How many rooms does George Monbiot have?

[12gauge]

ShadownINja said:

12gauge said:

ShadownINja said:

12gauge said:

Your views seems to suggest anyone that doesnt own a home should be treated as a second class citizen.

I can't argue with you because your logical deduction is daft.

Well, thats a cop out.

I find it irritating when people come up with crazy pseudo-logical steps or deductions to try to ridicule. It's a form of bullying to try to make someone appear stupid. Vis-a-vis, your statement makes no sense to what I've said.

I own something -> I shouldn't have to pay tax on owning an asset -> People who don't own said asset are second class citizens. That doesn't make sense.

FFS. Your last paragraph misses the third (and most important) bit.

They own different asset (alternative store of wealth ie, savings instead of a house) and pay tax on that, that they wouldnt pay if they owned a house of equal value.

DO YOU GET IT?

[ShadownINja]

12gauge said:

If i own a £50 million home as my prime residence and sell it for £75 million, i pay no CGT on it.

If you own a £50m home and due to an economic downturn, sell it for £25m, you can't write it off as a loss against your tax invoice, of course...

[12gauge]

ShadownINja said:

12gauge said:

If i own a £50 million home as my prime residence and sell it for £75 million, i pay no CGT on it.

If you own a £50m home and due to an economic downturn, sell it for £25m, you can't write it off as a loss against your tax invoice, of course...

Another story...

Anyway, ive had enough of going over the same point again and again, im off to cause mischief in another thread.

[ShadownINja]

12gauge said:

ShadownINja said:

12gauge said:

ShadownINja said:

12gauge said:

Your views seems to suggest anyone that doesnt own a home should be treated as a second class citizen.

I can't argue with you because your logical deduction is daft.

Well, thats a cop out.

I find it irritating when people come up with crazy pseudo-logical steps or deductions to try to ridicule. It's a form of bullying to try to make someone appear stupid. Vis-a-vis, your statement makes no sense to what I've said.

I own something -> I shouldn't have to pay tax on owning an asset -> People who don't own said asset are second class citizens. That doesn't make sense.

FFS. Your last paragraph misses the third (and most important) bit.

They own different asset (alternative store of wealth ie, savings instead of a house) and pay tax on that, that they wouldnt pay if they owned a house of equal value.

DO YOU GET IT?

It still doesn't make people second class citizens and thus is not my deduction.

[grumbledoak]

Pesty said:

Is monbiot the newspaper writers version of a Troll?

I don't generally read the Grauniad, but am occasionally amused by his (and Polly's) little army of stwits gobbling this stuff up as if George actually believes a word of it.

[ShadownINja]

12gauge said:

ShadownINja said:

12gauge said:

If i own a £50 million home as my prime residence and sell it for £75 million, i pay no CGT on it.

If you own a £50m home and due to an economic downturn, sell it for £25m, you can't write it off as a loss against your tax invoice, of course...

Another story...

Anyway, ive had enough of going over the same point again and again, im off to cause mischief in another thread.

That's a cop out.

[tomw2000]

12gauge said:

sidicks said:

This seems to be another 'polictics of envy' discussion from you..

Sidicks

No, its quite simple really.

If i own a £50 million home as my prime residence and sell it for £75 million, i pay no CGT on it.

If i put my £50 million of savings into stocks in productive businesses, (but own no home) and sell for £75 million, i pay quite a lot of tax.

You understand what im getting at, yes? God help you if you dont.

Wheres the envy in wanting a level playing field for renters and homeowners?

You pays yer money and takes yer choice.

If you don't want to 'invest' in property and instead invest elsewhere that's up to you.

[Tuna]

12gauge said:

sidicks said:

This seems to be another 'polictics of envy' discussion from you..

Sidicks

No, its quite simple really.

If i own a £50 million home as my prime residence and sell it for £75 million, i pay no CGT on it.

If i put my £50 million of savings into stocks in productive businesses, (but own no home) and sell for £75 million, i pay quite a lot of tax.

You understand what im getting at, yes? God help you if you dont.

So all investment should be taxed and controlled so that no-single investment type can possibly come out ahead? Good luck on that.

12gauge said:

Wheres the envy in wanting a level playing field for renters and homeowners?

Who owes you the right to a home at the cost you choose? No-one. Just as someone investing in stocks and shares can choose which stock to invest in and how, so you can choose how you pay for your home. Some ways of investing are better than others, and some have a lower barrier to entry. Unless the government assigns you your home (comrade) this is how it has always been.

So is your issue 'fairness', or affordability?

[Spiritual_Beggar]

We shouldn't be trying to 'level' the playing field between Renters & Owners.

Owners take on a FAR greater risk than renters! It's risk v reward.

[Dr_Gonzo]

12gauge said:

sidicks said:

This seems to be another 'polictics of envy' discussion from you..

Sidicks

No, its quite simple really.

If i own a £50 million home as my prime residence and sell it for £75 million, i pay no CGT on it.

If i put my £50 million of savings into stocks in productive businesses, (but own no home) and sell for £75 million, i pay quite a lot of tax.

You understand what im getting at, yes? God help you if you dont.

Wheres the envy in wanting a level playing field for renters and homeowners?

The difference is that your own home is not an investment, it's a liability.

[ShadownINja]

Dr_Gonzo said:

The difference is that your own home is not an investment, it's a liability.

I know what book you've been reading.

[turbobloke]

Dr_Gonzo said:

12gauge said:

sidicks said:

This seems to be another 'polictics of envy' discussion from you..

Sidicks

No, its quite simple really.

If I own a £50 million home as my prime residence and sell it for £75 million, i pay no CGT on it.

If i put my £50 million of savings into stocks in productive businesses, (but own no home) and sell for £75 million, i pay quite a lot of tax.

You understand what im getting at, yes? God help you if you dont.

Wheres the envy in wanting a level playing field for renters and homeowners?

The difference is that your own home is not an investment, it's a liability.

So basically 12gauge in the light of your knowledge you should spend your £50m on a major country pile going for a song, rather than make your next killing by investing in the stock market.

Or not. HTH

[5pen]

12gauge said:

sidicks said:

This seems to be another 'polictics of envy' discussion from you..

Sidicks

No, its quite simple really.

If i own a £50 million home as my prime residence and sell it for £75 million, i pay no CGT on it.

If i put my £50 million of savings into stocks in productive businesses, (but own no home) and sell for £75 million, i pay quite a lot of tax.

You understand what im getting at, yes? God help you if you dont.

Wheres the envy in wanting a level playing field for renters and homeowners?

You mention CGT but seem to ignore Stamp Duty.

By no means am I a tax expert but I believe the following is true...

Buying a house for £50m would incur stamp duty of £2m. A second home would incur Stamp Duty and CGT on any gain too.

Buying shares for £50m would incur stamp duty of £0.25m

Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.

[turbobloke]

ShadownINja said:

Dr_Gonzo said:

The difference is that your own home is not an investment, it's a liability.

I know what book you've been reading.

Has NoelWatson written a book on this?!

[Ozzie Osmond]

Before dismissing all this stuff too swiftly it's worth bearing in mind

• Almost all of the wealth is concentrated in 5% of the population.
• A 40% vote in favour of any party promoting nationalisation of property (with or without compensation) would almost certainly be enough to get the job done.

The risk is that sooner or later the "have-nots" will simply vote to "have". Those who currently "have" need to be awake, paying attention and working out how to avoid that situation.

IMO the right place for change to start is at the top, namely in foreign policy so that less of the economy is occupied by assorted crooks from around the world. The alternative of change starting from the bottom will be altogether less comfortable.

[NoelWatson]

turbobloke said:

ShadownINja said:

Dr_Gonzo said:

The difference is that your own home is not an investment, it's a liability.

I know what book you've been reading.

Has NoelWatson written a book on this?!

Yes. Just below Gordon on Amazon rankings

[turbobloke]

NoelWatson said:

turbobloke said:

ShadownINja said:

Dr_Gonzo said:

The difference is that your own home is not an investment, it's a liability.

I know what book you've been reading.

Has NoelWatson written a book on this?!

Yes. Just below Gordon on Amazon rankings

[audidoody]

He also tends to fly around the world a lot attending climate change conferences.

[grumbledoak]

ShadownINja said:

I know what book you've been reading.

Robert T. Kiyosaki would be my guess.

Everyone should be made to read that at school.

[fido]

Ozzie Osmond said:

• Almost all of the wealth is concentrated in 5% of the population.

Amazing isn't it after 13 years of New Labour?! My problem isn't with taxes on the rich (someone with the £50m house in the example above) - it's taxes on the normal city dweller who lives in a £500k property with an 'extra' room who cannot rely on writing commie bullsh8t for the Guardian to make ends meet, because that's who these envy taxes inevitably end up r8ping.