Off Topic The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Should the UK remain a part of the EU or leave?

  • Stay in

    Votes: 56 47.9%

  • Get out

    Votes: 61 52.1%
  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
kiwiqpr said:
thats ok then


You must log in or register to see images


Politics For All

@PoliticsForAlI
· 9h
You must log in or register to see images
You must log in or register to see images
| BREAKING: Boris Johnson says the Taliban have changed

Via
@thetimes
Click to expand...
You must log in or register to see media
 
sb_73 said:
Because a one off tax won’t cover the costs which will continue, and continue rising, permanently. The tax would need to go on forever as well. Fine by me, but the sums involved would need an interesting definition of ‘Uber rich’, ie ‘earning a bit over the average’. The share dividend stuff presumably meets with your approval? Good on the surface for getting stuff from fat cats, but not so great for all those self employed who pay themselves in dividends from sole trader companies. Who will also be paying on the salaries they pay themselves. A lot of these are not what I would describe as ‘rich’.

It’s not clear to me whether this 1.25% rise in NI, which is then going to be turned into a new payroll tax, is strictly ringfenced for health and social care, or whether, like current NI, it just goes into government coffers. Either way it’s not enough, especially as it seems to be for making up shortfalls in NHS funding not just social care. Anything given to local government to spend on social care is at risk because the central government is cutting central funding with its other hand, while demanding more from education etc, plus some local authorities are very poorly run and in huge debt.

The Germans dealt with this, in a cross party agreement, twenty years ago as they saw the problems that we have known about for decades and did something about it - a 2.5% ringfenced social care tax on income, which is also intergeneration-ally fairer because it’s also levied on those who have retired on generous pensions - which are of course income (Tories can’t do this because they rely on the grey vote. They can relax the triple lock this year because COVID and the furlough scheme have skewed the figures on wage rises in a bizarre way). They also centralised the running of social care because local government couldn’t keep up with changes. Health is covered by other equitable insurance schemes. It’s not perfect but it’s vaguely progressive and a bit fairer, it’s a collective insurance system where the risk is pooled ( Half of the over 60s in the U.K. never access any kind of social care, and only 10% end up costing more than £100k, it’s just hard to tell in advance who will need what) I don’t know why we didn’t just copy them. Presumably because they are foreign, and our government has ‘not invented here’ syndrome.

This is better than the existing non system, but an all party approach so we don’t get endless fiddling with it, would have helped. And a realisation that the tax will need to go up.
Click to expand...

But a one off tax on the super rich would certainly help I’m sure.

They can certainly afford it
 
how much would a 2% lift in company tax raise

You must log in or register to see images


Politics For All

@PoliticsForAlI
· 12h
You must log in or register to see images
You must log in or register to see images
| BREAKING: NHS Test and Trace is paying Serco almost £50 million per month

Via
@thetimes
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobmid and Staines R's
 
kiwiqpr said:
how much would a 2% lift in company tax raise

You must log in or register to see images


Politics For All

@PoliticsForAlI
· 12h
You must log in or register to see images
You must log in or register to see images
| BREAKING: NHS Test and Trace is paying Serco almost £50 million per month

Via
@thetimes
Click to expand...
Thats the going rate for a world beating system!
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiwiqpr
Is that the nurses and health care professionals wage rise grabbed back by that habitual cheating, lying horrible twat of a PM? his record of u-turns and absolutely blatant lies to the public beggars belief.
 
Lets not forget the 4.4 billion pounds lost on stamp duty by basically letting anyone with homes who could afford to sell them to cash in
 
Lets be honest, there still is no plan for social care despite tax rises, there never has been. The tax rises are to cover the billions of pounds spaffed up the wall to test and trace and to Tory party donors for their useless PPE. Our money has helped the rich get richer and now we have to pay more to cover that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoop-Leif and BobbyD
Quite Possibly Raving said:
Was interested to guage reaction to the social care announcement on here but relatively muted reaction across the board. I wonder if that's representative across the country.

I have mixed feelings. Selfishly, as I have parents/grandparents who all own property in the south of England, I could conceivably benefit significantly from these proposals at some point.

On the other hand, I'd be absolutely livid if I was a renter, without prospect of inheritance which has now been protected, earning an average salary. I'm guessing there are a lot of under 40s in this boat who are now paying more tax to protect the inheritance of the rich. Especially infuriating for people in this situation to know that there will be 60 year olds who have drawn a pension, still earning six figures, not impacted by the NIC rise. And Govt didn't choose to look at other measures like means testing winter fuel payments, free TV licensing, free travel for over 60s etc, or an increase to CGT.

From a 'veil of ignorance' perspective, this probably isn't the way I'd choose to raise the finance, but it's smart politically as 20/30 and increasingly 40 year olds don't vote Tory so it doesn't matter if they are taxed more to pay for the grey voters social care.

That said, I'm impressed Johnson has actually stepped up to try and tackle a very thorny issue. As I've made clear, I have an extremely low opinion of him but this is the first time (as PM) I can remember when he's done something that appears to be an attempt to do something proactive and necessary rather than just looking to serve his own interests.

Interesting to see how this one goes down with the public. Also a tricky one for Lab to respond to, as they don't want to look like they are opposing more money for the NHS, but equally probably don't like what looks like a rather regressive tax rise.
Click to expand...

I have to say, I was surprised (and initially impressed) that Johnson had actually tried to tackle the social care issue. I suppose it's an indicator of how low expectations of Johnson and his government are that literally any initiative is welcome. On inspection, though, it's clear that this plan barely scratches the surface of the problem and that the tax increases that will pay for it are regressive and unfair.

What are the alternatives, though? Here's what I would propose....

Nationalise the care home industry, taking the profit motive out of people's misery and allowing staff to be properly paid. Care homes would either come under the NHS umbrella, or be run by a separate new state body. Care to be provided as needed and free of charge, paid for as follows:
  • Scrap National Insurance and incorporate it into Income Tax, a new employment tax to replace Ers NI.
  • Increase Income Tax by 2.5%.
  • A 10% 'Death Tax' on the estates of the deceased.
Thoughts?
 
Stroller said:
I have to say, I was surprised (and initially impressed) that Johnson had actually tried to tackle the social care issue. I suppose it's an indicator of how low expectations of Johnson and his government are that literally any initiative is welcome. On inspection, though, it's clear that this plan barely scratches the surface of the problem and that the tax increases that will pay for it are regressive and unfair.

What are the alternatives, though? Here's what I would propose....

Nationalise the care home industry, taking the profit motive out of people's misery and allowing staff to be properly paid. Care homes would either come under the NHS umbrella, or be run by a separate new state body. Care to be provided as needed and free of charge, paid for as follows:
  • Scrap National Insurance and incorporate it into Income Tax, a new employment tax to replace Ers NI.
  • Increase Income Tax by 2.5%.
  • A 10% 'Death Tax' on the estates of the deceased.
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

We already have a 40% death tax. Are you planning on reducing it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back