Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
Just listened on the radio to one of the most outrageous right wing statements I have ever heard.
The person was talking about the state pension which he stated should be means tested.
And he said that people who live in Council Tax Band D and above houses should be 'made to downsize in order to receive the state pension'.
This person was an economist.
Honestly. Talking about things like this just illustrates how divided this country has become.
Not only divided by rich and poor. But divided by age and the type of house people have worked hard all their lives to be able to afford.
The person was talking about the state pension which he stated should be means tested.
And he said that people who live in Council Tax Band D and above houses should be 'made to downsize in order to receive the state pension'.
This person was an economist.
Honestly. Talking about things like this just illustrates how divided this country has become.
Not only divided by rich and poor. But divided by age and the type of house people have worked hard all their lives to be able to afford.
It's the kind of thing people with lots of property, who have no need of a pension, tend to say.
And then we wonder why people don't take notice of so-called 'experts' anymore!
It's not as though (State) pensioners haven't paid in over their working lives, if state pensions become even remotely seen as a benefit, not a right, then we are on the way to hell in a hand cart.
Your party recently started to refer to the state pension as a benefit rather than something that has been paid for over a person’s working life.
Don't know which of my (many) parties said that, but it's wrong, when it refers to the basic state pension, for those who have contributed all their lives, it's a right and should not be means tested.
There are some areas (possibly more than at present) where means testing is appropriate where people are in receipt of 'benefits', especially in the situation the country is in now, but not the basic state pension.
Its been looked at before and rejected as a terrible idea.
How can a financial advisor advise a client to pay into a pension if the money then counts against your state pension? It would be a terrible return on investment as most people would see their long term income drop buy 30% or more. It would only work in terms of saving the govt money if it hurt most state pensioners and would lead to a massive drop in people taking out pensions which is the opposite of what is needed.
People would just retire earlier to come in under the threshold making more economically inactive people.
Yes exactly.
I mean who in their right mind would contemplate implementing such a policy bearing in mind that the current state pension the vast majority of people get is £135/week. Some of which is then taxed by those who pay the basic rate of income tax.
Furthermore, there is a lot of discussion going on as to whether this so called black hole in the economy actually exists. Because it depends on the way you do the accounting and over which timescales.
And then, assuming you believe that there is a large black hole, what the size is. I have read estimates between £0 and £60 billions.
When I worked in aero engineering, we were talking about manufacturing measurements with toleranceces down to microns. A thousandth of a millimeter.
So I really don't believe anything I am told by economists.
Or politicians by the way.
Well said.
And of course ones house is not a liquid asset.
Anyway, I simply don't understand how some people can think that just because you happen to live in a particular house which is in Council Tax Band D and above, you are somehow well off.
The council tax banding process relies primarily on a notional house value set all the way back in 1991 based on sale prices in that year. Wonderful eh.
Filling 'black holes'... really all this means is "can we make sure we don't pass too much debt on to our grandchildren"
No economist, and very few politicians will even know what you are talking about with microns...
We need to get back to making things that are real, but sadly it's all on spreadsheets or in cyberspace
To be fair there is a real issue here - with an ageing population, healthcare costs grow faster and faster every year, while the number of peak tax payers (in terms of income tax and NICs) falls. Which means that people of working age have to pay more and more tax to cover the costs of those not of working age.
We have to solve that issue somehow. Whatever we do will involve changing the status quo, and I'm sure some people will be worse off as a result. But the alternative is to do nothing and leave our kids to deal with a tax and pensions crisis to go with the climate crisis, housing crisis and debt crisis we're leaving them.
We are screwed if we don't massively increase immigration in the short term.
I have to be honest, there is stuff in Hunt's statement which should be continued by Labour if they ever get into power.
I do have a question for anyone/everyone that knows - how do we have the highest tax burden in 70 years after 12 years of supposedly tax cutting Tory Governments (e.g. raising the income tax thresholds) and massive austerity, which is premised on spending less money?
Can anyone point me to a clear answer, because I am genuinely baffled.
I do have a question for anyone/everyone that knows - how do we have the highest tax burden in 70 years after 12 years of supposedly tax cutting Tory Governments (e.g. raising the income tax thresholds) and massive austerity, which is premised on spending less money?
Can anyone point me to a clear answer, because I am genuinely baffled.
I don't know the figures for state pensions but for the public sector (and some private) pensions for every £1 paid in the providers are liable to pay £3 out. That led to the pension crisis a few weeks ago. I'd assume the state pension outlook is far worse than that. Something will have to give.
Considering how the boomer generation screwed everybody after them I'm not too keen to pay for that on top of everything else we've been saddled with. The burden should not fall on the young.
Why are we giving our energy to France?
COVID
Why is there such massive opposition to means-tested state pensions? Even if the 'means' were set very high (i.e. private pension provision or other income above £100K per tax year for example) then that would still save quite a lot of money? My granddad benefits from a state pension and it doesn't even touch the sides of what he gets from private pensions and he would be the first to admit that he could easily do without it, including the free bus pass etc. he is entitled to.
That's the issue though, it hasn't been paid for over a persons working life. We cover the current obligation not our own, the unlucky lot after us will have to do the same for us.
I wouldn't agree with the discussed proposal but some means testing will need to come in. I'd increase IHT on property to cover it all personally as that's the unearned income.
This is pre-Truss but its still a good overview of both the economics and the politics. Basically its down to weak economic growth since the financial crash which meant the economy hasn't kept up with the increasing costs of health, social care and pensions.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2022/02/the-rise-of-high-tax-britain
I think it's the potentially random nature of the targets (using rateable tax bands) plus the idea of treating the state pension as a means-tested benefit that makes it a bad idea. Plus, I see it as a deflection from the real issue, because it wouldn't save enough money, whereas it would set unhelpful precedents.
If it's intended as some kind of OAP wealth tax - why not have a wealth tax? Why is income earned from going to work taxed more heavily (due to the impact of NI, tax allowances and in some cases tax rates) than income from pensions, capital gains, investments, rents etc.
Making the tax system fairer is crucial, we need more money to do the things that need doing (on climate change, education, housing, health and on care services etc) a lot of that can and should come from people of pension age but that needs an honest approach to tax not just a gimmick.
This is at the absolute heart of the matter. Because the system is set up to enable those with wealth and property to create more wealth and gain more property at the expensive of those who work. This underlying philosophy is woven through the policies of all UK governments since the 80s.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Totally agree, and also inheritance tax as @Smores says above. Apologies for nitpicking but I would avoid the term wealth tax personally as it has overtones of jealousy rather than fairness, so Fair Taxes might be better. Hopefully Labour's spin people can come up with something, terminology-wise.
If you mean the 1580s, then correct. It's always been that way because if you penalise people for having wealth then they stop trying to acquire it, which is bad for everybody.
The system needs to focus on all sides equally, what that means is collecting more from the bottom end, by collecting more taxes from a higher minimum earning level, and at the top end not by taxing high earners but by cutting out the loopholes of those who use schemes to underpay. The chunk of people in the middle already pay more than their equal portion.
It's not about penalising people for having wealth, but taxing to support society in a fair manner. One of the loopholes, as you describe it, is the taxation of income disproportionally to revenue from the various types of capital gains.
Thank you. That's a very good, but very depressing, read.
At what point do the British public say we have had enough?
Yes I understand all of that. But the absolute key to solving this systematic problem is not with forcing older people to downsize. Or trying to tax them more in order to receive their pathetic state pension.
But by increasing the national GDP.
And you will only do that by as you say, changing the status quo.
As a country, we are making less and less and importing more and more.
That is THE problem. And unless we change that, the current problems will seem tiny going forward.
We are told that Brexit ment that we would be able to make our own decisions; not that I believe a word of that by the way.
So, kick out the useless career politician Business Secretary and replace him with someone who actually knows about manufacturing.
And make manufacturing or making things here in the UK a national priority. And fundamentally increase our GDP year on year.
Creating wealth and distributing it fairly is the way to make sure that we don't have to demonize the old people. Rather to raise the living standards of us all.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
"feckin get in Jeremy lad! Spending cuts and tax rises. You smashed it mate, bosh!!"
November 2011 - the UK faces a lost decade of growth:
https://www.ft.com/content/f1b5d790-1a84-11e1-ae14-00144feabdc0
"The big facts are that the UK is set for a lost decade and a longer period of stringency than expected. The government’s position is that there is no alternative. That has now become a self-fulfilling prophecy. So blame foreigners: that always works."
https://www.ft.com/content/f1b5d790-1a84-11e1-ae14-00144feabdc0
"The big facts are that the UK is set for a lost decade and a longer period of stringency than expected. The government’s position is that there is no alternative. That has now become a self-fulfilling prophecy. So blame foreigners: that always works."
We don't. We just lube up and let the Tories have their way.
Darren Cnut
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If the Tories or Labour say the word "Brexit" three times does Michael Keaton become Prime Minister?
Not once does Hunt say brexit.
I am so frustrated. The entire country is pretending an elephant is not in the room.
I am so frustrated. The entire country is pretending an elephant is not in the room.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Taking back control of our borders.
Get Brexit done.
Never again should anyone believe a single word you are told by a politician.
And doesn't he look proud of himself. Prime candidate for I'm A Celebrity....
"feckin get in Jeremy lad! Spending cuts and tax rises. You smashed it mate, bosh!!"
Net migration is an interesting one. On one hand, why would more people want to come here if we're the economic basket case of Europe? On the other, is it that people are far less likely to emigrate due to the end of free movement with the EU? (Was the latter ever that high to begin with?)
Find it weird to see the figures increase, despite there being worsening living standards and seasonal labourers drying up (are they counted in migration stats?).
Darren Grimes is a cnut fyi, just to add that in there.
It won't be Europeans coming over...
Shit as the UK might be it's still a hell of a lot better than many countries in the world and people want to come here, especially those with family connections. Just don't expect much highly skilled labour to arrive.