Election Year or Fear!

[ramAnag]

While I'm at it, how can Thames Water justify paying out >?10Bn out in dividends since it started while, at the same time, building up debts of around ?15Bn. There's never been a profit so how can there have been a dividend? They also have a HUGE backlog of repairs and maintenance they claim they need government help to clear by a subsidy of several billion.

I find this obscene. I also think that gas, electric, water and public transport should be publicly run and not for profit.

Agreeing entirely with all of that and virtually all of your previous post too.

As regards GP?s post. You say ?we already all have too much as we have the luxury of deciding how to get rid of the excess?, but I feel that?s an oversimplification.
Not unlike MA, Mrs rA and myself may currently - property included - appear very comfortably off, but we are getting on a bit and, like everyone else, we don?t know what the future holds.
At the moment I think we?re both relatively healthy and there is little we can?t do but, as we all know, that can all change in the blink of an eye.
Currently I believe that care home costs are running at an average of about 1400GBP plus per week (73k pp per anum) so you see the problem and there are a great many folk, mostly in their late seventies and more, who will be facing the same dilemma.
Big and well deserved rewards to the politician who can find an answer to this one.

P.S. Sorry, if this site has been hacked it must have been by the anti punctuation police. Kin ridiculous. Sort it out!

[swaledale]

The answer is fairly simple RA, the trouble is the right wing media and voters get their knickers in a twist about it being paid for out of taxes or inheitance.

Same old story - people want, NHS, effective Police, and effective justice system, good schools and good older persons care, but they complain about paying for it by tax, which the billionaires who could afford to pay a little more, encourage and whip up up opposition to, knowing what people are like. May's proposals were actually quite fair, but the howls of the billionaire backed press sparked a revolt against her.

I mean its not as if there aren't economies in Europe that actually manage all these things, and before anybody says no system is perfect, but the Scandinavian model does provide good welfare, education etc. for their citizens and of course higher taxes.

So its not that there isn't a solution, its that politicians aren't brave enough to tell voters the truth, knowing full well they won't like it.

[ramAnag]

The answer is fairly simple RA, the trouble is the right wing media and voters get their knickers in a twist about it being paid for out of taxes or inheitance.

Same old story - people want, NHS, effective Police, and effective justice system, good schools and good older persons care, but they complain about paying for it by tax, which the billionaires who could afford to pay a little more, encourage and whip up up opposition to, knowing what people are like. May's proposals were actually quite fair, but the howls of the billionaire backed press sparked a revolt against her.

I mean its not as if there aren't economies in Europe that actually manage all these things, and before anybody says no system is perfect, but the Scandinavian model does provide good welfare, education etc. for their citizens and of course higher taxes.

So its not that there isn't a solution, its that politicians aren't brave enough to tell voters the truth, knowing full well they won't like it.

Yes. Again I agree. I had hoped one of the more economically literate contributors might have an alternative but previously, when one asked how I would pay for all my idealism and my reply was - higher taxes with more paid by those who can afford it - it all went oddly quiet.

[SithHappens]

But the mail et al tells us for every hardworking person paying tax there are a dozen lazy good for nothings taking money out the state to afford brand new tvs, mobile phones, 60 a day smoking habits and copius amount of drinking. Not forgetting annual holidays to sandals on sundrenched shores.

[Andy_Faber]

To answer AF's question...

I have nothing against people working hard and making money.

I have nothing against people starting up a business and making a profit. Caveat there is that they pay their staff well and treat them well. Passing some of the profit on to shareholder is not an issue either, provided the staff also benefit from the profits generated by their efforts.

We've agreed on roughly those words before

But, for those who's naivete/idealism leads them to cry 'limit wealth' or 'tax the rich', ponder on where that would leave you on any given weekend in winter. Not Pride Park that's for sure

[ramAnag]

We've agreed on roughly those words before

But, for those who's naivete/idealism leads them to cry 'limit wealth' or 'tax the rich', ponder on where that would leave you on any given weekend in winter. Not Pride Park that's for sure

Strange response. So you justify the current system of inequality on the basis of one wealthy person saving Derby County.

I can understand that there may be much to admire about Mr. Clowes but, while you are critical of the alleged naivety and idealism of others, what is your answer to the social inequality MA refers to?

[Geoff Parkstone]

Or indeed where these new investors many hanker for getting there wealth from. It ain't by getting promoted to head teacher.

[ramAnag]

Or indeed where these new investors many hanker for getting there wealth from. It ain't by getting promoted to head teacher.

What does that even mean?

[Andy_Faber]

Strange response. So you justify the current system of inequality on the basis of one wealthy person saving Derby County.

I can understand that there may be much to admire about Mr. Clowes but, while you are critical of the alleged naivety and idealism of others, what is your answer to the social inequality MA refers to?

Not justifying anything with that particular comment. Just pointing out a benefit we all share in the hard-earned, legally acquired and properly taxed assets of one of 'the rich'. I didn't see anyone handing in their season ticket to preserve their social ethics when he took over, nor, I guess, will I see it if he sells up to a sovereign wealth fund of a country with a shocking human rights record.

[Andy_Faber]

I've just caught up on the news - it sounds like a good first step towards social justice would be to enact TTR's prophecy of changing the man in charge and his badly advised or cloth-eared henchpeople. What a bloody shambles!

[swaledale]

Not justifying anything with that particular comment. Just pointing out a benefit we all share in the hard-earned, legally acquired and properly taxed assets of one of 'the rich'. I didn't see anyone handing in their season ticket to preserve their social ethics when he took over, nor, I guess, will I see it if he sells up to a sovereign wealth fund of a country with a shocking human rights record.

WTF are you on about? MA RA and myself said quite clearly that the issue isn't people accumulating wealth by legitimate means, paying their taxes and treating their employees fairly, which by all accounts Clowes does. So whats the social ethics that would be preserved?

On the other hand when you have people like Dyson, Ratcliffe and Bamford who are so patriotic, they live abroad and have convoluted arrangements to avoid paying a penny more tax than they have to, that's a different scenario.

I rally can't see Clowes selling up to an ethically dodgy person or organisation to be honest. But certainly my interest in Derby would cease if that did happen. Obviously most fans wouldn't give a stuff, but then obviously there are fans who are racist, bigoted and have right wing tendencies (even though they claim otherwise).

[swaledale]

Strange response. So you justify the current system of inequality on the basis of one wealthy person saving Derby County.

I can understand that there may be much to admire about Mr. Clowes but, while you are critical of the alleged naivety and idealism of others, what is your answer to the social inequality MA refers to?

Careful RA, you will blow his mind trying to answer that one!

[ramAnag]

Not justifying anything with that particular comment. Just pointing out a benefit we all share in the hard-earned, legally acquired and properly taxed assets of one of 'the rich'. I didn't see anyone handing in their season ticket to preserve their social ethics when he took over, nor, I guess, will I see it if he sells up to a sovereign wealth fund of a country with a shocking human rights record.

Strange, curious and certainly evasive. You introduced David Clowes and football club ownership into the argument but the question was, what would you do about the issues MA raised i.e. the rapidly widening gap between rich and poor and, I imagine, the fact that we are now in a situation where approaching half of the worlds wealth is owned by the richest 1% of people?
Maybe that is all fine by you. If it is, say so, because talking about legally acquired properly taxed assets and preserving social ethics is a GP sized red herring.

[MadAmster]

The 1% (and the multinationals) have well paid accountants who are experts in tax avoidance, tax evasion, tax havens, entering into agreements with government that sees them pay little to no tax. I have no way of checking but there are those spouting things like Amazon and other mutlis paying around 1% on their profits. If that's true then I'm all for making them pay the full amount of Corporation Tax or whatever it's called these days.

The 5 expat media magnates who own almost all UK media outlets should be paying full UK tax IMO. The Tax Laws need changing to prevent this abuse.

With regard to the DCFC situation, the club is now owned by Clowes Developments, not David personally. IIRC, he's not the only "owner" of Clowes Developments. Any losses he plugs at the club can be used as a tax write off with his "main" business. Nothing amiss there.

If Musk was a UK resident, I'm perfectly sure he could afford and not even notice a 2% to 5% wealth tax on anything over 20M GBP. According to AI...

A 5% wealth tax on individuals in the UK with net wealth exceeding ?20 million could potentially raise a significant amount of revenue, but estimates vary. Some analyses suggest it could generate around ?22 billion annually. However, other estimates are lower, with some proposing that a 2% wealth tax on assets exceeding ?10 million could raise around ?24 billion annually according to The Telegraph. The exact amount would depend on the definition of net wealth and how the tax is structured.

Now, IMO, and I know others may well disagree, those "falling foul" of such a wealth tax wouldn't notice the small hole in their finances. A similar "hike" on, say, income tax would see the poorest 60% struggling to make ends meet.

In NL we have a wealth tax which starts at "worth" above 57684 Euro, twice that for a couple. This is exclusive of the value of your primary home. Rates vary according to what your various bits of worth actually are. Money in a savings account gets taxed at 1.44%. Stocks, shares, 2nd and further homes are taxed at 5.88%. Despite this, Dutch income tax is one of the highest in the EU.

[Andy_Faber]

. I have no way of checking but there are those spouting things like Amazon and other mutlis paying around 1% on their profits. If that's true then I'm all for making them pay the full amount of Corporation Tax or whatever it's called these days.

The 5 expat media magnates who own almost all UK media outlets should be paying full UK tax IMO. The Tax Laws need changing to prevent this abuse.

A 5% wealth wealth tax


.

Bottom to top: no basic issue with that despite its difficulty in being applied. But where’s the lower point? rA’s clarion call was simply ‘tax the rich’, let’s have some numbers

They don’t own the BBC, where most traditionalist go, and they don’t own the big social media platforms, where most non traditionalists go. I think the impact of print media these days is overstated

Imagine Amazon taking umbrage at a tax hike and withdrawing their services from uk. Amazon could handle it, not sure uk could in the short term as it’s become so dependant on it. Maybe one of the Chinese equivalents would step in…