a straight face that anyone needs that amount of money. In fact, tell me with a straight face why anyone needs more than £1 billion.

Should any business be valued more than £1bn?

Elon Musk doesn’t earn £1.3t, that’s his ‘valuation’ based on the value of his stocks. It’s unrealised wealth and could fluctuate by billions on a day-by-day basis.

Ultimately, billionaires are easy targets for people like yourself, but they create jobs and livelihoods for thousands, millions of people. We can’t all have guaranteed jobs for life in the public sector…

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

There was an 83% super tax under the Labour government in the 70’s and combined with an asset tax added up to 98% - it didn’t end very well

History repeats itself once as farce, second as tragedy. This obsession with the left on a wealth tax goes to show it’s actually bankrupt of any intellectual property.

Wealth taxes is not a new concept that untested. It’s been implemented and repealed in many countries because it’s not an effective policy. India had a wealth tax in the 1950s and scrapped it in 2015, by all metrics, this is a society that is more unequal than our own.

Ironically, the biggest raises public service expenditure came at a time when economic growth was 2-3% under Blair and ironically, the top rate of tax was 40%.

Economic growth beats out tax raises every time and societies don’t tax themselves into prosperity. The sooner the left understands this, the sooner they can help the people they want to.

 

[Captain Dart]

Maybe but I’ve read history books that talk about the gaps between the haves and the have nots being a major source of social unrest and bringing down empires

Do you think the inequality gap is that vast in the UK?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Do you think the inequality gap is that vast in the UK?

It’s enormous

 

[Ccfcisparks]

History repeats itself once as farce, second as tragedy. This obsession with the left on a wealth tax goes to show it’s actually bankrupt of any intellectual property.

Wealth taxes is not a new concept that untested. It’s been implemented and repealed in many countries because it’s not an effective policy. India had a wealth tax in the 1950s and scrapped it in 2015, by all metrics, this is a society that is more unequal than our own.

Ironically, the biggest raises public service expenditure came at a time when economic growth was 2-3% under Blair and ironically, the top rate of tax was 40%.

Economic growth beats out tax raises every time and societies don’t tax themselves into prosperity. The sooner the left understands this, the sooner they can help the people they want to.

There are currently many countries operating some sort of wealth tax and its seen as succesfull.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Should any business be valued more than £1bn?

Elon Musk doesn’t earn £1.3t, that’s his ‘valuation’ based on the value of his stocks. It’s unrealised wealth and could fluctuate by billions on a day-by-day basis.

Ultimately, billionaires are easy targets for people like yourself, but they create jobs and livelihoods for thousands, millions of people. We can’t all have guaranteed jobs for life in the public sector…

If I were a communist or a socialist rather than a social democrat I guess you'd have a point. There's no objection from me on people getting rich, starting business etc...it's a big part of how we continue to make progress. The problem is when wealth and income inequality gets blown up to the levels that we're seeing whereby that wealth is concentrated in the hands of a shrinking number of people and the workers who help to create that wealth see less of a reward.

The repeated digs at public sector workers aren't helpful either. You accept that unless we want literal anarchy there needs to be a government of some form which needs to collect funds from people and employ some people for it to function. Things like education, policing, the military, healthcare and so on don't work with a profit incentive. Sneering at the people who work in different sectors as you can't resist doing ironically only benefits people at the top.

 

[Captain Dart]

It’s enormous

You missed the point, is it sufficient to create social unrest?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

There are currently many countries operating some sort of wealth tax and its seen as succesfull.

Name them.

 

[Ccfcisparks]

S

Name them.

Spain

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Spain

Define success?

Spain has been steadily reducing its wealth taxes - Madrid and Andalusia's (Spain’s capital and 2nd largest region) wealth tax is 0%. In any case, Spain’s wealth tax raises 0.2% of GDP.

Spain also has a number of exemptions such as:
- primary property
- luxury personal items
- family companies
- pensions
- heritage items (art)

Idk about you, but without being a tax expert, there are some v obvious ways you can get around these wealth taxes.

I’ll preempt you by mentioning Norway, whose wealth tax raises a bumper 0.4% of GDP.

The failure of Norway's wealth tax hike as a warning signal - Brussels Report

failure of Norway's wealth tax hike as a warning signal

www.brusselsreport.eu

 

[CCFCSteve]

S

Spain

Raises about €2bn.

I’m all for taxing people a bit more if it helps the country but none of the wealth taxes implemented have raised anything significant and even if we did get a chunk more in, people need to realise it won’t solve our current predicament

Said it a million times, if the average person wants better public services they need to be willing to pay more in tax and in exchange the cash generated needs to be spent better by local and national government. It’s one of the reasons why the country isn’t happy, they’re paying more but things seem to be getting worse. Still relatively early days of this government though

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Said it a million times, if the average person wants better public services they need to be willing to pay more in tax and in exchange the cash generated needs to be spent better by local and national government. It’s one of the reasons why the country isn’t happy, they’re paying more but things seem to be getting worse. Still relatively early days of this government though

No argument there, but this does extend to stuff outside what the government provides too. In general it feels as though we're paying an ever higher price for fewer crisps in the bag (a long lasting pet peeve of mine).

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

No argument there, but this does extend to stuff outside what the government provides too. In general it feels as though we're paying an ever higher price for fewer crisps in the bag (a long lasting pet peeve of mine).

Why? It’s the economy and the lack of growth. Tax rises on productive people to subsidise the unproductive people sets us on the road to serfdom.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Why? It’s the economy and the lack of growth. Tax rises on productive people to subsidise the unproductive people sets us on the road to serfdom.

Children and the elderly are economically unproductive, guess they're fucked then. Look, you just strike me as someone who's got way too high off his own supply.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

You missed the point, is it sufficient to create social unrest?

Yes but Farage is doing a good job of redirecting the working class to blaming an easier target for their woes

 

[PVA]

No argument there, but this does extend to stuff outside what the government provides too. In general it feels as though we're paying an ever higher price for fewer crisps in the bag (a long lasting pet peeve of mine).

A mate of mine works for Mars and says it's crazy how much smaller all their chocolates/products are getting but the prices keep increasing!

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Children and the elderly are economically unproductive, guess they're fucked then. Look, you just strike me as someone who's got way too high off his own supply.

When you’re highly strung about something, you lash out and bring up a complete straw man.

Let’s just set things straight, neither children or the elderly are ‘unproductive’.
Children = future taxpayers
Elderly = previous taxpayers

Examples of people who are unproductive:
- 4.03m UC claimants with ‘no work requirements’. Up from 1m in 2021 (DWP)
- 1.24m immigrants on UC (DWP who’s data also suggests it could be up to 1.9m)
- migrants on less than £35k p/a
- public sector pay outstripping inflation, whilst productivity flatlines
- funded by employers NI tax hike (a lot of public sector exemptions) = 134k more redundancies = 5% unemployment

The welfare bill is raising unsustainably and the latest £6bn increase mooted by Reeves at a time she’s considering tax rises is genuinely bonkers and will worsen the crises above.

 

[Captain Dart]

Yes but Farage is doing a good job of redirecting the working class to blaming an easier target for their woes

OK, change the subject if you will.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Yes but Farage is doing a good job of redirecting the working class to blaming an easier target for their woes

No, this has been bubbling away for much longer and the costs of immigration can’t be ignored anymore.

Farage also articulates a broader conservative economic platform for tax cuts and so on. People are unhappy their tax burden is at peace time records and billions of it is subsidising people on benefits, including a disproportionate amount of migrants. Again, you can’t have 90% of your population growth be down to net migration and not confront that it will have an impact on access to public services and housing.

I’m not entirely convinced of Farage, but his economic thinking diverges away from the ‘bean counting’ consensus of the last Tory-Labour governments.