IF the Palace cared to exert itself, still time to arrange for Duchess of Cambridge, to be named honorary Queen of next month's Cambridge, Ohio Salt Fork Arts and Craft Fair.
This is a sobering report about climate change action or inaction and especially the last paragraph (The whole article is in the Guardian)
G20 countries fail to reach agreement on cutting fossil fuels
Fossil fuel-producing members dispute goal of tripling renewable capacity by 2030
The G20 bloc of wealthy economies meeting in India failed to reach a consensus on phasing down fossil fuels on Saturday after objections by some producer nations.
Scientists and campaigners are exasperated by international bodies’ foot-dragging on action to curb global heating even as extreme weather across the northern hemisphere underlined the climate crisis facing the world.
The G20 member countries together account for more than three-quarters of global emissions and gross domestic product, so a cumulative effort by the group to decarbonise is crucial in the global fight against climate breakdown.
However, disagreements including the intended tripling of renewable energy capacities by 2030 resulted in officials issuing an outcome statement and a chair summary instead of a joint communique at the end of their four-day meeting in Panaji, the capital of the Indian coastal state of Goa.
Fossil fuel use became a lightning rod in daylong discussions, but officials failed to reach consensus over curbing “unabated” use and argued over the language to describe the pathway to cut emissions, two sources familiar with the matter said. However, the chair statement released on Saturday evening included concerns from some member nations that were missing in the Friday draft, saying “others had different views on the matter that abatement and removal technologies will address such concerns”.
Singh, in a press briefing after the conference, said some countries wanted to use carbon capture instead of a phase-down of fossil fuels. He did not name the countries.
Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, South Africa and Indonesia are all known to oppose the goal of tripling renewable energy capacity this decade.
The reluctance of these countries to decarbonise is why it is difficult to adhere to the more radical demands of environmentalists. These countries are not stupid, they are mostly more threatened by climate change than we are in a practical sense (ie desertification, sea levels rising), but they look at the evidence and just decide to basically carry on, essentially business as usual, whilst playing the card of 'blaming the oppressor' (the west).
For context G20 are 75%+ of world emissions as quoted.
But also 64% of population.
I think the core issue is getting USA and the BRICS properly on board.
Don't forget germany which shut down its nuclear plants, not only build lignite plants to make up but has bulldozed at least one windfarm to open an opencast lignite mine....oh but global action is going to occur...I believe in unicorns that fart rainbows
TBF I also haven't looked at places like Japan and Indonesia.
I mentioned germany for 2 reasons....it has signed up to all the global agreements and it has a strong green prescence in government. Moment climate change action got in the way they went backwards which is the point I am making. Countries will continue to do climate change action where it doesn't get in the way
@Leon, @Sandpit, you are both on the discussion group I created about Ukraine. The TLDR is that both sides have to burn up a goodly number of men and materiel to capture very small areas. The Ukraine counter offensive has over the past two months retaken two rectangles each about 50sq km in the Zaporhizia oblast. The Russian capture of Bakhmut took about 25sq km in a similar period. These moves are each less than 0.5% of the area of 2014 Ukraine.
In that discussion group @LostPassword made some good points about attriting (yes, it's a word) the Russians: although I agree with him he thinks it'll take months and I think it'll take over a year. The war is following a similar structure to WW1: a war of manoeuvre expected to last month's becomes congested due to new weapons, movement ceases, trenches are laid, artillery uses up shells in their millions, there is a Shell Crisis as prewar stocks are used up and production must ramp up to keep the sides supplied.
In the discussion group I gave links to three or four videos discussing the situation. The total watch time is about 3hrs so you would be forgiven for not watching them but they explain the supply and attrition issue in much greater depth.
(Ps @rcs1000 do you want to join in? I'm on the tablet so I don't know how to add you) (PPS it takes a long time to burn up millions of men. Ukraine has a while to go yet)
I would be interested in joining if it's an option? I encounter a fair number of alt-right/kremlin-line-trotting people so it would be good to have a balanced view of what's going on.
Oh - and if it's any use to summarising long youtube videos, I wrote a little script the other day that can extract the transcripts and give a summary and/or a sentiment score to them. I'm looking to extend it to extract the audio and do speech-to-text on them so I can then summarise them.
The things you do when you're "on holiday"...
Will add you tomorrow - I'm travelling to work and the tablet does not show the "add person" button, so will do so tomorrow on the laptop. Hope that is ok. Remind me tomorrow if I forget.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
I am not sure that can be the case can it? If wealth tax is, in part supposed to replace council tax and also provide additional raxation then it has to be on the value of the property not just on the bit you have paid off.
All proposals for wealth tax have so far been on the value of the house, nothing as far as I know has ever been mentioned about taxing just the principal you own. As I pointed out it would encourage interest only mortgages for a start which would end up in a collosal blow up at some point.
The point remains people paying it would be renters when land lords put the rent up to cover it.
The people just about managing to pay their mortgage as it is
People who have paid off houses they bought decades ago and have minimal incomes now
There will be loopholes for the well off as there always are in tax codes to avoid it.
You cannot allow deferrment of the tax till sale as it would discourage mobility and also because it would raise no money immediately. Maybe evicting pensioners and jams for non payment of taxes is seen as progressive these days. It always seemed a daft term to me that the left coined to make it sound like their barm pot ideological ideas were good
Taxing pensioners out of expensive houses would be popular, for some.
Where I live, there are a number of people who lived in their houses since the area wasn’t fashionable. Now they are “bed blocking” the people who want to buy a big house and rip it out and redo. Kick the pensioners and poors out, and sell to people with millions in cash.
There’s one lady I know whose husband bought in the late 50s. Windrush bus driver - literally. She wants to stay in the house - couple of generations live with her. Refuses big offers. Let’s get her in the street. Fuck! Yeah!
No one would ever need to leave their big expensive house. Again the groundwork has already done here - for dealing with social care costs.
Just let the WT be payable as a charge on the property, like we already do for covering social care costs.
Conjuring up the poor Windrush widow - who is presumably sitting on hundreds of thousands of pounds of asset value, if not millions - as an argument against wealth tax is pretty weak stuff.
Britain is moderately taxed, compared to its peers, but the tax seems to fall more heavily on middle income tax payers. Meanwhile, overall wealth levels - yes, largely property - are high by global standards.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
No description of what a wealth tax would entail have ever talked about anything other than the salable value of the property, not the equity you have payed off. Feel free to prove me wrong by giving a source that mentions paid off equity
Andy, you do know that trans people existed before 1995, yes? Also that David Bowie famously "dated" a trans woman in his 1970s Berlin days?
I know PB has no memory, but still this place is sometimes so ahistorical it's weird. I keep thinking I have to remind people that James Callaghan existed and was Prime Minister. MoonRabbit's view of unions is so warped it's scary
PB has the memory of the people it contains. Which always looks weird from a different timescale. For some, a decade ago is before they were interested in the world around them…
A simple example -
When I told people of a time when carpets were fitted (at relatively high expense) by a number of British workmen, it was met with incredulity. And that was 1998. Globalisation has collapsed costs and wages.
But to many here, a new carpet for a flat has always been a few hundred quid and fitted by a lone Bosnian* guy in a tearing hurry to get to his next job.
*Recent job I had done. He drank double espressos as fast I could make them. By the end of the job he was The Flash.
I believe you. Things change and nobody ever seems to remember things were different. I'm reading thru "Duty of Care" by David Hennessey ( I got depressed after reading Goodwin's VV&V book and thought I'd cheer myself up), and the first half was devoted to the 45to79 Butskellian consensus, when the Government thought it had a duty to do things FOR the British people instead of TO them. It's a whole different world.
Edgerton is also good on this. A period when the government was consciously trying to build a British state, instead of leaving it to hollow out.
Indeed. I have a copy of "Rise and Fall of the British Nation" and "The British War Machine" and reread them on occasion. A prophet poorly honoured in his own country. Damn, we really f***** this country up for the next generation. A state that worked and did things for people? What science fiction is this? The one we had in reality of over thirty years and reduced infant and child mortality and homelessness down to the point where it became unusual. We've got so used to tramps, druggies and shit towns we forget that things were better once.
Tramps existed. They were just kicked out of anywhere “respectable”, harassed and locked up.
The Victorian asylums helped out, by warehousing the problematic. Later they added drugging them into compliance
Conjuring up the poor Windrush widow - who is presumably sitting on hundreds of thousands of pounds of asset value, if not millions - as an argument against wealth tax is pretty weak stuff.
Britain is moderately taxed, compared to its peers, but the tax seems to fall more heavily on middle income tax payers. Meanwhile, overall wealth levels - yes, largely property - are high by global standards.
I’m pointing out that, until we deal with underlying problem of house prices, that a wealth tax will either raise very little or hit the wrong people hardest.
Among other effects, it would massively increase the pace that people are forced out of areas that are gentrifying/gentrified.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
I am not sure that can be the case can it? If wealth tax is, in part supposed to replace council tax and also provide additional raxation then it has to be on the value of the property not just on the bit you have paid off.
I don't see why a measure mixing is not possible here.
Council tax of 0.5% on property value to replace Council Tax (and abolish Stamp Duty as per the Proportional Property Tax proposals), and a general wealth tax on the net value of assets (which is what the Swiss do).
There would be a modest downward pressure on property values in more over-demand areas, as holding expensive property would be more expensive than at present. I think that is what we want.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
If that's the final score (big if) Sanchez has played a bloody blinder.
Your hispanophile centrist Dad Hyfud.
I'm not sure whether this is a projection just based on votes counted so far and therefore doesn't take into account whether the results so far are likely to be biased in a particular direction.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
I am not sure that can be the case can it? If wealth tax is, in part supposed to replace council tax and also provide additional raxation then it has to be on the value of the property not just on the bit you have paid off.
I don't see why a measure mixing is not possible here.
Council tax 0.5% on property value (and abolish Stamp Duty as per the Proportional Property Tax proposals), and a general wealth tax on the net value of assets (which is what the Swiss do).
Well there you have it just added another 700 pounds a year on top of my rent
This is a sobering report about climate change action or inaction and especially the last paragraph (The whole article is in the Guardian)
G20 countries fail to reach agreement on cutting fossil fuels
Fossil fuel-producing members dispute goal of tripling renewable capacity by 2030
The G20 bloc of wealthy economies meeting in India failed to reach a consensus on phasing down fossil fuels on Saturday after objections by some producer nations.
Scientists and campaigners are exasperated by international bodies’ foot-dragging on action to curb global heating even as extreme weather across the northern hemisphere underlined the climate crisis facing the world.
The G20 member countries together account for more than three-quarters of global emissions and gross domestic product, so a cumulative effort by the group to decarbonise is crucial in the global fight against climate breakdown.
However, disagreements including the intended tripling of renewable energy capacities by 2030 resulted in officials issuing an outcome statement and a chair summary instead of a joint communique at the end of their four-day meeting in Panaji, the capital of the Indian coastal state of Goa.
Fossil fuel use became a lightning rod in daylong discussions, but officials failed to reach consensus over curbing “unabated” use and argued over the language to describe the pathway to cut emissions, two sources familiar with the matter said. However, the chair statement released on Saturday evening included concerns from some member nations that were missing in the Friday draft, saying “others had different views on the matter that abatement and removal technologies will address such concerns”.
Singh, in a press briefing after the conference, said some countries wanted to use carbon capture instead of a phase-down of fossil fuels. He did not name the countries.
Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, South Africa and Indonesia are all known to oppose the goal of tripling renewable energy capacity this decade.
The reluctance of these countries to decarbonise is why it is difficult to adhere to the more radical demands of environmentalists. These countries are not stupid, they are mostly more threatened by climate change than we are in a practical sense (ie desertification, sea levels rising), but they look at the evidence and just decide to basically carry on, essentially business as usual, whilst playing the card of 'blaming the oppressor' (the west).
For context G20 are 75%+ of world emissions as quoted.
But also 64% of population.
I think the core issue is getting USA and the BRICS properly on board.
Don't forget germany which shut down its nuclear plants, not only build lignite plants to make up but has bulldozed at least one windfarm to open an opencast lignite mine....oh but global action is going to occur...I believe in unicorns that fart rainbows
TBF I also haven't looked at places like Japan and Indonesia.
I mentioned germany for 2 reasons....it has signed up to all the global agreements and it has a strong green prescence in government. Moment climate change action got in the way they went backwards which is the point I am making. Countries will continue to do climate change action where it doesn't get in the way
Germany emissions - fluctuations can be seen but a downward trend line not meeting the published target.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
No description of what a wealth tax would entail have ever talked about anything other than the salable value of the property, not the equity you have payed off. Feel free to prove me wrong by giving a source that mentions paid off equity
Well you haven't looked very hard:
"A wealth tax (also called a capital tax or equity tax) is a tax on an entity's holdings of assets or an entity's net worth. "
"Typically, wealth taxation often involves the exclusion of an individual's liabilities, such as mortgages and other debts, from their total assets."
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
If that's the final score (big if) Sanchez has played a bloody blinder.
Your hispanophile centrist Dad Hyfud.
I'm not sure whether this is a projection just based on votes counted so far and therefore doesn't take into account whether the results so far are likely to be biased in a particular direction.
Note PP lean Madrid only 17% in, heavy PSOE Barcelona 56% in
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Also it doesn't discriminate on equity payed off. If I buy a 500k house with a mortgage in law I am the owner of a 500k house. The house is merely collateral against my loan so the 500k is my asset
One thing I've never understood is projections on election night that don't take into account whether the areas reporting so far are likely to be skewed in a particular party or parties' favour. Because such a projection is mostly useless. It would be better not to do one at all than one of that type.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
Watching the TV a buy line suggests traditionally PP vote improves later in the count. We'll see.
Because Madrid reports more slowly?
Yes. However, I think that PP/VOX look too far from the magic 176. Sanchez can hold on with the support of the nationalists.
In which case would be the worst exit polls since 1992 here.
If the PSOE stay largest party as they are with almost 50% in, Sanchez can stay PM. PP will hope to overtake later on
I don't think they're exit polls - polls are banned in the last few days and tonight's polls are large sample polls taken very recently and published when voting closes.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
What you are describing is essentially adding extra council tax bands for higher value properties.
Not paying full council tax because you have a mortgage would be an interesting idea.
No what I was describing is the experience of most renters, landlord gets charged 700 a year wealth tax then my rent is going up a minimum of 700. Most landlords will round it up to 1000
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
What you are describing is essentially adding extra council tax bands for higher value properties.
Not paying full council tax because you have a mortgage would be an interesting idea.
No what I was describing is the experience of most renters, landlord gets charged 700 a year wealth tax then my rent is going up a minimum of 700. Most landlords will round it up to 1000
edit the 700 actually comes from wealth tax - what I currently pay a year in council tax so just over 1800
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Duh?
I've not actually seen a wealth tax proposed by any of our political parties to date (I stand to be corrected) but it's been suggested on here numerous times and never on mortgaged assets.
However, you confidently asserted that "People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own." I was just correcting that misunderstanding on your part.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
I am not sure that can be the case can it? If wealth tax is, in part supposed to replace council tax and also provide additional raxation then it has to be on the value of the property not just on the bit you have paid off.
I don't see why a measure mixing is not possible here.
Council tax 0.5% on property value (and abolish Stamp Duty as per the Proportional Property Tax proposals), and a general wealth tax on the net value of assets (which is what the Swiss do).
Well there you have it just added another 700 pounds a year on top of my rent
PPT proposals also include transfer of charge responsibility to the Landlord ! So if you aren't paying it direct and the LL puts your rent up by £700 that should be cost neutral for you, should it not?
(That would perhaps depend on tax treatment of the LL)
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Duh?
I've not actually seen a wealth tax proposed by any of our political parties to date (I stand to be corrected) but it's been suggested on here numerous times and never on mortgaged assets.
However, you confidently asserted that "People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own." I was just correcting that misunderstanding on your part.
Then easy work round set up a company abroad take out an interest only mortgage of £1, they own 100% of the equity till you pay off the mortgage in full. Presto no tax
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
I am not sure that can be the case can it? If wealth tax is, in part supposed to replace council tax and also provide additional raxation then it has to be on the value of the property not just on the bit you have paid off.
I don't see why a measure mixing is not possible here.
Council tax 0.5% on property value (and abolish Stamp Duty as per the Proportional Property Tax proposals), and a general wealth tax on the net value of assets (which is what the Swiss do).
Well there you have it just added another 700 pounds a year on top of my rent
PPT proposals also include transfer of charge responsibility to the Landlord ! So if you aren't paying it direct and the LL puts your rent up by £700 that should be cost neutral for you, should it not?
(That would perhaps depend on tax treatment of the LL)
Follow up - if you are paying £1800 a year CT that sounds like you would be better off.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Duh?
I've not actually seen a wealth tax proposed by any of our political parties to date (I stand to be corrected) but it's been suggested on here numerous times and never on mortgaged assets.
However, you confidently asserted that "People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own." I was just correcting that misunderstanding on your part.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Duh?
I've not actually seen a wealth tax proposed by any of our political parties to date (I stand to be corrected) but it's been suggested on here numerous times and never on mortgaged assets.
However, you confidently asserted that "People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own." I was just correcting that misunderstanding on your part.
Spot the place where it says it depends on how much equity you have paid off
Besides a side effect of equity based tax is it discourages paying off your house earlier. That just feeds into increased bank profits. Something you on the left want to encourage?
Looks like this is going to be close, Feijoo still 1.42 next PM on BF.
Felix, is it safe to add the UPN and the CC into the PP+Vox "blue block"?
Looks like the seat count is the current split, not a projection?
On the regions map, PSOE only lead in seats in Catalonia, Asturias, and Navarre, not even ahead in Andalucia or Extremadura which doesn't look like a great map for them.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Also it doesn't discriminate on equity payed off. If I buy a 500k house with a mortgage in law I am the owner of a 500k house. The house is merely collateral against my loan so the 500k is my asset
Er no, definitely not.
Would that house be worth £500k to your estate when calculating IHT? No.
Would that house be worth £500k when calculating you liabilty for social care should you need to fund it? No.
Would your house be worth £500k as an asset if you need to claim UC*? No.
In each case the value of the asset would be net of the mortgage. Same with any WT.
(*For UC your residential property is ignored completely but if for example you happened to own a property that you did not live in the outstanding mortgage would be netted off the value to determine the net asset you own.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
I am not sure that can be the case can it? If wealth tax is, in part supposed to replace council tax and also provide additional raxation then it has to be on the value of the property not just on the bit you have paid off.
I don't see why a measure mixing is not possible here.
Council tax 0.5% on property value (and abolish Stamp Duty as per the Proportional Property Tax proposals), and a general wealth tax on the net value of assets (which is what the Swiss do).
Well there you have it just added another 700 pounds a year on top of my rent
PPT proposals also include transfer of charge responsibility to the Landlord ! So if you aren't paying it direct and the LL puts your rent up by £700 that should be cost neutral for you, should it not?
(That would perhaps depend on tax treatment of the LL)
Follow up - if you are paying £1800 a year CT that sounds like you would be better off.
No I am paying 1125 a year with my single person discount, a wealth tax based on the house I live in would be 1800. My landlord would absolutely pass it on via a rent increase
How do PSOE end up with currently less seats with more votes ?
Is the system supposed to be perfectly proportional? There’s only a couple of seats in it.
d'Hondt isn't all that proportional at national level. Some of the provinces only have 3 or 4 seats to play with, which limits how proportional you can be nationwide.
There's a definite reward for getting your alliances in place before the election; friendly parties on 15 and 20 percent might get nothing, but a joint list on 35 should get something.
Hence the importance of the effective absorption of Citizens by the PP well before the election, and the swallowing up of Podemos by Sumar after it was called.
Looks like this is going to be close, Feijoo still 1.42 next PM on BF.
Felix, is it safe to add the UPN and the CC into the PP+Vox "blue block"?
Looks like the seat count is the current split, not a projection?
On the regions map, PSOE only lead in seats in Catalonia, Asturias, and Navarre, not even ahead in Andalucia or Extremadura which doesn't look like a great map for them.
But obviously it's the blocs that matter now.
The seat count is per currently counted votes, that part I can answer.
PP have made a big move forward but unless there is a big late change they look likely at least 10 short for a centre right coalition. Right now PSOE also not certain to reach 276 even with nationalist support.
PP have made a big move forward but unless there is a big late change they look likely at least 10 short for a centre right coalition. Right now PSOE also not certain to reach 276 even with nationalist support.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
I am not sure that can be the case can it? If wealth tax is, in part supposed to replace council tax and also provide additional raxation then it has to be on the value of the property not just on the bit you have paid off.
I don't see why a measure mixing is not possible here.
Council tax 0.5% on property value (and abolish Stamp Duty as per the Proportional Property Tax proposals), and a general wealth tax on the net value of assets (which is what the Swiss do).
Well there you have it just added another 700 pounds a year on top of my rent
PPT proposals also include transfer of charge responsibility to the Landlord ! So if you aren't paying it direct and the LL puts your rent up by £700 that should be cost neutral for you, should it not?
(That would perhaps depend on tax treatment of the LL)
Follow up - if you are paying £1800 a year CT that sounds like you would be better off.
No I am paying 1125 a year with my single person discount, a wealth tax based on the house I live in would be 1800. My landlord would absolutely pass it on via a rent increase
They might well try but the market would apply surely? If the landlord could get away with a £700 increase they would do so now. But the market can't support it.
How do PSOE end up with currently less seats with more votes ?
Is the system supposed to be perfectly proportional? There’s only a couple of seats in it.
d'Hondt isn't all that proportional at national level. Some of the provinces only have 3 or 4 seats to play with, which limits how proportional you can be nationwide.
There's a definite reward for getting your alliances in place before the election; friendly parties on 15 and 20 percent might get nothing, but a joint list on 35 should get something.
Hence the importance of the effective absorption of Citizens by the PP well before the election, and the swallowing up of Podemos by Sumar after it was called.
Not to be too picky, but d'Hondt is just an apportionment method. You could apply it nationally.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Also it doesn't discriminate on equity payed off. If I buy a 500k house with a mortgage in law I am the owner of a 500k house. The house is merely collateral against my loan so the 500k is my asset
Er no, definitely not.
Would that house be worth £500k to your estate when calculating IHT? No.
Would that house be worth £500k when calculating you liabilty for social care should you need to fund it? No.
Would your house be worth £500k as an asset if you need to claim UC*? No.
In each case the value of the asset would be net of the mortgage. Same with any WT.
(*For UC your residential property is ignored completely but if for example you happened to own a property that you did not live in the outstanding mortgage would be netted off the value to determine the net asset you own.
No the house will be worth whatever it could be sold for, however the estate then has to dispense debts owed before anything left is dispersed and tax calculated. If I have 100k in the bank and credit card debt of 50 k IHT will be calculated on 50k not the 100k I had in the bank but the 100k was still my asset.
Will your wealth tax take into account thinks like student loans, credit cards, overdraft, money I owe my friend down the road? No it won't. Therefore money I owe the bank to pay off the mortgage similar
PP have made a big move forward but unless there is a big late change they look likely at least 10 short for a centre right coalition. Right now PSOE also not certain to reach 276 even with nationalist support.
PSOE + Sumar + PNV + BNG + Bildu + Existe + ERC = 177 seats... for now... expect that to fall slightly
PSOE + Sumar + PNV + BNG + Bildu + Existe + ERC + Junts + CUP = 184 seats (in your dreams!!)
Today was a disaster for Test Cricket. It must never happen again
What can be done?
Backup days scheduled!
Do everything. Back up days. Minimum overs. Move or cancel tea and lunch ffs. Start at 9am on dry days. Anything
Test cricket teeters on the brink of oblivion. Millions of people have invested emotionally in this series only to have it absolutely ruined by two days of typically shite Mancunian weather, like it is beyond the wit of man to work around such things
Many of those people will now shrug and think Fuck it, what a waste of time, at least with white ball you get a result
And thus the last bastion of Test cricket crumbles away
Looks like this is going to be close, Feijoo still 1.42 next PM on BF.
Felix, is it safe to add the UPN and the CC into the PP+Vox "blue block"?
Looks like the seat count is the current split, not a projection?
On the regions map, PSOE only lead in seats in Catalonia, Asturias, and Navarre, not even ahead in Andalucia or Extremadura which doesn't look like a great map for them.
But obviously it's the blocs that matter now.
Correct on UPN&CC. one commentator suggested JUNTS in Catalonia might also support Feijoo.. It is very close and not clear that there is a viable Coalition.
PP have made a big move forward but unless there is a big late change they look likely at least 10 short for a centre right coalition. Right now PSOE also not certain to reach 276 even with nationalist support.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Also it doesn't discriminate on equity payed off. If I buy a 500k house with a mortgage in law I am the owner of a 500k house. The house is merely collateral against my loan so the 500k is my asset
Er no, definitely not.
Would that house be worth £500k to your estate when calculating IHT? No.
Would that house be worth £500k when calculating you liabilty for social care should you need to fund it? No.
Would your house be worth £500k as an asset if you need to claim UC*? No.
In each case the value of the asset would be net of the mortgage. Same with any WT.
(*For UC your residential property is ignored completely but if for example you happened to own a property that you did not live in the outstanding mortgage would be netted off the value to determine the net asset you own.
No the house will be worth whatever it could be sold for, however the estate then has to dispense debts owed before anything left is dispersed and tax calculated. If I have 100k in the bank and credit card debt of 50 k IHT will be calculated on 50k not the 100k I had in the bank but the 100k was still my asset.
Will your wealth tax take into account thinks like student loans, credit cards, overdraft, money I owe my friend down the road? No it won't. Therefore money I owe the bank to pay off the mortgage similar
Yes, yes, yes, and no to the money you the friend down the road (you could just make that one up).
As I said, all this stuff has already been well thought through and applied with tried and tested methods for areas like the benefits system, social care and IHT. Is it 100% perfect? No. is it workable in practice? Yes.
Seattle boasts a baseball stadium with a retractable roof.
Is this option NOT feasible/viable/possible for cricket in the UK?
Granted cricket pitch is larger than baseball field (at least according to 10-sec of googling).
It's not just slightly larger than a baseball field, it's a lot larger. That's the problem. I visited the baseball stadium in Toronto a few years ago, and they do play indoor cricket there, but that's a slightly different game to normal cricket.
Looks like this is going to be close, Feijoo still 1.42 next PM on BF.
Felix, is it safe to add the UPN and the CC into the PP+Vox "blue block"?
Looks like the seat count is the current split, not a projection?
On the regions map, PSOE only lead in seats in Catalonia, Asturias, and Navarre, not even ahead in Andalucia or Extremadura which doesn't look like a great map for them.
But obviously it's the blocs that matter now.
Correct on UPN&CC. one commentator suggested JUNTS in Catalonia might also support Feijoo.. It is very close and not clear that there is a viable Coalition.
JUNTS would take them to 174 on current votes.
I suspect that might finish at 176... with a suitable cheque for the Canaries being prepared...
Curfew in Lviv. All credit and debit cards stop working at 9pm. Everything begins closing at 10.30pm. The streets will be deserted by midnight
And only those of us with ACCREDITATION FROM THE UKRAINIAN ARMED FORCES will pensively walk the cobbled streets, dreaming of lost mitteleurop
Is that true about credit/debit cards? if so anyone who refuses to carry cash ON PRINCIPLE, DO YOU HEAR? is going to look rather an arse if they want a drink.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
I am not sure that can be the case can it? If wealth tax is, in part supposed to replace council tax and also provide additional raxation then it has to be on the value of the property not just on the bit you have paid off.
I don't see why a measure mixing is not possible here.
Council tax 0.5% on property value (and abolish Stamp Duty as per the Proportional Property Tax proposals), and a general wealth tax on the net value of assets (which is what the Swiss do).
Well there you have it just added another 700 pounds a year on top of my rent
PPT proposals also include transfer of charge responsibility to the Landlord ! So if you aren't paying it direct and the LL puts your rent up by £700 that should be cost neutral for you, should it not?
(That would perhaps depend on tax treatment of the LL)
Follow up - if you are paying £1800 a year CT that sounds like you would be better off.
No I am paying 1125 a year with my single person discount, a wealth tax based on the house I live in would be 1800. My landlord would absolutely pass it on via a rent increase
They might well try but the market would apply surely? If the landlord could get away with a £700 increase they would do so now. But the market can't support it.
Most renters get a knock on the door within a week or two your rent is going up because of whatever reason. My rent is now 700 a year dearer....however so is anywhere else I can rent because they all want to make that money back.
My alternative when they all raised rent is to do what? Rent at the new price or become homeless
Meanwhile, the challenge for Boris / Liz defenders is twofold.
1 Construct a timeline that doesn't lead to the fall of their champion. Complete personality transplants not allowed.
2 Construct a timeline where the Conservatives are more popular than they are now.
I don't think either can plausibly be done.
What's the point? What happened happened. Truss got a lot wrong, but two things critically wrong imo - she let her friendship with Kwarteng persuade her to give him less supervision than necessary, and she badly underestimated the strength and number of the opponents of her policies. It must have been quite surprising the see the American President snarling at her attempt to reinstate the 40% top rate of tax, as if it was any of his f***ing business, but there we were.
The point now is to look forward. We have a useless PM, with another useless PM in waiting. I see the best situation from here is for the Tories to ditch Sunak and give us an actual election.
She made the mistake of, having won the election, thinking that her party might unify behind her, rather than half of them ruthlessly briefing against her from the minute HMQ was buried.
No, her mistake was to assume the appetite for tax cuts favouring the wealthiest was as strong in 2022 as it had been in 1981 but the world has changed.
The notion of "fairness" is now in the ascendant - cutting the taxes of the poorest is now seen as more acceptable and if anything policies aimed at getting more out of the wealthiest would now have greater support.
I don’t think she did make that assumption. She realised many of her policies would make her unpopular in the short term (she said it many times) and was prepared to ride that out and fight an election on the results. Sadly, she didn't factor in de facto opposition from the BOE, the UK CS, the OBR, the IMF, the US, a nasty lot of backstabbers within the PCP - she needed to fight one at a time, not all at once on the battleground of Kwasi's somewhat flawed mini-budget.
Personally I think the energy/fracking stuff should have been packaged up with the energy price guarantee and put through as an energy security bill before anything else. Then a Food security bill, THEN an economical security bill.
I thought her fracking decision was correct. The idea of bringing through the various things piecemeal does tactically seem like would have been more effective, in hindsight. Wouldn't spook as many people, eliminates the argument there was no time put in to considering the measures, and a cumulative effect from passing one helping cement her ideas for the next vote.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Also it doesn't discriminate on equity payed off. If I buy a 500k house with a mortgage in law I am the owner of a 500k house. The house is merely collateral against my loan so the 500k is my asset
Er no, definitely not.
Would that house be worth £500k to your estate when calculating IHT? No.
Would that house be worth £500k when calculating you liabilty for social care should you need to fund it? No.
Would your house be worth £500k as an asset if you need to claim UC*? No.
In each case the value of the asset would be net of the mortgage. Same with any WT.
(*For UC your residential property is ignored completely but if for example you happened to own a property that you did not live in the outstanding mortgage would be netted off the value to determine the net asset you own.
No the house will be worth whatever it could be sold for, however the estate then has to dispense debts owed before anything left is dispersed and tax calculated. If I have 100k in the bank and credit card debt of 50 k IHT will be calculated on 50k not the 100k I had in the bank but the 100k was still my asset.
Will your wealth tax take into account thinks like student loans, credit cards, overdraft, money I owe my friend down the road? No it won't. Therefore money I owe the bank to pay off the mortgage similar
Aren't all those taken into account with IHT? (Student loans may be weird...?) So they can all be taken into account with a wealth tax.
Curfew in Lviv. All credit and debit cards stop working at 9pm. Everything begins closing at 10.30pm. The streets will be deserted by midnight
And only those of us with ACCREDITATION FROM THE UKRAINIAN ARMED FORCES will pensively walk the cobbled streets, dreaming of lost mitteleurop
Is that true about credit/debit cards? if so anyone who refuses to carry cash ON PRINCIPLE, DO YOU HEAR? is going to look rather an arse if they want a drink.
Yes, true
Cash only after 9pm. No idea why. But it is the case
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Also it doesn't discriminate on equity payed off. If I buy a 500k house with a mortgage in law I am the owner of a 500k house. The house is merely collateral against my loan so the 500k is my asset
Er no, definitely not.
Would that house be worth £500k to your estate when calculating IHT? No.
Would that house be worth £500k when calculating you liabilty for social care should you need to fund it? No.
Would your house be worth £500k as an asset if you need to claim UC*? No.
In each case the value of the asset would be net of the mortgage. Same with any WT.
(*For UC your residential property is ignored completely but if for example you happened to own a property that you did not live in the outstanding mortgage would be netted off the value to determine the net asset you own.
No the house will be worth whatever it could be sold for, however the estate then has to dispense debts owed before anything left is dispersed and tax calculated. If I have 100k in the bank and credit card debt of 50 k IHT will be calculated on 50k not the 100k I had in the bank but the 100k was still my asset.
Will your wealth tax take into account thinks like student loans, credit cards, overdraft, money I owe my friend down the road? No it won't. Therefore money I owe the bank to pay off the mortgage similar
Yes, yes, yes, and no to the money you the friend down the road (you could just make that one up).
As I said, all this stuff has already been well thought through and applied with tried and tested methods for areas like the benefits system, social care and IHT. Is it 100% perfect? No. is it workable in practice? Yes.
Wow storing that one....BenPointer says "stuff has already been well thought through and applied with tried and tested methods for areas like the benefits system, social care and IHT. Is it 100% perfect? No. is it workable in practice? Yes."
Looks like this is going to be close, Feijoo still 1.42 next PM on BF.
Felix, is it safe to add the UPN and the CC into the PP+Vox "blue block"?
Looks like the seat count is the current split, not a projection?
On the regions map, PSOE only lead in seats in Catalonia, Asturias, and Navarre, not even ahead in Andalucia or Extremadura which doesn't look like a great map for them.
But obviously it's the blocs that matter now.
Correct on UPN&CC. one commentator suggested JUNTS in Catalonia might also support Feijoo.. It is very close and not clear that there is a viable Coalition.
Save for (theoretical) Grand Coalition/
IF the Republic of Ireland is currently governed by coalition of Fine Gael + Fianna Fáil (and + Greens) then WHY cannot the Kingdom of Spain achieve (if that's the correct word) something similar.
Which of course Germany's parties Red and Black first did decades ago.
Seattle boasts a baseball stadium with a retractable roof.
Is this option NOT feasible/viable/possible for cricket in the UK?
Granted cricket pitch is larger than baseball field (at least according to 10-sec of googling).
It's not just slightly larger than a baseball field, it's a lot larger. That's the problem. I visited the baseball stadium in Toronto a few years ago, and they do play indoor cricket there, but that's a slightly different game to normal cricket.
Looks like this is going to be close, Feijoo still 1.42 next PM on BF.
Felix, is it safe to add the UPN and the CC into the PP+Vox "blue block"?
Looks like the seat count is the current split, not a projection?
On the regions map, PSOE only lead in seats in Catalonia, Asturias, and Navarre, not even ahead in Andalucia or Extremadura which doesn't look like a great map for them.
But obviously it's the blocs that matter now.
Correct on UPN&CC. one commentator suggested JUNTS in Catalonia might also support Feijoo.. It is very close and not clear that there is a viable Coalition.
PP + PSOE grand Coalition an option with PP + VOX or PSOE + SUMAR short of a majority + PP most seats now
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Duh?
I've not actually seen a wealth tax proposed by any of our political parties to date (I stand to be corrected) but it's been suggested on here numerous times and never on mortgaged assets.
However, you confidently asserted that "People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own." I was just correcting that misunderstanding on your part.
Spot the place where it says it depends on how much equity you have paid off
Besides a side effect of equity based tax is it discourages paying off your house earlier. That just feeds into increased bank profits. Something you on the left want to encourage?
Mmmm. If you delay paying off your mortgage you either keep the cash you saved elsewhere (in which case its still part of your total wealth) or you spend it (in which case its taxed anyway, so no big advantage to you).
Also, bear in mind that any sensible WT is not going to be taxing Mr and Mrs Average - the allowances would be set to £500k or £1m or more (median UK = £125k in 2020; mean UK wealth = £305k, according to the ONS).
Looks like this is going to be close, Feijoo still 1.42 next PM on BF.
Felix, is it safe to add the UPN and the CC into the PP+Vox "blue block"?
Looks like the seat count is the current split, not a projection?
On the regions map, PSOE only lead in seats in Catalonia, Asturias, and Navarre, not even ahead in Andalucia or Extremadura which doesn't look like a great map for them.
But obviously it's the blocs that matter now.
Correct on UPN&CC. one commentator suggested JUNTS in Catalonia might also support Feijoo.. It is very close and not clear that there is a viable Coalition.
PP + PSOE grand Coalition an option with PP + VOX or PSOE + SUMAR short of a majority
I might be proved wrong, but I feel like a PP/PSOE grand coalition is only marginally more likely than a peacetime Con/Lab GC in the UK.
I don't think Spain has any/much tradition of GC's (unlike Germany/Austria) even at regional level?
Meanwhile, the challenge for Boris / Liz defenders is twofold.
1 Construct a timeline that doesn't lead to the fall of their champion. Complete personality transplants not allowed.
2 Construct a timeline where the Conservatives are more popular than they are now.
I don't think either can plausibly be done.
What's the point? What happened happened. Truss got a lot wrong, but two things critically wrong imo - she let her friendship with Kwarteng persuade her to give him less supervision than necessary, and she badly underestimated the strength and number of the opponents of her policies. It must have been quite surprising the see the American President snarling at her attempt to reinstate the 40% top rate of tax, as if it was any of his f***ing business, but there we were.
The point now is to look forward. We have a useless PM, with another useless PM in waiting. I see the best situation from here is for the Tories to ditch Sunak and give us an actual election.
Truss lost control of the narrative because she didn’t have an answer when people asked the obvious question of /how/ exactly her policies were going to bring about growth. Everyone could see that they made the fiscal position of the government worse in the short term & she had no answer to the growth question apart from “it worked for Thatcher”.
Unfortunately for her Thatcher cosplay doesn’t get you the right to economic growth & once she was revealed as an empty shell with no idea what she was doing (& her Chancellor likewise) the markets spooked & there was no way back.
This is an odd word soup that bears absolutely no relation to the events of the period. Perhaps save it for when they ask you to write a liberty-taking adaptation for stage and screen.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Duh?
I've not actually seen a wealth tax proposed by any of our political parties to date (I stand to be corrected) but it's been suggested on here numerous times and never on mortgaged assets.
However, you confidently asserted that "People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own." I was just correcting that misunderstanding on your part.
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
In respect of your second paragraph, most wealth taxes use the value of the property not the value of the equity in the property as their primary metric
Er... evidence?
According to the examples covered here most, if not all appear to be levied on net assets.
But that is not the wealth tax any of our political parties have proposed at one time or another.
Duh?
I've not actually seen a wealth tax proposed by any of our political parties to date (I stand to be corrected) but it's been suggested on here numerous times and never on mortgaged assets.
However, you confidently asserted that "People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own." I was just correcting that misunderstanding on your part.
Spot the place where it says it depends on how much equity you have paid off
Besides a side effect of equity based tax is it discourages paying off your house earlier. That just feeds into increased bank profits. Something you on the left want to encourage?
Mmmm. If you delay paying off your mortgage you either keep the cash you saved elsewhere (in which case its still part of your total wealth) or you spend it (in which case its taxed anyway, so no big advantage to you).
Also, bear in mind that any sensible WT is not going to be taxing Mr and Mrs Average - the allowances would be set to £500k or £1m or more (median UK = £125k in 2020; mean UK wealth = £305k, according to the ONS).
Depends what I spend it on, most of my free cash expenditure is not taxed
Curfew in Lviv. All credit and debit cards stop working at 9pm. Everything begins closing at 10.30pm. The streets will be deserted by midnight
And only those of us with ACCREDITATION FROM THE UKRAINIAN ARMED FORCES will pensively walk the cobbled streets, dreaming of lost mitteleurop
Is that true about credit/debit cards? if so anyone who refuses to carry cash ON PRINCIPLE, DO YOU HEAR? is going to look rather an arse if they want a drink.
Yes, true
Cash only after 9pm. No idea why. But it is the case
Curfew in Lviv. All credit and debit cards stop working at 9pm. Everything begins closing at 10.30pm. The streets will be deserted by midnight
And only those of us with ACCREDITATION FROM THE UKRAINIAN ARMED FORCES will pensively walk the cobbled streets, dreaming of lost mitteleurop
Is that true about credit/debit cards? if so anyone who refuses to carry cash ON PRINCIPLE, DO YOU HEAR? is going to look rather an arse if they want a drink.
Yes, true
Cash only after 9pm. No idea why. But it is the case
Helps keep the riff-raff OFF the streets. Though hardly fail-safe, for example . . . Leon!
@Miklosvar has a point on Rhodes. This does not sound “normal”
“Greece mounted its largest-ever island evacuation this weekend, moving close to 19,000 people on Rhodes to escape wildfires that have prompted some tour operators to cancel flights to the popular destination.”
Which is why we need policies that aren’t regressive taxation. Note that the climate change levy on energy bills isn’t a problem because it is *equal*. Well, kinda. The rich have the best insulated homes, of course.
Green New Deal funded by Wealth Tax then. Done.
You seem to think only the rich will pay a wealth tax. Clue they wont
Renters will have the wealth tax added to their rent People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own. Poor pensioners that live on nothing more than a state pension but in the 40 years since they paid off their house that has now increased to an incredible price will suddenly find the wealth tax eating half their pension, fuel prices stealing the other half and food inflation swallowing another 20%
The rich will find ways around the wealth tax
Well we were looking at non-regressive ways to fund important things like saving the planet. What taxes would you rather use?
There is no such thing as a progressive tax frankly, your side have introduced so called progressive taxation measures, so have the tories. Always seems to hit the poor harder than the rich.
We don't need to save the planet either. Whatever happens the planet will still be here even if there are no humans. What you mean is save humans. Sorry too late it ain't going to happen. Rich countries in the west will find mitigation measures poor countries will be left to hang. There is nothing that can be done unless we get a global dictatorship that bans all private transportation, all meat etc. That won't happen so accept it.
You are talking a lot of rubbish again Pagan.
Income tax as implemented is unarguably progressive. You could argue it's not progressive enough and you could also argue that some very wealthy people find ways to avoid it. But by and large it's a progressive tax. (NI and VAT, in contrast, are not.)
Now about your assertion that People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k not the 40k they actually own. There is no possible basis for that to be the case. What you are describing would be a borrowing tax - an interesting concept but not one which would win many votes for any perty proposing or implementing it I would guess.
Focus on the facts, not your fantasies.
I am not sure that can be the case can it? If wealth tax is, in part supposed to replace council tax and also provide additional raxation then it has to be on the value of the property not just on the bit you have paid off.
I don't see why a measure mixing is not possible here.
Council tax of 0.5% on property value to replace Council Tax (and abolish Stamp Duty as per the Proportional Property Tax proposals), and a general wealth tax on the net value of assets (which is what the Swiss do).
There would be a modest downward pressure on property values in more over-demand areas, as holding expensive property would be more expensive than at present. I think that is what we want.
"modest downward pressure on property values"
The last time that happened it was a disaster for hundreds of thousands who found themselves in negative equity, unable to sell and unable to afford their mortgages.
I shouldsay I am quite in favour of a hefty drop in house price values but for any Government causing it by taxation it would be electoral suicide.
Comments
https://www.saltforkfestival.org/
(Camilla, eat yer heart out!)
Just let the WT be payable as a charge on the property, like we already do for covering social care costs.
Britain is moderately taxed, compared to its peers, but the tax seems to fall more heavily on middle income tax payers. Meanwhile, overall wealth levels - yes, largely property - are high by global standards.
PM Pedro Sánchez called the vote in response to his Socialist party’s dismal performance at the May local elections
Calling an election after suffering terrible local results? What a peculiar foreign notion...
The Victorian asylums helped out, by warehousing the problematic. Later they added drugging them into compliance I’m pointing out that, until we deal with underlying problem of house prices, that a wealth tax will either raise very little or hit the wrong people hardest.
Among other effects, it would massively increase the pace that people are forced out of areas that are gentrifying/gentrified.
If that's the final score (big if) Sanchez has played a bloody blinder.
Your hispanophile centrist Dad Hyfud.
Council tax of 0.5% on property value to replace Council Tax (and abolish Stamp Duty as per the Proportional Property Tax proposals), and a general wealth tax on the net value of assets (which is what the Swiss do).
There would be a modest downward pressure on property values in more over-demand areas, as holding expensive property would be more expensive than at present. I think that is what we want.
If the PSOE stay largest party as they are with almost 50% in, Sanchez can stay PM. PP will hope to overtake later on
"A wealth tax (also called a capital tax or equity tax) is a tax on an entity's holdings of assets or an entity's net worth. "
"Typically, wealth taxation often involves the exclusion of an individual's liabilities, such as mortgages and other debts, from their total assets."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_tax
Not paying full council tax because you have a mortgage would be an interesting idea.
16% counted PP+Vox = 155
53% counted PP+Vox = 162
I've not actually seen a wealth tax proposed by any of our political parties to date (I stand to be corrected) but it's been suggested on here numerous times and never on mortgaged assets.
However, you confidently asserted that "People who have paid off 10% of a 400,000 pound house will be paying wealth tax on the full 400k noth the 40k they actually own." I was just correcting that misunderstanding on your part.
(That would perhaps depend on tax treatment of the LL)
I've only quoted a couple of points from the proposals. They are here. There is also a regional balancing mechanism,
https://fairershare.org.uk/proportional-property-tax/
Spot the place where it says it depends on how much equity you have paid off
Looks like this is going to be close, Feijoo still 1.42 next PM on BF.
Felix, is it safe to add the UPN and the CC into the PP+Vox "blue block"?
Looks like the seat count is the current split, not a projection?
On the regions map, PSOE only lead in seats in Catalonia, Asturias, and Navarre, not even ahead in Andalucia or Extremadura which doesn't look like a great map for them.
But obviously it's the blocs that matter now.
Would that house be worth £500k to your estate when calculating IHT? No.
Would that house be worth £500k when calculating you liabilty for social care should you need to fund it? No.
Would your house be worth £500k as an asset if you need to claim UC*? No.
In each case the value of the asset would be net of the mortgage. Same with any WT.
(*For UC your residential property is ignored completely but if for example you happened to own a property that you did not live in the outstanding mortgage would be netted off the value to determine the net asset you own.
And only those of us with ACCREDITATION FROM THE UKRAINIAN ARMED FORCES will pensively walk the cobbled streets, dreaming of lost mitteleurop
There's a definite reward for getting your alliances in place before the election; friendly parties on 15 and 20 percent might get nothing, but a joint list on 35 should get something.
Hence the importance of the effective absorption of Citizens by the PP well before the election, and the swallowing up of Podemos by Sumar after it was called.
Stay safe.
Will your wealth tax take into account thinks like student loans, credit cards, overdraft, money I owe my friend down the road? No it won't. Therefore money I owe the bank to pay off the mortgage similar
PSOE + Sumar + PNV + BNG + Bildu + Existe + ERC + Junts + CUP = 184 seats (in your dreams!!)
Is this option NOT feasible/viable/possible for cricket in the UK?
Granted cricket pitch is larger than baseball field (at least according to 10-sec of googling).
Test cricket teeters on the brink of oblivion. Millions of people have invested emotionally in this series only to have it absolutely ruined by two days of typically shite Mancunian weather, like it is beyond the wit of man to work around such things
Many of those people will now shrug and think Fuck it, what a waste of time, at least with white ball you get a result
And thus the last bastion of Test cricket crumbles away
oh no, no otro
As I said, all this stuff has already been well thought through and applied with tried and tested methods for areas like the benefits system, social care and IHT. Is it 100% perfect? No. is it workable in practice? Yes.
I suspect that might finish at 176... with a suitable cheque for the Canaries being prepared...
This is what happens in reality.
Something happens, mortgage rate increase...wealth tax whatever...
Most renters get a knock on the door within a week or two your rent is going up because of whatever reason. My rent is now 700 a year dearer....however so is anywhere else I can rent because they all want to make that money back.
My alternative when they all raised rent is to do what? Rent at the new price or become homeless
Cash only after 9pm. No idea why. But it is the case
IF the Republic of Ireland is currently governed by coalition of Fine Gael + Fianna Fáil (and + Greens) then WHY cannot the Kingdom of Spain achieve (if that's the correct word) something similar.
Which of course Germany's parties Red and Black first did decades ago.
Madrid - Barcelona
Riyadh - Jeddah
Ankara - Istanbul/Izmir
Canberra - Melbourne/Sydney
Brasilia - Rio
Beijing - Shanghai
Bonn - Hamburg (before reunification)
Also, bear in mind that any sensible WT is not going to be taxing Mr and Mrs Average - the allowances would be set to £500k or £1m or more (median UK = £125k in 2020; mean UK wealth = £305k, according to the ONS).
I don't think Spain has any/much tradition of GC's (unlike Germany/Austria) even at regional level?
York - Hull
Mansion Tax ≠ WT
Council Tax ≠WT
I'm thinking the Congreso will be "well hung" if it all comes down to Junts who won't support either Sanchez or Feijoo for PM?
Bloody hell!
Sanchez political genius.
Even if he loses.
The last time that happened it was a disaster for hundreds of thousands who found themselves in negative equity, unable to sell and unable to afford their mortgages.
I shouldsay I am quite in favour of a hefty drop in house price values but for any Government causing it by taxation it would be electoral suicide.