Snap General Election?
Discussion
skahigh said:
This would cost me something like an extra £4k per year in tax compared to council tax, this would have a significant impact on our lives.
On the other hand, the Conservatives want to destroy my profession if this is to be believed.
http://www.itcontractor.com/theresa-may-abolish-co...
Some choice I have in this election.
FWIW Labour will abolish contracting too, it's in their manifestoOn the other hand, the Conservatives want to destroy my profession if this is to be believed.
http://www.itcontractor.com/theresa-may-abolish-co...
Some choice I have in this election.
footnote said:
Are you (PPP) saying that when you vote, you regularly give priority to what you subjectively decide is in the 'national interest' over what you believe to be in your personal interest, with the intention of correcting the 'badness or wrongness' of any major poitical party in offering you incentives that are not in the national interest - and that you can objectively determine what these are?
Subjectivity involves a mindset being based on or influenced by personal feelings, opinions and preferences. If anyone is looking beyond the end of their nose to wider implications, it starts to move away from subjectivity to objectivity.Anyway, I can't speak for PPP but for my part I only give priority to what I objectively decide is the least worst option for the country and not only in the short-term. There are manifestos and track records to consider, PM implications, and so on. It's not subjective.
Edited by turbobloke on Tuesday 30th May 11:20
Garvin said:
The 'introduction' to the Land Value Tax is contained on page 86 of the Labour manifesto with the words "we will initiate a review into reforming council tax and business rates and consider new options such as a land value tax, to ensure local government has sustainable funding for the long term". It is vague with no detail but the Tories have got their hands on the Labour plans from a paper produced from a thinktank chaired by Corby and McDonnell which has the 3% figure.
There's no way local authorities in the SE (which is where this will really hit hardest) could spend the money this would raise - a quick and dirty calculation tells me my council tax would rise 30 fold if converted to this LVT. Our local authority would be awash with money. Which tells me this money isn't going to local govt at all - it's all going direct to central Govt. Another example of Labour lying through its teeth to try to grab power.
Just to be clear, I will pay £4,500 in this garden tax, the company I work for will more than likely cease to trade, I am mid 20's I will have to sell my house no doubt at a reduced sum, find another Job at a lower pay bracket all because I work hard and play by the rules, doesn't sound great, I'm sure there will be thousands of people in this position. Scary week ahead
Possibly one of the main issues I have with labour is that they want a huge public sector (many of whom will vote for them on that basis) . But the public sector, whilst being entirely necessary, must be kept as small as possible, compared to the private sector.
The public sector do not really make money for, and in the country, they are there in support of the public who do actually make the money for the country.
Without the private sector making the money in the first place, the public sector could not exist (where would the cash for the public sector come from?) Once a country has a public sector which either approaches, or worse still, exceeds the size of the sector which provides the cash for it to exist, it is doomed.
For sure, for a while after the public/private sector balance was approached or exceeded, everyone in the country would be enjoying the benefits of unlimited public services, and hand outs, but once the cash was gone, the country would collapse like a house of cards. Therefore any party which wants to increase the size and spending of the public sector, relative to the private sector, is just a long term disaster/car crash in waiting, in my book, and thus would be hard to vote for (unless by a public sector worker who believes there is a magic money tree somewhere, and therefore does not worry about the future).
The public sector do not really make money for, and in the country, they are there in support of the public who do actually make the money for the country.
Without the private sector making the money in the first place, the public sector could not exist (where would the cash for the public sector come from?) Once a country has a public sector which either approaches, or worse still, exceeds the size of the sector which provides the cash for it to exist, it is doomed.
For sure, for a while after the public/private sector balance was approached or exceeded, everyone in the country would be enjoying the benefits of unlimited public services, and hand outs, but once the cash was gone, the country would collapse like a house of cards. Therefore any party which wants to increase the size and spending of the public sector, relative to the private sector, is just a long term disaster/car crash in waiting, in my book, and thus would be hard to vote for (unless by a public sector worker who believes there is a magic money tree somewhere, and therefore does not worry about the future).
Hereward said:
Assuming a Land Value Tax at 3% of 55% of the current market value of my home, my current annual Council Tax bill of £2,900 will turn in to £29,000. Crikey.
[Maxist Envy Mode]That'll teach you, you rich barsteward, lounging about in your expensive millionaire's penthouse[/Marxist Envy Mode]Perhaps when Labour are challenged on this a 'cap' will appear from nowhere . . . . . . now where have I seen that before . . . . . .
It promises to liven things up a little because it is so wide ranging and will affect so many, including die hard Labour supporters and media interviewers alike!
Justayellowbadge said:
If one lives in a leasehold flat with no land will it still apply?
Or will the freeholder be liable?
If so, ground rents would presumably go ballistic.
If not, 'land value' is a misnomer.
It would have to go to the freeholder. Good luck to them putting the service charge up ten fold and getting the money off leaseholders!Or will the freeholder be liable?
If so, ground rents would presumably go ballistic.
If not, 'land value' is a misnomer.
footnote said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
skahigh said:
Moonhawk said:
Yet another envy tax from Labour.
"You have a 'big' garden - you must be loaded- tax em to f
k"
This would cost me something like an extra £4k per year in tax compared to council tax, this would have a significant impact on our lives."You have a 'big' garden - you must be loaded- tax em to f
k"On the other hand, the Conservatives want to destroy my profession if this is to be believed.
http://www.itcontractor.com/theresa-may-abolish-co...
Some choice I have in this election.
In the long term, the national; interest is synonymous with personal interest. What is the point in voting for a party that promises milk and honey all for free in the short term, but which will destroy the country overall in the long term?
Hereward said:
Assuming a Land Value Tax at 3% of 55% of the current market value of my home, my current annual Council Tax bill of £2,900 will turn in to £29,000. Crikey.
Is that what they are proposing? If that is the case - even a modest property will see a huge increase.My parents property for example sold last year for around £90k. It's a modest 3 bed mid terrace with a small back yard and fronts the street (no front garden). It sits on the outskirts of Birkenhead in not a very upmarket area. It's a band A property which currently attracts council tax of around £1000 per year.
Under LVT at those rates - it's tax would increase by around 50%
The house would have to be valued at less that £60k for LVT to equal council tax (if the rates of LVT quoted above are correct).
p1stonhead said:
Justayellowbadge said:
If one lives in a leasehold flat with no land will it still apply?
Or will the freeholder be liable?
If so, ground rents would presumably go ballistic.
If not, 'land value' is a misnomer.
It would have to go to the freeholder. Good luck to them putting the service charge up ten fold and getting the money off leaseholders!Or will the freeholder be liable?
If so, ground rents would presumably go ballistic.
If not, 'land value' is a misnomer.
Pan Pan Pan said:
In the long term, the national; interest is synonymous with personal interest. What is the point in voting for a party that promises milk and honey all for free in the short term, but which will destroy the country overall in the long term?
And in another one of those u-turn thingies, after his nuclear / terrorism / brexit u-turns, Corbyn agrees!
"we're all better off when everybody is better off"
That deep thought, that philosophical gem, was followed by "we're all inside ths studio when we're all inside the studio". Genius at work.
Corbyn. Plonker.
joshcowin said:
Just to be clear, I will pay £4,500 in this garden tax, the company I work for will more than likely cease to trade, I am mid 20's I will have to sell my house no doubt at a reduced sum, find another Job at a lower pay bracket all because I work hard and play by the rules, doesn't sound great, I'm sure there will be thousands of people in this position. Scary week ahead
It could also damage the building trade.I have a house worth £250k and have some savings. I decide to spend those savings extending the house. This will theoretically increase the value of my house - but my income remains the same.
Under Labour's LVT - that increase in the value of the house now attracts a larger annual charge, but my ability to pay hasn't increased and my overall wealth probably hasn't increased by a significant amount if the increase in property value is only equal to the money spent on it.
How many people would think twice about having "home improvement" work done.
footnote said:
But why is that put forward as the most desirable objective in a society where more people than ever need looking after by other people?
Your children, your parents and grandparents and so on - should they just be left to look after themselves too?
And if they can't, should we just take the view that, well they had all the same opportunities as me, so tough luck if they don't make the best of it
No argument we should look after society's most vulnerable but it's no good to do nothing yourself and just look to somebody else to sort it out for you. I already pay for my children, and my parents have houses they can sell to pay for their own care if required. I don't expect to inherit anything and that's fine.Your children, your parents and grandparents and so on - should they just be left to look after themselves too?
And if they can't, should we just take the view that, well they had all the same opportunities as me, so tough luck if they don't make the best of it
The top 5% already pay a lot in tax (my personal contribution was £60k in FY17). The answer isn't to expect an ever smaller % of the population to carry everyone else. Everyone has a responsibility to make the most of the opportunities open to them. Too many "victims" in today's society where it's considered poverty not to have the latest iPhone.
As Norman Tebbit said, more people need to "get on their bikes."
Moonhawk said:
joshcowin said:
Just to be clear, I will pay £4,500 in this garden tax, the company I work for will more than likely cease to trade, I am mid 20's I will have to sell my house no doubt at a reduced sum, find another Job at a lower pay bracket all because I work hard and play by the rules, doesn't sound great, I'm sure there will be thousands of people in this position. Scary week ahead
It could also damage the building trade.I have a house worth £250k and have some savings. I decide to spend those savings extending the house. This will theoretically increase the value of my house - but my income remains the same.
Under Labour's LVT - that increase in the value of the house now attracts a larger annual charge, but my ability to pay hasn't increased and my overall wealth probably hasn't increased by a significant amount if the increase in property value is only equal to the money spent on it.
How many people would think twice about having "home improvement" work done.
Lord March having 3% on 55% of the value of Goodwood Estate!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff