Mr. Stereodog, some private schools are hugely expensive. Others could be afforded by many people but at the cost of forgoing holidays and other thing. The former will not be sunk or hit too hard by a VAT rise. The latter will be.
Do many families spend £17 500 on holidays each year? That is the average independent school fees before VAT.
You can easily drop 3-5k on a family summer holiday in July or August, which we are foregoing this year. The rest (10k or so) you account for by older cars, fewer weekend trips and a smaller house/mortgage and maybe reduced payments on top.
I'd say if you have one earner on 40k and another on 60k private school for one child becomes feasible post tax in the south-east.
You can possibly do it on lower salaries if you stretch yourself. Otherwise, you're into others helping you out, bursaries or scholarships.
£100k joint income would put that household in about the top 7%. The proportion of kids in private schools is about 7%. So, yes, that matches.
Why are you so fixated with percentiles?
My figures could include for a junior doctor and a teacher who are married or cohabiting and working full-time.
Do you think they're rich?
What might trouble you is how your situation highlights how pressure most people are these days. If the top end are under pressure, imagine how bad it is elsewhere. For example, at least you have a mortgage and can afford a house.
Yes, and?
You can pursue more than one policy at once.
Thinking this is a bad policy and a counterproductive policy doesn't mean you don't give a shit about the strugglers, strivers and the poor.
There seems to be a position here that it's a good thing if everyone is suffering and losing out in the belief that will somehow drive unity and make for a better society.
It's actually a classically socialist argument, and we've all seen where that story ends before.
Not at all, but it does shine a light on who has greatest need and where finite resources might be prioritised.
How about we expand those finite resources by not pursuing policies that might shrink it?
We should expand those finite resources, yes. I think the best way to do that is to invest, invest in better education, better health services, better support for entrepreneurialism.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
What did Theresa May say about citizens of nowhere?
I have no desire to stay here to be exploited by a resentful and vengeful populace pursuing policies I think will be destructive to the country at my personal expense.
It's better I take action that will show up their bankruptcy as fast as possible, so the scales fall from people's eyes and the country sobers up as fast as possible.
It’s amazing you can be so self-sacrificing about this, but so reluctant to be self-sacrificing when it comes to paying tax.
Indeed it is quite striking how many "patriotic" Brexiteers are so keen to bugger off as soon as democracy looks to be going against them. Its almost as if their interest in their fellow Brits is very focused on themselves.
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Closing down hundreds of Sure Start centres was far more anti-aspiration than asking private schools to find savings so that a small number of their clients can still afford to use them.
An, an eye for an eye.
Here's the problem: this policy won't raise a penny to help the problems of the state sector.
But it's interesting that you don't really care about that.
So you say.
We can't be sure about that without doing the experiment, though the experts who have looked at this think it will be revenue-positive for the government. And both schools highlighted by the Telegraph were clearly in a bad way financially before this plan was a gleam in a lefty's eye.
I am all for a much more honest conversation about tax and spend, which I'm pretty sure boils down to "we've been in fiscal la la land for decades, expect to pay more and get less." But nobody is offering that and it's in nobody's interest to go first.
So we have dismal little offerings like this.
On vat on private school fees the statistics of the number of children leaving the private sector with the cost implications, not just of placing these children in state schools, but the number of teachers and assistants in the private sector loosing their jobs will become apparent probably even before the policy is enacted due to the timing of this election
It seems it is coming under attack from teaching unions, is likely to face a judicial review, and irony of all ironies Reform have said they will appeal the policy to the ECHR, even though they want to abolish it
I genuinely expect it to cost more than it raises, leaving Labour to explain how they fund all the new teaching posts they have promised
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
What did Theresa May say about citizens of nowhere?
I have no desire to stay here to be exploited by a resentful and vengeful populace pursuing policies I think will be destructive to the country at my personal expense.
It's better I take action that will show up their bankruptcy as fast as possible, so the scales fall from people's eyes and the country sobers up as fast as possible.
1. You're paying 62% tax 2. They trashed the economy 3. They trashed public services
But you'd have to leave if Labour got in because they will be destructive to the country...
He’s not paying 62% tax. He’s paying a marginal rate of 62%. His overall tax rate will be a fair bit lower than that.
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Are you just in the top 20%, or are you actually in the top 5%?
I’m not voting for Labour. I don’t know whether they are anti-aspiration. I am, however, OK with those at the top of the income pile contributing more. I’m sure you work hard, but so do many people on lower wages.
Sure, but the position of some seems to be that if you're in the upper brackets you have no grounds to object no matter what your tax rate is, because others have less.
I pay 62% marginal rate at the moment, with not only no personal allowance but also on a Z-code.
At some point you wonder: why do I bother?
You can object all you like. I do not wish to put any limits on your voicing objections.
I don’t believe that just any level of taxation is appropriate for those in the upper brackets. I’ve never said that. I do think levels of taxation for those in the upper brackets are relatively low compared to what they were in my parents’ generation.
I earn well. I’m in the top decile by income. I don’t object to paying more tax.
There are pots other than directly felt payroll taxes that could raise significant money to cover our unfolding demographic disaster.
If I were in government I’d look to broadening the base for VAT - it’s been narrowed too far - and potentially up the rate a bit. Ireland has a 23% rate for example. I’d then also look at employer (not employee) NI: that’s the area where we are outliers compared with much of Europe and it’s an obvious place from which to fund pension and social care commitments.
The main objection to employer NI is “tax on jobs” but we have very low unemployment currently, and this doesn’t have the same behavioural impact as those high marginal rates for individuals.
VAT tends to be regressive though. No chance of an increase under Labour.
Oh I expect to see the threshold at which companies need to collect it drop to say £40,000 because the current threshold is a barrier to things.
Heck I used a none vat register electrician last week to rewire twin A's house. How you can have 3 workers (granted one a 17 year old apprentice) and not be VAT registered is beyond me..
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Closing down hundreds of Sure Start centres was far more anti-aspiration than asking private schools to find savings so that a small number of their clients can still afford to use them.
An, an eye for an eye.
Here's the problem: this policy won't raise a penny to help the problems of the state sector.
But it's interesting that you don't really care about that.
So you say.
We can't be sure about that without doing the experiment, though the experts who have looked at this think it will be revenue-positive for the government. And both schools highlighted by the Telegraph were clearly in a bad way financially before this plan was a gleam in a lefty's eye.
I am all for a much more honest conversation about tax and spend, which I'm pretty sure boils down to "we've been in fiscal la la land for decades, expect to pay more and get less." But nobody is offering that and it's in nobody's interest to go first.
So we have dismal little offerings like this.
On vat on private school fees the statistics of the number of children leaving the private sector with the cost implications, not just of placing these children in state schools, but the number of teachers and assistants in the private sector loosing their jobs will become apparent probably even before the policy is enacted due to the timing of this election
It seems it is coming under attack from teaching unions, is likely to face a judicial review, and irony of all ironies Reform have said they will appeal the policy to the ECHR, even though they want to abolish it
I genuinely expect it to cost more than it raises, leaving Labour to explain how they fund all the new teaching posts they have promised
I can’t see the judicial review or ECHR case winning, however.
Mr. Stereodog, some private schools are hugely expensive. Others could be afforded by many people but at the cost of forgoing holidays and other thing. The former will not be sunk or hit too hard by a VAT rise. The latter will be.
Do many families spend £17 500 on holidays each year? That is the average independent school fees before VAT.
You can easily drop 3-5k on a family summer holiday in July or August, which we are foregoing this year. The rest (10k or so) you account for by older cars, fewer weekend trips and a smaller house/mortgage and maybe reduced payments on top.
I'd say if you have one earner on 40k and another on 60k private school for one child becomes feasible post tax in the south-east.
You can possibly do it on lower salaries if you stretch yourself. Otherwise, you're into others helping you out, bursaries or scholarships.
£100k joint income would put that household in about the top 7%. The proportion of kids in private schools is about 7%. So, yes, that matches.
Why are you so fixated with percentiles?
My figures could include for a junior doctor and a teacher who are married or cohabiting and working full-time.
Do you think they're rich?
No, but I would question their judgement.
Does £15k per year bring a better return from:
1) Private education instead of state education 2) Saving the money so their child can buy a house
Would the difference between private and state education really be worth over £200k by the time their child reaches adulthood ?
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Are you just in the top 20%, or are you actually in the top 5%?
I’m not voting for Labour. I don’t know whether they are anti-aspiration. I am, however, OK with those at the top of the income pile contributing more. I’m sure you work hard, but so do many people on lower wages.
Sure, but the position of some seems to be that if you're in the upper brackets you have no grounds to object no matter what your tax rate is, because others have less.
I pay 62% marginal rate at the moment, with not only no personal allowance but also on a Z-code.
At some point you wonder: why do I bother?
You have the Tories to thank for that. As I said, the cost of VAT on school fees is a fraction of the cost of payroll tax rises over the last parliament.
There's some argument about raising tax revenue while minimising the hissing from the goose. But I can't remember it correctly.
In terms of general tax-raising strategy VAT on school fees is poor. It concentrates the tax increase on a small number of people in a visible way over a small proportion of those people's tax-paying lives.
But I think, as a policy, it's intended as a shit post. It's intended to rile up opposition to provide evidence that Starmer is on the correct side of a partisan divide that has a minority on the other side. I don't like where that approach has taken British politics when used in the past and I don't like it now.
I do generally believe that the richest can afford to contribute more for the good of the country, but I think that psychologically it's much better to persuade people to acquiesce to that with an argument about a common endeavour and a shared burden, rather than with an argument that casts the wealthy as a reviled minority.
There's some justification for VAT being charged on school fees, separate from the politics of the issue, and some justification for keeping it exempt. I think on balance that it's a needlessly divisive policy for questionable marginal gain, but the division seems to be the purpose, so I guess I'm not someone Starmer is trying to convince with it.
Mr. Stereodog, some private schools are hugely expensive. Others could be afforded by many people but at the cost of forgoing holidays and other thing. The former will not be sunk or hit too hard by a VAT rise. The latter will be.
Do many families spend £17 500 on holidays each year? That is the average independent school fees before VAT.
You can easily drop 3-5k on a family summer holiday in July or August, which we are foregoing this year. The rest (10k or so) you account for by older cars, fewer weekend trips and a smaller house/mortgage and maybe reduced payments on top.
I'd say if you have one earner on 40k and another on 60k private school for one child becomes feasible post tax in the south-east.
You can possibly do it on lower salaries if you stretch yourself. Otherwise, you're into others helping you out, bursaries or scholarships.
£100k joint income would put that household in about the top 7%. The proportion of kids in private schools is about 7%. So, yes, that matches.
Why are you so fixated with percentiles?
My figures could include for a junior doctor and a teacher who are married or cohabiting and working full-time.
Do you think they're rich?
What might trouble you is how your situation highlights how pressure most people are these days. If the top end are under pressure, imagine how bad it is elsewhere. For example, at least you have a mortgage and can afford a house.
Yes, and?
You can pursue more than one policy at once.
Thinking this is a bad policy and a counterproductive policy doesn't mean you don't give a shit about the strugglers, strivers and the poor.
There seems to be a position here that it's a good thing if everyone is suffering and losing out in the belief that will somehow drive unity and make for a better society.
It's actually a classically socialist argument, and we've all seen where that story ends before.
Not at all, but it does shine a light on who has greatest need and where finite resources might be prioritised.
How about we expand those finite resources by not pursuing policies that might shrink it?
Surely we need both to turn things around from where things are today.
For some levity - we now have Welsh pensioners campaigning for 20mph limits when roads happen to pass by their homes. The man is blocking the road like a JSO activist to prevent the council putting up a national speed limit sign.
You need to read the article properly as he lives on a country lane and of course it should have a 20mph limit
It is not the argument you think it is, but anyway the matter in Wales is virtually settled as the Welsh government have moderated their advice and some roads will have their speed limits restored
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Are you just in the top 20%, or are you actually in the top 5%?
I’m not voting for Labour. I don’t know whether they are anti-aspiration. I am, however, OK with those at the top of the income pile contributing more. I’m sure you work hard, but so do many people on lower wages.
Sure, but the position of some seems to be that if you're in the upper brackets you have no grounds to object no matter what your tax rate is, because others have less.
I pay 62% marginal rate at the moment, with not only no personal allowance but also on a Z-code.
At some point you wonder: why do I bother?
You can object all you like. I do not wish to put any limits on your voicing objections.
I don’t believe that just any level of taxation is appropriate for those in the upper brackets. I’ve never said that. I do think levels of taxation for those in the upper brackets are relatively low compared to what they were in my parents’ generation.
I earn well. I’m in the top decile by income. I don’t object to paying more tax.
There are pots other than directly felt payroll taxes that could raise significant money to cover our unfolding demographic disaster.
If I were in government I’d look to broadening the base for VAT - it’s been narrowed too far - and potentially up the rate a bit. Ireland has a 23% rate for example. I’d then also look at employer (not employee) NI: that’s the area where we are outliers compared with much of Europe and it’s an obvious place from which to fund pension and social care commitments.
The main objection to employer NI is “tax on jobs” but we have very low unemployment currently, and this doesn’t have the same behavioural impact as those high marginal rates for individuals.
VAT tends to be regressive though. No chance of an increase under Labour.
It’s not “progressive” but because of the way it’s structured, and different spending structures at different levels, it’s not particularly regressive either.
Does anyone know what Alba are doing in terms of candidates? I'm looking at the MRP for my constituency and it's got "Other" on 9%. But so far I only see Tory, SNP, Labour, and Lib Dem standing.
At least they should do better than the 1.66% the got in the last Holyrood elections? I know they didn't stand in the constituencies, but damn that was low.
Found an Evening Standard piece saying Alba were looking to contest 'at least 16' seats, which suggests their ambitions at this election remain fairly low.
An Interview with the very impressive Zadie Smith where among other things she talks about her comprehensive schooling in London where in her class she and another went to Cambridge and four to Oxford in her year. She makes the most impressive argument against the iniquity in education that I've heard in the last few days.
Morning all. Beautiful day here in the Cotswolds. Trust the sun is shining on you too, wherever you may be.
Betfair's GE markets have shifted a little bit in response to last nite's polls. Sporting's spreads remained unmoved though. They continue to pitch the Tories at 139-147 which looks a bit high to me and certainly at odds with Betfair's seat band markets. Time for a bit of hedging and arbing?
That Opinium poll was a stinker for the Government. I'm surprised it didn't have more impact.
I mean, I guess if you don't set a target then you cannot miss it, but in that case does saying you think it should come down really mean anything at all?
First up to join Laura on the show is Labour's shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper who is asked about migration - in particular, how many more people she thinks should be allowed legally to live in the country.
Cooper acknowledges there has been a big increase in work migration, explaining "work visas have doubled" in recent years.
"We think that is a problem," Cooper tells Laura. She says it must come down and factors driving it need to be tackled.
Laura asks again how many people should be allowed to come to the UK.
Cooper says Labour "is not setting a target". She adds that from one year to another there are variations, citing the homes for Ukraine scheme and the Covid-19 pandemic.
Cooper was equally evasive with Trevor Phillips on Sky and to be honest if they switched roles we would have a far better prospect for the next Home Secretary, and he is Labour and one of the best interviewers in the media today
An Interview with the very impressive Zadie Smith where among other things she talks about her comprehensive schooling in London where in her class she and another went to Campbridge and four to Oxford in her year. She makes the most impressive argument against the iniquity in education that I've heard in the last few days.
An Interview with the very impressive Zadie Smith where among other things she talks about her comprehensive schooling in London where in her class she and another went to Campbridge and four to Oxford in her year. She makes the most impressive argument against the iniquity in education that I've heard in the last few days.
An Interview with the very impressive Zadie Smith where among other things she talks about her comprehensive schooling in London where in her class she and another went to Campbridge and four to Oxford in her year. She makes the most impressive argument against the iniquity in education that I've heard in the last few days.
An Interview with the very impressive Zadie Smith where among other things she talks about her comprehensive schooling in London where in her class she and another went to Campbridge and four to Oxford in her year. She makes the most impressive argument against the iniquity in education that I've heard in the last few days.
An Interview with the very impressive Zadie Smith where among other things she talks about her comprehensive schooling in London where in her class she and another went to Campbridge and four to Oxford in her year. She makes the most impressive argument against the iniquity in education that I've heard in the last few days.
An Interview with the very impressive Zadie Smith where among other things she talks about her comprehensive schooling in London where in her class she and another went to Campbridge and four to Oxford in her year. She makes the most impressive argument against the iniquity in education that I've heard in the last few days.
Anyone know when manifestos might drop? I know it has not been long since the annoucement, and some parties will be making up policies on the hoof, but I do look forward to reading them.
In 2017, Labour's manifesto was released on Day 27 of the campaign, Tories on Day 29. In 2019, Labour on Day 23, Tories on Day 27. Based on that I would guess they would drop week beginning 17th June just in time for the postal ballots going out.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
You won't, though, because you are just about managing to scrimp and save, you say elsewhere. You'll end up paying for things that incur 20% VAT. At least that, I think, is the political economic logic.
No, I might actually fuck off.
My wife and I have discussed it.
Nah
Er, yes we have.
@farooq and others like him seem to toil under the illusion that no one will move if Labour doubles taxes and has daily struggle sessions for anyone who does not agree with Wokeness. I mean, why would you leave Britain with its glorious weather and completely sensible immigration policy which just makes everything better and better and our health system even more enviable? What mad person would want to leave such a paradise to go to say Thailand where they are introducing a visa with basically zero income tax?
The Lambo market can be volatile and illiquid but that 1st Gen Gallardo with the gated manual is a one-way bet and will go for strong money. I'd probably keep the Aventador.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
You won't, though, because you are just about managing to scrimp and save, you say elsewhere. You'll end up paying for things that incur 20% VAT. At least that, I think, is the political economic logic.
No, I might actually fuck off.
My wife and I have discussed it.
Nah
Er, yes we have.
@farooq and others like him seem to toil under the illusion that no one will move if Labour doubles taxes and has daily struggle sessions for anyone who does not agree with Wokeness. I mean, why would you leave Britain with its glorious weather and completely sensible immigration policy which just makes everything better and better and our health system even more enviable? What mad person would want to leave such a paradise to go to say Thailand where they are introducing a visa with basically zero income tax?
The Lambo market can be volatile and illiquid but that 1st Gen Gallardo with the gated manual is a one-way bet and will go for strong money. I'd probably keep the Aventador.
Plenty of crypto grifters looking to flex on TikTok to keep the Lambo market strong.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
What did Theresa May say about citizens of nowhere?
I have no desire to stay here to be exploited by a resentful and vengeful populace pursuing policies I think will be destructive to the country at my personal expense.
It's better I take action that will show up their bankruptcy as fast as possible, so the scales fall from people's eyes and the country sobers up as fast as possible.
Why does "everybody" think they have a right to go and live in another country?
I say "everybody" deliberately, becuse it is an attitude that one finds in all counties and in all walks of life.....
It is just gone 7.30am at The Priory primary school in Wednesbury, near Walsall, and already a dozen or so children – known as the “early birds” – have been dropped off so their parents can get to work. Some are jumping through hula hoops and others are just chatting at breakfast tables covered with smart red gingham cloths. The welcoming smell of toast fills the hall as more arrive.
This corner of the West Midlands is one of the most deprived parts of England, where poverty is rife. If teachers and staff here were not on hand to provide their charges with a good breakfast, they know many would arrive with empty stomachs, and then be unable to focus in class.
“It is so important,” says Elaine Dickenson, the school business manager who is overseeing the group. She sees the difference it makes to behaviour every day. “A full tummy means they can concentrate much better during lessons and for the rest of the day.” Dickenson is also able, from years of experience, to spot those in particular need. “You just know,” she says, “from the way they are dressed. You just have this sixth sense.”
There are kids that don't even get a good breakfast. They need help too.
I’m not sure the answer to every question is for the state or its agencies to arrogate the function to themselves. Whilst breakfast clubs, free school meals, after school and supper clubs all alleviate certain needs. I do wonder if they are necessarily the correct answer. You could make the case that the cumulative effects is the wholesale nationalisation of childhood.
There is also an increasing trend in western societies for the privatisation of choice and the socialisation of the consequences of poor choices. In terms of child nutrition whilst the ultimate responsibility ought to devolve upon the parents, not schools or wider society, to feed their children that doesn’t mean they should be left unassisted in the discharge of that responsibility. How you calibrate that assistance should be up for discussion, but simply signalling the wholesale transference of it to the state seems unlikely to end in a truly desirable place.
I tend towards agreement, but we do as a society protect people from the bad choices of other people. For example we insist cars drivers have insurance to cover third parties, but they don't have to have that insurance cover themselves. It seems similar to me to make sure that a seven year old child is not damaged by the choices of their parent(s).
Anyone know when manifestos might drop? I know it has not been long since the annoucement, and some parties will be making up policies on the hoof, but I do look forward to reading them.
In 2017, Labour's manifesto was released on Day 27 of the campaign, Tories on Day 29. In 2019, Labour on Day 23, Tories on Day 27. Based on that I would guess they would drop week beginning 17th June just in time for the postal ballots going out.
That's disappointing.
It does rather suggest that anyone who still believes manifestos make any significance difference is probably mistaken, coming so late in the game as they do.
Sure, policies will have been announced by then, but the manifestos are more just to provide a guidebook of general intentions after you win that any means of persuasion.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
You won't, though, because you are just about managing to scrimp and save, you say elsewhere. You'll end up paying for things that incur 20% VAT. At least that, I think, is the political economic logic.
No, I might actually fuck off.
My wife and I have discussed it.
Nah
Er, yes we have.
@farooq and others like him seem to toil under the illusion that no one will move if Labour doubles taxes and has daily struggle sessions for anyone who does not agree with Wokeness. I mean, why would you leave Britain with its glorious weather and completely sensible immigration policy which just makes everything better and better and our health system even more enviable? What mad person would want to leave such a paradise to go to say Thailand where they are introducing a visa with basically zero income tax?
Why hasn't this done before? Leon, you're a genius.
I'm 100% sure some 'Libertarian' has said those exact words before, right before proposing a sea pod utopia off the coast of, well, Thailand, or something.
I’m not naturally inclined towards her politics but this is subtle and just tongue in cheek enough that it works.
She’s having a very good campaign so far.
Oddly enough the two politicians who seem to be enjoying themselves most are two you’d think might be under a shadow because of scandal allegations: Davey on the post office and Rayner on her house sale. Making up the triumvirate, but with no scandal, is Brexit hardman Steve Baker who’s decided to go on holiday.
Everyone else looks thoroughly miserable. The whole Tory front bench. The entire Labour left, and most of the front bench. The entirety of the SNP and Scottish Greens. The England and Wales Greens don’t seem exactly cheerful. Tice and Farage are less angry than usual but hardly all smiles.
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Are you just in the top 20%, or are you actually in the top 5%?
I’m not voting for Labour. I don’t know whether they are anti-aspiration. I am, however, OK with those at the top of the income pile contributing more. I’m sure you work hard, but so do many people on lower wages.
Sure, but the position of some seems to be that if you're in the upper brackets you have no grounds to object no matter what your tax rate is, because others have less.
I pay 62% marginal rate at the moment, with not only no personal allowance but also on a Z-code.
At some point you wonder: why do I bother?
You can object all you like. I do not wish to put any limits on your voicing objections.
I don’t believe that just any level of taxation is appropriate for those in the upper brackets. I’ve never said that. I do think levels of taxation for those in the upper brackets are relatively low compared to what they were in my parents’ generation.
I earn well. I’m in the top decile by income. I don’t object to paying more tax.
There are pots other than directly felt payroll taxes that could raise significant money to cover our unfolding demographic disaster.
If I were in government I’d look to broadening the base for VAT - it’s been narrowed too far - and potentially up the rate a bit. Ireland has a 23% rate for example. I’d then also look at employer (not employee) NI: that’s the area where we are outliers compared with much of Europe and it’s an obvious place from which to fund pension and social care commitments.
The main objection to employer NI is “tax on jobs” but we have very low unemployment currently, and this doesn’t have the same behavioural impact as those high marginal rates for individuals.
VAT tends to be regressive though. No chance of an increase under Labour.
It’s not “progressive” but because of the way it’s structured, and different spending structures at different levels, it’s not particularly regressive either.
Hmm, fair enough. Digging around online finds a fun, nerdy debate about it.
Regardless, the politics are terrible - increasing tax on purchases with the spectre of cost of living floating about.
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Are you just in the top 20%, or are you actually in the top 5%?
I’m not voting for Labour. I don’t know whether they are anti-aspiration. I am, however, OK with those at the top of the income pile contributing more. I’m sure you work hard, but so do many people on lower wages.
Sure, but the position of some seems to be that if you're in the upper brackets you have no grounds to object no matter what your tax rate is, because others have less.
I pay 62% marginal rate at the moment, with not only no personal allowance but also on a Z-code.
At some point you wonder: why do I bother?
You can object all you like. I do not wish to put any limits on your voicing objections.
I don’t believe that just any level of taxation is appropriate for those in the upper brackets. I’ve never said that. I do think levels of taxation for those in the upper brackets are relatively low compared to what they were in my parents’ generation.
I earn well. I’m in the top decile by income. I don’t object to paying more tax.
There are pots other than directly felt payroll taxes that could raise significant money to cover our unfolding demographic disaster.
If I were in government I’d look to broadening the base for VAT - it’s been narrowed too far - and potentially up the rate a bit. Ireland has a 23% rate for example. I’d then also look at employer (not employee) NI: that’s the area where we are outliers compared with much of Europe and it’s an obvious place from which to fund pension and social care commitments.
The main objection to employer NI is “tax on jobs” but we have very low unemployment currently, and this doesn’t have the same behavioural impact as those high marginal rates for individuals.
In Ireland 23% is the headline rate, but there's a 13.5% rate on hospitality* (hotels, restaurants, etc). Seems a bit of a strange one, that you'd pay more VAT on an essential household appliance like a fridge, than on dinner out.
Arguments in favour are of tax competition for the tourist industry with continental Europe (where a lower VAT rate for hospitality is said to be common), and to support marginally viable small businesses. Large campaign to reduce this rate to 9%.
Lesson I take from it is that, once you start exempting some things from VAT, or charging lower rates, then you open the door to a whole world of pain as everyone argues for being treated as a special case.
I seem to be arguing in favour of VAT on private school fees now.
I’m not naturally inclined towards her politics but this is subtle and just tongue in cheek enough that it works.
She’s having a very good campaign so far.
Oddly enough the two politicians who seem to be enjoying themselves most are two you’d think might be under a shadow because of scandal allegations: Davey on the post office and Rayner on her house sale. Making up the triumvirate, but with no scandal, is Brexit hardman Steve Baker who’s decided to go on holiday.
Everyone else looks thoroughly miserable. The whole Tory front bench. The entire Labour left, and most of the front bench. The entirety of the SNP and Scottish Greens. The England and Wales Greens don’t seem exactly cheerful. Tice and Farage are less angry than usual but hardly all smiles.
Most of Labour are having to fight so hard to look serious, statesmanlike, and non-triumphant all the time. Farage and whatshisface are probably having some fun, but one sees campaigning as a distraction from what he wants to do, the other has to put up with people knowing he's just Farage's understudy.
An Interview with the very impressive Zadie Smith where among other things she talks about her comprehensive schooling in London where in her class she and another went to Campbridge and four to Oxford in her year. She makes the most impressive argument against the iniquity in education that I've heard in the last few days.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
What did Theresa May say about citizens of nowhere?
I have no desire to stay here to be exploited by a resentful and vengeful populace pursuing policies I think will be destructive to the country at my personal expense.
.
Off you go then - I will be curious to see where you end up but in theory you field should give you plenty of opportunities
Diane Abbott has been offered a peerage by Keir Starmer if she quits as a Labour candidate -- The Times
This whole affair has really been quite weird. However it ends up just letting her doddle to an easy win and then be ignored for 4-5 years surely would have been easier without all this briefing and back and forth?
Diane Abbott has been offered a peerage by Keir Starmer if she quits as a Labour candidate -- The Times
What about his policy on appointment to the Lords? No ex-MP can be a Lord until eight years or two parliaments have passed, whichever is longer.
That's my policy! If he's adopted it he is clearly taking sound advice .
Doesn’t sound like Labour want the Abbott story to go away, Team Starmer briefing are giving it fresh legs themselves! They are far too smug and confident about this to think Abbott can run again with Labour rosette.
Maybe it suits them. Everyone barking down one reasonably harmless rabbit hole, are not looking into others.
Which brings me to a rather easy prediction I can make. The first real pressure Labour are going to come under in this campaign is from their tax raid on private schools. I’m hearing that’s it’s coming up again and again and again in canvassing, and not necessarily in posh area’s either, and even from people who don’t have children, because they hope to and hope to send them to a private education not abandon them to the state sector, and Labours tax raid on private education is going to kill that ambition off for their family. Labour are in a mess over this policy, they are shitting votes over this one policy alone. Labour are about to come under immense pressure to do a hugely damaging u turn on it, once media and opponents smell blood how insanely unpopular it is on the doorsteps and not surviving first contact with voters 😄
I was educated in the state sector, and I said to my mum, why didn’t you send me to a private school with all the money you have? And she said it was a school with a very good reputation, so there was no need to spend money on a private education. Yep. That’s my mum.
Not sure where to start with this one.
The bit in bold - are you suggesting that Labour would be polling at over 50% if it weren't for this policy?
I think "even from people who don’t have children" was a hint that this is not to be taken at face value.
No take it at face value. Tax raid on private schools is dying a death on the doorsteps. Say in comparison with May’s Dementia Tax at this stage of 2017, all it needs now is for opposition and media (hint hint those of you reading this) to realise this and launch a pile on, and the polls will flip just on this one policy alone.
As I said up front, this is an easy prediction for me to make. Now we know from canvassing how badly this has gone down on the doorstep, Labour are in trouble over it. Labour are in trouble over it because they are stupid, this isn’t a clever money making wheeze and sop to Left wing, its voters from every level in society particularly working class who are furious with this policy, all it takes is a media pile on its unpopularity to make this election all about Labours school killing tax just like 2017 became all about Dementia Tax, and the polls will flip around.
Nick Palmer ex MP will back me up. Not many on here do more voter contact than he does, and he will be honest enough to tell you he has heard it over and over too. Even if he doesn’t admit I was first to inform him of Thangham’s defeat to the Greens two years ago!
particularly working class who are furious with this policy
Come on. The labour lead with people in work is 52:15. The labour lead with people in social grade DE & C2 is 42:22.
The Labour lead with people who are likely to have school age kids is 52:14.
You telling me I’m wrong?
Yes
You’ve made the error of thinking just because you, allegedly, pinned the election date in the right place that everything else you say is infallible or even remotely close to the donkey’s bottom. If we’re playing the ’told you so’ game, my prediction on here over 2 years ago of a Labour landslide was a lot bolder: I was almost alone on this forum and it was widely derided at the time. Lots of talk about ‘precedence’ and ’record swings'. Now almost everyone accepts at least the possibility. But foreseeing one outcome doesn’t mean I’m correct about anything else.
VAT on private schools is a good policy. We all recognise taxes need to be raised for better public services and we don’t see why wealthy people who choose to send their children to private schools should be exempt.
It has very little traction or interest for people. No one particularly minds about it.
Like most of this election campaign. It’s already over.
4 weeks Thursday. Postal votes soon.
This is where, on this occasion, you are wrong, and, to wake you up and help you get it right, I’ll call you and Labour clueless.
“VAT on private schools is a good policy… …we don’t see why wealthy people who choose to send their children to private schools should be exempt.”
BUT It’s not wealthy people. It is only working class and squeezed middle people who suffer from this policy. Really wealthy people, who send children to really wealthy schools totally uneffected by this, as the price rise is peanuts to them.
Once media and opposition parties pile on Labours true colours being revealed with their onslaught on aspiration, it doesn’t matter the actual number of midwives, plumbers, electricians who use private education, it doesn’t even matter if they have children, but the whole election focus on Labours attack on aspiration will send voters back to the Conservatives.
This, right here, in your quote above, is why Conservatives are the natural party of government, and Labour only win elections here and there. It’s always better where the Conservatives are, because they own aspiration for every UK household, and it is Labours mentality to attack aspiration.
In your post you didn’t acknowledge how clever I am at politics. In just handful of posts on PB in second week of campaign I have turned what looked like a Labour majority into a hung Parliament.
Morning all. Beautiful day here in the Cotswolds. Trust the sun is shining on you too, wherever you may be.
Betfair's GE markets have shifted a little bit in response to last nite's polls. Sporting's spreads remained unmoved though. They continue to pitch the Tories at 139-147 which looks a bit high to me and certainly at odds with Betfair's seat band markets. Time for a bit of hedging and arbing?
That Opinium poll was a stinker for the Government. I'm surprised it didn't have more impact.
Maybe everyone was watching the football.
I’m not sure there’s any great belief in the polls. The recent locals were very bad but not the complete annihilation presaged in the polls. Something is out of whack, plus as Andy Marr said this morning his contacts in both parties aren’t picking up the sentiment on the doors. Now both have reasons to mislead him so treat with appropriate levels of NaCl.
The one area I really know about is Broxbourne where the Tory vote share in 2019 locals was 57% and most recently was a shade over 50%. Swing about 7-7.5% overall. Now there are some extra wards in the Parliamentary seat but I can’t see on that basis the Tories have much trouble holding the seat with a reduced majority. All the polls and MRP seem to show the seat going down.
I can see plausible scenarios that the seat goes down, but my instinct says that the local election results should be a closer guide in this seat. You can look at other places where similar disparities exist and you can start clawing the Tories up towards a more respectable outcome in seats.
Are the Tories down to bedrock, almost certainly. Has the bedrock been largely chiselled away and carried off, possibly but not entirely certain or likely.
Morning all. Beautiful day here in the Cotswolds. Trust the sun is shining on you too, wherever you may be.
Betfair's GE markets have shifted a little bit in response to last nite's polls. Sporting's spreads remained unmoved though. They continue to pitch the Tories at 139-147 which looks a bit high to me and certainly at odds with Betfair's seat band markets. Time for a bit of hedging and arbing?
That Opinium poll was a stinker for the Government. I'm surprised it didn't have more impact.
Maybe everyone was watching the football.
I’m not sure there’s any great belief in the polls. The recent locals were very bad but not the complete annihilation presaged in the polls. Something is out of whack, plus as Andy Marr said this morning his contacts in both parties aren’t picking up the sentiment on the doors. Now both have reasons to mislead him so treat with appropriate levels of NaCl.
The one area I really know about is Broxbourne where the Tory vote share in 2019 locals was 57% and most recently was a shade over 50%. Swing about 7-7.5% overall. Now there are some extra wards in the Parliamentary seat but I can’t see on that basis the Tories have much trouble holding the seat with a reduced majority. All the polls and MRP seem to show the seat going down.
I can see plausible scenarios that the seat goes down, but my instinct says that the local election results should be a closer guide in this seat. You can look at other places where similar disparities exist and you can start clawing the Tories up towards a more respectable outcome in seats.
Are the Tories down to bedrock, almost certainly. Has the bedrock been largely chiselled away and carried off, possibly but not entirely certain or likely.
It's a perfectly respectable view, TJ, but it wasn't that long ago that many of us thought 30% was bedrock. No longer sure where bedrock is.
If a wipeout was in the offing anyway, Sunak might as well have waited until November/ December. Got 2 years under his belt and a little bit more of a legacy.
I don't see any benefit he's derived from going early, except that he gets out of the game a bit earlier. Which might be it of course.
Thing is, there was a decent defensive case to be made for May, and a different decent defensive case for November/December.
Apart from the surprise value (and that seems to be hurting the Conservatives most), it's hard to discern the logic of July.
The memoirs and instant histories will be fascinating.
We know Sunak’s crapness at politics is axiomatic but but he should have gone sooner, not later.
@Casino_Royale’s point would have stood under a PM and government that was in a position to do stuff and had a coherent idea of what they were doing, rather than failing on the tests they had set themselves - but the uncertainty had left us with a zombie administration. His legacy - a weak PM without a mandate who failed on his own terms* - is where he is, and six months more wouldn’t have redeemed that; they would have further cemented it.
Really he should have gone to the country in the early months and appealed for an electorate mandate. It would have blindsided Labour and been before his various weaknesses and failures became so clearly apparent.
*and in fairness, practically all political careers end either in failure or unexpectedly early death.
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Are you just in the top 20%, or are you actually in the top 5%?
I’m not voting for Labour. I don’t know whether they are anti-aspiration. I am, however, OK with those at the top of the income pile contributing more. I’m sure you work hard, but so do many people on lower wages.
Sure, but the position of some seems to be that if you're in the upper brackets you have no grounds to object no matter what your tax rate is, because others have less.
I pay 62% marginal rate at the moment, with not only no personal allowance but also on a Z-code.
At some point you wonder: why do I bother?
You have the Tories to thank for that. As I said, the cost of VAT on school fees is a fraction of the cost of payroll tax rises over the last parliament.
Well, no, actually I have the last Labour government in 2009 to thank for that and a certain NickPalmerexMP.
It is true, however, the Tories haven't reversed it. Not even Truss did.
lol typical tory it is ALWAYS someone else's fault
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Closing down hundreds of Sure Start centres was far more anti-aspiration than asking private schools to find savings so that a small number of their clients can still afford to use them.
An, an eye for an eye.
Here's the problem: this policy won't raise a penny to help the problems of the state sector.
But it's interesting that you don't really care about that.
No, I was responding to your assertion that Labour are anti-aspiration by pointing out closing down countless Sure Start centres was far more anti-aspirational.
Morning all. Beautiful day here in the Cotswolds. Trust the sun is shining on you too, wherever you may be.
Betfair's GE markets have shifted a little bit in response to last nite's polls. Sporting's spreads remained unmoved though. They continue to pitch the Tories at 139-147 which looks a bit high to me and certainly at odds with Betfair's seat band markets. Time for a bit of hedging and arbing?
That Opinium poll was a stinker for the Government. I'm surprised it didn't have more impact.
Maybe everyone was watching the football.
I’m not sure there’s any great belief in the polls. The recent locals were very bad but not the complete annihilation presaged in the polls. Something is out of whack, plus as Andy Marr said this morning his contacts in both parties aren’t picking up the sentiment on the doors. Now both have reasons to mislead him so treat with appropriate levels of NaCl.
The one area I really know about is Broxbourne where the Tory vote share in 2019 locals was 57% and most recently was a shade over 50%. Swing about 7-7.5% overall. Now there are some extra wards in the Parliamentary seat but I can’t see on that basis the Tories have much trouble holding the seat with a reduced majority. All the polls and MRP seem to show the seat going down.
I can see plausible scenarios that the seat goes down, but my instinct says that the local election results should be a closer guide in this seat. You can look at other places where similar disparities exist and you can start clawing the Tories up towards a more respectable outcome in seats.
Are the Tories down to bedrock, almost certainly. Has the bedrock been largely chiselled away and carried off, possibly but not entirely certain or likely.
But according to Wikipedia, turnout in Broxbourne in the local elections was only 26%. At the last general election the turnout in Broxbourne was about 64%. You are really talking about two different electorates.
Y’know, I’ve travelled widely and am nobody’s idea of a flag-shagger, but there’s honestly nowhere in the world I’d rather live than the UK. This is the paradox of patriotism; a lot of ‘patriots’ are loyal to an idea, not a nation.
I suppose I get the weather thing but tbh I really quite like it.
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Are you just in the top 20%, or are you actually in the top 5%?
I’m not voting for Labour. I don’t know whether they are anti-aspiration. I am, however, OK with those at the top of the income pile contributing more. I’m sure you work hard, but so do many people on lower wages.
Sure, but the position of some seems to be that if you're in the upper brackets you have no grounds to object no matter what your tax rate is, because others have less.
I pay 62% marginal rate at the moment, with not only no personal allowance but also on a Z-code.
At some point you wonder: why do I bother?
You can object all you like. I do not wish to put any limits on your voicing objections.
I don’t believe that just any level of taxation is appropriate for those in the upper brackets. I’ve never said that. I do think levels of taxation for those in the upper brackets are relatively low compared to what they were in my parents’ generation.
I earn well. I’m in the top decile by income. I don’t object to paying more tax.
There are pots other than directly felt payroll taxes that could raise significant money to cover our unfolding demographic disaster.
If I were in government I’d look to broadening the base for VAT - it’s been narrowed too far - and potentially up the rate a bit. Ireland has a 23% rate for example. I’d then also look at employer (not employee) NI: that’s the area where we are outliers compared with much of Europe and it’s an obvious place from which to fund pension and social care commitments.
The main objection to employer NI is “tax on jobs” but we have very low unemployment currently, and this doesn’t have the same behavioural impact as those high marginal rates for individuals.
VAT tends to be regressive though. No chance of an increase under Labour.
It’s not “progressive” but because of the way it’s structured, and different spending structures at different levels, it’s not particularly regressive either.
The IFS haven't debunked it they just showed a different graph. But net household income is the most intuitive way to think of it, even of IFS dislike it because it is 'volatile'.
Morning all. Beautiful day here in the Cotswolds. Trust the sun is shining on you too, wherever you may be.
Betfair's GE markets have shifted a little bit in response to last nite's polls. Sporting's spreads remained unmoved though. They continue to pitch the Tories at 139-147 which looks a bit high to me and certainly at odds with Betfair's seat band markets. Time for a bit of hedging and arbing?
That Opinium poll was a stinker for the Government. I'm surprised it didn't have more impact.
Maybe everyone was watching the football.
I’m not sure there’s any great belief in the polls. The recent locals were very bad but not the complete annihilation presaged in the polls. Something is out of whack, plus as Andy Marr said this morning his contacts in both parties aren’t picking up the sentiment on the doors. Now both have reasons to mislead him so treat with appropriate levels of NaCl.
The one area I really know about is Broxbourne where the Tory vote share in 2019 locals was 57% and most recently was a shade over 50%. Swing about 7-7.5% overall. Now there are some extra wards in the Parliamentary seat but I can’t see on that basis the Tories have much trouble holding the seat with a reduced majority. All the polls and MRP seem to show the seat going down.
I can see plausible scenarios that the seat goes down, but my instinct says that the local election results should be a closer guide in this seat. You can look at other places where similar disparities exist and you can start clawing the Tories up towards a more respectable outcome in seats.
Are the Tories down to bedrock, almost certainly. Has the bedrock been largely chiselled away and carried off, possibly but not entirely certain or likely.
It's a perfectly respectable view, TJ, but it wasn't that long ago that many of us thought 30% was bedrock. No longer sure where bedrock is.
I agree that the polls are somehow understating the Tories, and like @ToryJim i think my gut feel on this is stemming from the locals which were bad but not an annihilation.
Apparently VAT on private schools is going to “dramatically shift the polls”
Hopium at its finest.
Why should it shift the polls, as it's already known to be Labour policy, and has already been a focus of attention in the campaign?
Unless the Conservatives make it their primary campaign issue over the next 4 weeks, talk about it in the debates, FB ads and so on.
It wouldn't even be the craziest thing they've done so far.
It may fit in with the strategy of trying to get a few percent of votes back from Reform, but given the small percentage of privately educated children and their demographics, I can't see it doing much to a Labour lead of 20% or so.
Even with a question framed in a negative way about private schools being forced to close there is quite a division of opinion. 14% of Tory voters think it a good thing if they do.
So more people think it's a bad thing than a good thing then, and the policy is net unpopular?
Good. There is still some common sense in this country.
Yep, You are on to something Casino 🙂
For something only a minority of population actually use, a majority of all voters hate the policy of attacking and wounding that thing. What’s going on there?
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
What did Theresa May say about citizens of nowhere?
I have no desire to stay here to be exploited by a resentful and vengeful populace pursuing policies I think will be destructive to the country at my personal expense.
It's better I take action that will show up their bankruptcy as fast as possible, so the scales fall from people's eyes and the country sobers up as fast as possible.
My dude, your high-income cohort pays way less of your income in indirect taxes. Way, way less. For people like you it's about 9%. For people on the other end of the scale, it's more like 28%.
All this whining about "exploitation" is incredibly self-centred.
I paid over £80k in taxes last year, which was almost half of everything I earnt.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
You won't, though, because you are just about managing to scrimp and save, you say elsewhere. You'll end up paying for things that incur 20% VAT. At least that, I think, is the political economic logic.
No, I might actually fuck off.
My wife and I have discussed it.
Nah
Er, yes we have.
@farooq and others like him seem to toil under the illusion that no one will move if Labour doubles taxes and has daily struggle sessions for anyone who does not agree with Wokeness. I mean, why would you leave Britain with its glorious weather and completely sensible immigration policy which just makes everything better and better and our health system even more enviable? What mad person would want to leave such a paradise to go to say Thailand where they are introducing a visa with basically zero income tax?
Why hasn't this done before? @Leon, you're a genius.
@Casino_Royale is a smart, hard working heterosexual white British male. British society is doing everything it can to tell him he is despised just for being a straight white male, and everyone else - every woman, every minority, everyone else has priority over him
At the same time the state is asking him to pay more and more tax for increasingly shabby public services because the state insists on importing 700,000 people a year (that no one asked for) putting ever more pressure on everything - and what money is left over must be spent - billions a year - on housing asylum seekers who are really just economic migrants but we are too spineless to say this and to pathetic to keep them out
And still you scoff at the idea @Casino_Royale might think “Fuck this” and bugger off somewhere else
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
What did Theresa May say about citizens of nowhere?
I have no desire to stay here to be exploited by a resentful and vengeful populace pursuing policies I think will be destructive to the country at my personal expense.
It's better I take action that will show up their bankruptcy as fast as possible, so the scales fall from people's eyes and the country sobers up as fast as possible.
1. You're paying 62% tax 2. They trashed the economy 3. They trashed public services
But you'd have to leave if Labour got in because they will be destructive to the country...
You seem mentally incapable of envisaging anything worse that the current administration.
Noted. That tells me something about your own limitations as an individual.
An Interview with the very impressive Zadie Smith where among other things she talks about her comprehensive schooling in London where in her class she and another went to Campbridge and four to Oxford in her year. She makes the most impressive argument against the iniquity in education that I've heard in the last few days.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
What did Theresa May say about citizens of nowhere?
I have no desire to stay here to be exploited by a resentful and vengeful populace pursuing policies I think will be destructive to the country at my personal expense.
It's better I take action that will show up their bankruptcy as fast as possible, so the scales fall from people's eyes and the country sobers up as fast as possible.
My dude, your high-income cohort pays way less of your income in indirect taxes. Way, way less. For people like you it's about 9%. For people on the other end of the scale, it's more like 28%.
All this whining about "exploitation" is incredibly self-centred.
I paid over £80k in taxes last year, which was almost half of everything I earnt.
So you're wrong about that too.
The Tories have been in power for 14 years plenty of time for them to resolve the income tax issues you seem to dislike
And equally plenty of time for you to have up sticks and gone elsewhere
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Are you just in the top 20%, or are you actually in the top 5%?
I’m not voting for Labour. I don’t know whether they are anti-aspiration. I am, however, OK with those at the top of the income pile contributing more. I’m sure you work hard, but so do many people on lower wages.
Sure, but the position of some seems to be that if you're in the upper brackets you have no grounds to object no matter what your tax rate is, because others have less.
I pay 62% marginal rate at the moment, with not only no personal allowance but also on a Z-code.
At some point you wonder: why do I bother?
I hear you. Taxes are too high. Much too high for the appalling public services we get. But this is under a *Conservative* government. Your government. The government you are voting for. It isn’t every Labour taxing you because of class war or jealousy. It’s your own side because they have trashed the economy and are catastrophically incompetent.
If the line is “ah but Labour would put taxes up and waste our money” then why are you supporting the party who waste our money and put taxes up? 62%!!! Crackers! How do you drive entrepreneurial behaviour with punitive marginal tax rates?
You’re voting for it though, so you support it.
Absolute nonsense.
but they have recently cut NI, the freeze in PA is due to expire in just under 4 years, and there's a path to restore budget balance. I
No there isn't. The NI cuts were based on 13% cuts in Government spending but when asked to explain where the cuts will come from no detail has been provided because the cuts cannot be found.
I (and 55% of the population looking at a survey question Guido is talking about) expect to see an October budget with tax rises because the cuts that the NI cuts were based on don't actually exist and can't be implemented.
Worse those cuts are to the existing services and in many places (justice, education) the existing services are already not good enough...
What's interesting here is that Labour supporters are pursuing two different arguments simultaneously that are in direct opposition to each other: (1) that taxation can't be any worse than what it currently is under the Tories, that's all their fault, and it needs sorting, and, (2) that public services are on their knees, nowhere near good enough, and that's something Labour is also going to sort out.
What they don't do is follow-through: what's the priority? Reducing the tax burden, or expanding funding into public services?
The Tories are already struggling with this so, when Labour takes office, where is the money for either going to be found?
Mr. Stereodog, some private schools are hugely expensive. Others could be afforded by many people but at the cost of forgoing holidays and other thing. The former will not be sunk or hit too hard by a VAT rise. The latter will be.
Do many families spend £17 500 on holidays each year? That is the average independent school fees before VAT.
You can easily drop 3-5k on a family summer holiday in July or August, which we are foregoing this year. The rest (10k or so) you account for by older cars, fewer weekend trips and a smaller house/mortgage and maybe reduced payments on top.
I'd say if you have one earner on 40k and another on 60k private school for one child becomes feasible post tax in the south-east.
You can possibly do it on lower salaries if you stretch yourself. Otherwise, you're into others helping you out, bursaries or scholarships.
£100k joint income would put that household in about the top 7%. The proportion of kids in private schools is about 7%. So, yes, that matches.
Why are you so fixated with percentiles?
My figures could include for a junior doctor and a teacher who are married or cohabiting and working full-time.
Do you think they're rich?
No, but I would question their judgement.
Does £15k per year bring a better return from:
1) Private education instead of state education 2) Saving the money so their child can buy a house
Would the difference between private and state education really be worth over £200k by the time their child reaches adulthood ?
It's a good question, and that's why the main effect of this policy will effectively be to boost house prices.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
You won't, though, because you are just about managing to scrimp and save, you say elsewhere. You'll end up paying for things that incur 20% VAT. At least that, I think, is the political economic logic.
No, I might actually fuck off.
My wife and I have discussed it.
Nah
Er, yes we have.
@farooq and others like him seem to toil under the illusion that no one will move if Labour doubles taxes and has daily struggle sessions for anyone who does not agree with Wokeness. I mean, why would you leave Britain with its glorious weather and completely sensible immigration policy which just makes everything better and better and our health system even more enviable? What mad person would want to leave such a paradise to go to say Thailand where they are introducing a visa with basically zero income tax?
Indeed, far too many Labour supporters (all dumbly liking each other posts this morning) don't seem to think there's any limit to which might drive someone with talent and means to leave this shores.
They are about to find out just how wrong they are.
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
You’re household income is in the… what… top 5% of the country?
Anyone paying for private school is going to have a salary in the top 20%, or so, unless they have a big inheritance, bursary, scholarship or are an employee of the school. Otherwise, you couldn't afford the fees. The fees are significant and we are in the position, as you put it, of needing to 'juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees'. And there's a whole world of difference between being in the top 20% and the top 0.01%, even though it's convenient for Streeting to conflate them.
We've got to the position we're in our professional careers after 20 years of hard work having started out with nothing and that's a place we've only been in for the last 3 years and we no liquid wealth or assets to fall back on.
Why are Labour so anti-aspiration?
Are you just in the top 20%, or are you actually in the top 5%?
I’m not voting for Labour. I don’t know whether they are anti-aspiration. I am, however, OK with those at the top of the income pile contributing more. I’m sure you work hard, but so do many people on lower wages.
Sure, but the position of some seems to be that if you're in the upper brackets you have no grounds to object no matter what your tax rate is, because others have less.
I pay 62% marginal rate at the moment, with not only no personal allowance but also on a Z-code.
At some point you wonder: why do I bother?
I hear you. Taxes are too high. Much too high for the appalling public services we get. But this is under a *Conservative* government. Your government. The government you are voting for. It isn’t every Labour taxing you because of class war or jealousy. It’s your own side because they have trashed the economy and are catastrophically incompetent.
If the line is “ah but Labour would put taxes up and waste our money” then why are you supporting the party who waste our money and put taxes up? 62%!!! Crackers! How do you drive entrepreneurial behaviour with punitive marginal tax rates?
You’re voting for it though, so you support it.
Absolute nonsense.
but they have recently cut NI, the freeze in PA is due to expire in just under 4 years, and there's a path to restore budget balance. I
No there isn't. The NI cuts were based on 13% cuts in Government spending but when asked to explain where the cuts will come from no detail has been provided because the cuts cannot be found.
I (and 55% of the population looking at a survey question Guido is talking about) expect to see an October budget with tax rises because the cuts that the NI cuts were based on don't actually exist and can't be implemented.
Worse those cuts are to the existing services and in many places (justice, education) the existing services are already not good enough...
What's interesting here is that Labour supporters are pursuing two different arguments simultaneously that are in direct opposition to each other: (1) that taxation can't be any worse than what it currently is under the Tories, that's all their fault, and it needs sorting, and, (2) that public services are on their knees, nowhere near good enough, and that's something Labour is also going to sort out.
What they don't do is follow-through: what's the priority? Reducing the tax burden, or expanding funding into public services?
The Tories are already struggling with this so, when Labour takes office, where is the money for either going to be found?
Oh I think taxes will be worse and remember I pay roughly what you do now I’ve reached the part of my career where I determine £xm IT projects
Morning all. Beautiful day here in the Cotswolds. Trust the sun is shining on you too, wherever you may be.
Betfair's GE markets have shifted a little bit in response to last nite's polls. Sporting's spreads remained unmoved though. They continue to pitch the Tories at 139-147 which looks a bit high to me and certainly at odds with Betfair's seat band markets. Time for a bit of hedging and arbing?
That Opinium poll was a stinker for the Government. I'm surprised it didn't have more impact.
Maybe everyone was watching the football.
I’m not sure there’s any great belief in the polls. The recent locals were very bad but not the complete annihilation presaged in the polls. Something is out of whack, plus as Andy Marr said this morning his contacts in both parties aren’t picking up the sentiment on the doors. Now both have reasons to mislead him so treat with appropriate levels of NaCl.
The one area I really know about is Broxbourne where the Tory vote share in 2019 locals was 57% and most recently was a shade over 50%. Swing about 7-7.5% overall. Now there are some extra wards in the Parliamentary seat but I can’t see on that basis the Tories have much trouble holding the seat with a reduced majority. All the polls and MRP seem to show the seat going down.
I can see plausible scenarios that the seat goes down, but my instinct says that the local election results should be a closer guide in this seat. You can look at other places where similar disparities exist and you can start clawing the Tories up towards a more respectable outcome in seats.
Are the Tories down to bedrock, almost certainly. Has the bedrock been largely chiselled away and carried off, possibly but not entirely certain or likely.
If past performance is a guide then it looks sort of 97 with Lib Dems on about 30. If the Tories really have broken something then its 120 with Lib Dems on about 60.
Despite the polls I find it hard to tell. Has the Tory colossus got feet of clay?
In any event the incoming global crisis will test SKS to the limit. War is coming and as of now we will lose. Talking about triple locks in the face of such an existential threat seems so trivial as to signify the decadence of the West.
The next 5 years could include any of Trump, massive disruption from volcano and/or Earthquake, major economic dislocation, London ceasing to be a major financial centre, major supply chain disruption, famine and pestilence.
But we are not talking about how our country faces the future.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
What did Theresa May say about citizens of nowhere?
I have no desire to stay here to be exploited by a resentful and vengeful populace pursuing policies I think will be destructive to the country at my personal expense.
It's better I take action that will show up their bankruptcy as fast as possible, so the scales fall from people's eyes and the country sobers up as fast as possible.
1. You're paying 62% tax 2. They trashed the economy 3. They trashed public services
But you'd have to leave if Labour got in because they will be destructive to the country...
It’s not completely illogical that Labour might be even worse - and TBF Casino was responding to a hypothetical.
It is going to be a problem for Labour that almost the only people who’ve done OK under the Tories are the wealthy, and that they tend also to be the most internationally mobile. Plucking the goose without making it take flight will be a necessary balancing act. Winding up people Casino is not entirely beside the point if that’s how they’re going to govern.
Is he being selfish ? Perhaps; perhaps not. But again, your judgment of him really doesn’t make any difference.
Mr. Stereodog, some private schools are hugely expensive. Others could be afforded by many people but at the cost of forgoing holidays and other thing. The former will not be sunk or hit too hard by a VAT rise. The latter will be.
Do many families spend £17 500 on holidays each year? That is the average independent school fees before VAT.
Yes that’s roughly what we pay, for one child at a bog standard day school in SE London (with illustrious alumni including James Cleverly).
That’s some holiday. Now imagine if you had 2 children of secondary school age.
But again, the Tory campaign against this isn’t aimed at parents of schoolchildren, who already know this. It’s aimed at pensioners who remember private school being something hard working middle class families could afford by foregoing a foreign holiday, back in the 70s or 80s.
The proportion of children in private schools in the 70s and 80s was roughly the same as today (perhaps a bit lower). Since then, the UK has become more unequal, particularly with the top income decile's income growing far faster than the rest of the populations.
Since 2010, spending per per pupil in private schools has grown from 50% higher than state schools to 100% higher.
I don't want to be personally rude but PB's demographics really start to show on topics like this.
Private school fees have gone up by something like 20% since the early 2010s.
When I went, it was at the end of when “normal” people could still afford it. By the time I left normal people were being replaced by rich Russians.
This wasn’t Eton or Harrow either.
So yes I do think it’s a myth that normal people are being priced out. They were priced out a decade ago.
But the politics of it is, with Labours naked attack on aspiration being the key moment in this campaign, a whole barrel of “these myths” are now going to be poured all over Starmer’s head to own. That’s how it works. Who said it was fair?
An Interview with the very impressive Zadie Smith where among other things she talks about her comprehensive schooling in London where in her class she and another went to Campbridge and four to Oxford in her year. She makes the most impressive argument against the iniquity in education that I've heard in the last few days.
The Lambo market can be volatile and illiquid but that 1st Gen Gallardo with the gated manual is a one-way bet and will go for strong money. I'd probably keep the Aventador.
I recall a talk by Rowan Atkinson in which he said his parter reconsidered his car habit, when he pointed out that he could buy a car, crash it a couple of times, repair it and then sell it for x times the purchase price.
Wes Streeting gave a good defence for the VAT on private schools on QT .
The vast majority of kids going to private schools come from families where the fees are loose change !
As for parents who really juggle the finances to be able to afford the fees it’s of course unfortunate and I can understand why they would be angry .
The Labour policy is really just a sop to the left in the party , raises relatively small sums but you’ll be hard pressed to find much sympathy amongst most of the public.
This really riles me.
I can assure you it's not "loose change" in our home, or for most of my fellow parents at our local school. What a dickhead Streeting is.
We are two hard-working parents working full-time in professional jobs and we need to scrimp and save for every penny.
We have little in assets and a heavy mortgage. We manage it because we make sacrifices and are careful, not because we're rolling in it.
Someone posted the transcript of what he said down thread? Some people thought that was a strong answer? WTF? 🤭
Labour’s class war anti aspiration rubbish in Streetings answer, will bomb on every doorstep, as he is about to find out. Streeting has just gone a long way to losing Labour this election.
It boils down like this. Labour don’t understand the households of this country, they don’t get the aspiration households feel. To steal Rochdales silly term and put it to better use - households have hopia for their children and their family.
Starmer’s 2024 manifesto has a wrongheaded contractual view of society, in place of mutual loyalties binding human beings into families, groups and nations, all myopic Labour can see is the individual and the state.
VAT on private schools is a totem for the left which is why it’s absurdly high up the priority list.
But apparently, having been so high and being largely ignored as a “that’s a good idea but it doesn’t affect me” policy, it’s now going to prompt a voter rebellion so huge that it will decisively move the dial against Keith Donkey.
No. No it won’t. This is absurdist hoping on stilts. Private schools are not an aspiration for the vast majority of voters. Good schools for their kids IS. Practically everyone thinks paying twice for something is bonkers.
If the Tories came out and offered private school standards in state schools, then maybe. But as we saw with the national service lunacy, they truly have got it in for other people’s kids, kicking the majority and putting them back in their place whilst their own can keep their status as the few.
I'm not particularly left wing at all these days. I just slip over the left of centre line. I am on the whole sceptical of Starmer-Labour. I would be more content supporting Crazy Ed's zany LibDems..
However charging VAT on a private education floats my boat. I sent my children to state school because I wanted a good quality and rounded education. I couldn't have afforded Monmouth, Christ College Brecon or Llandovery College and I despise these Mickey Mouse entities prefixed with "St" that I could have afforded. Half my family including my mother were students at St Michael's Llanelli. Keep them open by all means, but they are businesses, charge VAT. I am a 50% shareholder in a post 16 education provider and we are subject to VAT.
Would be interesting to see if this VAT reform unlocks greater change in private schools. For example, perhaps they need to split into commercial organisations aiming to give the rich a head start and genuinely charitable institutions providing an alternative free education, those primarily focused on the needs of local communities (say with over 50% free places) or those serving children with special needs.
They could offer assisted places to poorer faand become multi-generayionallymilies. Or they could if Tony hadnt nixed it.
This just won't happen. It's the politics of envy, but not from the direction you would assume.
A few years ago my wife ( and by default myself) got involved in foster caring. I concluded that some of these children through no fault of their own would fail within the state sector so why not give them bursaries to top schools like Monmouth School, so they become valued members of society?
Blimey, I was nearly lynched by my wife's friends. "Why should these children benefit from a top education whilst I can't afford to send my wonderful child there" was the response, "my little angel is more deserving".
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
Where to though? We've also looked at it many times.
You've mentioned Canada before but in addition to the barmy left over there (even more than here) driving you even more crazy and house prices there and the general cost of living, Canada is one of the countries where the state pension is fixed forever at time of your leaving, (whereas the States, for example, it is not).
You are luckier than me, being younger, as you have a better chance being accepted as you still work (and your children are under 18). But I note that those PBers who have upped sticks generally have a non-British spouse (e.g. Fishing, DougSeal, Gardenwalker (I think)).
What about parents? We couldn't leave whilst our parents are still alive. Which is why we have left it too late now.
Is it that weird that Labour has policies that don't appeal to £150k earners, the private education industry and people who think the latter-day Tory Party are milquetoast lefties?
OK, so maybe I'll fuck off and take all my tax revenue with me, if that's your attitude. Then see who's going to fill your coffers for your class war.
How about that?
What did Theresa May say about citizens of nowhere?
I have no desire to stay here to be exploited by a resentful and vengeful populace pursuing policies I think will be destructive to the country at my personal expense.
It's better I take action that will show up their bankruptcy as fast as possible, so the scales fall from people's eyes and the country sobers up as fast as possible.
Why not? I stayed here while your lot vengefully pursued policies destructive to the country and me personally.
Comments
It seems it is coming under attack from teaching unions, is likely to face a judicial review, and irony of all ironies Reform have said they will appeal the policy to the ECHR, even though they want to abolish it
I genuinely expect it to cost more than it raises, leaving Labour to explain how they fund all the new teaching posts they have promised
Heck I used a none vat register electrician last week to rewire twin A's house. How you can have 3 workers (granted one a 17 year old apprentice) and not be VAT registered is beyond me..
Does £15k per year bring a better return from:
1) Private education instead of state education
2) Saving the money so their child can buy a house
Would the difference between private and state education really be worth over £200k by the time their child reaches adulthood ?
In terms of general tax-raising strategy VAT on school fees is poor. It concentrates the tax increase on a small number of people in a visible way over a small proportion of those people's tax-paying lives.
But I think, as a policy, it's intended as a shit post. It's intended to rile up opposition to provide evidence that Starmer is on the correct side of a partisan divide that has a minority on the other side. I don't like where that approach has taken British politics when used in the past and I don't like it now.
I do generally believe that the richest can afford to contribute more for the good of the country, but I think that psychologically it's much better to persuade people to acquiesce to that with an argument about a common endeavour and a shared burden, rather than with an argument that casts the wealthy as a reviled minority.
There's some justification for VAT being charged on school fees, separate from the politics of the issue, and some justification for keeping it exempt. I think on balance that it's a needlessly divisive policy for questionable marginal gain, but the division seems to be the purpose, so I guess I'm not someone Starmer is trying to convince with it.
It is not the argument you think it is, but anyway the matter in Wales is virtually settled as the Welsh government have moderated their advice and some roads will have their speed limits restored
It’s not “progressive” but because of the way it’s structured, and different spending structures at different levels, it’s not particularly regressive either.
Found an Evening Standard piece saying Alba were looking to contest 'at least 16' seats, which suggests their ambitions at this election remain fairly low.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/dundee-alex-salmond-westminster-v-a-scottish-government-b1160362.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001znkm
Betfair's GE markets have shifted a little bit in response to last nite's polls. Sporting's spreads remained unmoved though. They continue to pitch the Tories at 139-147 which looks a bit high to me and certainly at odds with Betfair's seat band markets. Time for a bit of hedging and arbing?
That Opinium poll was a stinker for the Government. I'm surprised it didn't have more impact.
Maybe everyone was watching the football.
https://x.com/breakingryan1/status/1796929287003439615?s=61
I’m not naturally inclined towards her politics but this is subtle and just tongue in cheek enough that it works.
https://www.imidaily.com/asia-pacific/thailand-introduces-practically-free-visa-for-digital-nomads-and-remote-workers/
I say "everybody" deliberately, becuse it is an attitude that one finds in all counties and in all walks of life.....
It does rather suggest that anyone who still believes manifestos make any significance difference is probably mistaken, coming so late in the game as they do.
Sure, policies will have been announced by then, but the manifestos are more just to provide a guidebook of general intentions after you win that any means of persuasion.
Oddly enough the two politicians who seem to be enjoying themselves most are two you’d think might be under a shadow because of scandal allegations: Davey on the post office and Rayner on her house sale. Making up the triumvirate, but with no scandal, is Brexit hardman Steve Baker who’s decided to go on holiday.
Everyone else looks thoroughly miserable.
The whole Tory front bench. The entire Labour left, and most of the front bench. The entirety of the SNP and Scottish Greens. The England and Wales Greens don’t seem exactly cheerful. Tice and Farage are less angry than usual but hardly all smiles.
Regardless, the politics are terrible - increasing tax on purchases with the spectre of cost of living floating about.
Arguments in favour are of tax competition for the tourist industry with continental Europe (where a lower VAT rate for hospitality is said to be common), and to support marginally viable small businesses. Large campaign to reduce this rate to 9%.
Lesson I take from it is that, once you start exempting some things from VAT, or charging lower rates, then you open the door to a whole world of pain as everyone argues for being treated as a special case.
I seem to be arguing in favour of VAT on private school fees now.
* Doubtless lots of other complexity too.
NEW THREAD
“VAT on private schools is a good policy… …we don’t see why wealthy people who choose to send their children to private schools should be exempt.”
BUT It’s not wealthy people. It is only working class and squeezed middle people who suffer from this policy. Really wealthy people, who send children to really wealthy schools totally uneffected by this, as the price rise is peanuts to them.
Once media and opposition parties pile on Labours true colours being revealed with their onslaught on aspiration, it doesn’t matter the actual number of midwives, plumbers, electricians who use private education, it doesn’t even matter if they have children, but the whole election focus on Labours attack on aspiration will send voters back to the Conservatives.
This, right here, in your quote above, is why Conservatives are the natural party of government, and Labour only win elections here and there. It’s always better where the Conservatives are, because they own aspiration for every UK household, and it is Labours mentality to attack aspiration.
In your post you didn’t acknowledge how clever I am at politics. In just handful of posts on PB in second week of campaign I have turned what looked like a Labour majority into a hung Parliament.
The one area I really know about is Broxbourne where the Tory vote share in 2019 locals was 57% and most recently was a shade over 50%. Swing about 7-7.5% overall. Now there are some extra wards in the Parliamentary seat but I can’t see on that basis the Tories have much trouble holding the seat with a reduced majority. All the polls and MRP seem to show the seat going down.
I can see plausible scenarios that the seat goes down, but my instinct says that the local election results should be a closer guide in this seat. You can look at other places where similar disparities exist and you can start clawing the Tories up towards a more respectable outcome in seats.
Are the Tories down to bedrock, almost certainly. Has the bedrock been largely chiselled away and carried off, possibly but not entirely certain or likely.
@Casino_Royale’s point would have stood under a PM and government that was in a position to do stuff and had a coherent idea of what they were doing, rather than failing on the tests they had set themselves - but the uncertainty had left us with a zombie administration. His legacy - a weak PM without a mandate who failed on his own terms* - is where he is, and six months more wouldn’t have redeemed that; they would have further cemented it.
Really he should have gone to the country in the early months and appealed for an electorate mandate. It would have blindsided Labour and been before his various weaknesses and failures became so clearly apparent.
*and in fairness, practically all political careers end either in failure or unexpectedly early death.
I suppose I get the weather thing but tbh I really quite like it.
For something only a minority of population actually use, a majority of all voters hate the policy of attacking and wounding that thing. What’s going on there?
So you're wrong about that too.
At the same time the state is asking him to pay more and more tax for increasingly shabby public services because the state insists on importing 700,000 people a year (that no one asked for) putting ever more pressure on everything - and what money is left over must be spent - billions a year - on housing asylum seekers who are really just economic migrants but we are too spineless to say this and to pathetic to keep them out
And still you scoff at the idea @Casino_Royale might think “Fuck this” and bugger off somewhere else
Noted. That tells me something about your own limitations as an individual.
And equally plenty of time for you to have up sticks and gone elsewhere
What they don't do is follow-through: what's the priority? Reducing the tax burden, or expanding funding into public services?
The Tories are already struggling with this so, when Labour takes office, where is the money for either going to be found?
They are about to find out just how wrong they are.
So please don’t put words into my mouth.
Despite the polls I find it hard to tell. Has the Tory colossus got feet of clay?
In any event the incoming global crisis will test SKS to the limit. War is coming and as of now we will lose. Talking about triple locks in the face of such an existential threat seems so trivial as to signify the decadence of the West.
The next 5 years could include any of Trump, massive disruption from volcano and/or Earthquake, major economic dislocation, London ceasing to be a major financial centre, major supply chain disruption, famine and pestilence.
But we are not talking about how our country faces the future.
That is the biggest worry of all
It is going to be a problem for Labour that almost the only people who’ve done OK under the Tories are the wealthy, and that they tend also to be the most internationally mobile.
Plucking the goose without making it take flight will be a necessary balancing act. Winding up people Casino is not entirely beside the point if that’s how they’re going to govern.
Is he being selfish ? Perhaps; perhaps not.
But again, your judgment of him really doesn’t make any difference.
Labour’s class war anti aspiration rubbish in Streetings answer, will bomb on every doorstep, as he is about to find out. Streeting has just gone a long way to losing Labour this election.
It boils down like this. Labour don’t understand the households of this country, they don’t get the aspiration households feel. To steal Rochdales silly term and put it to better use - households have hopia for their children and their family.
Starmer’s 2024 manifesto has a wrongheaded contractual view of society, in place of mutual loyalties binding human beings into families, groups and nations, all myopic Labour can see is the individual and the state.
However charging VAT on a private education floats my boat. I sent my children to state school because I wanted a good quality and rounded education. I couldn't have afforded Monmouth, Christ College Brecon or Llandovery College and I despise these Mickey Mouse entities prefixed with "St" that I could have afforded. Half my family including my mother were students at St Michael's Llanelli. Keep them open by all means, but they are businesses, charge VAT. I am a 50% shareholder in a post 16 education provider and we are subject to VAT.
A few years ago my wife ( and by default myself) got involved in foster caring. I concluded that some of these children through no fault of their own would fail within the state
sector so why not give them bursaries to top schools like Monmouth School, so they become valued members of society?
Blimey, I was nearly lynched by my wife's friends. "Why should these children benefit from a top education whilst I can't afford to send my wonderful child there" was the response, "my little angel is more deserving".
You've mentioned Canada before but in addition to the barmy left over there (even more than here) driving you even more crazy and house prices there and the general cost of living, Canada is one of the countries where the state pension is fixed forever at time of your leaving, (whereas the States, for example, it is not).
You are luckier than me, being younger, as you have a better chance being accepted as you still work (and your children are under 18). But I note that those PBers who have upped sticks generally have a non-British spouse (e.g. Fishing, DougSeal, Gardenwalker (I think)).
What about parents? We couldn't leave whilst our parents are still alive. Which is why we have left it too late now.