Jeremy Corbyn Vol. 2

[ellroy]

Welshbeef said:

He means the 50% to 45%

That 50% rate that didn’t generate any positive tax take? That one?

[Welshbeef]

ellroy said:

Welshbeef said:

He means the 50% to 45%

That 50% rate that didn’t generate any positive tax take? That one?

That’s the one.

[jurbie]

AstonZagato said:

I find it incredible that people seemingly have no understanding of the Laffer curve.

In the early 2000's I spent quite a bit of time working in the Netherlands and my hotel was full of young English welders. Apparently the Dutch tax rules were such that it wasn't worth working overtime because you'd lose most of the money in tax. Unfortunately businesses need people to work overtime so the only option was to import workers from abroad. So Dutch welders ended up unemployed and the Dutch state lost out on tax receipts.

I'd be interested to see how many of those advocating higher taxes would be prepared to work overtime for no extra money if they knew the state would benefit? Maybe it's an opt-in that the chancellor could bring in at the next budget.

[anonymous-user]

2xChevrons said:

...you can take 10% of the richest man's wealth without harming his quality of life in any way and make massive improvements to the lives of 1000 people at the bottom. There is no logical or moral reason not to...

The logical and moral reason is the benefits trap; the next 1000 people up the ladder are not going to bother working if they make less than the old bottom 1000; I certainly wouldn't. You end up with an even bigger swathe of society who take home more or less exactly the same despite some doing absolutely nothing and others working their arses off. IMO the 'obvious' solution without resorting to EE Corbyn's Venezuelan economics is to significantly increase the minimum wage and lower corporation tax.

[irocfan]

Trolleys Thank You said:

Lol. Nice dose of "blame the poor" followed by some pretty wild extrapolations.

Nice dose of not a fking clue

[gadgetmac]

AstonZagato said:

Well, I'm already looking at Guersney. I know many people who have left the UK to avoid tax.

You wont go. Tell you what, PM me if Corbyn gets in and I’ll give £100 to the charity of your choice if you do go. I’ll even drive you to the airport free of charge.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2016/05/26/do...

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/04/29/1358...

Its bullst spouted by predominantly tory voters as some kind of threat that the electorate better not vote against their interests or they’ll take their ball and go and play elsewhere.

They never do, they never will. There are a few high paid workers here and there that might but the numbers are inconsequential.

In fact more of the lower paid workers leave than the higher paid ones:

https://unherd.com/the-feed-blog/rich-wont-leave-e...

[anonymous-user]

Welshbeef said:

ellroy said:

Welshbeef said:

He means the 50% to 45%

That 50% rate that didn’t generate any positive tax take? That one?

That’s the one.

Of course... that will be Labour's poison pill that permanently eroded the high rate tax base as thousands who begrudgingly paid the previous 40% found all sorts of new ways to pay themselves outside of PAYE. That one right?

[edh]

Income tax changes wont help all that much. The solution is to tax land not work. Labour is edging towards this.

Attacking rent seeking takes us back to the original free market thinking of Adam Smith. I'm in favour of rewarding work and innovation. It's a shame that most capital in the UK is stuck into property instead of doing something productive.

Far too much focus on income tax. NI is a worse tax than income tax IMO. Combine the two makes sense. Corporation tax is wrongly claimed to fall on the workers but is largely paid by shareholders. No justification for cuts here I think as we'd be better off policing the abuses in Holland and Ireland first. (I read that Apple are starting to pay 13bn of back taxes in Ireland)

[Trolleys Thank You]

fblm said:

Nice excuse. If it's a moral issue as chevron claims what difference do borders and currencies make? You will simply have 80% of your wealth confiscated and given to 1000 starving people in the third world. Morally what difference does it make whether its taking from a billionaire in Chelsea and giving it to a thousand people in Middlesbrough or taking from you and giving to a thousand Rohingya? Arguably the latter would do far more good. I'm going to hazard a guess you don't like that plan, given one of the benefits of cryptos you spent many posts touting was keeping your wealth out of the hands of governments!

Maybe not a bad idea. Garuantee you we'd see a lot less immigration if that were to happen.

One of the benefits of cryptos is avoiding the value of your money from being inflated into thin air. Something the Tories have been very happy to assist with through QE and Brexit.

[andy_s]

Trolleys Thank You said:

Maybe not a bad idea. Garuantee you we'd see a lot less immigration if that were to happen.

One of the benefits of cryptos is avoiding the value of your money from being inflated into thin air. Something the Tories have been very happy to assist with through QE and Brexit.

Good point, inflation has been crippling for decades.

[WindyCommon]

AstonZagato said:

I find it incredible that people seemingly have no understanding of the Laffer curve.

Oh I think they understand it. It's not about optimisation. A YouGov poll showed that 69% of Labour voters supported tax increases for higher earners "...even if it did not bring any extra money"

[Halb]

AstonZagato said:

Well, I'm already looking at Guersney. I know many people who have left the UK to avoid tax.

Does that mean you would have to live in Guernsey?

[djc206]

gadgetmac said:

You wont go. Tell you what, PM me if Corbyn gets in and I’ll give £100 to the charity of your choice if you do go. I’ll even drive you to the airport free of charge.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2016/05/26/do...

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/04/29/1358...

Its bullst spouted by predominantly tory voters as some kind of threat that the electorate better not vote against their interests or they’ll take their ball and go and play elsewhere.

They never do, they never will. There are a few high paid workers here and there that might but the numbers are inconsequential.

In fact more of the lower paid workers leave than the higher paid ones:

https://unherd.com/the-feed-blog/rich-wont-leave-e...

I won’t leave but I will work less. My time is important to me and I won’t sacrifice it for less than a third of the money I’m being paid for it. I’ll just cut my hours and find a hobby to occupy them.

[anonymous-user]

gadgetmac said:

You wont go. Tell you what, PM me if Corbyn gets in and I’ll give £100 to the charity of your choice if you do go. I’ll even drive you to the airport free of charge.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2016/05/26/do...

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/04/29/1358...

Its bullst spouted by predominantly tory voters as some kind of threat that the electorate better not vote against their interests or they’ll take their ball and go and play elsewhere.

They never do, they never will. There are a few high paid workers here and there that might but the numbers are inconsequential.

In fact more of the lower paid workers leave than the higher paid ones:

https://unherd.com/the-feed-blog/rich-wont-leave-e...

Seriously? You know US state taxes are minimal right? (0-13% but most are about 5%). Wealthy US citizens have to pay federal income tax a fraction under 40% no matter where they live in the world, let alone which state so it makes little difference to them. Moving from California (53%) to Nevada (40%) is a rather different prospect than moving from the UK (47%) to Guernsey (20%), Zurich(20%), BVI(8%), Monaco(0%) etc...

You say "They never do, they never will"; I did but you're right I am inconsequential. I'm not sure your assertion that all of us are, is any more valid than your extrapolating the findings of a US study globally though.

[mcelliott]

Halb said:

AstonZagato said:

Well, I'm already looking at Guersney. I know many people who have left the UK to avoid tax.

Does that mean you would have to live in Guernsey?

You'd have to be resident and therefore spend a certain number of days in Guernsey (and more crucially a certain number out of the UK).

[gadgetmac]

djc206 said:

I won’t leave but I will work less. My time is important to me and I won’t sacrifice it for less than a third of the money I’m being paid for it. I’ll just cut my hours and find a hobby to occupy them.

You’re ‘rich’ then are you? Because I and the articles I’ve linked to are talking about the entrepreneurs, the high rollers, the serious wealth creators not the merely ‘well paid’.

I’m employed by one such high profile person, helicopter, plane(s), yacht, high-end cars x 8 and he isn’t going anywhere and he has no plans to. Neither do his associates. They’ll just spend more money on financial advisors to help them mitigate any tax increases.

[pingu393]

gadgetmac said:

djc206 said:

I won’t leave but I will work less. My time is important to me and I won’t sacrifice it for less than a third of the money I’m being paid for it. I’ll just cut my hours and find a hobby to occupy them.

You’re ‘rich’ then are you? Because I and the articles I’ve linked to are talking about the entrepreneurs, the high rollers, the serious wealth creators not the merely ‘well paid’.

I’m employed by one such high profile person, helicopter, plane(s), yacht, high-end cars x 8 and he isn’t going anywhere and he has no plans to. Neither do his associates. They’ll just spend more money on financial advisors to help them mitigate any tax increases.

Your last sentence sums up Corbyn's stupidity about taxing the rich. The super-rich will spend £100,000s to save millions in tax. I bet your boss will pay no more tax under Corbyn, but you will.

[AstonZagato]

gadgetmac said:

You wont go. Tell you what, PM me if Corbyn gets in and I’ll give £100 to the charity of your choice if you do go. I’ll even drive you to the airport free of charge.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2016/05/26/do...

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/04/29/1358...

Its bullst spouted by predominantly tory voters as some kind of threat that the electorate better not vote against their interests or they’ll take their ball and go and play elsewhere.

They never do, they never will. There are a few high paid workers here and there that might but the numbers are inconsequential.

In fact more of the lower paid workers leave than the higher paid ones:

https://unherd.com/the-feed-blog/rich-wont-leave-e...

I will if I can persuade the wife to go.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
Going back in a month’s time.

Also, check out Guy Hands, Mike Platt, Alan Howard, Peter de Putron. When these guys left they took big parts of their employees with them.

Yeah but it’s all a bluff

[anonymous-user]

Trolleys Thank You said:

One of the benefits of cryptos is avoiding the value of your money from being inflated into thin air. Something the Tories have been very happy to assist with through QE and Brexit.

Ignoring that it's the independent Bank of England not the Treasury that conducts QE if you really want to play that silly game Labour did 200bn of QE, the coalition did 175bn and the Tories have done a further 60bn. Secondly; damn those pesky facts let's stick with hyperbole

[anonymous-user]

edh said:

Income tax changes wont help all that much. The solution is to tax land not work. Labour is edging towards this.

Attacking rent seeking takes us back to the original free market thinking of Adam Smith. I'm in favour of rewarding work and innovation. It's a shame that most capital in the UK is stuck into property instead of doing something productive.

Far too much focus on income tax. NI is a worse tax than income tax IMO. Combine the two makes sense. Corporation tax is wrongly claimed to fall on the workers but is largely paid by shareholders. No justification for cuts here I think as we'd be better off policing the abuses in Holland and Ireland first. (I read that Apple are starting to pay 13bn of back taxes in Ireland)

You took your time. Whilst taxing land and wealth arguably makes more sense than taxing income, having accumulated all mine after income and CG tax, you can, with respect, feck off! Employer NI is a stupid stealth tax, however it's impossible to avoid so at least the Amazon's etc don't get away with zip in the mean time. The CT cut is justified by a significant increase in NMW, with the added benefit of leveling the playing field between large MN's and small local businesses as well as attracting overseas listings and head offices. As for hitting shareholders, we've done this before, they are in large part the worlds pension funds... and those that aren't are hit by a miriad of capital gains, with holding and dividend taxes globally.