Labour Party politics

[Teddy Eagle]

Again, I don't like the emotive framing that I'm being 'resentful'.

I don't resent pensioners at all - I just want our fiscal policy to accurately reflect the huge generational imbalance in wealth that currently exist.

You might resent pensioners more if you knew that when you retire everything is free. Bills, alcohol, clothes, petrol, food, holidays, everything. We often have to build a massive bonfire out of £20 notes just to get rid of them and to spite everyone still at work. And then the government insist on handing everyone thousands more in pensions every week. Oh, well.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

So why has he backed off the benefits jobby.
This statement fits that as well !

Because it's a terrible policy that impacts some of the most economically vulnerable in society.

I am suggesting policies should be aimed at the wealthier demographics in society, such as pensioners.

 

[Eagleman13]

When there's a report that says 'house prices are up by 6%' do they put a disclaimer to say "not every house in the country has gone up by 6%'? They don't, because it's f***ing obvious.

No idea where or when you got that info from . . .

House prices see biggest monthly fall for over two years

The Nationwide says the fall may reflect weaker demand following April's changes to stamp duty.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[georgenorman]

Because it's a terrible policy that impacts some of the most economically vulnerable in society.

I am suggesting policies should be aimed at the wealthier demographics in society, such as pensioners.

What you going to do once you have removed all the money from people who have money?

 

[CPFCSaturn]

No idea where or when you got that info from . . .

House prices see biggest monthly fall for over two years

The Nationwide says the fall may reflect weaker demand following April's changes to stamp duty.

www.bbc.co.uk

🤣

It was an example, Eagleman13 - I didn't claim that house prices have gone up by 6%, I just put a number to a hypothetical example to prove a point.

 

[NEILLO]

🤣

It was an example, Eagleman13 - I didn't claim that house prices have gone up by 6%, I just put a number to a hypothetical example to prove a point.

And of course, not all of them fell 🤣

 

[CPFCSaturn]

What you going to do once you have removed all the money from people who have money?

What am I going to do once we have addressed the obscene wealth inequality in the country? Well improve the standard of living for the vast majority of the country, obviously.

 

[georgenorman]

What am I going to do once we have addressed the obscene wealth inequality in the country? Well improve the standard of living for the vast majority of the country, obviously.

In every country where taking money from those that have some and supposedly using it to improve the lives of those that don't have ended in abject failure and worse. Why do you think Britain would be any different?

 

[CPFCSaturn]

In every country where taking money from those that have some and supposedly using it to improve the lives of those that don't have ended in abject failure and worse. Why do you think Britain would be any different?

We’ve done this many times before - I’m not interested in a GCSE Politics level exchange where you start talking about socialism.

What were the tax rates on the rich during the ‘golden era’ of capitalism? Did that result in abject failure and worse?

Norway have a wealth tax currently and are regularly ranked as one of the best places to live in the world.

Its an interesting discussion if you can engage in it - there exists a huge range of options between our current version of capitalism and socialism.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

What am I going to do once we have addressed the obscene wealth inequality in the country? Well improve the standard of living for the vast majority of the country, obviously.

When the top rate of income tax was 19/6 in the pound I don't remember my standard of living improving.

 

[cryrst]

Because it's a terrible policy that impacts some of the most economically vulnerable in society.

I am suggesting policies should be aimed at the wealthier demographics in society, such as pensioners.

And the WFA removal didn’t impact some of the most economically vulnerable, those being pensioners. If averages were the way to choose then a high average of benefit claimants don’t need it or deserve it.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

And the WFA removal didn’t impact some of the most economically vulnerable, those being pensioners. If averages were the way to choose then a high average of benefit claimants don’t need it or deserve it.

Benefits are already means tested.

The WFA was not.

Both should be means tested.

 

[cryrst]

We’ve done this many times before - I’m not interested in a GCSE Politics level exchange where you start talking about socialism.

What were the tax rates on the rich during the ‘golden era’ of capitalism? Did that result in abject failure and worse?

Norway have a wealth tax currently and are regularly ranked as one of the best places to live in the world.

Its an interesting discussion if you can engage in it - there exists a huge range of options between our current version of capitalism and socialism.

In the purest sense it is socialism though.
Trying to make everyone equal just makes everyone poor.

 

[cryrst]

Benefits are already means tested.

The WFA was not.

Both should be means tested.

Benefits are not tested enough then as many don’t qualify but get it anyway through the back door.
Should be a harsher test imo.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

In the purest sense it is socialism though.
Trying to make everyone equal just makes everyone poor.

No, it’s not.

Was ‘the golden era of capitalism’ also just socialism?

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Benefits are not tested enough then as many don’t qualify but get it anyway through the back door.
Should be a harsher test imo.

From the limited exposure I’ve had to benefit applications, they don’t look easy at all.

If it were so easy to claim benefits and live an easy life, why doesn’t everyone do it?

 

[georgenorman]

We’ve done this many times before - I’m not interested in a GCSE Politics level exchange where you start talking about socialism.

What were the tax rates on the rich during the ‘golden era’ of capitalism? Did that result in abject failure and worse?

Norway have a wealth tax currently and are regularly ranked as one of the best places to live in the world.

Its an interesting discussion if you can engage in it - there exists a huge range of options between our current version of capitalism and socialism.

Norway's standard of living is almost entirely based on their oil wealth.
We are already suffering the highest taxation we have ever had and have to sit and watch governments p it up the wall on incredibly mad project like HS2 and Green Energy.
Meanwhile more and more layers of government are added, Regional Assemblies, Metro-Mayors, Police Commissioners - all a complete waste of money.
People's standard of living will rise if they are given incentives to work, keep and spend their own money rather than the state making choices for them.
Less government, less taxation, that's what we need.
The wealthy already contribute most in taxation. It will reach a point when they will choose to b-off with their money and businesses - what will you do then?

 

[georgenorman]

When the top rate of income tax was 19/6 in the pound I don't remember my standard of living improving.

Yes and money and business drained from the country.
It's the same with Corporation Tax, when they cut the rate, the amount they collected actually rose.

 

[DANGERCLOSE]

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Norway's standard of living is almost entirely based on their oil wealth.
We are already suffering the highest taxation we have ever had and have to sit and watch governments p it up the wall on incredibly mad project like HS2 and Green Energy.
Meanwhile more and more layers of government are added, Regional Assemblies, Metro-Mayors, Police Commissioners - all a complete waste of money.
People's standard of living will rise if they are given incentives to work, keep and spend their own money rather than the state making choices for them.
Less government, less taxation, that's what we need.
The wealthy already contribute most in taxation. It will reach a point when they will choose to b-off with their money and businesses - what will you do then?

Income tax rates have been much higher previously than they are currently.

I think addressing government wastage and corruption is a huge priority, agree.

People’s standard of living will not improve through just going to work - most people’s salaries nowadays are paid almost entirely to landlords, energy companies and supermarkets - it’s exacerbating wealth inequality, not improving it.

There are plenty of countries with higher tax rates than us with no shortage of rich people. There was a load of fear-mongering when Labour got elected that all the rich people would leave, and it never happened.