On the other hand, it's a wonderful problem to have.
It is daft, but it demonstrates that if people do not have an incentive to work or wealth create as they will be over taxed then they will not do it.
Erm.... his Camelot financial adviser should have told him to look at paying in to a personal pension and so defer paying higher rate tax by putting it inside his pension wrapper - it would benefit then from 25% tax free cash when he did fully retire and there could be IHT planning benefits for him too by building his pension pot and which his £1m is unlikely to benefit from. Even if he's a 40% taxpayer in retirement, the effective return is a min 16.7%
Indeed. Thanks to the sale of our business I have just come into a decent amount of cash. As far as I can tell, beyond the tax on what I have to pay on the money I made, there is no additional liability. I will carry on working (for now, at least), put the money into various investments and funds, and pay exactly the same tax as I paid before on my salary. Obviously, when I start drawing down on what I have built up, there are tax implications, but by then I will not be working. It seems to me that this bloke may have a cause of action against the Camelot financial adviser.
As an aside. I went to see someone recently about managing what I got and he told me that one of their clients is a very big lottery winner who spent a few hundred grand on a new Lamborghini. He then sold it when he was charged £37,000 for its first service!! It is a different world.
I believe its about the same to stick 4 new tyres on a Bugatti Veyron....
Didn't Jeremy Clarkson give his ferrari away a while back while warning anyone who took it on that the service bills would be exorbitant and unavoidable?
As an aside. I went to see someone recently about managing what I got and he told me that one of their clients is a very big lottery winner who spent a few hundred grand on a new Lamborghini. He then sold it when he was charged £37,000 for its first service!! It is a different world.
The annual service on a Huracan is about 800 quid, maybe 1200 for an Aventador. Two grand a year for tyres if he drives it hard. Double all of that if he tracks it. No way is an annual service on a modern Lambo anywhere near 37k. There is a lot of VW/Audi components in them...
Maybe not a Lamborghini then. I know nothing whatsoever about cars.
A Veyron is about 20k/year to service and a Koeniggsegg is 30k (but they fly the techs to your house from Sweden to do it).
As an aside. I went to see someone recently about managing what I got and he told me that one of their clients is a very big lottery winner who spent a few hundred grand on a new Lamborghini. He then sold it when he was charged £37,000 for its first service!! It is a different world.
The annual service on a Huracan is about 800 quid, maybe 1200 for an Aventador. Two grand a year for tyres if he drives it hard. Double all of that if he tracks it. No way is an annual service on a modern Lambo anywhere near 37k. There is a lot of VW/Audi components in them...
Maybe not a Lamborghini then. I know nothing whatsoever about cars.
While it’s true that supercars are more expensive to maintain than more normal transport, a regular service on even a supercar is an order of magnitude less than your adviser suggests.
They do eat tyres, brakes and clutches if used as intended though, which add up very quickly - and whatever you do don’t damage any bodywork, which is really very expensive indeed! It’s quite possible to get a £30k bill after a year if it’s not been looked after carefully.
Jobs need to be paid for. If each job is paid the media salary of approx. £27,000, then that is £10.8 billion per year in wages (assuming these are not temporary jobs).
Whilst there may be some savings compared to 'traditional' power, it seems like rather a lot.
Putting it another way: 1,2 million people work in the NHS. Will a third of that number really be employable in the green energy sector?
On the other hand, it's a wonderful problem to have.
It is daft, but it demonstrates that if people do not have an incentive to work or wealth create as they will be over taxed then they will not do it.
Erm.... his Camelot financial adviser should have told him to look at paying in to a personal pension and so defer paying higher rate tax by putting it inside his pension wrapper - it would benefit then from 25% tax free cash when he did fully retire and there could be IHT planning benefits for him too by building his pension pot and which his £1m is unlikely to benefit from. Even if he's a 40% taxpayer in retirement, the effective return is a min 16.7%
Indeed. Thanks to the sale of our business I have just come into a decent amount of cash. As far as I can tell, beyond the tax on what I have to pay on the money I made, there is no additional liability. I will carry on working (for now, at least), put the money into various investments and funds, and pay exactly the same tax as I paid before on my salary. Obviously, when I start drawing down on what I have built up, there are tax implications, but by then I will not be working. It seems to me that this bloke may have a cause of action against the Camelot financial adviser.
As an aside. I went to see someone recently about managing what I got and he told me that one of their clients is a very big lottery winner who spent a few hundred grand on a new Lamborghini. He then sold it when he was charged £37,000 for its first service!! It is a different world.
Will you be joining our pilgrimage to Milton Keynes tonight - nice of them to host a home game virtually on my door-step!
Remember I told you about one of our sparks who won a £1 million on a scratchcard. He wanted to carry on working. However the Camelot financial adivsior has been to see him. As he will get between 3-4% interest on his money, any income he gets from employment will be subject to the top rate of tax, therefore massively reducing his hourly rate, making it pointless for him to carry on working. He has taken his money and moved to America. One of the dangers of over taxing "rich" people, they leave.
That's a weird story, there's a non-trivial difference between the tax you'd pay in the UK and the US, but in the US you have insane healthcare premiums and various other costs, not to mention all the relocation expenses etc. 3-4% interest on £1 million is only 30K to 40K, and from the story they were well below the top tax bracket before the win so we're not talking about vast savings here...
Unless of course your guy already wanted to the live in the US, in which case good luck to them...
It's probably that 'frankly' people aren't very smart when it comes to money.
£1m sounds like a huge sum, but it's not really. It's enough so that the average person doesn't have to work and keep the current lifestyle of an average person. Or it's enough that you can be well off if you carry on working.
It's not enough so that you don't have to work, but be rich as well. It's simply not. To get to that bracket, you really need multiple millions.
As for the subbie, its certainly true that if you wanted that money to provide income without spending the capital, it'll be taxed. Guessing a good sparkie can earn 30-40k, so the interest/investment income would be taxed at the higher rate. So the 30k pa its giving him, is really only 18k or so post tax.
which is 'nice' but when it's coming down to £1,500 extra per month, it's not so impressive.
By the way where does Corbyn think we are going to find 400k people to work in the renewable energy field? Does he really think we have got a lot of unemployed engineers or construction workers hanging about waiting for his largess?
Immigration. Lots of it to punish tory voters.
It’s unlikely that you’re joking either.
Which is a disturbing insight into your mental state, like your rather nasty refusal to attend the funeral of someone on account of them being a Leave voter.
People are odd. I knew someone from South Yorkshire who refused to go to a dear friend's wedding in Birmingham as it was 'the south', filled with southern wa*kers, etc, etc.
Says more about people from South Yorkshire.
Not really. He was a lovely man, and a 'proper' lefty that made Dennis Skinner look like a Thatcherite. I saw him the Saturday after Blair's 1997 GE win and congratulated him on a Labour win. His response. "We haven't won. The Conservatives have!"
Doesn't sound like a lovely man to me - sounds like a professional curmudgeon.
Well, he was from Yorkshire.
But he was a lovely man. Capable of intense acts of friendship, generous, funny, witty. It was just that he had some oddities - as many of us do.
And to be fair, he was ahead of the times in calling Blair a Tory.
To stereotype for a moment, if there were a book on your South Yorkshire friend's location, I wouldn't lay the Barnsley area at much below 1/2 and I'd back at around Evens.
On the other hand, it's a wonderful problem to have.
It is daft, but it demonstrates that if people do not have an incentive to work or wealth create as they will be over taxed then they will not do it.
Erm.... his Camelot financial adviser should have told him to look at paying in to a personal pension and so defer paying higher rate tax by putting it inside his pension wrapper - it would benefit then from 25% tax free cash when he did fully retire and there could be IHT planning benefits for him too by building his pension pot and which his £1m is unlikely to benefit from. Even if he's a 40% taxpayer in retirement, the effective return is a min 16.7%
Indeed. Thanks to the sale of our business I have just come into a decent amount of cash. As far as I can tell, beyond the tax on what I have to pay on the money I made, there is no additional liability. I will carry on working (for now, at least), put the money into various investments and funds, and pay exactly the same tax as I paid before on my salary. Obviously, when I start drawing down on what I have built up, there are tax implications, but by then I will not be working. It seems to me that this bloke may have a cause of action against the Camelot financial adviser.
As an aside. I went to see someone recently about managing what I got and he told me that one of their clients is a very big lottery winner who spent a few hundred grand on a new Lamborghini. He then sold it when he was charged £37,000 for its first service!! It is a different world.
I believe its about the same to stick 4 new tyres on a Bugatti Veyron....
Didn't Jeremy Clarkson give his ferrari away a while back while warning anyone who took it on that the service bills would be exorbitant and unavoidable?
No idea, but I do remember Top Gear did a segment on some bloke who owned 3 super cars and they went through costs of servicing, new tyres etc, and it was totally insane. Also, if you break down, the very nice man, the very very nice man, the very very very nice man from the AA, is going to be the square root of f##k all help.
I just don't get why you would want to own a super car. Do a track day, I get, but actually owning them, you might as well keep your log burner going in the winter sticking bundles of £10s in it, as it would be cheaper.
Also, there seems to be an unfairness in terms of location. Stand on the top of Honey Hill in Northamptonshire (just south of the A14) and you can see many distinct windfarms and individual wind turbines. Yet go to equally-hilly Oxfordshire and there are virtually none.
The only reason for this can really be the effective power of NIMBYs.
I would point out that Oxfordshire does seem to have loads and loads of solar farms. To be honest, I only really started noticing them when I took up microlighting - most aren't readily visible from the road, but they're very conspicuous from the air (and give convenient thermals)
The “House Thermal” at Didcot used to be way better though
Not that we should design energy policy around the needs of recreational aviation of course...
Under Brexit concerns: we'll lose the epic thermal off the Honda plant car parks at Swindon if they leave the country due to a bad or no deal, but I doubt many parties would put that concern front and centre...
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
F1: I like that the updated F1 official site has results going back to the 1950s. Why they start out with the oldest season as default is a bit weird, though.
Anyway, last couple of races both had 4 DNFs, and in both cases 3/4 were on the first lap.
People are still drowning. It doesn't matter if *fewer* people are drowning; we should still be doing what we can to save them. Not smugly acclaiming that a rescue boat has been taken out of action.
Is there a penalty for a Red Bull? 1.66 for them to doubly enter Q3 (same odds as Haas) seems a bit generous.
Horner hinted in Singapore that they’d be starting from the back of the grid. Engine penalties expected but not yet announced. Might be worth a quid or two just in case they don’t.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
Of course we don't know if the individual has other wealth already such as a big pension pot facing AA or LTA issues so you can't really go in that hard to be fair.
On the other hand, it's a wonderful problem to have.
It is daft, but it demonstrates that if people do not have an incentive to work or wealth create as they will be over taxed then they will not do it.
Erm.... his Camelot financial adviser should have told him to look at paying in to a personal pension and so defer paying higher rate tax by putting it inside his pension wrapper - it would benefit then from 25% tax free cash when he did fully retire and there could be IHT planning benefits for him too by building his pension pot and which his £1m is unlikely to benefit from. Even if he's a 40% taxpayer in retirement, the effective return is a min 16.7%
Indeed. Thanks to the sale of our business I have just come into a decent amount of cash. As far as I can tell, beyond the tax on what I have to pay on the money I made, there is no additional liability. I will carry on working (for now, at least), put the money into various investments and funds, and pay exactly the same tax as I paid before on my salary. Obviously, when I start drawing down on what I have built up, there are tax implications, but by then I will not be working. It seems to me that this bloke may have a cause of action against the Camelot financial adviser.
As an aside. I went to see someone recently about managing what I got and he told me that one of their clients is a very big lottery winner who spent a few hundred grand on a new Lamborghini. He then sold it when he was charged £37,000 for its first service!! It is a different world.
I believe its about the same to stick 4 new tyres on a Bugatti Veyron....
Didn't Jeremy Clarkson give his ferrari away a while back while warning anyone who took it on that the service bills would be exorbitant and unavoidable?
No idea, but I do remember Top Gear did a segment on some bloke who owned 3 super cars and they went through costs of servicing, new tyres etc, and it was totally insane. Also, if you break down, the very nice man, the very very nice man, the very very very nice man from the AA, is going to be the square root of f##k all help.
I just don't get why you would want to own a super car. Do a track day, I get, but actually owning them, you might as well keep your log burner going in the winter sticking bundles of £10s in it, as it would be cheaper.
It'd be the insurance that frightens me. I don't know if that's a valid fear, though.
So, Britain actually leads the world in decarbonising amongst large economies and has been doing for several years (since about 2011/12 or so). Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
Possibly a bad day for Georges Monbiot to complain that reduction in carbon requires reduction in economic growth, but few readers will know or care about the reality, I guess.
And soon we move onto the conservative conference which may well be the most important one they have held in a generation.
Yesterday TM looked tired in her interviews and we saw her Maybot on display again. This morning she is talking of reducing corporation tax to the lowest in the G20 and making the UK the best place in the world to do business. This is a perfectly reasonable place for a conservative PM but does give the impression she is giving up on a deal.
This worries me considerably and I am concerned that her political antennae is switched off. When asked yesterday by Sky if she would sign upto their petition for leaders debates she refused to answer, when the correct response should have been an immmediate 'absolutely '. A few weeks ago she over ruled Sajid on the 3% police pay increase which is just plain stupid,
I do understand why she will not agree any deal that puts a border in the Irish sea but her stubbornness makes compromise very difficult.
I do not think she can continue like this for much longer but cannot see it is the national interest to replace her now, as desirable as that may be, but I doubt she will survive much beyond late Spring 2019
And to all of you who think I am her cheerleader I do admire her honesty, decency and dedication to public service in stark contrast to some of the objectionable speeches from hard left haters we saw at the labour conference.
Let us hope, despite my reservations, she can get a deal or at the very least a transistion period.
I do not believe we should remain in the EU now no matter the difficulties but I am sure many will start to campaign to re-join post Brexit, but I cannot see that happening in the short term
Feeling a bit melancholy today
I still reckon May will strike a last minute deal. Something like EEA+CU with a fig leaf on immigration. But I doubt much will be sorted this side of Christmas.
May won’t strike that deal. She’s boxed in.
'That deal' being 'something like' – 'something like' leaves a lot of room for manoeuvre.
Edit ....and the Palestinian flags were a very smart idea.
I'd use the Palestinian flags on Tory graphics in Peterborough, Poole, Portished, Penarth, Portsmouth etc
LABOUR: PALESTINE OVER NSERT TOWN/CITY NAME HERE
I think you miss the point. It's a quiet reminder that concern for the plight of the Palestinians is a popular and legitimate cause and should not be confused with antisemitism.
I think that’s right. The Palestinians aren’t a particularly ‘popular’ cause, but I suspect there’s widespread unease over the way they’ve been, and are being treated. Maybe at a low level, but it’s there.
Undoubtedly that's shared by a lot of people, including me. But I am, frankly, more concerned about how British Jews here - our citizens, our friends, neighbours, colleagues - are being treated and talked about, often by the same people so vociferous in their concern for Palestinians. And the Labour leadership seems all too willing to ignore the concerns of some British citizens for the concerns of people about which, bluntly, Britain can do nothing. That is an odd set of priorities - a bit Mrs Jellaby like - and would be harmless were it not for the fact that there does seem to be an overlap between some pro-Palestinians and some anti-semites. That is the issue which Labour is deliberately avoiding. It has made the choice - if the price for being pro-Palestinian is to be anti-semitic or tolerate or do nothing about anti-semitism then Labour - under its current leadership - is willing to pay that price.
That is a very fair comment.
Unfortunately, the Conservative party is also willing to give succour to virulent anti-Semites. The UK's moral compass has gone missing.
Yes it has. It is very very sad. Against that, I'm afraid, I find policies about solar panels a bit of a second order issue.
For me my oldest friend contemplating leaving England if Labour come to power because of its attitudes to Jews (sadly echoing the decision of her parents to leave Germany and come to this country) is a far more important determinant of my vote than the possibility of Labour giving me an allotment (a lifelong dream) or subsidising my solar panels or green roofs, all policies I support.
Mr. Anazina, maybe. Maybe taking a sample size of one and then using that to categorise an entire population is unwise. Perhaps you looked at the last Islamic terror attack and concluded all Muslims are murderers. Perhaps you looked at acid attacks in London, and concluded all Londoners are perpetrators or victims of barbaric violence.
Or perhaps you concluded that individuals are not necessarily perfect representations of everyone with whom they share a demographic, and that pretending otherwise is somewhat infantile.
I am not suggesting all Yorkshiremen are like that, but there is a lot of it about, sadly.
I see it on here – people from West Yorkshire who make snotty, nigh-on bigoted, remarks about Londoners and Frenchmen, having never even visited London or France.
Remember I told you about one of our sparks who won a £1 million on a scratchcard. He wanted to carry on working. However the Camelot financial adivsior has been to see him. As he will get between 3-4% interest on his money, any income he gets from employment will be subject to the top rate of tax, therefore massively reducing his hourly rate, making it pointless for him to carry on working. He has taken his money and moved to America. One of the dangers of over taxing "rich" people, they leave.
That's a weird story, there's a non-trivial difference between the tax you'd pay in the UK and the US, but in the US you have insane healthcare premiums and various other costs, not to mention all the relocation expenses etc. 3-4% interest on £1 million is only 30K to 40K, and from the story they were well below the top tax bracket before the win so we're not talking about vast savings here...
Unless of course your guy already wanted to the live in the US, in which case good luck to them...
It's probably that 'frankly' people aren't very smart when it comes to money.
£1m sounds like a huge sum, but it's not really. It's enough so that the average person doesn't have to work and keep the current lifestyle of an average person. Or it's enough that you can be well off if you carry on working.
It's not enough so that you don't have to work, but be rich as well. It's simply not. To get to that bracket, you really need multiple millions.
As for the subbie, its certainly true that if you wanted that money to provide income without spending the capital, it'll be taxed. Guessing a good sparkie can earn 30-40k, so the interest/investment income would be taxed at the higher rate. So the 30k pa its giving him, is really only 18k or so post tax.
which is 'nice' but when it's coming down to £1,500 extra per month, it's not so impressive.
About ten years ago I remember reading you need an ANNUAL income of £3-4m per year. Which means either a good source of income or a pot worth £50m+. Given the intervening decade we can probably suggest that is £5m and £100m...
Mr. Anazina, maybe. Maybe taking a sample size of one and then using that to categorise an entire population is unwise. Perhaps you looked at the last Islamic terror attack and concluded all Muslims are murderers. Perhaps you looked at acid attacks in London, and concluded all Londoners are perpetrators or victims of barbaric violence.
Or perhaps you concluded that individuals are not necessarily perfect representations of everyone with whom they share a demographic, and that pretending otherwise is somewhat infantile.
I am not suggesting all Yorkshiremen are like that, but there is a lot of it about, sadly.
I see it on here – people from West Yorkshire who make snotty, nigh-on bigoted, remarks about Londoners and Frenchmen, having never even visited London or France.
Funny old world.
I doubt there is a single person on here that matches that description.
Plus you have had a sense of humour bypass if you think mocking the cheese eating surrender monkeys is nigh-on bigoted.
While we're slapping our anecdata on the table, I work with dozens of top rate tax payers in a job which tends to get paid at least half again as much in the US. Strangely none of us are clamouring to uproot our lives and emigrate
So one of the missing pieces in this discussion is that the card "stop rich people emigrating" card is only ever really pulled out when talking about tax rates. But tax rates just affect how much money you have - and if you're rich, by definition, you've got plenty of money!
There are lots of other quality-of-life issues that you can't buy with money, and you rely on the government for. The classic one is pollution; For instance, there's lots of (anecdotal) evidence about rich people leaving China to get away from the pollution. This argument would make as much sense or more deployed in the service of funding for the arts, or public transport (if only to keep the unwashed masses from blocking the roads) or policing.
On the other hand, it's a wonderful problem to have.
It is daft, but it demonstrates that if people do not have an incentive to work or wealth create as they will be over taxed then they will not do it.
Erm.... his Camelot financial adviser shoulfrom. Even if he's a 40% taxpayer in retirement, the effective return is a min 16.7%
Indeed. Thanks to the sale of our business I have just come into a decent amount of cash. As far as I can tell, beyond the tax on what I have to pay on the money I made, there is no additional liability. I will carry on working (for now, at least), put the money into various investments and funds, and pay exactly the same tax as I paid before on my salary. Obviously, when I start drawing down on what I have built up, there are tax implications, but by then I will not be working. It seems to me that this bloke may have a cause of action against the Camelot financial adviser.
As an aside. I went to see someone recently about managing what I got and he told me that one of their clients is a very big lottery winner who spent a few hundred grand on a new Lamborghini. He then sold it when he was charged £37,000 for its first service!! It is a different world.
I believe its about the same to stick 4 new tyres on a Bugatti Veyron....
Didn't Jeremy Clarkson give his ferrari away a while back while warning anyone who took it on that the service bills would be exorbitant and unavoidable?
No idea, but I do remember Top Gear did a segment on some bloke who owned 3 super cars and they went through costs of servicing, new tyres etc, and it was totally insane. Also, if you break down, the very nice man, the very very nice man, the very very very nice man from the AA, is going to be the square root of f##k all help.
I just don't get why you would want to own a super car. Do a track day, I get, but actually owning them, you might as well keep your log burner going in the winter sticking bundles of £10s in it, as it would be cheaper.
You are not in the right mindset. If you own a supercar you are not living in a modest semi in Hartlepool Biggleswade. You have tons and tons of money and this is just one more outlet for you to spend it on. What it costs in 100s or 1,000s is neither here nor there to you.
So, Britain actually leads the world in decarbonising amongst large economies and has been doing for several years (since about 2011/12 or so). Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
Possibly a bad day for Georges Monbiot to complain that reduction in carbon requires reduction in economic growth, but few readers will know or care about the reality, I guess.
This is what annoys me. We are actually doing really well at adopting renewables, but if you listen to the media and politicians you would think Britain is doing poorly. I don't know quite why things are working out as well as they are — cheap Chinese solar, and massive offshore investment I guess — but I'd be inclined to say to government to leave well alone.
On the other hand, it's a wonderful problem to have.
It is daft, but it demonstrates that if people do not have an incentive to work or wealth create as they will be over taxed then they will not do it.
Erm.... his Camelot financial adviser should have told him to look at paying in to a personal pension and so defer paying higher rate tax by putting it inside his pension wrapper - it would benefit then from 25% tax free cash when he did fully retire and there could be IHT planning benefits for him too by building his pension pot and which his £1m is unlikely to benefit from. Even if he's a 40% taxpayer in retirement, the effective return is a min 16.7%
Indeed. Thanks to the sale of our business I have just come into a decent amount of cash. As far as I can tell, beyond the tax on what I have to pay on the money I made, there is no additional liability. I will carry on working (for now, at least), put the money into various investments and funds, and pay exactly the same tax as I paid before on my salary. Obviously, when I start drawing down on what I have built up, there are tax implications, but by then I will not be working. It seems to me that this bloke may have a cause of action against the Camelot financial adviser.
As an aside. I went to see someone recently about managing what I got and he told me that one of their clients is a very big lottery winner who spent a few hundred grand on a new Lamborghini. He then sold it when he was charged £37,000 for its first service!! It is a different world.
I believe its about the same to stick 4 new tyres on a Bugatti Veyron....
Didn't Jeremy Clarkson give his ferrari away a while back while warning anyone who took it on that the service bills would be exorbitant and unavoidable?
Yep, the bills can be shocking if you’re not expecting them.
Good video from a guy who used to own an exotic car rental company, about the economics of running expensive cars youtube.com/watch?v=OpRzPVjNGNc
Remember I told you about one of our sparks who won a £1 million on a scratchcard. He wanted to carry on working. However the Camelot financial adivsior has been to see him. As he will get between 3-4% interest on his money, any income he gets from employment will be subject to the top rate of tax, therefore massively reducing his hourly rate, making it pointless for him to carry on working. He has taken his money and moved to America. One of the dangers of over taxing "rich" people, they leave.
3-4 % is certainly not risk free at the moment, though perfectly achievable. He will face considerable healthcare insurance costs that are gratis here in lieu of direct taxation I think also
On the other hand, it's a wonderful problem to have.
It is daft, but it demonstrates that if people do not have an incentive to work or wealth create as they will be over taxed then they will not do it.
Erm.... his Camelot financial adviser shoulfrom. Even if he's a 40% taxpayer in retirement, the effective return is a min 16.7%
Indeed. Thanks to the sale of our business I have just come into a decent amount of cash. As far as I can tell, beyond the tax on what I have to pay on the money I made, there is no additional liability. I will carry on working (for now, at least), put the money into various investments and funds, and pay exactly the same tax as I paid before on my salary. Obviously, when I start drawing down on what I have built up, there are tax implications, but by then I will not be working. It seems to me that this bloke may have a cause of action against the Camelot financial adviser.
As an aside. I went to see someone recently about managing what I got and he told me that one of their clients is a very big lottery winner who spent a few hundred grand on a new Lamborghini. He then sold it when he was charged £37,000 for its first service!! It is a different world.
I believe its about the same to stick 4 new tyres on a Bugatti Veyron....
Didn't Jeremy Clarkson give his ferrari away a while back while warning anyone who took it on that the service bills would be exorbitant and unavoidable?
No idea, but I do remember Top Gear did a segment on some bloke who owned 3 super cars and they went through costs of servicing, new tyres etc, and it was totally insane. Also, if you break down, the very nice man, the very very nice man, the very very very nice man from the AA, is going to be the square root of f##k all help.
I just don't get why you would want to own a super car. Do a track day, I get, but actually owning them, you might as well keep your log burner going in the winter sticking bundles of £10s in it, as it would be cheaper.
You are not in the right mindset. If you own a supercar you are not living in a modest semi in Hartlepool Biggleswade. You have tons and tons of money and this is just one more outlet for you to spend it on. What it costs in 100s or 1,000s is neither here nor there to you.
So, Britain actually leads the world in decarbonising amongst large economies and has been doing for several years (since about 2011/12 or so). Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
Possibly a bad day for Georges Monbiot to complain that reduction in carbon requires reduction in economic growth, but few readers will know or care about the reality, I guess.
This is what annoys me. We are actually doing really well at adopting renewables, but if you listen to the media and politicians you would think Britain is doing poorly. I don't know quite why things are working out as well as they are — cheap Chinese solar, and massive offshore investment I guess — but I'd be inclined to say to government to leave well alone.
Or to the government carry on what you're already doing as it's working.
So, Britain actually leads the world in decarbonising amongst large economies and has been doing for several years (since about 2011/12 or so). Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
Possibly a bad day for Georges Monbiot to complain that reduction in carbon requires reduction in economic growth, but few readers will know or care about the reality, I guess.
This is what annoys me. We are actually doing really well at adopting renewables, but if you listen to the media and politicians you would think Britain is doing poorly. I don't know quite why things are working out as well as they are — cheap Chinese solar, and massive offshore investment I guess — but I'd be inclined to say to government to leave well alone.
What surprised me is that the second place for decarbonisation is taken by.... China! (Admittedly they've got a long way yet to go, with a carbon intensity two to three times that of us in the UK, but they're well ahead of the G20 average rate)
So, Britain actually leads the world in decarbonising amongst large economies and has been doing for several years (since about 2011/12 or so). Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
Possibly a bad day for Georges Monbiot to complain that reduction in carbon requires reduction in economic growth, but few readers will know or care about the reality, I guess.
This is what annoys me. We are actually doing really well at adopting renewables, but if you listen to the media and politicians you would think Britain is doing poorly. I don't know quite why things are working out as well as they are — cheap Chinese solar, and massive offshore investment I guess — but I'd be inclined to say to government to leave well alone.
What surprised me is that the second place for decarbonisation is taken by.... China! (Admittedly they've got a long way yet to go, with a carbon intensity two to three times that of us in the UK, but they're well ahead of the G20 average rate)
That's fascinating. I imagine it's a combination of both their fast economic growth and their desire to tackle smog.
Indeed. Thanks to the sale of our business I have just come into a decent amount of cash. As far as I can tell, beyond the tax on what I have to pay on the money I made, there is no additional liability. I will carry on working (for now, at least), put the money into various investments and funds, and pay exactly the same tax as I paid before on my salary. Obviously, when I start drawing down on what I have built up, there are tax implications, but by then I will not be working. It seems to me that this bloke may have a cause of action against the Camelot financial adviser.
As an aside. I went to see someone recently about managing what I got and he told me that one of their clients is a very big lottery winner who spent a few hundred grand on a new Lamborghini. He then sold it when he was charged £37,000 for its first service!! It is a different world.
I believe its about the same to stick 4 new tyres on a Bugatti Veyron....
Didn't Jeremy Clarkson give his ferrari away a while back while warning anyone who took it on that the service bills would be exorbitant and unavoidable?
No idea, but I do remember Top Gear did a segment on some bloke who owned 3 super cars and they went through costs of servicing, new tyres etc, and it was totally insane. Also, if you break down, the very nice man, the very very nice man, the very very very nice man from the AA, is going to be the square root of f##k all help.
I just don't get why you would want to own a super car. Do a track day, I get, but actually owning them, you might as well keep your log burner going in the winter sticking bundles of £10s in it, as it would be cheaper.
You are not in the right mindset. If you own a supercar you are not living in a modest semi in Hartlepool Biggleswade. You have tons and tons of money and this is just one more outlet for you to spend it on. What it costs in 100s or 1,000s is neither here nor there to you.
There are plenty of people who buy a £50k Ferrari or Lamborghini as a retirement present, or following a house sale etc. They forget that there cars are actually £250k cars new, and the maintainance is priced accordingly. A lot of old rear engined Ferraris for example, need the timing belt replaced every three years - which involves 30-40 hours of labour, as the engine needs to come out of the car to do it!
I dont get this perceived idea that just a few people have benefited from the ecomoic upturn since 2010. There are now thousands more hotels in this country than there were in 2000. You try and get a room in one, is this just "rich" people paying the high prices that hotels charge, or maybe is it that ordinary people can afford to pay the rates. Three weeks ago I fancied a night at Poole dogs with my other half, thought we would stay the night, not a single hotel room was available in Poole. My golf society had a weekend away last weekend at Celtic Manor. Celtic manor own 5 hotels on the site, we tried to add an extra body to our trip two weeks before we went, we couldn't as every single one of their rooms was taken. Hotels are just one example. My friend loves Center Parcs, I think it is a complete waste of money as you can have three weeks in spain for the cost of one week at Center Parcs. Despite this he reports that the park is always sold out when he goes.
I hear it time and time again on here that just a few rich people have benefited in that past 8 years from this incredible economic upturn, the evidence I see completely refutes that premise.
I'm not aware of Poole Dogs (more of a travel lodge guy) but center parcs and weekends away at the celtic manor with the golf society are indicators of the higher end of society rather than the average or the slightly lower end.
My golf society the higher end of society???? Its a pub golf society full of ordinary working men who all happen to go the local pub and like a game of golf.
Did you imagine the word 'with' to be a comma and golf club to be an addition to the list by itself?
Here is part of the sentence again
'weekends away at the celtic manor with the golf society'
It may surprise you to know that the people going to the food bank aren't spending time at Centerparcs or weekends at the Celtic Manor. This isn't me saying you are incredibly rich and privileged, but the people who are struggling are not the types spending time at Centerparcs and weekends at the Celtic Manor.
Okay so the rich and privileged in my golf society include a dustman, a sky repairman, a plumber, three electricians, a carpenter, a lorry driver, a road digger, a carpet fitter, a builder and 5 chaps who work on production lines in factories. I will let them know that they are at the higher ecelons of society and that they are "rich" and should be taxed much more.
And soon we move onto the conservative conference which may well be the most important one they have held in a generation.
Yesterday TM looked tired in her interviews and we saw her Maybot on display again. This morning she is talking of reducing corporation tax to the lowest in the G20 and making the UK the best place in the world to do business. This is a perfectly reasonable place for a conservative PM but does give the impression she is giving up on a deal.
This worries me considerably and I am concerned that her political antennae is switched off. When asked yesterday by Sky if she would sign upto their petition for leaders debates she refused to answer, when the correct response should have been an immmediate 'absolutely '. A few weeks ago she over ruled Sajid on the 3% police pay increase which is just plain stupid,
I do understand why she will not agree any deal that puts a border in the Irish sea but her stubbornness makes compromise very difficult.
I do not think she can continue like this for much longer but cannot see it is the national interest to replace her now, as desirable as that may be, but I doubt she will survive much beyond late Spring 2019
And to all of you who think I am her cheerleader I do admire her honesty, decency and dedication to public service in stark contrast to some of the objectionable speeches from hard left haters we saw at the labour conference.
Let us hope, despite my reservations, she can get a deal or at the very least a transistion period.
I do not believe we should remain in the EU now no matter the difficulties but I am sure many will start to campaign to re-join post Brexit, but I cannot see that happening in the short term
Feeling a bit melancholy today
Neither Theresa May nor Philip Hammond have political antennae. The improvement in the public finances gives them the opportunity to give the voters some prizes, but they won't take it. Like you, I fail to understand the reasoning behind not giving the police 3%.
So, Britain actually leads the world in decarbonising amongst large economies and has been doing for several years (since about 2011/12 or so). Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
Possibly a bad day for Georges Monbiot to complain that reduction in carbon requires reduction in economic growth, but few readers will know or care about the reality, I guess.
This is what annoys me. We are actually doing really well at adopting renewables, but if you listen to the media and politicians you would think Britain is doing poorly. I don't know quite why things are working out as well as they are — cheap Chinese solar, and massive offshore investment I guess — but I'd be inclined to say to government to leave well alone.
Or to the government carry on what you're already doing as it's working.
That's what I meant really by "leave well alone", somehow we've ended up with a set of policies from Labour, coalition, and then the Tories, that despite the moaning and predictions of doom from the usual suspects seems to be having the right effects. So, don't move an inch!
So, Britain actually leads the world in decarbonising amongst large economies and has been doing for several years (since about 2011/12 or so). Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
Possibly a bad day for Georges Monbiot to complain that reduction in carbon requires reduction in economic growth, but few readers will know or care about the reality, I guess.
This is what annoys me. We are actually doing really well at adopting renewables, but if you listen to the media and politicians you would think Britain is doing poorly. I don't know quite why things are working out as well as they are — cheap Chinese solar, and massive offshore investment I guess — but I'd be inclined to say to government to leave well alone.
What surprised me is that the second place for decarbonisation is taken by.... China! (Admittedly they've got a long way yet to go, with a carbon intensity two to three times that of us in the UK, but they're well ahead of the G20 average rate)
That's fascinating. I imagine it's a combination of both their fast economic growth and their desire to tackle smog.
On the other hand, it's a wonderful problem to have.
It is daft, but it demonstrates that if people do not have an incentive to work or wealth create as they will be over taxed then they will not do it.
Erm.... his Camelot financial adviser shoulfrom. Even if he's a 40% taxpayer in retirement, the effective return is a min 16.7%
Indeed. Thanks to the sale of our business I have just come into a decent amount of cash. As far as I can tell, beyond the tax on what I have to pay on the money I made, there is no additional liability. I will carry on working (for now, at least), put the money into various investments and funds, and pay exactly the same tax as I paid before on my salary. Obviously, when I start drawing down on what I have built up, there are tax implications, but by then I will not be working. It seems to me that this bloke may have a cause of action against the Camelot financial adviser.
I believe its about the same to stick 4 new tyres on a Bugatti Veyron....
Didn't Jeremy Clarkson give his ferrari away a while back while warning anyone who took it on that the service bills would be exorbitant and unavoidable?
No idea, but I do remember Top Gear did a segment on some bloke who owned 3 super cars and they went through costs of servicing, new tyres etc, and it was totally insane. Also, if you break down, the very nice man, the very very nice man, the very very very nice man from the AA, is going to be the square root of f##k all help.
I just don't get why you would want to own a super car. Do a track day, I get, but actually owning them, you might as well keep your log burner going in the winter sticking bundles of £10s in it, as it would be cheaper.
You are not in the right mindset. If you own a supercar you are not living in a modest semi in Hartlepool Biggleswade. You have tons and tons of money and this is just one more outlet for you to spend it on. What it costs in 100s or 1,000s is neither here nor there to you.
It my humble upbringing....
I used to know a man who owned a Ferrari. HE had a successful business, which he’d built up himself. £10m t/o I think, round about. Quite a modest bungalow, just round the corner from me. No exotic foreign holidays or anything like that; the Ferrari was his one toy. IIRC his wife had a compact car.
So, Britain actually leads the world in decarbonising amongst large economies and has been doing for several years (since about 2011/12 or so). Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
Possibly a bad day for Georges Monbiot to complain that reduction in carbon requires reduction in economic growth, but few readers will know or care about the reality, I guess.
This is what annoys me. We are actually doing really well at adopting renewables, but if you listen to the media and politicians you would think Britain is doing poorly. I don't know quite why things are working out as well as they are — cheap Chinese solar, and massive offshore investment I guess — but I'd be inclined to say to government to leave well alone.
What surprised me is that the second place for decarbonisation is taken by.... China! (Admittedly they've got a long way yet to go, with a carbon intensity two to three times that of us in the UK, but they're well ahead of the G20 average rate)
That's fascinating. I imagine it's a combination of both their fast economic growth and their desire to tackle smog.
Do you have a link to these figures?
It's also a realisation that green energy is a great leveller: all the large economies are going for green energy to various scales, and the tech is immature. China is as well placed as anyone to help invent and evolve the technology, and the resultant market for it will be huge - both internally within China and more importantly, externally.
It's like when La Gloire and HMS Warrior made wooden ships obsolete overnight in 1860 (or HMS Dreadnought forty years later): they also made all the Royal Navy's ships obsolete, allowing competitors to start at a level playing field.
So, Britain actually leads the world in decarbonising amongst large economies and has been doing for several years (since about 2011/12 or so). Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
Possibly a bad day for Georges Monbiot to complain that reduction in carbon requires reduction in economic growth, but few readers will know or care about the reality, I guess.
This is what annoys me. We are actually doing really well at adopting renewables, but if you listen to the media and politicians you would think Britain is doing poorly. I don't know quite why things are working out as well as they are — cheap Chinese solar, and massive offshore investment I guess — but I'd be inclined to say to government to leave well alone.
What surprised me is that the second place for decarbonisation is taken by.... China! (Admittedly they've got a long way yet to go, with a carbon intensity two to three times that of us in the UK, but they're well ahead of the G20 average rate)
Okay so the rich and privileged in my golf society include a dustman, a sky repairman, a plumber, three electricians, a carpenter, a lorry driver, a road digger, a carpet fitter, a builder and 5 chaps who work on production lines in factories. I will let them know that they are at the higher ecelons of society and that they are "rich" and should be taxed much more.
I know a couple of genuinely working class men who spend many thousands per year fishing - both in new kit, and going around the country to fish at new lakes or rivers.
It's their hobby, so fair enough. But they don't seem to get the same derision that golfers seem to get.
(I could also say the same about long-distance walking: I once calculated I was carrying over a grand's worth of kit on me.)
On solar panels: the trouble with feed in tariffs is that domestic solar is the worst kind of power as far as the rest of the grid is concerned: it has to be accepted, can't be turned down or turned off if not required & at any moment the grid might be required to supply power instead if a cloud passes across the sun. Wind has some of the same problems, but is a little more predictable.
Electrical supply costs effectively have two components - the cost of generating the electricity itself & the cost of maintaining supply 24/7. In effect, domestic solar 'customers' are getting to use the grid as an instantly available, effectively infinite capacity (relative to their requirements) battery, which (more importantly) they don't have to pay for. It's not surprising that this was a great deal for domestic solar installers & that the subsidies were eventually going to go away once the solar supply threatened to reach the point that it actually threatened the stability of the grid (Note that I have no idea whether this point had actually been reached - just that it was inevitable eventually.)
On the other hand, it's a wonderful problem to have.
It is daft, but it demonstrates that if people do not have an incentive to work or wealth create as they will be over taxed then they will not do it.
Erm.... his Camelot financial adviser shoulfrom. Even if he's a 40% taxpayer in retirement, the effective return is a min 16.7%
Indeed.adviser.
As world.
I believe its about the same to stick 4 new tyres on a Bugatti Veyron....
Didn't Jeremy Clarkson give his ferrari away a while back while warning anyone who took it on that the service bills would be exorbitant and unavoidable?
No idea, but I do remember Top Gear did a segment on some bloke who owned 3 super cars and they went through costs of servicing, new tyres etc, and it was totally insane. Also, if you break down, the very nice man, the very very nice man, the very very very nice man from the AA, is going to be the square root of f##k all help.
I just don't get why you would want to own a super car. Do a track day, I get, but actually owning them, you might as well keep your log burner going in the winter sticking bundles of £10s in it, as it would be cheaper.
You are not in the right mindset. If you own a supercar you are not living in a modest semi in Hartlepool Biggleswade. You have tons and tons of money and this is just one more outlet for you to spend it on. What it costs in 100s or 1,000s is neither here nor there to you.
Not sure that is true. If you suddenly come into big money, then you might go out and make a big statement of success - but you are still someone who is not used to having a shedload of money. If you've paid £150 for annual service and suddenly you see it costing £37,000 that is going to be a big shock, no matter how much you now have in the bank.
It takes a long time to get your head round these things, believe me.
And yes with a million quid, pension wrapping it is probably best..
Not very sexy though is it. Winning a million quid, then doing nothing with it (on a tangible basis) for 30 odd years.
i'd at least pay off my mortgage with it first. But again thats oly enough to make you more comfortable. Not rich.
I don't think you can blame someone for splashing out say £50k-£100k on their indulgence of choice. After all, they play the lottery for the chance of a lifechanging fortune, not a steady income
And yes with a million quid, pension wrapping it is probably best..
Not very sexy though is it. Winning a million quid, then doing nothing with it (on a tangible basis) for 30 odd years.
i'd at least pay off my mortgage with it first. But again thats oly enough to make you more comfortable. Not rich.
Yes, a million quid sounds like an awful lot, but really isn’t when you get down to it.
I guess most people would pay off their mortgage or move to a bigger house, buy a new car (not a Lamborghini), help out some family and friends with loans, have a big party, maybe take a year off and do a round-the-world trip of a lifetime - then come back down to earth and realise half the money’s gone and it’s back to the grind.
£10m on the other hand, you could live quite happily for life on the investment income.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Edit ....and the Palestinian flags were a very smart idea.
I'd use the Palestinian flags on Tory graphics in Peterborough, Poole, Portished, Penarth, Portsmouth etc
LABOUR: PALESTINE OVER NSERT TOWN/CITY NAME HERE
I think you miss the point. It's a quiet reminder that concern for the plight of the Palestinians is a popular and legitimate cause and should not be confused with antisemitism.
I think that’s right. The Palestinians aren’t a particularly ‘popular’ cause, but I suspect there’s widespread unease over the way they’ve been, and are being treated. Maybe at a low level, but it’s there.
Undoubtedly that price.
That is a very fair comment.
Unfortunately, the Conservative party is also willing to give succour to virulent anti-Semites. The UK's moral compass has gone missing.
Yes it has. It is very very sad. Against that, I'm afraid, I find policies about solar panels a bit of a second order issue.
For me my oldest friend contemplating leaving England if Labour come to power because of its attitudes to Jews (sadly echoing the decision of her parents to leave Germany and come to this country) is a far more important determinant of my vote than the possibility of Labour giving me an allotment (a lifelong dream) or subsidising my solar panels or green roofs, all policies I support.
It's horrible. I finally realised I had made a mistake in returning to Labour when I realised I was embarrassed to tell Jewish friends and colleagues that I was a Labour party member. I genuinely could not look them in the eye. That is no way to be. The choices voters now have are just appalling and the message that both our main parties are sending to the world is shameful.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Thats true. My 'marginal' rate of tax is 42%, being higher rate and 2% NI. If it was higher than that, certainly over 50%, my motivation to work more for the government than for me would be diminished somewhat.
Thats why I'm of the opinion that rates of taxation should never exceed 50%. thats not the case in our system currently, with marginal rates of 60% being in place.
It'd be the insurance that frightens me. I don't know if that's a valid fear, though.
You can bring it down to a level of merely ludicrous with a massive excess. When I had my 993 GT2 (which was far from new when I had it) I had a 10k excess so unless I wrote it off in a ball of fire I would have been better not off having any insure at all.
My Track Pig 996 is not old enough to be appreciating in value nor new enough to be worth serious money so it's about 600 quid/year TPF&T. My 993 Carrera 2S which ten years older costs twice as much. Fuck knows how they work it all out.
As Sandpit observes it's the consumables that kill you. I flat spotted a new set of Nitto NT01s at a track day in the 996 earlier this year. 1600 quid.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Exactly. The 40% rate has a big impact on he number of hours worked by skilled workers. When I was in my 20s and saving for a deposit, the idea of working Sundays for a net £9/hour really didn’t appeal any more, so hours were worked up to the 20% limit.
Mr. Observer, I do appreciate your dilemma (obviously you want Labour to be a party that is what it was, rather than what it has become). But I hope that others come to the same conclusion as you, and rapidly.
Ironically, if the boundary changes go through and Labour goes for comprehensive reselections, that could lead (we can but hope) to sane Labour MPs finally plucking up the courage to split.
It'd be the insurance that frightens me. I don't know if that's a valid fear, though.
You can bring it down to a level of merely ludicrous with a massive excess. When I had my 993 GT2 (which was far from new when I had it) I had a 10k excess so unless I wrote it off in a ball of fire I would have been better not off having any insure at all.
My Track Pig 996 is not old enough to be appreciating in value nor new enough to be worth serious money so it's about 600 quid/year TPF&T. My 993 Carrera 2S which ten years older costs twice as much. Fuck knows how they work it all out.
As Sandpit observes it's the consumables that kill you. I flat spotted a new set of Nitto NT01s at a track day in the 996 earlier this year. 1600 quid.
Edit ....and the Palestinian flags were a very smart idea.
I'd use the Palestinian flags on Tory graphics in Peterborough, Poole, Portished, Penarth, Portsmouth etc
LABOUR: PALESTINE OVER NSERT TOWN/CITY NAME HERE
I think you miss the point. It's a quiet reminder that concern for the plight of the Palestinians is a popular and legitimate cause and should not be confused with antisemitism.
I think that’s right. The Palestinians aren’t a particularly ‘popular’ cause, but I suspect there’s widespread unease over the way they’ve been, and are being treated. Maybe at a low level, but it’s there.
Undoubtedly that price.
That is a very fair comment.
Unfortunately, the Conservative party is also willing to give succour to virulent anti-Semites. The UK's moral compass has gone missing.
Yes it has. It is very very sad. Against that, I'm afraid, I find policies about solar panels a bit of a second order issue.
For me my oldest friend contemplating leaving England if Labour come to power because of its attitudes to Jews (sadly echoing the decision of her parents to leave Germany and come to this country) is a far more important determinant of my vote than the possibility of Labour giving me an allotment (a lifelong dream) or subsidising my solar panels or green roofs, all policies I support.
It's horrible. I finally realised I had made a mistake in returning to Labour when I realised I was embarrassed to tell Jewish friends and colleagues that I was a Labour party member. I genuinely could not look them in the eye. That is no way to be. The choices voters now have are just appalling and the message that both our main parties are sending to the world is shameful.
I came to similar conclusions some time back. I had thought, at one point, that Labour might be an option since the Libs disappeared and the Tories went insane...
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Exactly. The 40% rate has a big impact on he number of hours worked by skilled workers. When I was in my 20s and saving for a deposit, the idea of working Sundays for a net £9/hour really didn’t appeal any more, so hours were worked up to the 20% limit.
In other words the £30 or 40k p.a. means you don't have to work Sundays any more which sounds like a decent trade to me.
Edit ....and the Palestinian flags were a very smart idea.
I'd use the Palestinian flags on Tory graphics in Peterborough, Poole, Portished, Penarth, Portsmouth etc
LABOUR: PALESTINE OVER NSERT TOWN/CITY NAME HERE
I think you miss the point. It's a quiet reminder that concern for the plight of the Palestinians is a popular and legitimate cause and should not be confused with antisemitism.
I think that’s right. The Palestinians aren’t a particularly ‘popular’ cause, but I suspect there’s widespread unease over the way they’ve been, and are being treated. Maybe at a low level, but it’s there.
Undoubtedly that price.
That is a very fair comment.
Unfortunately, the Conservative party is also willing to give succour to virulent anti-Semites. The UK's moral compass has gone missing.
Yes it has. It is very very sad. Against that, I'm afraid, I find policies about solar panels a bit of a second order issue.
For me my oldest friend contemplating leaving England if Labour come to power because of its attitudes to Jews (sadly echoing the decision of her parents to leave Germany and come to this country) is a far more important determinant of my vote than the possibility of Labour giving me an allotment (a lifelong dream) or subsidising my solar panels or green roofs, all policies I support.
It's horrible. I finally realised I had made a mistake in returning to Labour when I realised I was embarrassed to tell Jewish friends and colleagues that I was a Labour party member. I genuinely could not look them in the eye. That is no way to be. The choices voters now have are just appalling and the message that both our main parties are sending to the world is shameful.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Exactly. The 40% rate has a big impact on he number of hours worked by skilled workers. When I was in my 20s and saving for a deposit, the idea of working Sundays for a net £9/hour really didn’t appeal any more, so hours were worked up to the 20% limit.
In other words the £30 or 40k p.a. means you don't have to work Sundays any more which sounds like a decent trade to me.
But not when the country needs to pay for more health carers.
Maybe we should have work done on day 6 and day 7 at half tax?
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Thats true. My 'marginal' rate of tax is 42%, being higher rate and 2% NI. If it was higher than that, certainly over 50%, my motivation to work more for the government than for me would be diminished somewhat.
Thats why I'm of the opinion that rates of taxation should never exceed 50%. thats not the case in our system currently, with marginal rates of 60% being in place.
I have a client who was on £120k pa - that's a marginal rate of tax of 62%
He was fortunate that his employer let him go 4-days a week (the other option being to put excess over £100k in to his pension)
Edit ....and the Palestinian flags were a very smart idea.
I'd use the Palestinian flags on Tory graphics in Peterborough, Poole, Portished, Penarth, Portsmouth etc
LABOUR: PALESTINE OVER NSERT TOWN/CITY NAME HERE
I think you miss the point. It's a quiet reminder that concern for the plight of the Palestinians is a popular and legitimate cause and should not be confused with antisemitism.
I think that’s right. The Palestinians aren’t a particularly ‘popular’ cause, but I suspect there’s widespread unease over the way they’ve been, and are being treated. Maybe at a low level, but it’s there.
Undoubtedly that price.
That is a very fair comment.
Unfortunately, the Conservative party is also willing to give succour to virulent anti-Semites. The UK's moral compass has gone missing.
Yes it has. It is very very sad. Against that, I'm afraid, I find policies about solar panels a bit of a second order issue.
For me my oldest friend contemplating leaving England if Labour come to power because of its attitudes to Jews (sadly echoing the decision of her parents to leave Germany and come to this country) is a far more important determinant of my vote than the possibility of Labour giving me an allotment (a lifelong dream) or subsidising my solar panels or green roofs, all policies I support.
It's horrible. I finally realised I had made a mistake in returning to Labour when I realised I was embarrassed to tell Jewish friends and colleagues that I was a Labour party member. I genuinely could not look them in the eye. That is no way to be. The choices voters now have are just appalling and the message that both our main parties are sending to the world is shameful.
I came to similar conclusions some time back. I had thought, at one point, that Labour might be an option since the Libs disappeared and the Tories went insane...
But no - there is no one to vote for.
Labour Party Conference attendees all waving Palestinian flags is one of the more absurd moments in British politics I have seen and there have been quite a few of late.
Mine was fucked. I made a few quid parting it out though.
A 'normal' 993 Turbo is a much better car as it has less turbo lag and doesn't have high speed cornering like this: understeer, understeer, understeer, OVERSTEER. My GT2 couldn't stay with a well driven Lancer Evolution or GTR on a touge run. They just weren't built for the road.
The GT2 motor in a 4WD 993 Turbo chassis would be a good package.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Exactly. The 40% rate has a big impact on he number of hours worked by skilled workers. When I was in my 20s and saving for a deposit, the idea of working Sundays for a net £9/hour really didn’t appeal any more, so hours were worked up to the 20% limit.
In other words the £30 or 40k p.a. means you don't have to work Sundays any more which sounds like a decent trade to me.
I was in the fortunate situation that virtually unlimited overtime and on-call work was available, working for a software company. I’d have happily worked a lot more hours than I did, but hitting the 40% tax bracket was a pain in the arse and changed thoughts of whether any additional overtime was worth it. Several of us thought the same at the time.
From memory over time, the level of earnings where you pay 40% income tax has come down in real terms thanks to fiscal drag, so there’s likely to be many more people in a similar situation today.
So, Britain actually leads the world in decarbonising amongst large economies and has been doing for several years (since about 2011/12 or so). Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
More or less the time when Lib Dem ministers in the good old Coalition Government had the initiative and energy portfolio. A pity that later the all-Tory government decided to sell off the Green Investment Bank though. And now the extreme Corbynites are starting to catch up, and even overtake the Tories on this.
Mine was fucked. I made a few quid parting it out though.
A 'normal' 993 Turbo is a much better car as it has less turbo lag and doesn't have high speed cornering like this: understeer, understeer, understeer, OVERSTEER. My GT2 couldn't stay with a well driven Lancer Evolution or GTR on a touge run. They just weren't built for the road.
Edit ....and the Palestinian flags were a very smart idea.
I'd use the Palestinian flags on Tory graphics in Peterborough, Poole, Portished, Penarth, Portsmouth etc
LABOUR: PALESTINE OVER NSERT TOWN/CITY NAME HERE
I think you miss the point. It's a quiet reminder that concern for the plight of the Palestinians is a popular and legitimate cause and should not be confused with antisemitism.
I think that’s right. The Palestinians aren’t a particularly ‘popular’ cause, but I suspect there’s widespread unease over the way they’ve been, and are being treated. Maybe at a low level, but it’s there.
Undoubtedly that price.
That is a very fair comment.
Unfortunately, the Conservative party is also willing to give succour to virulent anti-Semites. The UK's moral compass has gone missing.
Yes it has. It is very very sad. Against that, I'm afraid, I find policies about solar panels a bit of a second order issue.
For me my oldest friend contemplating leaving England if Labour come to power because of its attitudes to Jews (sadly echoing the decision of her parents to leave Germany and come to this country) is a far more important determinant of my vote than the possibility of Labour giving me an allotment (a lifelong dream) or subsidising my solar panels or green roofs, all policies I support.
It's horrible. I finally realised I had made a mistake in returning to Labour when I realised I was embarrassed to tell Jewish friends and colleagues that I was a Labour party member. I genuinely could not look them in the eye. That is no way to be. The choices voters now have are just appalling and the message that both our main parties are sending to the world is shameful.
What was your local party like?
I never went! I only rejoined to get a vote. When I was a member previously, though, there was no real rancour. The CLP is broadly pro-Corbyn, but not obsessively so and Matt Western, our MP, is a decent bloke who gets business, keeps his head down and sticks resolutely to local issues.
Edit ....and the Palestinian flags were a very smart idea.
I'd use the Palestinian flags on Tory graphics in Peterborough, Poole, Portished, Penarth, Portsmouth etc
LABOUR: PALESTINE OVER NSERT TOWN/CITY NAME HERE
I think you miss the point. It's a quiet reminder that concern for the plight of the Palestinians is a popular and legitimate cause and should not be confused with antisemitism.
I think that’s right. The Palestinians aren’t a particularly ‘popular’ cause, but I suspect there’s widespread unease over the way they’ve been, and are being treated. Maybe at a low level, but it’s there.
Undoubtedly that price.
That is a very fair comment.
Unfortunately, the Conservative party is also willing to give succour to virulent anti-Semites. The UK's moral compass has gone missing.
Yes it has. It is very very sad. Against that, I'm afraid, I find policies about solar panels a bit of a second order issue.
For me my oldest friend contemplating leaving England if Labour come to power because of its attitudes to Jews (sadly echoing the decision of her parents to leave Germany and come to this country) is a far more important determinant of my vote than the possibility of Labour giving me an allotment (a lifelong dream) or subsidising my solar panels or green roofs, all policies I support.
It's horrible. I finally realised I had made a mistake in returning to Labour when I realised I was embarrassed to tell Jewish friends and colleagues that I was a Labour party member. I genuinely could not look them in the eye. That is no way to be. The choices voters now have are just appalling and the message that both our main parties are sending to the world is shameful.
I came to similar conclusions some time back. I had thought, at one point, that Labour might be an option since the Libs disappeared and the Tories went insane...
But no - there is no one to vote for.
Is it not worth looking at the results in your constituency and seeing who the main non Con/Lab/UKIP challenger is? Seems a shame to not vote.
It's long been my experience that every new pledge to a Party Conference comes with its own bucket of salt attached. It's not, as someone said earlier, post-reality politics at all, it's normal aspirational politics.
All parties are, I genuinely believe, sincere in wanting Britain to be a better place for the majority (though not all) of its people and each Party sincerely believes its policies and ideas are the way to achieve that.
All are flawed to some degree because, to be honest, if there was an easy solution it would have been implemented by now. Politics therefore comes down to either hoping, pace Micawber, that "something will turn up" in terms of human ingenuity providing as solution (as we've seen and are seeing with energy consumption) or taking a potentially divisive cultural solution based on an ideological premise.
The strength of Government should come from the proactive recognition of future problems and the devising of imaginative responses. All too often, Government becomes reactive - climate change, the impact of mass immigration, changes in lifestyle brought on by huge technological advances which permeate every facet of our lives.
Is that an argument for technocracy over ideology? Not necessarily, it's more about the quality of what you do rather than the way you choose to do it.
Mine was fucked. I made a few quid parting it out though.
A 'normal' 993 Turbo is a much better car as it has less turbo lag and doesn't have high speed cornering like this: understeer, understeer, understeer, OVERSTEER. My GT2 couldn't stay with a well driven Lancer Evolution or GTR on a touge run. They just weren't built for the road.
The GT2 motor in a 4WD 993 Turbo chassis would be a good package.
The reason they’re so valuable now is that there’s not many left. Most of them have hit something solid rear-end first not long after the boost came on. Proper widowmaker of a car.
I like your idea of an engine transplant to make a 4wd one, that would be slightly more manageable in the real world. A boggo 993T is now six figures though.
I’m looking at picking up a high miles 996 or 997 for some weekend fun at the moment, they’re dirt cheap over here and I live literally round the corner from the local track.
Edit ....and the Palestinian flags were a very smart idea.
I'd use the Palestinian flags on Tory graphics in Peterborough, Poole, Portished, Penarth, Portsmouth etc
LABOUR: PALESTINE OVER NSERT TOWN/CITY NAME HERE
I think you miss the point. It's a quiet reminder that concern for the plight of the Palestinians is a popular and legitimate cause and should not be confused with antisemitism.
I think that’s right. The Palestinians aren’t a particularly ‘popular’ cause, but I suspect there’s widespread unease over the way they’ve been, and are being treated. Maybe at a low level, but it’s there.
Undoubtedly that price.
That is a very fair comment.
Unfortunately, the Conservative party is also willing to give succour to virulent anti-Semites. The UK's moral compass has gone missing.
Yes it has. It is very very sad. Against that, I'm afraid, I find policies about solar panels a bit of a second order issue.
For me my oldest friend contemplating leaving England if Labour come to power because of its attitudes to Jews (sadly echoing the decision of her parents to leave Germany and come to this country) is a far more important determinant of my vote than the possibility of Labour giving me an allotment (a lifelong dream) or subsidising my solar panels or green roofs, all policies I support.
It's horrible. I finally realised I had made a mistake in returning to Labour when I realised I was embarrassed to tell Jewish friends and colleagues that I was a Labour party member. I genuinely could not look them in the eye. That is no way to be. The choices voters now have are just appalling and the message that both our main parties are sending to the world is shameful.
I came to similar conclusions some time back. I had thought, at one point, that Labour might be an option since the Libs disappeared and the Tories went insane...
But no - there is no one to vote for.
Labour Party Conference attendees all waving Palestinian flags is one of the more absurd moments in British politics I have seen and there have been quite a few of late.
Will contrast dramatically with the Conservative conference all waving union flags.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Yes, but that is the same for anyone who enters the higher rate tax band. By your argument no-one should be liable for 40% tax. He has landed a massive windfall and ~£30k pa in unearned income, so I really don't see the issue here. If you are suggesting we'd be better off with a flat tax structure then at least that is a valid position. You seem to be heading into an intellectual muddle here. What do you suggest instead? HMRC's position on this is quite right.
Mr. Anazina, maybe. Maybe taking a sample size of one and then using that to categorise an entire population is unwise. Perhaps you looked at the last Islamic terror attack and concluded all Muslims are murderers. Perhaps you looked at acid attacks in London, and concluded all Londoners are perpetrators or victims of barbaric violence.
Or perhaps you concluded that individuals are not necessarily perfect representations of everyone with whom they share a demographic, and that pretending otherwise is somewhat infantile.
I am not suggesting all Yorkshiremen are like that, but there is a lot of it about, sadly.
I see it on here – people from West Yorkshire who make snotty, nigh-on bigoted, remarks about Londoners and Frenchmen, having never even visited London or France.
Funny old world.
I doubt there is a single person on here that matches that description.
Plus you have had a sense of humour bypass if you think mocking the cheese eating surrender monkeys is nigh-on bigoted.
Morris Dancer has never visited London, or France. I know this because he admits it on here, while concurrently making xenophobic comments about French people and indeed doing the tired old PB That London thing.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Yes, but that is the same for anyone who enters the higher rate tax band. By your argument no-one should be liable for 40% tax. He has landed a massive windfall and ~£30k pa in unearned income, so I really don't see the issue here. If you are suggesting we'd be better off with a flat tax structure then at least that is a valid position. You seem to be heading into an intellectual muddle here. What do you suggest instead? HMRC's position on this is quite right.
I think that's precisely what he's suggesting.
HMRC's position on this isn't right if it is discouraging people from working. It's the same as the 'poverty trap' that keeps people on welfare wanting to only precisely 16 hours as if they lose more they'll lose their benefits.
Our tax and benefit system is far too complicated and creates too many cliff-edge losers. A simple flat 'negative income tax' would solve this and ensure that everyone is better off whenever they work more - both skilled workers like electricians and those entering the workforce like the 16 hours unskilled at the moment.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Yes, but that is the same for anyone who enters the higher rate tax band. By your argument no-one should be liable for 40% tax. He has landed a massive windfall and ~£30k pa in unearned income, so I really don't see the issue here. If you are suggesting we'd be better off with a flat tax structure then at least that is a valid position. You seem to be heading into an intellectual muddle here. What do you suggest instead? HMRC's position on this is quite right.
I think that's precisely what he's suggesting.
HMRC's position on this isn't right if it is discouraging people from working. It's the same as the 'poverty trap' that keeps people on welfare wanting to only precisely 16 hours as if they lose more they'll lose their benefits.
Our tax and benefit system is far too complicated and creates too many cliff-edge losers. A simple flat 'negative income tax' would solve this and ensure that everyone is better off whenever they work more - both skilled workers like electricians and those entering the workforce like the 16 hours unskilled at the moment.
Sorry. You are now going down the drains with this. Some people will ALWAYS find a reason not to do extra work. What do you suggest should happen to his friend? That the interest isn't taxed? So, someone who lands a huge unearned windfall gets tax-free income off the interest but someone one PAYE earning a salary of £50k, has to pay 40% tax on any bonus? Hardly a fair system.
Mr. Anazina, maybe. Maybe taking a sample size of one and then using that to categorise an entire population is unwise. Perhaps you looked at the last Islamic terror attack and concluded all Muslims are murderers. Perhaps you looked at acid attacks in London, and concluded all Londoners are perpetrators or victims of barbaric violence.
Or perhaps you concluded that individuals are not necessarily perfect representations of everyone with whom they share a demographic, and that pretending otherwise is somewhat infantile.
I am not suggesting all Yorkshiremen are like that, but there is a lot of it about, sadly.
I see it on here – people from West Yorkshire who make snotty, nigh-on bigoted, remarks about Londoners and Frenchmen, having never even visited London or France.
Funny old world.
I doubt there is a single person on here that matches that description.
Plus you have had a sense of humour bypass if you think mocking the cheese eating surrender monkeys is nigh-on bigoted.
Morris Dancer has never visited London, or France. I know this because he admits it on here, while concurrently making xenophobic comments about French people and indeed doing the tired old PB That London thing.
Morris Dancer makes really obvious jokes unless you think he really has a trebuchet. Sense of humour bypass indeed.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Yes, but that is the same for anyone who enters the higher rate tax band. By your argument no-one should be liable for 40% tax. He has landed a massive windfall and ~£30k pa in unearned income, so I really don't see the issue here. If you are suggesting we'd be better off with a flat tax structure then at least that is a valid position. You seem to be heading into an intellectual muddle here. What do you suggest instead? HMRC's position on this is quite right.
I think that's precisely what he's suggesting.
HMRC's position on this isn't right if it is discouraging people from working. It's the same as the 'poverty trap' that keeps people on welfare wanting to only precisely 16 hours as if they lose more they'll lose their benefits.
Our tax and benefit system is far too complicated and creates too many cliff-edge losers. A simple flat 'negative income tax' would solve this and ensure that everyone is better off whenever they work more - both skilled workers like electricians and those entering the workforce like the 16 hours unskilled at the moment.
This is why I want to see someone like Michael Gove as Chancellor. The income tax, NI and benefits system is utterly unfit for purpose, needs throwing away and starting with a clean sheet of paper.
Preferably a sheet or two, rather than a book or two as we have now.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Yes, but that is the same for anyone who enters the higher rate tax band. By your argument no-one should be liable for 40% tax. He has landed a massive windfall and ~£30k pa in unearned income, so I really don't see the issue here. If you are suggesting we'd be better off with a flat tax structure then at least that is a valid position. You seem to be heading into an intellectual muddle here. What do you suggest instead? HMRC's position on this is quite right.
Its a simple issue, he has a £1 million quid in the bank, if he keeps on working his hourly rate will reduce significantly. Therefore he is not going to carry on working on PAYE and is going to enjoy his windfall. He is only 28 so the idea of putting his money into a pension as it is tax efficient does not appeal to him. The current tax structure is fine, and the implications of the current tax structure for him is also totally correct. I was just stating what his reaction to it are, that his incentive to carry on working has been taken away which again is perfectly understandable. I was using this point to demonstrate what a person is likely to do when his incentive to work or wealth create is reduced, taxing more does not always lead to more taxes being collected.
How is your friend paying top rate tax? He is just paying 40% higher rate, not the additional (top) rate as you suggest. Like most people on here he is in the 40% tax band. It is rather like saying I have no incentive to work harder because I pay the higher rate. Are you suggesting he shouldn't have to pay income tax on the interest?
Sounds to me like the Camelot adviser gave shockingly bad advice - maybe even tot he extent of being negligent. Good luck with moving to America and living off £1 million without working.
Indeed. The advisor sounds like an utter clown.
He is not a clown, the electricians hourly rate after the new tax rate is taken into account will reduce by about 30%. Therefore his incentive to work on PAYE is vastly reduced. As an electrician the only way to increase his pay to make up for this is to do loads more hours but why would he? I am not suggesting that he should not be liable for the tax on interest at all. He has just shown normal human nature.
Yes, but that is the same for anyone who enters the higher rate tax band. By your argument no-one should be liable for 40% tax. He has landed a massive windfall and ~£30k pa in unearned income, so I really don't see the issue here. If you are suggesting we'd be better off with a flat tax structure then at least that is a valid position. You seem to be heading into an intellectual muddle here. What do you suggest instead? HMRC's position on this is quite right.
I don't know if he has a mortgage, but if he does, he can use the money to pay that off and leave the rest as an investment to build up for his pension (so reducing his need to make pension contributions, of course). It's not glamorous, but it will increase his current spending power significantly, while being very tax efficient.
Comments
They do eat tyres, brakes and clutches if used as intended though, which add up very quickly - and whatever you do don’t damage any bodywork, which is really very expensive indeed! It’s quite possible to get a £30k bill after a year if it’s not been looked after carefully.
Jobs need to be paid for. If each job is paid the media salary of approx. £27,000, then that is £10.8 billion per year in wages (assuming these are not temporary jobs).
Whilst there may be some savings compared to 'traditional' power, it seems like rather a lot.
Putting it another way: 1,2 million people work in the NHS. Will a third of that number really be employable in the green energy sector?
£1m sounds like a huge sum, but it's not really. It's enough so that the average person doesn't have to work and keep the current lifestyle of an average person. Or it's enough that you can be well off if you carry on working.
It's not enough so that you don't have to work, but be rich as well. It's simply not. To get to that bracket, you really need multiple millions.
As for the subbie, its certainly true that if you wanted that money to provide income without spending the capital, it'll be taxed. Guessing a good sparkie can earn 30-40k, so the interest/investment income would be taxed at the higher rate. So the 30k pa its giving him, is really only 18k or so post tax.
which is 'nice' but when it's coming down to £1,500 extra per month, it's not so impressive.
I just don't get why you would want to own a super car. Do a track day, I get, but actually owning them, you might as well keep your log burner going in the winter sticking bundles of £10s in it, as it would be cheaper.
Anyway, last couple of races both had 4 DNFs, and in both cases 3/4 were on the first lap.
Carbon intensity (carbon use against GDP) has fallen by about half since 2000, with economic growth of 31% set against total energy consumption being down/i> by 13% (and the carbon use of that energy consumption being seriously reduced).
Possibly a bad day for Georges Monbiot to complain that reduction in carbon requires reduction in economic growth, but few readers will know or care about the reality, I guess.
For me my oldest friend contemplating leaving England if Labour come to power because of its attitudes to Jews (sadly echoing the decision of her parents to leave Germany and come to this country) is a far more important determinant of my vote than the possibility of Labour giving me an allotment (a lifelong dream) or subsidising my solar panels or green roofs, all policies I support.
Sounds like conference has been hood-winked.
I am not suggesting all Yorkshiremen are like that, but there is a lot of it about, sadly.
I see it on here – people from West Yorkshire who make snotty, nigh-on bigoted, remarks about Londoners and Frenchmen, having never even visited London or France.
Funny old world.
Plus you have had a sense of humour bypass if you think mocking the cheese eating surrender monkeys is nigh-on bigoted.
There are lots of other quality-of-life issues that you can't buy with money, and you rely on the government for. The classic one is pollution; For instance, there's lots of (anecdotal) evidence about rich people leaving China to get away from the pollution. This argument would make as much sense or more deployed in the service of funding for the arts, or public transport (if only to keep the unwashed masses from blocking the roads) or policing.
HartlepoolBiggleswade. You have tons and tons of money and this is just one more outlet for you to spend it on. What it costs in 100s or 1,000s is neither here nor there to you.Good video from a guy who used to own an exotic car rental company, about the economics of running expensive cars
youtube.com/watch?v=OpRzPVjNGNc
He will face considerable healthcare insurance costs that are gratis here in lieu of direct taxation I think also
(Admittedly they've got a long way yet to go, with a carbon intensity two to three times that of us in the UK, but they're well ahead of the G20 average rate)
Do you have a link to these figures?
i'd at least pay off my mortgage with it first. But again thats oly enough to make you more comfortable. Not rich.
Mr. Sandpit, yeah, but it's only 1.66, so I'd probably prefer not to.
Mr. Anazina, and here was I thinking that myself and Mr. T (and Mr. Cooke, I think) were the only fiction writers here.
It's like when La Gloire and HMS Warrior made wooden ships obsolete overnight in 1860 (or HMS Dreadnought forty years later): they also made all the Royal Navy's ships obsolete, allowing competitors to start at a level playing field.
It's their hobby, so fair enough. But they don't seem to get the same derision that golfers seem to get.
(I could also say the same about long-distance walking: I once calculated I was carrying over a grand's worth of kit on me.)
Electrical supply costs effectively have two components - the cost of generating the electricity itself & the cost of maintaining supply 24/7. In effect, domestic solar 'customers' are getting to use the grid as an instantly available, effectively infinite capacity (relative to their requirements) battery, which (more importantly) they don't have to pay for. It's not surprising that this was a great deal for domestic solar installers & that the subsidies were eventually going to go away once the solar supply threatened to reach the point that it actually threatened the stability of the grid (Note that I have no idea whether this point had actually been reached - just that it was inevitable eventually.)
See the “Power Grid Stability and Rooftop Solar” section of https://syonyk.blogspot.com/2018/05/why-typical-home-solar-setup-does-not-work-off-grid.html for some gory details.
It takes a long time to get your head round these things, believe me.
I guess most people would pay off their mortgage or move to a bigger house, buy a new car (not a Lamborghini), help out some family and friends with loans, have a big party, maybe take a year off and do a round-the-world trip of a lifetime - then come back down to earth and realise half the money’s gone and it’s back to the grind.
£10m on the other hand, you could live quite happily for life on the investment income.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1044873499540680704?s=21
Thats why I'm of the opinion that rates of taxation should never exceed 50%. thats not the case in our system currently, with marginal rates of 60% being in place.
My Track Pig 996 is not old enough to be appreciating in value nor new enough to be worth serious money so it's about 600 quid/year TPF&T. My 993 Carrera 2S which ten years older costs twice as much. Fuck knows how they work it all out.
As Sandpit observes it's the consumables that kill you. I flat spotted a new set of Nitto NT01s at a track day in the 996 earlier this year. 1600 quid.
Ironically, if the boundary changes go through and Labour goes for comprehensive reselections, that could lead (we can but hope) to sane Labour MPs finally plucking up the courage to split.
Well. It's a nice thought.
(Changing posting name to 'miserable git')
https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/buying-maintenance/news/a30706/this-porsche-911-gt2-tho/
But no - there is no one to vote for.
Maybe we should have work done on day 6 and day 7 at half tax?
He was fortunate that his employer let him go 4-days a week (the other option being to put excess over £100k in to his pension)
A 'normal' 993 Turbo is a much better car as it has less turbo lag and doesn't have high speed cornering like this: understeer, understeer, understeer, OVERSTEER. My GT2 couldn't stay with a well driven Lancer Evolution or GTR on a touge run. They just weren't built for the road.
The GT2 motor in a 4WD 993 Turbo chassis would be a good package.
From memory over time, the level of earnings where you pay 40% income tax has come down in real terms thanks to fiscal drag, so there’s likely to be many more people in a similar situation today.
It's long been my experience that every new pledge to a Party Conference comes with its own bucket of salt attached. It's not, as someone said earlier, post-reality politics at all, it's normal aspirational politics.
All parties are, I genuinely believe, sincere in wanting Britain to be a better place for the majority (though not all) of its people and each Party sincerely believes its policies and ideas are the way to achieve that.
All are flawed to some degree because, to be honest, if there was an easy solution it would have been implemented by now. Politics therefore comes down to either hoping, pace Micawber, that "something will turn up" in terms of human ingenuity providing as solution (as we've seen and are seeing with energy consumption) or taking a potentially divisive cultural solution based on an ideological premise.
The strength of Government should come from the proactive recognition of future problems and the devising of imaginative responses. All too often, Government becomes reactive - climate change, the impact of mass immigration, changes in lifestyle brought on by huge technological advances which permeate every facet of our lives.
Is that an argument for technocracy over ideology? Not necessarily, it's more about the quality of what you do rather than the way you choose to do it.
I like your idea of an engine transplant to make a 4wd one, that would be slightly more manageable in the real world. A boggo 993T is now six figures though.
I’m looking at picking up a high miles 996 or 997 for some weekend fun at the moment, they’re dirt cheap over here and I live literally round the corner from the local track.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/25/mep-expenses-eu-court-ruling
What a shower of shit they are.
HMRC's position on this isn't right if it is discouraging people from working. It's the same as the 'poverty trap' that keeps people on welfare wanting to only precisely 16 hours as if they lose more they'll lose their benefits.
Our tax and benefit system is far too complicated and creates too many cliff-edge losers. A simple flat 'negative income tax' would solve this and ensure that everyone is better off whenever they work more - both skilled workers like electricians and those entering the workforce like the 16 hours unskilled at the moment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax
Preferably a sheet or two, rather than a book or two as we have now.
Your foot-stamping squeals because I refuse to recant the non-PC heresy of using the term 'frogs' is quite entertaining.
Mr. Thompson, blasphemy! You'll be suggesting I don't live in a castle or genetically engineer land-walking superfish next.
And don't dare question my enormous man cannon.