Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Brace yourselves for the impending train wreck of the Brexit n

245

Comments

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    O/T

    "The number of people leaving London has jumped more than 80 per cent in the past five years, with more than 93,000 people departing the capital last year, figures have suggested.
    Research by Savills shows the exodus is being led by those in their 30s, with the number of those between the ages of 30 and 39 leaving the capital rising 68 per cent between 2012 and 2016, to 34,540."

    http://www.cityam.com/269004/exodus-number-people-moving-out-london-has-risen-80-per
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/24/bloated-london-property-prices-fuelling-exodus-from-capital
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,098
    edited July 2017


    Have you explained to them that their debt is tax and that you paid more tax at their age than they do?

    Are you sure this is the case ?

    Employer NI (13.8%) + Employee NI (12%) + PAYE (20%) + Student Loan (9%) on everything over 21,000 is a "decent" marginal tax rate.

    What was the tax on 20k 30 years back and 45k for a plan II graduate now - those are reasonably comparable figures with inflation and so forth (And in terms of purchasing property the 20k went ALOT further than 45k today...) ?

    My tables show the 'true tax' burden on a salary of 40k for a plan II graduate is 39% right now.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,163

    Had the German Army gone for France directly, and not involved Belguim things might well have been different. In spite of the Entente Cordiale.
    In terms of British involvement, that's certainly possible. There were good reasons why the German armies were directed through Belgium (and Luxembourg) rather than further south but then there were good reasons to go through the south of the Netherlands too and not create a bottleneck but the Germans decided to amend their plans so as not to bring the Dutch in.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,010

    Have you explained to them that their debt is tax and that you paid more tax at their age than they do?

    As I say, they have no real issue with the loans.
  • I tend to take a better view of French, Haig and the other leaders of the day than some. What were they supposed to do? They couldn't sit on the defensive for three years and wait for tanks to be developed and ultimately, the staffs did develop tactics which won the war (it's not as if the French, German, Austrian, American or Russian generals had any greater success).

    The casualties at Waterloo or Borodino 100 years earlier were proportionately comparable to those at the Somme (about 20% of the forces engaged). Likewise those in Normandy in WW2 were similar to those in WW1.

    Britain has generally sought to use proxies to do the land fighting because the cost and manpower in policing the sea required it. But the casualties in sea battles have always been lower. I think Trafalgar was about 7,000 killed and wounded among both sides.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,138
    We'd be better off at the back of the queue no doubt

    https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/889828832731181056
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    Read the subject line.

    "Let me guess: Meeks".

    Scroll to bottom.

    Go straight to the comments.
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    FF43 said:

    Repost my contribution to the last thread, which is perhaps even more relevant to this one

    The problem is that the UK wants the product of the multilateral approach while having no understanding of the necessary structures that make that product possible. The EU on the other hand hasn't addressed the membership issue. They can say take it or leave it, but when people say, actually we will leave it, they might do better to be a bit more flexible within the constraints they do have.

    There won't be a war, even metaphorically. We wouldn't win it (metaphorically) either.

    I recommend this article for anyone interested in the EU position:

    https://twitter.com/WeyandSabine/status/889561390578638850
    The EU position seems to be that they shouldn't have to compromise on anything.

    As has been clear for a long time, if the EU wants "no deal" they can force it.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,540
    isam said:

    We'd be better off at the back of the queue no doubt

    I'm intensely relaxed about Trump becoming personally associated with our Brexit future.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,513

    The wisdom of crowds, eh? You must know some different crowds to me. In my experience, most crowds couldn't tell shit from clay.

    But maybe the Brexit crowd is different.
    The point isn't whether they can tell shit from clay, it's that collectively they have a sort of instinct. They got it right on Iraq for instance. Right to reject Scottish independence but vote in the SNP as a strong voice. And then punish the SNP for continuing to threaten independence.

    And I believe right to take us out of the EU, a system deliberately (and probably rightly, if you look at the EU as a whole) designed to transfer resources away from this country.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,098
    edited July 2017
    I make the taxation burden on a graduate earning 45,000 ~ 40.8% (If we regard a plan II loan as tax) as of now

    558.32 PAYE
    368.40 Employee NIC
    423.66 Employer NIC
    180 Student Tax (Monthly figures)

    And 38.9% for a 20,000 graduate in 1987.


    4745.25 Tax (20000 - 2425) * 0.27
    1155.96 Employee NIC (14820 - 1976) * .09
    1883.51 Employer NIC (20000 - 1976) * .1045
    (Annual figures)
  • isamisam Posts: 41,138
    edited July 2017
    I remember the days when IPSOS MORI was important, & no one cared about the EU...

    Ipsos MORI‏@IpsosMORI
    54% ABC1s cite #Brexit as most important issue vs. 25% of C2DEs http://bit.ly/2vVN02K #socialgrade

    A bloke who took the missus for granted is obsessed with getting her back now she's left him

  • isamisam Posts: 41,138
    edited July 2017

    I'm intensely relaxed about Trump becoming personally associated with our Brexit future.
    Phew that's a relief! I'll sleep easy tonight

    It would have been bad news for us if he had been a fan of the EU of course. Being a Remainer is WIN-WIN isn't it?!! :lol:
  • Pulpstar said:

    Are you sure this is the case ?

    Employer NI (13.8%) + Employee NI (12%) + PAYE (20%) + Student Loan (9%) on everything over 21,000 is a "decent" marginal tax rate.

    What was the tax on 20k 30 years back and 45k for a plan II graduate now - those are reasonably comparable figures with inflation and so forth (And in terms of purchasing property the 20k went ALOT further than 45k today...) ?

    My tables show the 'true tax' burden on a salary of 40k for a plan II graduate is 39% right now.
    I worked it out for my own case a month or so back.

    Roughly, in 1985 on my graduate starting salary of £8,500 a year, I lost 27% in tax and NI. That salary was 120% of the then average wage, so it's equivalent today would be £31k. On such a salary, a graduate today would pay 23% in tax and NI, a non-graduate 20%. They pay less, and when I was a graduate, non-graduates paid the same as graduates.

    What they perceive as debt is just a tax that takes their tax up to less than their parents paid.

    There is a good case for rebadging it as a graduate tax, however. What is stupid about it now is that the repayments are fixed at 9% of earnings above ~21k at the same time as the principal amount owed goes up because the interest rate on it is not fixed - it is some rate like 6%, which is a farcically high rate for long term borrowing stopped out of earnings. It should be something like BOE rate plus 0.25%, so that they can see it depleting.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    If we oldies really want to make the youngsters jealous, tell 'em about MIRAS...
  • Pulpstar said:

    I make the taxation burden on a graduate earning 45,000 ~ 40.8% (If we regard a plan II loan as tax) as of now

    558.32 PAYE
    368.40 Employee NIC
    423.66 Employer NIC
    180 Student Tax (Monthly figures)

    And 38.9% for a 20,000 graduate in 1987.


    4745.25 Tax (20000 - 2425) * 0.27
    1155.96 Employee NIC (14820 - 1976) * .09
    1883.51 Employer NIC (20000 - 1976) * .1045
    (Annual figures)

    £45k today would be £14k in 1987.
    https://www.measuringworth.com/ukcompare/relativevalue.php?use2=a:5:{i:0;s:3:"CPI";i:1;s:6:"DEFIND";i:2;s:4:"WAGE";i:3;s:5:"GDPCP";i:4;s:4:"GDPC";}&amount=14000&year_source=1987&year_result=2016&button=Submit
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    If we oldies really want to make the youngsters jealous, tell 'em about MIRAS...

    Lol tell them you could get double miras as a couple before 1988.Lawson ended it giving a future date , so a rush boom ensued then a collapse in the early nineties in house prices .Then to even it up tell them about the 15% interest rate and re possessions.Great times.
  • If we oldies really want to make the youngsters jealous, tell 'em about MIRAS...

    But then remind them what a video recorder cost in 1982 - £600 in Boots
    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/dec/19/price-christmas-past-boots-catalogue

    which is £1,800 in today's money. Today TV recording is basically free off the likes of iPlayer.

    In 1996 I bought my first laptop. It had Windows 95, a 13" screen and an 800mb hard drive; it cost £2,500 then, which is about £5,000 today. For £150 you can buy a better machine than that in Currys.

    I struggle to understand why anyone, whether Kipper or Corbynista, would want to live in the past. Having done so I am glad I no longer do.
  • Yorkcity said:

    Lol tell them you could get double miras as a couple before 1988.Lawson ended it giving a future date , so a rush boom ensued then a collapse in the early nineties in house prices .Then to even it up tell them about the 15% interest rate and re possessions.Great times.
    For consistency, any move to apply CGT to houses should be accompanied by the return of MIRAS, as in the USA.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    For consistency, any move to apply CGT to houses should be accompanied by the return of MIRAS, as in the USA.
    Alice I did not know that .How does the CGT work ? Do they take the price of the house when you bought it to when you sell it.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2017

    But then remind them what a video recorder cost in 1982 - £600 in Boots
    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/dec/19/price-christmas-past-boots-catalogue

    which is £1,800 in today's money. Today TV recording is basically free off the likes of iPlayer.

    In 1996 I bought my first laptop. It had Windows 95, a 13" screen and an 800mb hard drive; it cost £2,500 then, which is about £5,000 today. For £150 you can buy a better machine than that in Currys.

    I struggle to understand why anyone, whether Kipper or Corbynista, would want to live in the past. Having done so I am glad I no longer do.
    Let's be honest, people liked owning laptops and video players when most people couldn't afford them.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,540

    For consistency, any move to apply CGT to houses should be accompanied by the return of MIRAS, as in the USA.
    How about annual property taxes based on a percentage of the sale price, as in the USA?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,167
    Yorkcity said:

    Alice I did not know that .How does the CGT work ? Do they take the price of the house when you bought it to when you sell it.
    CGT on a residential home (as opposed to 2nd properties and rentals) is what civil servants call "brave, minister".

  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    For consistency, any move to apply CGT to houses should be accompanied by the return of MIRAS, as in the USA.
    My father was a jobbing speculative builder . I moved house 12 times as a child .As he bought and sold houses nearly each year.So he never had to pay CGT as it was his only residence.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    Read the subject line.

    "Let me guess: Meeks".

    Scroll to bottom.

    Go straight to the comments.

    You missed a piece which was mostly critical of the EU. Just the sort of thing to put some tension in your trousers, I'd have thought.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,242

    Except now when it's called 'the will of the people'.
    Are you saying the EU is simply Germany winning by politics what it failed to win by wars of aggression? If a Brexiteer said that there would be uproar.

    You'll be equating the whole thing with the Nazi's next.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,167
    isam said:

    We'd be better off at the back of the queue no doubt

    https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/889828832731181056

    Er, isn't Trump a protectionist who wants to Make America Great Again by protecting the rust belt from foreign imports of steel, ships, cars etc etc?
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    Anorak said:

    You missed a piece which was mostly critical of the EU. Just the sort of thing to put some tension in your trousers, I'd have thought.
    I have no interest in Meeks boring on about the EU. We've been subjected to it for months.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    CGT on a residential home (as opposed to 2nd properties and rentals) is what civil servants call "brave, minister".

    Very in the UK .I hate paying 20% Vat on repairs and improvements to my own house.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    I have no interest in Meeks boring on about the EU. We've been subjected to it for months.
    Luckily my irony meter exploded a long time ago.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    AndyJS said:

    Even more amazing is the fact that the Democrats seem to be completely failing to make any headway against him. Evidence is their lack of success in winning any of the fairly close special elections that have taken place over the last 9 months or so.
    Democrats seem to be making the mistakes of Miliband and the other Labour "moderates": thinking that they can just sit back and automatically get back into office purely because the incumbents are so obviously flawed, without actually promising anything better or particularly different themselves. I doubt it will work any better for the Democrats than it worked for Labour at the 2015 election.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,803
    So Ali thinks it's all going to be a disaster?

    Who knew!
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    For consistency, any move to apply CGT to houses should be accompanied by the return of MIRAS, as in the USA.
    If there were CGT on residential housing ....

    Why should you get Mortgage interest rate relief on a capital investment in your residence when you don't get interest rate relief on other investments?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,396
    Mr. 565, inertia is a powerful force.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited July 2017
    The solution to the profound intergenerational unfairness introduced by £9k tuition fees (+ the repayment structure) is to backdate them to existing graduates - without the 30 year cut off, reclaiming them from peoples estates if still unpaid at death.

    It would be great for the public finances.
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    Anorak said:

    Luckily my irony meter exploded a long time ago.
    I don't understand this, since I have never written above the line, being ineligible to do so as I have the wrong opinions for Smithson's taste.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,596
    RoyalBlue said:

    I think the problem would have been that it's almost impossible to go on the offensive purely with a navy. Even air power was quite limited in a strategic (as opposed to battlefield) sense until the advent of nukes.
    Yes, I agree and was certainly not suggesting that the Allies could win through naval power alone. It was however our main strength and we could have focused it on blockading Germany until we had the kind of land force that would make a real difference.

    Not sure you are right about Paris falling. I don't want to sound insouciant about the fate of Parisians, but strategically would it have mattered anyway? In the end, Germany lost for logistical reasons as much as anything and taking Paris, and other French cities, would have stretched their resources.

    Btw, let's not be dogmatic about this. We are by no means the first to differ on the subject!
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    I worked it out for my own case a month or so back.

    Roughly, in 1985 on my graduate starting salary of £8,500 a year, I lost 27% in tax and NI. That salary was 120% of the then average wage, so it's equivalent today would be £31k. On such a salary, a graduate today would pay 23% in tax and NI, a non-graduate 20%. They pay less, and when I was a graduate, non-graduates paid the same as graduates.

    What they perceive as debt is just a tax that takes their tax up to less than their parents paid.

    There is a good case for rebadging it as a graduate tax, however. What is stupid about it now is that the repayments are fixed at 9% of earnings above ~21k at the same time as the principal amount owed goes up because the interest rate on it is not fixed - it is some rate like 6%, which is a farcically high rate for long term borrowing stopped out of earnings. It should be something like BOE rate plus 0.25%, so that they can see it depleting.
    Alice_Aforethought should be made Minister of Education.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,803
    Friday is GDP day isn't it?

    Everyone getting suitably excited I hope? :D
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,396
    Mr. Gin, of course. Friday is the first day of Hungarian practice. And Traitor's Prize comes out.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,242
    edited July 2017
    FF43 said:

    We will paying not just in money terms but also in having less input into the stuff we do agree. There will be plenty of things we do want want but won't get. The EU has no interest in replicating its systems just for us because we don't like their membership. I doubt for example that we will retain our place in the medical isotypes clearing system. We will either have to create our production facilities at a significant cost or take a hit on the reliability of supplies. We won't be part of their open skies programme, drugs testing programme, financial services regulation and much more. All of these will have a major hit on investment and jobs.

    PS I don't expect net payments to EU countries to be much if any less than now, going forward. In fact we will WANT to pay, as a way of buying back some of the influence we have lost. Hypothesis to be tested, I grant you.
    Wild speculation based on no actual evidence at all I would suggest.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,242

    I have no interest in Meeks boring on about the EU. We've been subjected to it for months.
    As with almost all of Alastair's thread headers it is an excellent, balanced piece based on a well informed and neutral stance.

    He saves his bias for the comments below the line which shows admirable restraint.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,596

    IIRC, the blockade plan was the original grand strategy (and indeed, was ultimately an extremely important part in the winning of the war) but political pressure from the French, the Russians and the public would not have permitted Britain's troops to sit by while Paris was threatened - and later, as the casualties mounted.

    I tend to take a better view of French, Haig and the other leaders of the day than some. What were they supposed to do? They couldn't sit on the defensive for three years and wait for tanks to be developed and ultimately, the staffs did develop tactics which won the war (it's not as if the French, German, Austrian, American or Russian generals had any greater success). The unfortunate fact was that the war broke out at a time when the defender had an unusually strong advantage.

    Even so, I do wonder about your final point. Would a German victory have been so disastrous? To answer that does depend on when it happened. A war that ended by Christmas 1914, as it might have done had Joffre not performed miracles to reorganise his defensive line while the Germans bore down on Paris (something that the BEF did play a small but possibly critical role in), would have produced a different peace from one which dragged on to 1917 and saw France collapse after being bled white at Verdun. The simple answer is that I don't know. I do know, however, that by continuing past the summer of 1917 produced such horrific consequences for the rest of the 20th century that almost anything would have been better.
    Noted with thanks, David. We're fairly close on this (maybe not on the merits of French and Haig though) and I would love to continue, but they are racing at Chelmsford tonite.
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    As with almost all of Alastair's thread headers it is an excellent, balanced piece based on a well informed and neutral stance.
    Am I to infer that he didn't write the headline?
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Yorkcity said:

    Very in the UK .I hate paying 20% Vat on repairs and improvements to my own house.
    VAT on building extensions must be raking in a fair bit of tax for the government from London home improvements such as basement extensions.

    At least you don't have to pay VAT on the land which you already have. Plus the Council tax band is unchanged after the extension.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,820
    edited July 2017
    isam said:

    We'd be better off at the back of the queue no doubt.

    The Americans have a reputation of being tough negotiators. Trump or no Trump I would expect them to drive a hard bargain. Like the EU in fact. A PTA with the US could be somewhat useful, but you're definitely better off in the system than outside it
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,513

    As with almost all of Alastair's thread headers it is an excellent, balanced piece based on a well informed and neutral stance.

    He saves his bias for the comments below the line which shows admirable restraint.
    Eh?
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    Am I to infer that he didn't write the headline?
    The headline writing must be our editor's perk?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,380
    RoyalBlue said:

    Just to get away from 1914, I think one thing John Charmley gets absolutely right is his argument that Britain was finished as a global strategic actor in 1940, not 1945. The decision to fight on alone despite there being no prospect of victory without allies and the exhaustion of foreign reserves in 1941 made us utterly dependent on US goodwill, supplies and money. What Charmley gets wrong is his argument that reaching an agreement with Hitler would have been better.

    If the government had taken this to heart, we could have avoided trying to maintain much larger forces and competing in technological arms races that we could never have afforded in the post war period. We should have concentrated on rebuilding our economic strength (as De Gaulle recognised) instead.

    I think the ruling classes and man in the street were both deceived by the 'victory' of 1945. It was undoubtedly a moral victory, and the right thing to do, but a defeat in all other respects.

    I'm not so sure. Yes, the Empire would have been wound up after WWII, but the UK could have maintained bases across the world, like the USA, had it been willing to pay the price in terms of blood and money. We preferred butter to guns. I'm not saying it was the wrong choice, but it was a choice that was open to us.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,540
    edited July 2017
    FF43 said:

    The Americans have a reputation of being tough negotiators. Trump or no Trump I would expect them to drive a hard bargain. Like the EU in fact. A PTA with the US could be somewhat useful, but you're definitely better off in the system than outside it

    Trump's tweet gave the game away. They just see us as a pawn to get leverage with the EU.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    The headline writing must be our editor's perk?
    It's all a bit meta discussing me rather than interesting points of political betting, but to clarify:

    1) I usually suggest a headline. Usually my suggestions are fairly rubbish and are rightly not taken up.

    2) Occasionally the headline is mine. I expect those are fairly obvious.

    3) On this occasion the headline is not mine, but my original suggestion included the phrase "train wreck". I'm entirely content with the revised version, since it fairly reflects the contents.

    I thought the train theme might appeal to some of our locomotive-minded posters.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,540
    RoyalBlue said:

    I think the ruling classes and man in the street were both deceived by the 'victory' of 1945. It was undoubtedly a moral victory, and the right thing to do, but a defeat in all other respects.

    Which is why is was such a blunder for us to stay out of the ECSC at the beginning. We needed to cash in our moral victory for a position of leadership in the future European order. Instead we squandered the opportunity, and ever since have felt that history somehow cheated us.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,803
    At the moment????? ;)
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,803



    I thought the train theme might appeal to some of our locomotive-minded posters.

    Paging Sunil! :D
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited July 2017

    But then remind them what a video recorder cost in 1982 - £600 in Boots
    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/dec/19/price-christmas-past-boots-catalogue

    which is £1,800 in today's money. Today TV recording is basically free off the likes of iPlayer.

    In 1996 I bought my first laptop. It had Windows 95, a 13" screen and an 800mb hard drive; it cost £2,500 then, which is about £5,000 today. For £150 you can buy a better machine than that in Currys.

    I struggle to understand why anyone, whether Kipper or Corbynista, would want to live in the past. Having done so I am glad I no longer do.
    We are living in your past.

    Forgive me personalizing this, as it relates to all pre-2012 students to a greater - or slightly lesser (1998-2012) extent. But;

    Your little bit of the national debt that the country took on to pay for your university tuition has come back to bite the country.

    The government has asked the next generation to shoulder almost all of their own tuition fee burden as well as handing on the burden of repaying their elders tuition fee debt.

    That's not right.

    My preferred solution would be to backdate £9k student loans to all graduates. As that's not remotely politically possible, abolition - or substantial restructuring - of the post 2012 loans, with the bulk of the costs reclaimed through general taxation is the least unfair solution.

    Tuition fees were a generational f*ckover. Voters voting to shield themselves from spending cuts/tax rises by lumping the burden on not-yet-voters.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,513
    Sean_F said:

    I'm not so sure. Yes, the Empire would have been wound up after WWII, but the UK could have maintained bases across the world, like the USA, had it been willing to pay the price in terms of blood and money. We preferred butter to guns. I'm not saying it was the wrong choice, but it was a choice that was open to us.
    The power came from the prosperity. If you don't have that, you have nothing.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,167

    VAT on building extensions must be raking in a fair bit of tax for the government from London home improvements such as basement extensions.

    At least you don't have to pay VAT on the land which you already have. Plus the Council tax band is unchanged after the extension.
    The Council Tax is not necessarily unchanged after the extension. I know because mine was increased by a band after we did some work.

    It seems that if a neighbour makes a complaint that their Council Tax band is too high, given that they know yours is the same and now your house is a bit bigger, then there can be a reevaluation triggered of the example property. I forget all the finer details of how this worked, but we now have to pay more.

    Plus I have spent the last four years trying to work out which of the neighbours pulled this stunt!!!
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900


    In 1996 I bought my first laptop. It had Windows 95, a 13" screen and an 800mb hard drive; it cost £2,500 then, which is about £5,000 today. For £150 you can buy a better machine than that in Currys.

    Not to mention that the 95 model was a giant brick with a battery life of about 5 minutes :-)
  • isamisam Posts: 41,138
    edited July 2017
    GIN1138 said:
    "The engines will be made in Germany" was the knee jerk reaction
  • Yorkcity said:

    Alice I did not know that .How does the CGT work ? Do they take the price of the house when you bought it to when you sell it.
    More or less. You're allowed $250k per person CGT allowance and any sales price gain over that versus the original buy price attracts CGT. To get the $250k allowance, you have to have lived there for 2 of the previous 5 years, so rental property would not qualify but second homes would if you lived in them efficiently.

    There are also dispensations for things like illness or job relocation that get you the $250k allowance even if you don't otherwise qualify. If you sell up below the threshold time, your gain is pro-rated, and taxed like current year income. Above that time it's treated as long-term gain and taxed at whatever CGT rate applies to people in your income bracket, which is 0 to 20%.

    The latter point means that pensioners downsizing big houses they bought 40 years ago, but can no longer afford to run on a small pension, probably escape CGT altogether. They owe it, but at a rate of 0%. This is the opposite intent to most proposals we hear of over here, which normally seek to expropriate such people.

    US MIRAS is exactly like UK MIRAS was.
  • AndyJS said:

    Let's be honest, people liked owning laptops and video players when most people couldn't afford them.
    If most people couldn't afford them they'd never have caught on.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,380

    The power came from the prosperity. If you don't have that, you have nothing.
    I beg to differ. A country needs sufficient prosperity to maintain its military-industrial complex, but it does not need to be very prosperous to be very powerful. Russia, for example, has always punched way above its economic weight, whether under the Czars, the Communists, or Putin, because of the priority it gives the armed forces.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,317
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Pong said:

    We are living in your past.

    Forgive me personalizing this, as it relates to all pre-2012 students to a greater - or slightly lesser (1998-2012) extent. But;

    Your little bit of the national debt that the country took on to pay for your university tuition has come back to bite the country.

    The government has asked the next generation to shoulder almost all of their own tuition fee burden as well as handing on the burden of repaying their elders tuition fee debt.

    That's not right.

    My preferred solution would be to backdate £9k student loans to all graduates. As that's not remotely politically possible, abolition - or substantial restructuring - of the post 2012 loans, with the bulk of the costs reclaimed through general taxation is the least unfair solution.

    Tuition fees were a generational f*ckover. Voters voting to shield themselves from spending cuts/tax rises by lumping the burden on not-yet-voters.
    Tuition fees at least are an exchange people knew about when they signed up to them. To backdate it would be despicable discrimination as it wasn't part of what was agreed when they went to it. Why should a wealthy electrician or plumber in their 40s pay considerably less tax than a more educate but less successful graduate from the same age?

    What is manifestly unfair about the current setup is the interest rate. Interest should be inflation only. That way someone who borrows £9k today repays £9k over time in real terms and not considerably more than that.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,242
    OT (sort of)

    The EU is doing its best to gain more control over cyberspace and restrict what we can see.

    This is from the Open Media pressure group:

    "Richard, July has been a brutal month for our free speech rights, and we need your help to fight back.

    On July 11th, the European People’s Party (EPP) reversed their stance on the Link Tax, which led to it being passed in two key committees. They also approved dangerous content filtering rules which would force websites to install technology to block and filter what we can post and create online.

    It can’t be understated how dangerous this new development is. The EPP is the largest party in the EU, and if their MEPs vote in favour of these terrible policies in the lead committee when Parliament resumes, it will be very hard for us to stop it.

    We can stop the Link Tax and content filtering, but only if we reach out to our MEPs and hammer home how many people are paying attention. As elected members, they’ll need to show they’re not just in the pockets of big business.

    The Link Tax, known as Article 11 in the EU Parliament, is a proposal that will allow press publishers to charge a fee whenever a link is used on a website that shows even a headline, or a few lines of text with it. This has enormous implications for how websites can link to one another, and it would do untold damage to the Internet ecosystem, crushing smaller voices on the web."
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,803
    isam said:

    "The engines will be made in Germany" was the knee jerk reaction
    There always has to be cloud to every silver lining...
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,242
    Pong said:

    We are living in your past.

    Forgive me personalizing this, as it relates to all pre-2012 students to a greater - or slightly lesser (1998-2012) extent. But;

    Your little bit of the national debt that the country took on to pay for your university tuition has come back to bite the country.

    The government has asked the next generation to shoulder almost all of their own tuition fee burden as well as handing on the burden of repaying their elders tuition fee debt.

    That's not right.

    My preferred solution would be to backdate £9k student loans to all graduates. As that's not remotely politically possible, abolition - or substantial restructuring - of the post 2012 loans, with the bulk of the costs reclaimed through general taxation is the least unfair solution.

    Tuition fees were a generational f*ckover. Voters voting to shield themselves from spending cuts/tax rises by lumping the burden on not-yet-voters.
    Rubbish. The need for student loans came about as a result of the utterly ridiculous idea of trying to get 50% of school leavers into university, the vast majority to do degrees they did not need, in subjects they would not pursue as a career and which in no way benefitted society or the country. It was first and foremost a way to get 18-21 year olds off the unemployment register. It is a failed policy which should be scrapped.

    We should go back to having a small number of the brightest and the best go to University with their courses paid for by the state on condition they then work for at least 5 (or more) years in the UK so making sure the country as a whole benefits from their success.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,396
    Mr. Tyndall, the Link Tax is a demented idea.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    More or less. You're allowed $250k per person CGT allowance and any sales price gain over that versus the original buy price attracts CGT. To get the $250k allowance, you have to have lived there for 2 of the previous 5 years, so rental property would not qualify but second homes would if you lived in them efficiently.

    There are also dispensations for things like illness or job relocation that get you the $250k allowance even if you don't otherwise qualify. If you sell up below the threshold time, your gain is pro-rated, and taxed like current year income. Above that time it's treated as long-term gain and taxed at whatever CGT rate applies to people in your income bracket, which is 0 to 20%.

    The latter point means that pensioners downsizing big houses they bought 40 years ago, but can no longer afford to run on a small pension, probably escape CGT altogether. They owe it, but at a rate of 0%. This is the opposite intent to most proposals we hear of over here, which normally seek to expropriate such people.

    US MIRAS is exactly like UK MIRAS was.
    Thanks much appreciated.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    Sean_F said:

    I beg to differ. A country needs sufficient prosperity to maintain its military-industrial complex, but it does not need to be very prosperous to be very powerful. Russia, for example, has always punched way above its economic weight, whether under the Czars, the Communists, or Putin, because of the priority it gives the armed forces.
    I must disagree. I don't think Russia post 1991 is very powerful; whether on a economic, cultural influence or technological basis it is continuing to decline vis a vis the West and the other BRICs. It has an ability to be uniquely destructive, but it is unable to use that power to address its fundamental weaknesses (awful demographics, commodity dependence, brain drain).

    Prioritising the armed forces fails when it bankrupts the underlying economy. This is a lesson they should have learnt from the USSR but clearly haven't.

    To your earlier point, we did prefer guns! We spent billions to maintain military influence in areas remote from our core interests, far more than our European peers. As a consequence, we went from being the largest economy in Western Europe to 3rd (and briefly 4th).
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,242

    Mr. Tyndall, the Link Tax is a demented idea.

    Yep. But it seems they are pushing ahead with it.
  • Pong said:

    Your little bit of the national debt that the country took on to pay for your university tuition has come back to bite the country.

    Since I paid more tax then, and am in the 1% that pays 27% of all income tax now, that is simply not so. Someone who paid 27% tax in 1985 cannot possibly have contributed less than someone who pays 23% on the equivalent earnings today.

    What should happen with degrees is that universities offering worthless ones should be allowed to go bust, and their management should be liable for mis-selling claims, as firms that sold PPI are. If that essential piece of the picture were in place, degrees would either be worth having or else they would not be undertaken at all, hence problem solved.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,010
    isam said:

    "The engines will be made in Germany" was the knee jerk reaction

    No, the kneejerk reaction was that it is very good news indeed as it makes a soft Brexit much more likely.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,396
    Mr. Tyndall, I just can't fathom that.

    And how are they going to police it? If someone posts a comment on my blog containing a link to a newspaper, do I have to pay tax?!

    ****ing idiots.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,010
    FF43 said:

    The Americans have a reputation of being tough negotiators. Trump or no Trump I would expect them to drive a hard bargain. Like the EU in fact. A PTA with the US could be somewhat useful, but you're definitely better off in the system than outside it

    America First.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,540
    edited July 2017
    RoyalBlue said:

    I must disagree. I don't think Russia post 1991 is very powerful; whether on a economic, cultural influence or technological basis it is continuing to decline vis a vis the West and the other BRICs. It has an ability to be uniquely destructive, but it is unable to use that power to address its fundamental weaknesses (awful demographics, commodity dependence, brain drain).

    Prioritising the armed forces fails when it bankrupts the underlying economy. This is a lesson they should have learnt from the USSR but clearly haven't.
    Irina Hakamada, who was one of the most prominent Presidential candidates against Putin in 2004, predicted in the wake of the Ukrainian invasion that the Russian Federation could end up collapsing in a similar manner to the collapse of the USSR as a result of imperial overreach.

    I think the Putin regime is starting to run out of steam and something dramatic could change soon.
  • Mr. Tyndall, I just can't fathom that.

    And how are they going to police it? If someone posts a comment on my blog containing a link to a newspaper, do I have to pay tax?!

    ****ing idiots.

    If it's possible to track sponsored links for payment purposes, it must also be possible for tax collection purposes. Probably ISPs will be made to do it, and will pass the tax bill as well as the collection cost on, in the form of higher charges.

    The EU's FTT will be excellent for London if it comes in. As the UK is something like 50% of the EU financial sector, and the others thus had nothing on an individual country by country basis to lose if it panned out badly, I was never persuaded that the UK's voice was being heard on this. Within the EU we'd simply be ignored and screwed over because we would be the only loser by it.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,317

    If it's possible to track sponsored links for payment purposes, it must also be possible for tax collection purposes. Probably ISPs will be made to do it, and will pass the tax bill as well as the collection cost on, in the form of higher charges.

    The EU's FTT will be excellent for London if it comes in. As the UK is something like 50% of the EU financial sector, and the others thus had nothing on an individual country by country basis to lose if it panned out badly, I was never persuaded that the UK's voice was being heard on this. Within the EU we'd simply be ignored and screwed over because we would be the only loser by it.
    They do that by yah a little bisque URL, don't they? You could just avoid it by deleting the unique bit.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited July 2017

    Tuition fees at least are an exchange people knew about when they signed up to them. To backdate it would be despicable discrimination as it wasn't part of what was agreed when they went to it.
    Actually, no.

    The tories changed the T&C's (froze the threshold) for post-2012 students, so the amount they will pay back was increased relative to what they agreed when they signed up to the deal, age 16/17.

    If they can be asked to pay more, then all pre-2012 students can, too.

    As the tories are fond of saying;

    We're all in this together.

    Or are we not?
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    edited July 2017
    Richard_Tyndall said
    "We should go back to having a small number of the brightest and the best go to University with their courses paid for by the state on condition they then work for at least 5 (or more) years in the UK so making sure the country as a whole benefits from their success."

    Roughly speaking I agree with that, only I'm not so sure about the "best". Anyway, do something like that and foster polytechnics and technical colleges too.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,317
    Pong said:

    Actually, no.

    The tories changed the T&C's (froze the threshold) for post-2012 students, so the amount they will pay back was increased relative to what they agreed when they signed up to the deal, age 16/17.

    If they can be asked to pay more, then all pre-2012 students can, too.

    As the tories are fond of saying;

    We're all in this together.
    They changed the deal after they had signed on the dotted line for the loan?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,396
    F1: still no Hungarian markets up. Humbug.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Oh ferchrissakes I've just got home and seen the thread title.

    Not even going to bother.

    Are we talking about anything interesting?
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited July 2017
    RobD said:

    They changed the deal after they had signed on the dotted line for the loan?
    Yes. It's outrageous, isn't it?

    If the tories treated their client vote like that, they'd be out of power for a generation - and rightly so.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223

    Irina Hakamada, who was one of the most prominent Presidential candidates against Putin in 2004, predicted in the wake of the Ukrainian invasion that the Russian Federation could end up collapsing in a similar manner to the collapse of the USSR as a result of imperial overreach.

    I think the Putin regime is starting to run out of steam and something dramatic could change soon.
    That's overstating the case. Russia is not about to collapse, even with oil at $45 a barrel. What Putin will do instead is drastically scale back his rearmament programme and aid to his vassals (e.g. Belarus) while keeping up the Victory Day parade and testing NATO's air defences.

    In 10 years' time, who will buy Russian over Chinese aircraft?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,242
    Toms said:

    Richard_Tyndall said
    "We should go back to having a small number of the brightest and the best go to University with their courses paid for by the state on condition they then work for at least 5 (or more) years in the UK so making sure the country as a whole benefits from their success."

    Roughly speaking I agree with that, only I'm not so sure about the "best". Anyway, do something like that and foster polytechnics and technical colleges too.

    I was using brightest and best as a lazy catchphrase. But hopefully you get my meaning. Those who are academically suited should be given the opportunity of university, those who are not should have options that suit their strengths exactly as you say. We also need top massively increase apprenticeships so people can learn skills on the job.

    A good example of the current idiocy would be nursing where we have now got rid of excellent nursing colleges and made them degree courses. Why?
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    Pong said:

    Actually, no.

    The tories changed the T&C's
    The Coalition, no? And didn't universities fall under BIS (prop. V Cable) at the time?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,424
    Should have known it was Mr Meeks just from the thread title!

    https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/732785721145188352
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,396
    Mr. M, what's your view on Kubica's skill level when he was in F1?

    Earlier, Mr. Jessop suggested I might be over-egging the cake (also, he was right to point out it's been some years which probably won't have made the Pole any faster).
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited July 2017

    The Coalition, no? And didn't universities fall under BIS (prop. V Cable) at the time?
    No, after the 2015 election.

    Remember the insane promises the tories made during the campaign? They had to be paid for somehow.

    The tories went for the easy option of screwing the kids to balance the books. Standard tory intergenerational theft for the benefit of their client vote.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,317
    Pong said:

    Yes. It's outrageous, isn't it?

    If the tories treated their client vote like that, they'd be out of power for a generation - and rightly so.
    Like they tried to do when abolishing the triple lock? ;)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,540
    RoyalBlue said:

    That's overstating the case. Russia is not about to collapse, even with oil at $45 a barrel. What Putin will do instead is drastically scale back his rearmament programme and aid to his vassals (e.g. Belarus) while keeping up the Victory Day parade and testing NATO's air defences.

    In 10 years' time, who will buy Russian over Chinese aircraft?
    Many of Putin's vassals are within the territory of the Russian Federation, which is run far more like an empire than a federation. It's one of the things that stokes their paranoia about foreign influence.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,171

    There are plenty of very healthy donations from individuals who work in senior positions in both business and finance, though.

    Quite a few big businesses (especially retail business) shy away from large political donations, given that circa 50% of their customers might be offended whichever way they donated.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478

    I was using brightest and best as a lazy catchphrase. But hopefully you get my meaning. Those who are academically suited should be given the opportunity of university, those who are not should have options that suit their strengths exactly as you say. We also need top massively increase apprenticeships so people can learn skills on the job.

    A good example of the current idiocy would be nursing where we have now got rid of excellent nursing colleges and made them degree courses. Why?
    OK. We might also allow for self support, extra curricular jobs, and scholarships (my case.) The bottom line should be that one *wants to* and *is able to* pursue studies.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,100
    Understand the point, but associating Brexit with 1914 undermines it.
This discussion has been closed.