I don't have a son in the army and I do not get benefits. I have 3 spare bedrooms and a spare house personally and pay mortgages for them, but I am still against some poor person being penalised and beggared whilst rich people get large cuts. Even a Tory like you John , deep in your frozen heart must know that demonising the poorest in society is wrong.
I have never demonized anyone. In any case, claiming JSA (or in most cases ESA) should be a short term expedient. The bedroom tax is a useful incentive in getting people back into work. No-one should expect to be supported long term by benefits, unless they really are too ill or disabled to do any sort of work.
Dear Dear John, how naive can you be. So taking money off the poorest , so they have to choose between heating themselves or feeding themselves, who are the most certain to be unemployable in the country is an incentive to make them work. I presume you would think that bringing back the workhouse would be beneficial.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I have been, on a couple of occasions. Last time I took a job 300 miles away and let my home as I was in negative equity.
Actually I think indoor relief for drug addicts would be sensible.
Is indoor relief some kind of deviant thingy, sounds dodgy.
Could our Scottish correspondents summarise how well the smaller political party in an arrangement to vote with the bigger government party has fared at subsequent elections.
In Germany the smaller FDP party in the coalition got wiped out at the following election. Might the same effect be seen in Scotland as regards Lib Dems and Conservative arrangements with Labour and SNP?
Lib Dems went down the toilet after propping up Labour in Holyrood and started the rise of the SNP. You would have thought they might have learned from that , but the lure of ministerial cars and snouts in troughs overcame it.
No they didn't, they only nose dived after they went into coalition in Westminster
Where does the nasty come in , I am merely pointing out that you think it is fine to have poor people put out of their houses just because at the minute they have a spare room. You said you supported it as you were paying for your house so it is hard to then get on your high horse and get upset when I say you are heartless and self interested and care not a jot for anyone but yourself. Think yourself lucky you can afford to have the choice to take a bigger mortgage to have a spare room, most of these people have no choices in life. Count your blessings rather than harbour ill feelings.
Actually you kept some of what I said but snipped out the part where I said we should pay for what people need.
What I object to is paying for that which people don't need. If I'm saying we should pay for what people need then I think its fair to get upset when you lie that I "care not a jot for anyone but yourself" - that made up lie is totally incompatible with saying we should pay for what people need.
Get over yourself and get a conscience, another one that would have poor children up chimneys and claim it is firm but fair.
I don't have a son in the army and I do not get benefits. I have 3 spare bedrooms and a spare house personally and pay mortgages for them, but I am still against some poor person being penalised and beggared whilst rich people get large cuts. Even a Tory like you John , deep in your frozen heart must know that demonising the poorest in society is wrong.
I have never demonized anyone. In any case, claiming JSA (or in most cases ESA) should be a short term expedient. The bedroom tax is a useful incentive in getting people back into work. No-one should expect to be supported long term by benefits, unless they really are too ill or disabled to do any sort of work.
Dear Dear John, how naive can you be. So taking money off the poorest , so they have to choose between heating themselves or feeding themselves, who are the most certain to be unemployable in the country is an incentive to make them work. I presume you would think that bringing back the workhouse would be beneficial.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I dislike the term unemployable. Surely in a society in which someone of your calibre has well-paid work, there is hope for everyone.
That must be worth at least 50 internet points. Well done You! :-)
Monica's even sadder alter ego Dave comes on to praise her idiocy
:-( Beast.
I hope you get tan lines!
Did you miss that I live in Scotland
What are you talking about Malcolm? We have had an excellent summer this year. Last weekend 3 solid days of sunshine. Beats last year into a top hat.
I don't have a son in the army and I do not get benefits. I have 3 spare bedrooms and a spare house personally and pay mortgages for them, but I am still against some poor person being penalised and beggared whilst rich people get large cuts. Even a Tory like you John , deep in your frozen heart must know that demonising the poorest in society is wrong.
I have never demonized anyone. In any case, claiming JSA (or in most cases ESA) should be a short term expedient. The bedroom tax is a useful incentive in getting people back into work. No-one should expect to be supported long term by benefits, unless they really are too ill or disabled to do any sort of work.
Dear Dear John, how naive can you be. So taking money off the poorest , so they have to choose between heating themselves or feeding themselves, who are the most certain to be unemployable in the country is an incentive to make them work. I presume you would think that bringing back the workhouse would be beneficial.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I have been, on a couple of occasions. Last time I took a job 300 miles away and let my home as I was in negative equity.
Actually I think indoor relief for drug addicts would be sensible.
Is indoor relief some kind of deviant thingy, sounds dodgy.
On the doorstep the general feedback so far is "not impressed". Interestingly UKIP support seems to be going down very rapidly. Can be perhaps explained in the context of an issues based rather than a leadership based election? UKIP are very much a one-trick pony and if Europe is not the key election issue and leadership is not at the top of everyone's list they look likely to continue to drop in the polls.
The latest poll of polls has them at 15% I believe. Not many would have believed their support would have held up this close to the general election. This time last year many were saying they would be in single digits by now.
I don't have a son in the army and I do not get benefits. I have 3 spare bedrooms and a spare house personally and pay mortgages for them, but I am still against some poor person being penalised and beggared whilst rich people get large cuts. Even a Tory like you John , deep in your frozen heart must know that demonising the poorest in society is wrong.
I have never demonized anyone. In any case, claiming JSA (or in most cases ESA) should be a short term expedient. The bedroom tax is a useful incentive in getting people back into work. No-one should expect to be supported long term by benefits, unless they really are too ill or disabled to do any sort of work.
Dear Dear John, how naive can you be. So taking money off the poorest , so they have to choose between heating themselves or feeding themselves, who are the most certain to be unemployable in the country is an incentive to make them work. I presume you would think that bringing back the workhouse would be beneficial.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I dislike the term unemployable. Surely in a society in which someone of your calibre has well-paid work, there is hope for everyone.
That must be worth at least 50 internet points. Well done You! :-)
Monica's even sadder alter ego Dave comes on to praise her idiocy
:-( Beast.
I hope you get tan lines!
Did you miss that I live in Scotland
Hmm. Perhaps you can find a streaming webcam from Berkshire? We have seasons other than winter.
Crap place to live though, I tried south of England and it was full of people and concrete. You could not get anywhere during holidays and weather was not much better in reality, here it is paradise when it is nice and we have pubs for when it is not. Big advantage that it did have was in getting across the channel, that I do miss and nice pubs, much nicer than ones up here in general.
Could our Scottish correspondents summarise how well the smaller political party in an arrangement to vote with the bigger government party has fared at subsequent elections.
In Germany the smaller FDP party in the coalition got wiped out at the following election. Might the same effect be seen in Scotland as regards Lib Dems and Conservative arrangements with Labour and SNP?
Lib Dems went down the toilet after propping up Labour in Holyrood and started the rise of the SNP. You would have thought they might have learned from that , but the lure of ministerial cars and snouts in troughs overcame it.
No they didn't, they only nose dived after they went into coalition in Westminster
Alstair , stuff the truth based on dates it sowed their seeds of destruction , they have always been dodgy, and I have hated them since and glad to see their extinction. It just took some time for them to wither and die.
I don't have a son in the army and I do not get benefits. I have 3 spare bedrooms and a spare house personally and pay mortgages for them, but I am still against some poor person being penalised and beggared whilst rich people get large cuts. Even a Tory like you John , deep in your frozen heart must know that demonising the poorest in society is wrong.
I have never demonized anyone. In any case, claiming JSA (or in most cases ESA) should be a short term expedient. The bedroom tax is a useful incentive in getting people back into work. No-one should expect to be supported long term by benefits, unless they really are too ill or disabled to do any sort of work.
Dear Dear John, how naive can you be. So taking money off the poorest , so they have to choose between heating themselves or feeding themselves, who are the most certain to be unemployable in the country is an incentive to make them work. I presume you would think that bringing back the workhouse would be beneficial.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I dislike the term unemployable. Surely in a society in which someone of your calibre has well-paid work, there is hope for everyone.
That must be worth at least 50 internet points. Well done You! :-)
Monica's even sadder alter ego Dave comes on to praise her idiocy
:-( Beast.
I hope you get tan lines!
Did you miss that I live in Scotland
What are you talking about Malcolm? We have had an excellent summer this year. Last weekend 3 solid days of sunshine. Beats last year into a top hat.
David, just having a bit of fun and banter with Dave. The weather has indeed been lovely
On the doorstep the general feedback so far is "not impressed". Interestingly UKIP support seems to be going down very rapidly. Can be perhaps explained in the context of an issues based rather than a leadership based election? UKIP are very much a one-trick pony and if Europe is not the key election issue and leadership is not at the top of everyone's list they look likely to continue to drop in the polls.
The latest poll of polls has them at 15% I believe. Not many would have believed their support would have held up this close to the general election. This time last year many were saying they would be in single digits by now.
The point was that they have declined substantially in the space of a week - at this rate he'll be behind Cameron next week, and behind Ed by the GE.....
Gauke on Sunday Politics "in 5 years according to OBR IHT will be 12% of estates"
But since most of those are going to be in the South it could easily be 20% of south east households and probably over 30% of those in London. Which is why this issue could have a big impact.
The 6% and 12% are a mixture of 1st and 2nd deaths for couples. So I have also omitted the effect of couples lowering (roughly) by half the value of the estate on 1st death and then the 2nd death having roughly twice the first. So my figures above when expresed as a share of households that end up paying IHT could be a further 5 to 10 percentage points above my first post.
I don't have a son in the army and I do not get benefits. I have 3 spare bedrooms and a spare house personally and pay mortgages for them, but I am still against some poor person being penalised and beggared whilst rich people get large cuts. Even a Tory like you John , deep in your frozen heart must know that demonising the poorest in society is wrong.
I have never demonized anyone. In any case, claiming JSA (or in most cases ESA) should be a short term expedient. The bedroom tax is a useful incentive in getting people back into work. No-one should expect to be supported long term by benefits, unless they really are too ill or disabled to do any sort of work.
Dear Dear John, how naive can you be. So taking money off the poorest , so they have to choose between heating themselves or feeding themselves, who are the most certain to be unemployable in the country is an incentive to make them work. I presume you would think that bringing back the workhouse would be beneficial.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I have been, on a couple of occasions. Last time I took a job 300 miles away and let my home as I was in negative equity.
Actually I think indoor relief for drug addicts would be sensible.
Is indoor relief some kind of deviant thingy, sounds dodgy.
It's what you referred to as "the workhouse".
LOL, John you were just using fancy words to trap me. There was me thinking it was dodgy as well, I thought you were proposing free brothels for drug users. I was searching for the paracetomol.
O/T but re tactical voting - @antifrank might be interested in this story about the way in which the SNPOUT keep changing their minds on how to vote tactically:
The 'is he or isn't he' yoyo SLab-SNP-SLab member Muhammad Shoaib seems intent on keeping himself in the news. SNP candidate Tasmina Sheik is a 'coconut' and not a 'pure bred Pakistani' (she's mixed race).
I don't have a son in the army and I do not get benefits. I have 3 spare bedrooms and a spare house personally and pay mortgages for them, but I am still against some poor person being penalised and beggared whilst rich people get large cuts. Even a Tory like you John , deep in your frozen heart must know that demonising the poorest in society is wrong.
I have never demonized anyone. In any case, claiming JSA (or in most cases ESA) should be a short term expedient. The bedroom tax is a useful incentive in getting people back into work. No-one should expect to be supported long term by benefits, unless they really are too ill or disabled to do any sort of work.
Dear Dear John, how naive can you be. So taking money off the poorest , so they have to choose between heating themselves or feeding themselves, who are the most certain to be unemployable in the country is an incentive to make them work. I presume you would think that bringing back the workhouse would be beneficial.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I dislike the term unemployable. Surely in a society in which someone of your calibre has well-paid work, there is hope for everyone.
That must be worth at least 50 internet points. Well done You! :-)
Monica's even sadder alter ego Dave comes on to praise her idiocy
:-( Beast.
I hope you get tan lines!
Did you miss that I live in Scotland
Hmm. Perhaps you can find a streaming webcam from Berkshire? We have seasons other than winter.
Crap place to live though, I tried south of England and it was full of people and concrete. You could not get anywhere during holidays and weather was not much better in reality, here it is paradise when it is nice and we have pubs for when it is not. Big advantage that it did have was in getting across the channel, that I do miss and nice pubs, much nicer than ones up here in general.
malcolmg - what area do you live in? I live in southern Hampshire.
MalcG Welfare is not meant to enable you to live in luxury, but to enable you to survive until you get a new job, not provide a spareroom subsidy
So people have to move out of their homes for the few months it takes them to get a ew job, just because they have a spare room? I'm having difficulty with the justice and cost-effectiveness of this notion.
Willie Rennie is someone that the Lib Dems believe is one of their best campaigners. Many posts on LD sites on his wonderfulness. So for GE2010 he was put in charge of the MP part of that campaign. Result was a net loss in seats even with the cleggasm. Willie also lost his own seat. More please!
I don't have a son in the army and I do not get benefits. I have 3 spare bedrooms and a spare house personally and pay mortgages for them, but I am still against some poor person being penalised and beggared whilst rich people get large cuts. Even a Tory like you John , deep in your frozen heart must know that demonising the poorest in society is wrong.
I have never demonized anyone. In any case, claiming JSA (or in most cases ESA) should be a short term expedient. The bedroom tax is a useful incentive in getting people back into work. No-one should expect to be supported long term by benefits, unless they really are too ill or disabled to do any sort of work.
Dear Dear John, how naive can you be. So taking money off the poorest , so they have to choose between heating themselves or feeding themselves, who are the most certain to be unemployable in the country is an incentive to make them work. I presume you would think that bringing back the workhouse would be beneficial.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I dislike the term unemployable. Surely in a society in which someone of your calibre has well-paid work, there is hope for everyone.
That must be worth at least 50 internet points. Well done You! :-)
Monica's even sadder alter ego Dave comes on to praise her idiocy
:-( Beast.
I hope you get tan lines!
Did you miss that I live in Scotland
Hmm. Perhaps you can find a streaming webcam from Berkshire? We have seasons other than winter.
Crap place to live though, I tried south of England and it was full of people and concrete. You could not get anywhere during holidays and weather was not much better in reality, here it is paradise when it is nice and we have pubs for when it is not. Big advantage that it did have was in getting across the channel, that I do miss and nice pubs, much nicer than ones up here in general.
Fair enough. London is certainly a concrete wasteland.
I still think summer in rural Hampshire is something special, and at some point I'm going to have to check out Corfe Castle in Dorset. The home of the Famous Five must surely be bursting with Good Eggs and sunbeams.
I don't have a son in the army and I do not get benefits. I have 3 spare bedrooms and a spare house personally and pay mortgages for them, but I am still against some poor person being penalised and beggared whilst rich people get large cuts. Even a Tory like you John , deep in your frozen heart must know that demonising the poorest in society is wrong.
I have never demonized anyone. In any case, claiming JSA (or in most cases ESA) should be a short term expedient. The bedroom tax is a useful incentive in getting people back into work. No-one should expect to be supported long term by benefits, unless they really are too ill or disabled to do any sort of work.
Dear Dear John, how naive can you be. So taking money off the poorest , so they have to choose between heating themselves or feeding themselves, who are the most certain to be unemployable in the country is an incentive to make them work. I presume you would think that bringing back the workhouse would be beneficial.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I have been, on a couple of occasions. Last time I took a job 300 miles away and let my home as I was in negative equity.
Actually I think indoor relief for drug addicts would be sensible.
Is indoor relief some kind of deviant thingy, sounds dodgy.
It's what you referred to as "the workhouse".
LOL, John you were just using fancy words to trap me. There was me thinking it was dodgy as well, I thought you were proposing free brothels for drug users. I was searching for the paracetomol.
"fancy words"? Just what it was called. The workhouse superseded the system of "outdoor relief" ie parish poor law guardians giving dole money to people living in their own homes or of no fixed abode.
I would never suggest free brothels for heroin uses, if they can afford to spend a few hundred pounds a week on their habit, they can pay for their own. And shouldn't get benefits as they obviously have another undeclared, albeit illegal, job. Hence my suggestion of something akin to the workhouse.
In London it takes 1.6 council home sales to fund the build of one replacement.
Link please. I'm very sceptical about that stat.
This site, for instance, was squatted council property, and is being redeveloped into 58 houses and flats, of which 50% are social housing, while also release capital for additional council investment elsewhere
I don't have a son in the army and I do not get benefits. I have 3 spare bedrooms and a spare house personally and pay mortgages for them, but I am still against some poor person being penalised and beggared whilst rich people get large cuts. Even a Tory like you John , deep in your frozen heart must know that demonising the poorest in society is wrong.
I have never demonized anyone. In any case, claiming JSA (or in most cases ESA) should be a short term expedient. The bedroom tax is a useful incentive in getting people back into work. No-one should expect to be supported long term by benefits, unless they really are too ill or disabled to do any sort of work.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I dislike the term unemployable. Surely in a society in which someone of your calibre has well-paid work, there is hope for everyone.
That must be worth at least 50 internet points. Well done You! :-)
Monica's even sadder alter ego Dave comes on to praise her idiocy
:-( Beast.
I hope you get tan lines!
Crap place to live though, I tried south of England and it was full of people and concrete. You could not get anywhere during holidays and weather was not much better in reality, here it is paradise when it is nice and we have pubs for when it is not. Big advantage that it did have was in getting across the channel, that I do miss and nice pubs, much nicer than ones up here in general.
malcolmg - what area do you live in? I live in southern Hampshire.
I live in Ayrshire , I did live in Hampshire some years ago , spent a year in the Winchester Royal Hotel which was very pleasant and also had a house in Alresford and was in Chandler's Ford as well. Also lived in Little Gaddesden and Hemel Hempstead at other times. Was around a big recession though and lost my shirt, had to give away my house in Alresford which whilst a bad decision was only thing I could do at the time. Hampshire was very nice but busy, Alresford was superb place to live.
Fair enough. London is certainly a concrete wasteland.
I still think summer in rural Hampshire is something special, and at some point I'm going to have to check out Corfe Castle in Dorset. The home of the Famous Five must surely be bursting with Good Eggs and sunbeams.
I live on the Surrey/Hanmpshire border and it is quite nice round here too, in fact Hart district council keeps on getting voted the best place to live in the UK. Good transport links, and it is good having Dorset as the next county and the West Country a couple of hours' drive away. It certainly feels that you are just on the edge of the London built-up area.
When are the Tories going to come out with policies that appeal to the Midlands marginals? Train fares and IHT are very "South East" centric - are they aiming for bigger majorities there, while leaving the populist field free to Labour?
Yes, my patch is a reasonably prosperous Midlands constituency. The number of homes worth over £1 million is negligible - a typical large family home in a sought-after area is £700K. I can't imagine that it's very different in the others.
Well current IHT is at £650,000, so owners will be paying £20K on the house plus 40% of any other assets. Likely outcome is that they will need to sell the family house to pay tax.
Now they are being exempted from paying tax on the family house.
I'm sure they'll appreciate the thought.
This is not a tax break that benefits the wealthy (e.g. my 2 bedroom flat in London won't benefit), but hard-working families that have built up a decent nest-egg through saving and prudence.
Gibberish. How would the policy not equally benefit lazy singletons who have inherited wealth on a slightly smaller scale than you have?
Not gibberish.
The "hard-working families" trope was a response to @NickPalmer's definition of a large family house being worth £700,000. If a lazy singleton lived in one of those it would benefit them as well.
The 'is he or isn't he' yoyo SLab-SNP-SLab member Muhammad Shoaib seems intent on keeping himself in the news. SNP candidate Tasmina Sheik is a 'coconut' and not a 'pure bred Pakistani' (she's mixed race).
I have upgraded him from tw*t to *rsehole.
Shoaib's yoyoing between SLab and the SNP is as nothing to Sheik's random motion between the Tories, Labour and SNP. More a flake than a bounty bar coconut.
Fair enough. London is certainly a concrete wasteland.
I still think summer in rural Hampshire is something special, and at some point I'm going to have to check out Corfe Castle in Dorset. The home of the Famous Five must surely be bursting with Good Eggs and sunbeams.
The detail of today's YouGov does not seem to match the headline figures. The tables seem to show Lab 34.25% Con 33.25% - Labour lead of 1%.
Where are you getting that from? the Table on Page 2 has Lab 34/Con 33 but doesn't have likelihood to vote taken into account, which the headline figures on page 1 do.
Which channel is the Scottish debate on at the moment ?
BBC one scotland. Sunday Politics regional variation
Lets just say it's not going to improve your personal view of Murphy's politeness.
Iain Martin tweets: Nicola Sturgeon doing v v badly on Scottish version of Sunday Politics. Under real pressure on £7.6bn black hole in Scotland's finances.
The fundamental principle is that it will have been built up out of income that has already been taxed, so why should the government get a second bite at the cherry.
The answer to your question "why should the government get a second bite at the cherry?" is "Because it does it with everything: that is the nature of taxation".
Objects are taxed when they change state, NOT one-off. Raw materials are dug up, refined into construction material, assembled, maintained, repaired, decommissioned, scrapped and disposed/recycled. At EVERY stage, the objects are taxed and the people also taxed. The same applies to services. If the "fundamental principle" you refer to (things once taxed should not be taxed again) was actually a fundamental principle, the only things taxed would be the sand for the bricks and imports.
That's a fair enough description.
The fundamental principle is that the state takes a share of the proceeds of value creation in order to spend on centralised services that facilitate that value creation.
So income tax is a tax on the value created by renting your labour/time
Value added tax is a tax on the value created by a change of state (e.g. bricks into a house)
With IHT there is no value creation, just a transfer of an asset between two people without consideration being received on the other side.
Fair enough. London is certainly a concrete wasteland.
I still think summer in rural Hampshire is something special, and at some point I'm going to have to check out Corfe Castle in Dorset. The home of the Famous Five must surely be bursting with Good Eggs and sunbeams.
Which channel is the Scottish debate on at the moment ?
BBC one scotland. Sunday Politics regional variation
Lets just say it's not going to improve your personal view of Murphy's politeness.
Iain Martin tweets: Nicola Sturgeon doing v v badly on Scottish version of Sunday Politics. Under real pressure on £7.6bn black hole in Scotland's finances.
Iain Martin thinking the SNP are doing poorly? Shocked, shocked I say.
Dear Dear John, how naive can you be. So taking money off the poorest , so they have to choose between heating themselves or feeding themselves, who are the most certain to be unemployable in the country is an incentive to make them work. I presume you would think that bringing back the workhouse would be beneficial.
PS: I hope you are never down on your luck , you would be in for a shock.
I dislike the term unemployable. Surely in a society in which someone of your calibre has well-paid work, there is hope for everyone.
That must be worth at least 50 internet points. Well done You! :-)
Monica's even sadder alter ego Dave comes on to praise her idiocy
:-( Beast.
I hope you get tan lines!
Did you miss that I live in Scotland
Hmm. Perhaps you can find a streaming webcam from Berkshire? We have seasons other than winter.
Crap place to live though, I tried south of England and it was full of people and concrete. You could not get anywhere during holidays and weather was not much better in reality, here it is paradise when it is nice and we have pubs for when it is not. Big advantage that it did have was in getting across the channel, that I do miss and nice pubs, much nicer than ones up here in general.
Fair enough. London is certainly a concrete wasteland.
I still think summer in rural Hampshire is something special, and at some point I'm going to have to check out Corfe Castle in Dorset. The home of the Famous Five must surely be bursting with Good Eggs and sunbeams.
Now you are talking , I loved the Famous Five as a boy, used to devour the books as soon as they came out, happy days. Certainly nice right across that area if you get away from the big towns etc.
Carnyx Well if taxpayers have to pay for it yes, otherwise they could get a lodger if they do not want to move until they get a new job and can pay for it themselves
Fair enough. London is certainly a concrete wasteland.
I still think summer in rural Hampshire is something special, and at some point I'm going to have to check out Corfe Castle in Dorset. The home of the Famous Five must surely be bursting with Good Eggs and sunbeams.
From last night, this really shows why the Tories are so hated and called the nasty party, people with many houses , unlimited spare rooms, lackeys , money etc and yet they still want to shove the unfortunate poor into one room. Shameful. Charles said:
» show previous quotes I pay plenty in taxes, and I'm fine with that.
I just want it to be spent more productively than giving an individual a spare room unless they need it. There is too much need to waste resources like that.
care to comment on Overseas Aid ?
I have never voted Tory in my life, but I still don't see what's wrong with not paying for someone to have spare room if it is indeed a spare room, that is it is a room they do not need. Millions upon millions of Tory voters will not be the ones with unlimited money and rooms (they do get votes in poor areas too remember, just not enough to win in them), but paying for unnecessary things hurts those people too.
If the rooms are not in fact spare, then sure someone should be exempted or the policy clarified to make sure such people are not swept up in it, but the principle seems fair. Many things are ideal but not fair to provide - and yes, the rich absolutely should pay more to make things much fairer.
Overseas aid? I'm fine with it in principle, it can do a lot of good, although ti should be much tighter controlled.
Living with a mortgage my house has a spare room which we deliberately decided for when we moved in. Guess what though, we pay extra each month as a result of that.
I pay for my own home and through taxes for other people's homes too. If people genuinely need that fair enough, but if they don't why should they get that? It's unfair that I pay for my own home and for spare rooms other people don't need. It's also unfair that people who do need bigger homes can't get them if those who don't need them won't move.
Of course, if you want to buy a council house with a spare room the government will subsidise you up to £I00,000 to do so. Why should I pay for that?
So long as the sale price is above replacement cost it's fine.
I fail to see why the State should sell its assets below market price, especially if they are likely to appreciate. Maybe the State should subsequently take a share of any profit.
Very happy with the concept of the state taking a share of profit (perhaps tapering to zero after 10 years) and restrictions on sale.
But the logic for the transaction is that there is social benefit from encouraging private ownership (willingness to invest in an area in which you have a stake, etc)
Fair enough. London is certainly a concrete wasteland.
I still think summer in rural Hampshire is something special, and at some point I'm going to have to check out Corfe Castle in Dorset. The home of the Famous Five must surely be bursting with Good Eggs and sunbeams.
I live on the Surrey/Hanmpshire border and it is quite nice round here too, in fact Hart district council keeps on getting voted the best place to live in the UK. Good transport links, and it is good having Dorset as the next county and the West Country a couple of hours' drive away. It certainly feels that you are just on the edge of the London built-up area.
If I had to move I think it would be to Dorset. Mind you I would not be able to afford it most likely , I doubt property there is very reasonable.
From last night, this really shows why the Tories are so hated and called the nasty party, people with many houses , unlimited spare rooms, lackeys , money etc and yet they still want to shove the unfortunate poor into one room. Shameful. Charles said:
» show previous quotes I pay plenty in taxes, and I'm fine with that.
I just want it to be spent more productively than giving an individual a spare room unless they need it. There is too much need to waste resources like that.
care to comment on Overseas Aid ?
I have never voted Tory in my life, but I still don't see what's wrong with not paying for someone to have spare room if it is indeed a spare room, that is it is a room they do not need. Millions u...
Overseas aid? I'm fine with it in principle, it can do a lot of good, although ti should be much tighter controlled.
Living with a mortgage my house has a spare room which we deliberately decided for when we moved in. Guess what though, we pay extra each month as a result of that.
I pay for my own home and through taxes for other people's homes too. If people genuinely need that fair enough, but if they don't why should they get that? It's unfair that I pay for my own home and for spare rooms other people don't need. It's also unfair that people who do need bigger homes can't get them if those who don't need them won't move.
Of course, if you want to buy a council house with a spare room the government will subsidise you up to £I00,000 to do so. Why should I pay for that?
So long as the sale price is above replacement cost it's fine.
In London it takes 1.6 council home sales to fund the build of one replacement.
A real property I know very well in west London. Re-build cost quoted in 2013 = £270,000 Value of house for sale = £550,000 If social housing, then the receipt the Govt would get is at least £450,000. Unknown factor is cost of land wherever the replacement is. So as long as land costs are under £180,000 then there is no loss.
In London? No chance
So do you own a property in London or work in this field? Please explain your expertise.
In 2012, the average cost of a single build land plot in London was £430,000.
What it also does, of course, is frees up Labour to use upper rate pension relief as a no comeback source of funding.
Hasn't Labour already "spent" that on reducing tuition fees for well-off students?
Indeed. And the Tories have now accepted it is a legitimate move. They would choose to give the money raised to people inheriting large estates. Labour will use it to reduce the costs of going to university. FOR RICH PEOPLE
fixed it for you
Blimey. Doesn't the Labour policy apply to everyone? I hadn't realised.
Well previously you were criticising the government because so many people didn't earn enough to pay back the loans in full. So logically only people who are currently paying off more than 2/3 of their loan will benefit from the reduction. I suppose you could argue about whether they count as "rich" or not, but they are certainly better off than the others.
I haven't seen much of it but I don't think anyone other than Sturgeon was asked a question in the bits I saw.
Just Brewer asking Sturgeon questions and the 3 unionists shouting at her as she tries to answer, desperate. Murphy is dire and Brewer is absolutely useless at this.
When are the Tories going to come out with policies that appeal to the Midlands marginals? Train fares and IHT are very "South East" centric - are they aiming for bigger majorities there, while leaving the populist field free to Labour?
Yes, my patch is a reasonably prosperous Midlands constituency. The number of homes worth over £1 million is negligible - a typical large family home in a sought-after area is £700K. I can't imagine that it's very different in the others.
Well current IHT is at £650,000, so owners will be paying £20K on the house plus 40% of any other assets. Likely outcome is that they will need to sell the family house to pay tax.
Now they are being exempted from paying tax on the family house.
I'm sure they'll appreciate the thought.
This is not a tax break that benefits the wealthy (e.g. my 2 bedroom flat in London won't benefit), but hard-working families that have built up a decent nest-egg through saving and prudence.
I don't know much about the British credit situation right now but even assuming a bank balance of zero at the time when you received a 650k asset, if you were still using the house I wouldn't have thought you'd have great difficulty securing a 20k loan to pay the tax on it.
You'd be surprised about mortgage regulation these days...
I lived in London in the early 1990s. Concrete wasteland was certainly my impression.
Unless my A-Level in English Social-History was wrong (and written by David Thomson) then this is the bloke who kept London (and England) green-and-pleasant:
The difference of attitude by Marr between Harriot's vacuous nonsense and his aggression against Osborne is just embarrassing.
Classic from Osborne against Hattie "Harriet and I went to the same school, so all this posh boy stuff from her doesn't mean anything".
She should have responded ' The difference between us is actually very simple. I am prepared to look after those who lack my material good fortune whilst you appear only to care for your own ilk'
What it also does, of course, is frees up Labour to use upper rate pension relief as a no comeback source of funding.
Hasn't Labour already "spent" that on reducing tuition fees for well-off students?
Indeed. And the Tories have now accepted it is a legitimate move. They would choose to give the money raised to people inheriting large estates. Labour will use it to reduce the costs of going to university. FOR RICH PEOPLE
fixed it for you
Those RICH People will still be paying a lot more than students back in the 60s and 70s - or even when Cameron and Osborne were students!
Inheritance tax: EARN a million quid (takes about 40 years on Av. UK wage ) and you pay about 210000 in tax and NI. Have a million quid fall into your lap when mummy throws a seven and you pay rock all. Doesn't sound like a vote-winner to me. More like two fingers up to anyone who works for a living.
Comments
1999 - 17 Seats (Form Coalition)
2003 - 17 Seats (Continue Coalition)
2007 - 16 Seats (Refuse to Form Coalition)
2010 - Westminster Coalition
2011 - 5 Seats
Mr Farage's positive scores are still higher than Messrs Cameron, Clegg, Miliband.
Mr Farage +47 / -41
Mr Cameron +45 / -48
Mr Miliband +32 / -57
Mr Clegg +26 / -63
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/oqslggwc4a/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-110415.pdf
http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-wheels-keep-turning/#more-69502
I have upgraded him from tw*t to *rsehole.
I still think summer in rural Hampshire is something special, and at some point I'm going to have to check out Corfe Castle in Dorset. The home of the Famous Five must surely be bursting with Good Eggs and sunbeams.
I would never suggest free brothels for heroin uses, if they can afford to spend a few hundred pounds a week on their habit, they can pay for their own. And shouldn't get benefits as they obviously have another undeclared, albeit illegal, job. Hence my suggestion of something akin to the workhouse.
http://www.gingerpop.co.uk
This site, for instance, was squatted council property, and is being redeveloped into 58 houses and flats, of which 50% are social housing, while also release capital for additional council investment elsewhere
http://www.lqgroup.org.uk/services-for-residents/media-centre/press-releases/2013/3/19/landq-acquires-prime-site-near-oval-to-develop-homes-overlooking-kennington-park/
The "hard-working families" trope was a response to @NickPalmer's definition of a large family house being worth £700,000. If a lazy singleton lived in one of those it would benefit them as well.
Lets just say it's not going to improve your personal view of Murphy's politeness.
More a flake than a bounty bar coconut.
https://twitter.com/AngrySalmond/status/587209093825306624
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/47-per-cent-of-london-is-green-space-is-it-time-for-our-capital-to-become-a-national-park-9756470.html
When the t'Economist reported this - what, twenty years-ago - 23% of London was parkland. Nothing has changed....
The fundamental principle is that the state takes a share of the proceeds of value creation in order to spend on centralised services that facilitate that value creation.
So income tax is a tax on the value created by renting your labour/time
Value added tax is a tax on the value created by a change of state (e.g. bricks into a house)
With IHT there is no value creation, just a transfer of an asset between two people without consideration being received on the other side.
Still, modern history isn't my strong point.
But the logic for the transaction is that there is social benefit from encouraging private ownership (willingness to invest in an area in which you have a stake, etc)
http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-the-shaky-foundations-of-the-governments-latest-grand-design/10583
I doubt it has gone down much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Ashley-Cooper,_7th_Earl_of_Shaftesbury
Parks are part-and-parcel of London. In SE London we have some of the best.
Lee Seville (@LeeSeville_UKIP)
April 10
#HeywoodandMiddleton pic.twitter.com/d41R6gjixa
EARN a million quid (takes about 40 years on Av. UK wage ) and you pay about 210000 in tax and NI.
Have a million quid fall into your lap when mummy throws a seven and you pay rock all. Doesn't sound like a vote-winner to me. More like two fingers up to anyone who works for a living.