Do you want to discuss boring politics? (28 Viewers)

[fatso]

Let’s go the whole hog then and charge the rich no tax whatsoever. I’m sure the money will trickle down regardless.

There's always one!

 

---

[shmmeee]

I'm not talking about promotions I'm talking about overtime and extra shifts.

Hence why I used the words "overtime" and "extra shifts"

It's really not difficult. Do try and keep up.

Is there anything else I can explain to you?

It’s the same thing. More work for more money. No one is not taking more money cos of higher rate income tax. Thats just stupid. The £100k threshold drop for parents is real but outside of that it’s not a thing.

 

[shmmeee]

Let’s go the whole hog then and charge the rich no tax whatsoever. I’m sure the money will trickle down regardless.

Hey this is a good idea. We could deregulate finance too, those guys are always making money (somehow despite being higher rate payers), maybe privatise a few industries for efficiency. By Jove I think he’s got it!

 

[CCFCSteve]

Let’s go the whole hog then and charge the rich no tax whatsoever. I’m sure the money will trickle down regardless.

In terms of income tax the top 1% pay 30% of all income tax generate. Top 10% pay 60%. We discussed before that unless there is a global tax on wealth the richest will just move where they see fit. I think we’re losing 16k millionaires this year highest in the world (after around 10k last year). I added a link yesterday about Norway, also see Hollande and France.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

In terms of income tax the top 1% pay 30% of all income tax generate. Top 10% pay 60%. We discussed before that unless there is a global tax on wealth the richest will just move where they see fit. I think we’re losing 16k millionaires this year highest in the world (after around 10k last year). I added a link yesterday about Norway, also see Hollande and France.

Globally there has continued to be a transfer of wealth from those who don’t have much to those who already have a lot. The outpouring of sympathy for the ultra rich on here touches my heart though.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I'm not talking about promotions I'm talking about overtime and extra shifts.

Hence why I used the words "overtime" and "extra shifts"

It's really not difficult. Do try and keep up.

Is there anything else I can explain to you?

Haha, you get paid for overtime

 

[CCFCSteve]

Globally there has continued to be a transfer of wealth from those who don’t have much to those who already have a lot. The outpouring of sympathy for the ultra rich on here touches my heart though.

We all know what’s happened* and I’d imagine 99% aren’t happy with it but unless you’re gonna change global tax regimes I think it’s better to focus on what we might be able to control


*a lot of facilitated or at least encouraged by endless QE which some on here are more than happy with

 

[SBT]

why should I work overtime and extra shifts. when I'm losing 40% of that income to tax?

Because you’ll get more money imo

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

We all know what’s happened* and I’d imagine 99% aren’t happy with it but unless you’re gonna change global tax regimes I think it’s better to focus on what we might be able to control


*a lot of facilitated or at least encouraged by endless QE which some on here are more than happy with

Regular people have been squeezed enough as it is, so where else do you suggest we get money from? Looking in the direction of people who have hoarded obscene sums of money is the obvious place.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Well currently there’s a big redistribution of wealth into a shrinking number of hands, but I don’t see much objection to that. Look at the naked grab of that in the US for the best example.

Yep and ironically as a result of quantitative easing and generous hand outs of COVID grants/loans and more.

Quantitative easing is credited with pushing up asset prices (i.e. property). Cheap credit hasn’t helped because there’s a generation of new homeowners that has increased the % of their income on mortgage payments and because they have maxed out their borrowing… are completely exposed to fluctuating interest rates.

It’s not looking good.

 

[SBT]

Taxing wealth more is never the way to generate more income.

The wealthy just up sticks and move abroad ,
Hence why places like Monaco and Dubai are full of millionaires.
They take their money else where and the jobs that money creates goes with them.

Which of the low-tax millionaire haven economies do you think Britain should most ideally resemble? Are you hankering after Monaco-levels cost of living? Or a Dubai-level social safety net for the less fortunate?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Yep and ironically as a result of quantitative easing and generous hand outs of COVID grants/loans and more.

Quantitative easing is credited with pushing up asset prices (i.e. property). Cheap credit hasn’t helped because there’s a generation of new homeowners that has increased the % of their income on mortgage payments and because they have maxed out their borrowing… are completely exposed to fluctuating interest rates.

It’s not looking good.

Pumping money into the economy during lockdown was a necessity. Longer ago we deregulated financial services to the point we not only allowed criminal bankers to wreck the global economy, we used public money to bail out their institutions.

We have followed the trickle down route enough times to know that the wealth doesn’t trickle down, it gets further concentrated, and the government ends up more out of pocket.

 

[CCFCSteve]

Regular people have been squeezed enough as it is, so where else do you suggest we get money from? Looking in the direction of people who have hoarded obscene sums of money is the obvious place.

My point is unless it’s done properly/sensibly many appear to be willing to go elsewhere….we all know what that means, those of us who contribute have to pay even more !

 

[CCFCSteve]

Pumping money into the economy during lockdown was a necessity. Longer ago we deregulated financial services to the point we not only allowed criminal bankers to wreck the global economy, we used public money to bail out their institutions.

We have followed the trickle down route enough times to know that the wealth doesn’t trickle down, it gets further concentrated, and the government ends up more out of pocket.

It was the right thing to bail out the banks at the time and ultimately cost very little in the grand scheme of things (think around £10bn was the loss on RBS). It was disgusting that internationally very few of any bankers/senior bankers paid for this (sued, jail etc) though. The problem with GFC though though was the start of massive QE globally !

QE started around GFC but continued in the intervening years, totally unnecessarily for a lot of it. Some was required for Covid but probably nowhere near £450bn. There’s been almost £1trn overall.

I’ve explained before that by debasing the currency we all have less purchasing power, those with hard, tangible assets benefit ie the rich because assets appreciate in value (or at least stay still as the currency debases so it gives the illusion they’re increasing) and those people can borrow more at artificially low rates to buy even more assets. Those with limited tangible assets/only cash lose out because the value of that money depreciates and the prices of everything increases.

We’ve not been living in the real world with suppressed interest rates and available cash sloshing around the system. Then suddenly rates had to be increased due to inflation and we’re paying £100bn pa in interest just to service government debt

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Pumping money into the economy during lockdown was a necessity. Longer ago we deregulated financial services to the point we not only allowed criminal bankers to wreck the global economy, we used public money to bail out their institutions.

We have followed the trickle down route enough times to know that the wealth doesn’t trickle down, it gets further concentrated, and the government ends up more out of pocket.

It was pumped into the economy and did two things primarily:

1) a record transfer of wealth to the ‘wealthy’, be it individuals or corporations, AND;
2) introduced the welfare state to many young and able people

It’s a twofold issue and 2 obviously unintended consequences.

 

[chiefdave]

Regular people have been squeezed enough as it is, so where else do you suggest we get money from? Looking in the direction of people who have hoarded obscene sums of money is the obvious place.

There may be differences of opinion in how to implement it but surely nobody disagrees with the fundamental idea of those with the most paying more than they do now rather than the continued squeeze on working people.

I have a ‘good’ job. Being a good citizen like I’m told to be, working hard, struggling to own a house etc etc

In my working life in my sector I’ve seen it go from strictly 9-5, overtime or toil kicking in past that, pay rises every year, bonuses two or three times a year, 35 days + holiday being the norm to 10 hour days being the norm, with no overtime or toil, stagnant pay, no bonuses (or benefits), holiday entitlement down to the legally allowed minimum.

And people wonder why productivity isn’t shooting up!

These changes have all occurred in approx the last 15 years but seem never ending. We’ve now got a generation coming through who, if we don’t change things, are rejecting our way of life. They aren’t prepared to be slaves to work for little return.

While this change has taken place it’s also been noticeable that company owners are taking more and more. It’s not sustainable.

And we wonder why workers aren’t productive. People are tired and have had enough. They’ve seen through trickle down and the idea that if you work hard you get rewarded.

 

[wingy]

It was the right thing to bail out the banks at the time and ultimately cost very little in the grand scheme of things (think around £10bn was the loss on RBS). It was disgusting that internationally very few of any bankers/senior bankers paid for this (sued, jail etc) though

QE started around GFC but continued in the intervening years, totally unnecessarily for a lot of it. Some was required for Covid but probably nowhere near £450bn. There’s been almost £1trn overall.

I’ve explained before that by debasing the currency we all have less purchasing power, those with hard, tangible assets benefit ie the rich because assets appreciate in value (or at least stay still as the currency debases so it gives the illusion they’re increasing) and those people can borrow more at artificially low rates to buy even more assets. Those with limited tangible assets/only cash lose out because the value of that money depreciates and the prices of everything increases.

We’ve not been living in the real world with suppressed interest rates and available cash sloshing around the system. Then suddenly rates had to be increased due to inflation and we’re paying £100bn pa in interest just to service government debt

I still naively I assume the way to do it was to bail out the end users which then goes to the Banks or whatever lender of choice!

 

[chiefdave]

It was pumped into the economy and did two things primarily:

1) a record transfer of wealth to the ‘wealthy’, be it individuals or corporations, AND;
2) introduced the welfare state to many young and able people

It’s a twofold issue and 2 obviously unintended consequences.

Completely agree with your first point. On the second we’re seeing the results of austerity, a generation of kids who are physically or mentally fucked before they start. Add in the long term impact of Covid, which it seems people want to pretend doesn’t exist, and there’s a big problem coming.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

It was the right thing to bail out the banks at the time and ultimately cost very little in the grand scheme of things (think around £10bn was the loss on RBS). It was disgusting that internationally very few of any bankers/senior bankers paid for this (sued, jail etc) though

QE started around GFC but continued in the intervening years, totally unnecessarily for a lot of it. Some was required for Covid but probably nowhere near £450bn. There’s been almost £1trn overall.

I’ve explained before that by debasing the currency we all have less purchasing power, those with hard, tangible assets benefit ie the rich because assets appreciate in value (or at least stay still as the currency debases so it gives the illusion they’re increasing) and those people can borrow more at artificially low rates to buy even more assets. Those with limited tangible assets/only cash lose out because the value of that money depreciates and the prices of everything increases.

We’ve not been living in the real world with suppressed interest rates and available cash sloshing around the system. Then suddenly rates had to be increased due to inflation and we’re paying £100bn pa in interest just to service government debt

Exactly, my mum remortgaged in 2008 at 6 or 8%. When interest rates spiked under Truss to historically normal levels, there was mass panic and rightly so. It just demonstrates how dysfunctional the economy is.

There were even calls for government to step in and support with people’s mortgages which is just grotesque for renters and non-home owners.

 

[wingy]

Exactly, my mum remortgaged in 2008 at 6 or 8%. When interest rates spiked under Truss to historically normal levels, there was mass panic and rightly so. It just demonstrates how dysfunctional the economy is.

There were even calls for government to step in and support with people’s mortgages which is just grotesque for renters and non-home owners.

I did address that point at the time, compensation for everyone would have been required,two bangs for your buck's for the price of one going direct to Banks?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Completely agree with your first point. On the second we’re seeing the results of austerity, a generation of kids who are physically or mentally fucked before they start. Add in the long term impact of Covid, which it seems people want to pretend doesn’t exist, and there’s a big problem coming.

Austerity effectively ended in 2017. The left needs to get out of its head that all evils go back to austerity.

Fraser Nelson did a documentary on the welfare state and there are specific things where the UK is an outlier. Close to 90% of people in receipt of welfare will not leave the system and close to 10-11% of the population are on some sort of incapacity benefits. This is driven by 18-24 year olds with mental health issues. This benefit was modelled on 2% of the population on this, not 10%+.

Welfare reform is needed and the government U-turning in modest reforms was cowardly.

 

[Captain Dart]

Austerity effectively ended in 2017. The left needs to get out of its head that all evils go back to austerity.

Fraser Nelson did a documentary on the welfare state and there are specific things where the UK is an outlier. Close to 90% of people in receipt of welfare will not leave the system and close to 10-11% of the population are on some sort of incapacity benefits. This is driven by 18-24 year olds with mental health issues. This benefit was modelled on 2% of the population on this, not 10%+.

Welfare reform is needed and the government U-turning in modest reforms was cowardly.

Why should so many 18-24 year olds have mental health issues and need support, I find that hard to understand.

 

[chiefdave]

Austerity effectively ended in 2017. The left needs to get out of its head that all evils go back to austerity.

Fraser Nelson did a documentary on the welfare state and there are specific things where the UK is an outlier. Close to 90% of people in receipt of welfare will not leave the system and close to 10-11% of the population are on some sort of incapacity benefits. This is driven by 18-24 year olds with mental health issues. This benefit was modelled on 2% of the population on this, not 10%+.

Welfare reform is needed and the government U-turning in modest reforms was cowardly.

I don’t think austerity is necessarily the root cause of changes in pay & benefits, at least not in my sector.

It’s a convenient excuse used by those at the top. The amount of work the companies I have worked for has never dropped as a result of austerity or any other crisis yet they’re constantly referenced as a reason to need to cut staff, stop pay rises, stop bonuses & benefits etc. Not to mention the trend of cutting staff and expecting those remaining to take on the additional workload.

As for benefits think we need to stop obsessing over the minority who have no desire to work and instead concentrate on the large number of people who would love to play a more active role in society. Support for those people is non existent and they never seem to be spoken about when people talk about the need to have less people on benefits.

 

[chiefdave]

Why should so many 18-24 year olds have mental health issues and need support, I find that hard to understand.

I think it’s valid to ask why so many kids are SEND(?) now. When I was at school it wasn’t a thing, which obviously wasn’t the case it was just not considered. Have we gone too far the other way and now have an education system pumping out kids not ready to play a role in the workforce.

Having said that I’m sure absolutely destroying mental health services in the last decade or so hasn’t helped.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Austerity effectively ended in 2017. The left needs to get out of its head that all evils go back to austerity.

Fraser Nelson did a documentary on the welfare state and there are specific things where the UK is an outlier. Close to 90% of people in receipt of welfare will not leave the system and close to 10-11% of the population are on some sort of incapacity benefits. This is driven by 18-24 year olds with mental health issues. This benefit was modelled on 2% of the population on this, not 10%+.

Welfare reform is needed and the government U-turning in modest reforms was cowardly.

The modest reforms you speak of planned to take my wife’s PIP. Not ‘modest’ for us I assure you.

 

[fatso]

Which of the low-tax millionaire haven economies do you think Britain should most ideally resemble? Are you hankering after Monaco-levels cost of living? Or a Dubai-level social safety net for the less fortunate?

I'm simply suggesting a tax system that doesn't look to squeeze the wealthy until they leave and hence take all their wealth (and the tax) with them.

Currently the top 1% of earners pay 30% of the tax. If they leave the country, who pays that lost tax revenue?

It's not practical for the working classes to scream about their tax burden being too high and at the same time demanding the top 1% are taxed more.

We need to spend the money we have more wisely, and committing to spending 5% of gdp on defence is financial madness, as is the spiraling cost of HS2.

 

[SBT]

It's not practical for the working classes to scream about their tax burden being too high and at the same time demanding the top 1% are taxed more.

Who said anything about it being practical? For one group it can be a matter of survival; for the other it’s largely one of convenience.

 

[chiefdave]

Currently the top 1% of earners pay 30% of the tax. If they leave the country, who pays that lost tax revenue?

What’s the breakdown for % of income paid in tax as you move up the income scale? Sure that data must exist somewhere. Although to get the full picture you need to factor in things like VAT which may be tricky

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

What’s the breakdown for % of income paid in tax as you move up the income scale? Sure that data must exist somewhere. Although to get the full picture you need to factor in things like VAT which may be tricky

VAT, the regressive tax that no party seems to care about cutting.

 

[fatso]

VAT, the regressive tax that no party seems to care about cutting.

VAT is a tax on spending the money you've already paid tax on. (So is stamp duty)

Raising VAT, NI, inheritance tax and fuel duty etc and freezing tax band thresholds indefinitely is politically less damaging for the government than increasing income tax.
But you soon realise that in effect we all work for the Chancellor.

 

[chiefdave]

In London and just seen some Reform / Tommy Robinson protest go past. Small in number but it made me laugh that they had signs about Starmer being a communist

Probably explains why I saw some random guy in a union flag shirt kicking off with a copper when I went to breakfast.

 

[Captain Dart]

I think it’s valid to ask why so many kids are SEND(?) now. When I was at school it wasn’t a thing, which obviously wasn’t the case it was just not considered. Have we gone too far the other way and now have an education system pumping out kids not ready to play a role in the workforce.

Having said that I’m sure absolutely destroying mental health services in the last decade or so hasn’t helped.

Telling children they have special needs, what a good way to encourage them.

 

[Nick]

I think it’s valid to ask why so many kids are SEND(?) now. When I was at school it wasn’t a thing, which obviously wasn’t the case it was just not considered. Have we gone too far the other way and now have an education system pumping out kids not ready to play a role in the workforce.

Having said that I’m sure absolutely destroying mental health services in the last decade or so hasn’t helped.

It's probably generational, I'd bet their parents have never done a day's work so now they aren't.

Being send isn't an excuse, obviously if somebody is severely disabled they can't work.

 

[CCFCSteve]

I think it’s valid to ask why so many kids are SEND(?) now. When I was at school it wasn’t a thing, which obviously wasn’t the case it was just not considered. Have we gone too far the other way and now have an education system pumping out kids not ready to play a role in the workforce.

Having said that I’m sure absolutely destroying mental health services in the last decade or so hasn’t helped.

Throw in mobile phones (plus social media) as one of the main reasons for starters. Crazy that there doesn’t seem to be proper recognition of this. I’ve noticed with a fully formed brain (some might argue with that) how my attention span/focus has dropped off, god knows what it’s doing to kids. Frightening

 

[Marty]

I think it’s valid to ask why so many kids are SEND(?) now. When I was at school it wasn’t a thing, which obviously wasn’t the case it was just not considered. Have we gone too far the other way and now have an education system pumping out kids not ready to play a role in the workforce.

Having said that I’m sure absolutely destroying mental health services in the last decade or so hasn’t helped.

Definitely.