Howdy, Stranger!

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

Gavin Williamson has done another whoopsie – politicalbetting.com

123468

Comments

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,893

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    And, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

    More tax will mean some people choose to work less, take fewer risks, move to another job or none or move abroad - because every new calculation alters decisions at the margins, and it's all cumulative.

    My guess is that this tax won't raise as much as it's estimated to do for those reasons, and it will also crowd out some private sector investment in other parts of the economy too - probably in R&D.
    Indeed, I reckon in direct tax I'll be paying 60% of my salary by the end of this decade as this levy keeps on going up. That's back to the pre Thatcher era.

    As you know via my father I know some fairly top people at Health trusts and what not.

    They reckon for the next five years all this extra revenue raised will be gobbled up by the NHS and there'll be nothing left for social care.

    So after 2024 this levy will be increased a lot because social care is going to be in an even worth situation because it has had no extra funds.

    Social care also has a major vaccination problem and staffing problem, so salaries are likely to increase over the next few years.
    In the pre Thatcher era, the headline rates were high but there were many more deductions and allowances. Mortgage interest and Endowment insurance policies for example, so the actual rates were lower.

    There used to be different tax rates for earned and unearned income though, which used to correct for the lack of NI on unearned incomes. It went as a distinction in Thatchers time I think.
  • You end up with the grotesque spectacle of a Tory Chancellor, a TORY Chancellor, hiring taxis to ferry around tax demands to their own voters.

    Sandy! Welcome back, hope you're well
  • isam said:

    Carnyx said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    UKIP policy!
    Was it MRLP? Someone, I think the Guardian, did a comparative quiz on UKIP and MRLP policy statements and manifestoes and you had to tryy and judge who went for which proposal. It was surprisingly difficult and the MRLP came out as remarkably sane and promising.
    “UKIP’s manifesto has pledged that the party would waive tuition fees for students in science, technology, engineering, maths and medicine”.”

    https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ukip-would-make-stem-tuition-fee-free-and-revise-net-migration-count/2019716.article

    Well, UKIP seem a good deal more articulate than TSE who wrote tautologically "I'd end tuition fees in STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees."

    I wonder if TSE can guess what the "E" in STEM might be.
    I'm multitasking.

    If there's any errors in the morning thread I'm blaming you.
  • MaxPB said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    It's the first time I've been tempted by tax avoidance in my life, not because it's a lot of money, but because the government is no longer deserving of my very significant tax contribution. It's galling that rich old people are not paying their own way and costs are being lumped into working people.

    It has to be said, loads of my friends are feeling absolutely mutinous about this tax. Labour could capitalise on it really easily but they have a complete numpty in charge.
    I fully expect in 6-7 years the GE campaign being the Tories saying they will raise it to 2% and Labour talking about introducing new bands, of 0% through to 5%...
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 14,647

    MaxPB said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    It's the first time I've been tempted by tax avoidance in my life, not because it's a lot of money, but because the government is no longer deserving of my very significant tax contribution. It's galling that rich old people are not paying their own way and costs are being lumped into working people.

    It has to be said, loads of my friends are feeling absolutely mutinous about this tax. Labour could capitalise on it really easily but they have a complete numpty in charge.
    The correct term is tax minimisation, and my financial advisers and accountants have already been in touch about this tax.

    My father is a pensioner has gone back to work (part time) and he's furious that he will pay 1.25% NI whilst I'm paying 13.25% so his generation can be better off.
    Matthew 22:20-22 refers.

    What sort of bright ideas do they have, as a matter of itnerest?
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 665

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that they end up increasing it sufficiently to cover the entire NHS & Social Care budget. DHSC budget was £150bn in 2019/20 and £212bn in 20/21.

    1.25% expected to raise £12bn, so it would need to be ~15.6% to raise £150bn, or ~22% to cover the 20/21 budget.

    I could see it being very tempting to have a hypothecated tax to fund the NHS, as that might be more popular with the general public, as they'd know that tax was spent on the NHS and not "wasted" on whatever else the government spends money on that a particular voter objects to (Foreign Aid, Benefits, Trident, etc). So the question then becomes what taxes the government will seek to cut with (at least some of) the money raised?

    Perhaps it will help to cover the expected hole in the public finances when fuel duty revenue disappears as cars switch to electricity? Perhaps we will see income tax cut (which I could sadly see being very popular, even though a switch from Income Tax to a rebadged NI would be sub-optimal for many reasons). Inheritance Tax could be abolished. Stamp Duty could be cut.

    I think that's where this is heading. The government will seek to cut some taxes, to burnish its low-tax credentials and create a point of difference with Labour, and it will find it is popular to increase a hypothecated NHS tax and cut other general taxes. I'd expect to see it cut taxes that its voters dislike, as it loads more taxes on the people who don't vote Tory.

    So I'd expect to see this levy increase, and to see taxes on assets (or aspiration if you will) to be cut.
    It is certainly possible. If they were to jack up NHS Tax substantially they'd free up some room for manoeuvre to make smaller cuts elsewhere, and still claim progress towards reducing the deficit.

    IHT sounds like a fair bet for the first, or one of the first, such targets. The well-to-do pensioners landed gentry and their heirs probably hate that one more than anything else.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 5,967

    isam said:

    Carnyx said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    UKIP policy!
    Was it MRLP? Someone, I think the Guardian, did a comparative quiz on UKIP and MRLP policy statements and manifestoes and you had to tryy and judge who went for which proposal. It was surprisingly difficult and the MRLP came out as remarkably sane and promising.
    “UKIP’s manifesto has pledged that the party would waive tuition fees for students in science, technology, engineering, maths and medicine”.”

    https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ukip-would-make-stem-tuition-fee-free-and-revise-net-migration-count/2019716.article

    Well, UKIP seem a good deal more articulate than TSE who wrote tautologically "I'd end tuition fees in STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees."

    I wonder if TSE can guess what the "E" in STEM might be.
    I'm multitasking.

    If there's any errors in the morning thread I'm blaming you.
    "If there's [sic] any errors in the morning thread I'm blaming you"

    If there are any errors in the morning thread I'm blaming your University.

    That is what you do when you see a cv, it seems.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 45,235
    edited September 8
    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that they end up increasing it sufficiently to cover the entire NHS & Social Care budget. DHSC budget was £150bn in 2019/20 and £212bn in 20/21.

    1.25% expected to raise £12bn, so it would need to be ~15.6% to raise £150bn, or ~22% to cover the 20/21 budget.

    I could see it being very tempting to have a hypothecated tax to fund the NHS, as that might be more popular with the general public, as they'd know that tax was spent on the NHS and not "wasted" on whatever else the government spends money on that a particular voter objects to (Foreign Aid, Benefits, Trident, etc). So the question then becomes what taxes the government will seek to cut with (at least some of) the money raised?

    Perhaps it will help to cover the expected hole in the public finances when fuel duty revenue disappears as cars switch to electricity? Perhaps we will see income tax cut (which I could sadly see being very popular, even though a switch from Income Tax to a rebadged NI would be sub-optimal for many reasons). Inheritance Tax could be abolished. Stamp Duty could be cut.

    I think that's where this is heading. The government will seek to cut some taxes, to burnish its low-tax credentials and create a point of difference with Labour, and it will find it is popular to increase a hypothecated NHS tax and cut other general taxes. I'd expect to see it cut taxes that its voters dislike, as it loads more taxes on the people who don't vote Tory.

    So I'd expect to see this levy increase, and to see taxes on assets (or aspiration if you will) to be cut.
    It is certainly possible. If they were to jack up NHS Tax substantially they'd free up some room for manoeuvre to make smaller cuts elsewhere, and still claim progress towards reducing the deficit.

    IHT sounds like a fair bet for the first, or one of the first, such targets. The well-to-do pensioners landed gentry and their heirs probably hate that one more than anything else.
    I back IHT

    However, perversely none of the political parties or the general public back using property to pay for social care
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,643
    edited September 8
    I see England are running Kane et al into the ground. Now they are ahead, get Kane off.

    Loads of talent on the bench to see out the game.
  • Carnyx said:

    MaxPB said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    It's the first time I've been tempted by tax avoidance in my life, not because it's a lot of money, but because the government is no longer deserving of my very significant tax contribution. It's galling that rich old people are not paying their own way and costs are being lumped into working people.

    It has to be said, loads of my friends are feeling absolutely mutinous about this tax. Labour could capitalise on it really easily but they have a complete numpty in charge.
    The correct term is tax minimisation, and my financial advisers and accountants have already been in touch about this tax.

    My father is a pensioner has gone back to work (part time) and he's furious that he will pay 1.25% NI whilst I'm paying 13.25% so his generation can be better off.
    Matthew 22:20-22 refers.

    What sort of bright ideas do they have, as a matter of itnerest?
    I'm not sure exactly, I did hear that there might be some benefit in transferring some of your salary into benefits in kind, but I may have misread.

    It is a work in progress, I suspect they'll have some policies sorted out well before the tax kicks in next April.
  • isam said:

    Carnyx said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    UKIP policy!
    Was it MRLP? Someone, I think the Guardian, did a comparative quiz on UKIP and MRLP policy statements and manifestoes and you had to tryy and judge who went for which proposal. It was surprisingly difficult and the MRLP came out as remarkably sane and promising.
    “UKIP’s manifesto has pledged that the party would waive tuition fees for students in science, technology, engineering, maths and medicine”.”

    https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ukip-would-make-stem-tuition-fee-free-and-revise-net-migration-count/2019716.article

    Well, UKIP seem a good deal more articulate than TSE who wrote tautologically "I'd end tuition fees in STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees."

    I wonder if TSE can guess what the "E" in STEM might be.
    I'm multitasking.

    If there's any errors in the morning thread I'm blaming you.
    "The TSE series is the most reliable computer ever made. No TSE computer has ever made a mistake or distorted information. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, fool-proof and incapable of error."
  • isam said:

    Carnyx said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    UKIP policy!
    Was it MRLP? Someone, I think the Guardian, did a comparative quiz on UKIP and MRLP policy statements and manifestoes and you had to tryy and judge who went for which proposal. It was surprisingly difficult and the MRLP came out as remarkably sane and promising.
    “UKIP’s manifesto has pledged that the party would waive tuition fees for students in science, technology, engineering, maths and medicine”.”

    https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ukip-would-make-stem-tuition-fee-free-and-revise-net-migration-count/2019716.article

    Well, UKIP seem a good deal more articulate than TSE who wrote tautologically "I'd end tuition fees in STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees."

    I wonder if TSE can guess what the "E" in STEM might be.
    I'm multitasking.

    If there's any errors in the morning thread I'm blaming you.
    "If there's [sic] any errors in the morning thread I'm blaming you"

    If there are any errors in the morning thread I'm blaming your University.

    That is what you do when you see a cv, it seems.
    Autocorrect baby.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,893

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    I don't think Britons thicker than other nations, or at least would be reticent in suggesting it. 40-50% going on the tertiary degrees is not out of line with other developed nations, and even developing countries often educate 20% to that level. An educated workforce is a key to economic success in the modern world.

    The problem of British Universities is not the numbers of students going, it is the crap courses with minimal contact time that the Universities run.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,140

    MaxPB said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    It's the first time I've been tempted by tax avoidance in my life, not because it's a lot of money, but because the government is no longer deserving of my very significant tax contribution. It's galling that rich old people are not paying their own way and costs are being lumped into working people.

    It has to be said, loads of my friends are feeling absolutely mutinous about this tax. Labour could capitalise on it really easily but they have a complete numpty in charge.
    The correct term is tax minimisation, and my financial advisers and accountants have already been in touch about this tax.

    My father is a pensioner has gone back to work (part time) and he's furious that he will pay 1.25% NI whilst I'm paying 13.25% so his generation can be better off.
    Yeah my own dad was pretty scathing this evening that the working poor are being taxed to pay for his own generation being spared any insurance costs or taxes.

    He is for the first time in his life contemplating a Labour vote.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 15,018

    You end up with the grotesque spectacle of a Tory Chancellor, a TORY Chancellor, hiring taxis to ferry around tax demands to their own voters.

    Sandy! Welcome back, hope you're well
    I didn't know I'd been away!

    And yes, I am well. I hope you are too, Comrade.
  • Dan Hodges ( I know)

    Reshuffle speculation mounting tonight
  • Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    I don't think Britons thicker than other nations, or at least would be reticent in suggesting it. 40-50% going on the tertiary degrees is not out of line with other developed nations, and even developing countries often educate 20% to that level. An educated workforce is a key to economic success in the modern world.

    The problem of British Universities is not the numbers of students going, it is the crap courses with minimal contact time that the Universities run.
    Your final sentence nails it.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 665

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that they end up increasing it sufficiently to cover the entire NHS & Social Care budget. DHSC budget was £150bn in 2019/20 and £212bn in 20/21.

    1.25% expected to raise £12bn, so it would need to be ~15.6% to raise £150bn, or ~22% to cover the 20/21 budget.

    I could see it being very tempting to have a hypothecated tax to fund the NHS, as that might be more popular with the general public, as they'd know that tax was spent on the NHS and not "wasted" on whatever else the government spends money on that a particular voter objects to (Foreign Aid, Benefits, Trident, etc). So the question then becomes what taxes the government will seek to cut with (at least some of) the money raised?

    Perhaps it will help to cover the expected hole in the public finances when fuel duty revenue disappears as cars switch to electricity? Perhaps we will see income tax cut (which I could sadly see being very popular, even though a switch from Income Tax to a rebadged NI would be sub-optimal for many reasons). Inheritance Tax could be abolished. Stamp Duty could be cut.

    I think that's where this is heading. The government will seek to cut some taxes, to burnish its low-tax credentials and create a point of difference with Labour, and it will find it is popular to increase a hypothecated NHS tax and cut other general taxes. I'd expect to see it cut taxes that its voters dislike, as it loads more taxes on the people who don't vote Tory.

    So I'd expect to see this levy increase, and to see taxes on assets (or aspiration if you will) to be cut.
    It is certainly possible. If they were to jack up NHS Tax substantially they'd free up some room for manoeuvre to make smaller cuts elsewhere, and still claim progress towards reducing the deficit.

    IHT sounds like a fair bet for the first, or one of the first, such targets. The well-to-do pensioners landed gentry and their heirs probably hate that one more than anything else.
    I back IHT

    However, perversely none of the political parties or the general public back using property to pay for social care
    You can make a case for that stance being immoral, but not necessarily perverse.

    Assets are hard to accrue, and will become steadily more valuable - and more jealously guarded - as asset prices continue to inflate whilst earned incomes are taxed to kingdom come.

    The people who benefit from control of assets are disproportionately elderly property owners, and middle aged mortgage payers who expect to inherit substantial estates. These groups are large and they are much more enthusiastic about voting than younger people, so it's no surprise if the politicians are inclined to butter them up if they want to be successful.

    If NHS Tax spirals out of control whilst taxes on property are slashed or abolished, we should not be surprised at all.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,893

    //twitter.com/GuardianHeather/status/1434868457980444676

    In answer to your previous comments, I continue to identify as male.

    If I do decide to embrace my feminine animus, I shall signal the change by changing my name to Vixen.

    🦊
  • Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    I don't think Britons thicker than other nations, or at least would be reticent in suggesting it. 40-50% going on the tertiary degrees is not out of line with other developed nations, and even developing countries often educate 20% to that level. An educated workforce is a key to economic success in the modern world.

    The problem of British Universities is not the numbers of students going, it is the crap courses with minimal contact time that the Universities run.
    Your final sentence nails it.
    I think if a course is rubbish you should get a refund
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,897

    Dan Hodges ( I know)

    Reshuffle speculation mounting tonight

    LATEST Senior Government sources confirming to me tonight there is definitely NO Cabinet reshuffle tomorrow. Put your phones back on silent everyone.
    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1435703465033052160
  • Foxy said:

    //twitter.com/GuardianHeather/status/1434868457980444676

    In answer to your previous comments, I continue to identify as male.

    If I do decide to embrace my feminine animus, I shall signal the change by changing my name to Vixen.

    🦊
    Sorry for my mistake, Foxy.

    Hope you are otherwise well, Sir
  • MattWMattW Posts: 10,137
    Foxy said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    And, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

    More tax will mean some people choose to work less, take fewer risks, move to another job or none or move abroad - because every new calculation alters decisions at the margins, and it's all cumulative.

    My guess is that this tax won't raise as much as it's estimated to do for those reasons, and it will also crowd out some private sector investment in other parts of the economy too - probably in R&D.
    Indeed, I reckon in direct tax I'll be paying 60% of my salary by the end of this decade as this levy keeps on going up. That's back to the pre Thatcher era.

    As you know via my father I know some fairly top people at Health trusts and what not.

    They reckon for the next five years all this extra revenue raised will be gobbled up by the NHS and there'll be nothing left for social care.

    So after 2024 this levy will be increased a lot because social care is going to be in an even worth situation because it has had no extra funds.

    Social care also has a major vaccination problem and staffing problem, so salaries are likely to increase over the next few years.
    In the pre Thatcher era, the headline rates were high but there were many more deductions and allowances. Mortgage interest and Endowment insurance policies for example, so the actual rates were lower.

    There used to be different tax rates for earned and unearned income though, which used to correct for the lack of NI on unearned incomes. It went as a distinction in Thatchers time I think.
    The latter ended up at 98%.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,481
    "@EuropeElects
    Germany, Allensbach poll:

    SPD-S&D: 27% (+3)
    CDU/CSU-EPP: 25% (-1)
    GRÜNE-G/EFA: 15.5% (-1.5)
    AfD-ID: 11% (+0.5)
    FDP-RE: 9.5% (-1)
    LINKE-LEFT: 6%

    +/- vs. 18-26 Aug

    Fieldwork: 1-7 September 2021
    Sample size: 1,258"
  • Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    I don't think Britons thicker than other nations, or at least would be reticent in suggesting it. 40-50% going on the tertiary degrees is not out of line with other developed nations, and even developing countries often educate 20% to that level. An educated workforce is a key to economic success in the modern world.

    The problem of British Universities is not the numbers of students going, it is the crap courses with minimal contact time that the Universities run.
    Your final sentence nails it.
    I think if a course is rubbish you should get a refund
    Yup, it would definitely bankrupt the University of Oxford, so I support this policy.
  • Poland equaliser
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,481
    edited September 8

    Big up South West London!

    The wealthiest part of the country, (I think).
  • TresTres Posts: 576
    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    And, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

    More tax will mean some people choose to work less, take fewer risks, move to another job or none or move abroad - because every new calculation alters decisions at the margins, and it's all cumulative.

    My guess is that this tax won't raise as much as it's estimated to do for those reasons, and it will also crowd out some private sector investment in other parts of the economy too - probably in R&D.
    Indeed, I reckon in direct tax I'll be paying 60% of my salary by the end of this decade as this levy keeps on going up. That's back to the pre Thatcher era.

    As you know via my father I know some fairly top people at Health trusts and what not.

    They reckon for the next five years all this extra revenue raised will be gobbled up by the NHS and there'll be nothing left for social care.

    So after 2024 this levy will be increased a lot because social care is going to be in an even worth situation because it has had no extra funds.

    Social care also has a major vaccination problem and staffing problem, so salaries are likely to increase over the next few years.
    Yes. The worst aspect of this is the invention of a whole new tax. Not only that, a tax dedicated to an inviolable God, the NHS, who can only be propitiated, never ignored (let alone neglected)

    Paying this NHS levy for Brits, will be like paying the Gods with blood, for the Aztecs.

    With the Aztecs it started with the odd live human sacrifice on sacred days, and it ended - literally - with the rich buying babies from the poor, just to kill them, and weekends of orgiastic sacrificial murder when the streets of Tenochtitlan ran ‘ankle deep’ in human gore

    That’s the future of the British economy
    We send £20 a week to each child in the country, let's fund our NHS instead.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,621
    edited September 8

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    Agree, but you're talking about an instrumentalist, skills-based, vocational education, which is needed for some jobs. But education shouldn't just be about training for a job. And anyway, the thickest of the thick students I ever came across were nearly always doing business studies or computing.

    I'm talking about a love of learning, a thirst for knowledge, a world in which lorry drivers may wish to study Jane Austen at evening class, or care workers philosophy. Which reminds me, it was under Thatcher that some universities were pressurised into reducing or cutting out their philosophy courses. I hate the instrumentalist, every course must lead to a job discourse that dominates these days. But then I'm an idealist. We're talking at cross purposes really.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 4,260
    Carnyx said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    Hmm. Tough on classicists and linguists. Do we have enough of the former and no need for the latter?
    I'm on board with this.
    No problem with people doing classics. Don't really see what the state should for it though.
    And we need linguists, sure, but I'd suggest there are far cheaper ways of becoming proficient in a foreign language, and that language degrees quickly get bogged down in.literature because there's not that much language left to study. People with A Levels in a language always seem fluent to me. (This from someone who did not get past GCSE German and for whom the ability to speak in a foreign language seems as bizarre and unobtainable as the ability to levitate - so I may be a bit off here.)
  • Scott_xP said:

    Dan Hodges ( I know)

    Reshuffle speculation mounting tonight

    LATEST Senior Government sources confirming to me tonight there is definitely NO Cabinet reshuffle tomorrow. Put your phones back on silent everyone.
    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1435703465033052160
    Who knows, but the rumours have done their job of making the minions pliant for a key vote, and only a fool would throw away that power unnecessarily.

    Terrible as he is, Boris gets "Leader of the gang" dynamics.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 14,825
    Foxy said:

    //twitter.com/GuardianHeather/status/1434868457980444676

    In answer to your previous comments, I continue to identify as male.

    If I do decide to embrace my feminine animus, I shall signal the change by changing my name to Vixen.

    🦊
    Anima.
    You're welcome.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,490

    kle4 said:

    pigeon said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    319 v 248 majority of 71

    So a clear majority for the Government for the NI rise but 44 Tory MPs either voted against the proposals or abstained
    They were only 9 from their majority so how is that compatible, without pairing possibly
    Did the SNP vote?
    I can't find out who the missing opposition voters were, but I would assume that the SNP were whipped against it as the NI changes clearly affect Scotland and they have been complaining about them vociferously.

    It looks more like about 50 opposition MPs simply declined to turn up, the majority of them probably because they had concluded that the Government was bound to win the vote.
    That'd be terrible if so. Of course it is usually true, but you still have to play your part and you might get lucky, or at least give the government a spool - equally so some Tory potential rebel could claim they saw loads of opposition not there so knew there was no point in being brave and so chickened out.
    5 conservatives voted against, 37 abstained as well as 21 Labour mps
    Who are the 5 Tories with principles?

    Remarkable that of the 2 manifesto breaches more Tory MPs chose to stand up for giving billions more away to foreign countries and aid organisations, than stood up against increasing taxes by billions.
    Your principles might not be the same as other peoples..
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 14,825
    Andy_JS said:

    "@EuropeElects
    Germany, Allensbach poll:

    SPD-S&D: 27% (+3)
    CDU/CSU-EPP: 25% (-1)
    GRÜNE-G/EFA: 15.5% (-1.5)
    AfD-ID: 11% (+0.5)
    FDP-RE: 9.5% (-1)
    LINKE-LEFT: 6%

    +/- vs. 18-26 Aug

    Fieldwork: 1-7 September 2021
    Sample size: 1,258"

    A second poll with the government re-elected with a majority.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,893
    MattW said:

    Foxy said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    And, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

    More tax will mean some people choose to work less, take fewer risks, move to another job or none or move abroad - because every new calculation alters decisions at the margins, and it's all cumulative.

    My guess is that this tax won't raise as much as it's estimated to do for those reasons, and it will also crowd out some private sector investment in other parts of the economy too - probably in R&D.
    Indeed, I reckon in direct tax I'll be paying 60% of my salary by the end of this decade as this levy keeps on going up. That's back to the pre Thatcher era.

    As you know via my father I know some fairly top people at Health trusts and what not.

    They reckon for the next five years all this extra revenue raised will be gobbled up by the NHS and there'll be nothing left for social care.

    So after 2024 this levy will be increased a lot because social care is going to be in an even worth situation because it has had no extra funds.

    Social care also has a major vaccination problem and staffing problem, so salaries are likely to increase over the next few years.
    In the pre Thatcher era, the headline rates were high but there were many more deductions and allowances. Mortgage interest and Endowment insurance policies for example, so the actual rates were lower.

    There used to be different tax rates for earned and unearned income though, which used to correct for the lack of NI on unearned incomes. It went as a distinction in Thatchers time I think.
    The latter ended up at 98%.
    Yes, in 1974, when the Tories were in power, but only on investment income over £20 000, equivalent to £210 000 today. Like I said, there were many allowances and deductions.

    The Top rate of income tax was near 90% for much of the post war period. There were similar rates in other countries including the USA. Which had marginal rates of 90%, and a top rate of 70% as recently as 1982. Interestingly these very high rates did coincide with the golden period of post war economic growth.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 1,366
    edited September 8

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    Agree, but you're talking about an instrumentalist, skills-based, vocational education, which is needed for some jobs. But education shouldn't just be about training for a job. And anyway, the thickest of the thick students I ever came across were nearly always doing business studies or computing.

    I'm talking about a love of learning, a thirst for knowledge, a world in which lorry drivers may wish to study Jane Austen at evening class, or care workers philosophy. Which reminds me, it was under Thatcher that some universities were pressurised into reducing or cutting out their philosophy courses. I hate the instrumentalist, every course must lead to a job discourse that dominates these days. But then I'm an idealist. We're talking at cross purposes really.
    Yes. I seem to remember OGH's son studied Philosophy. I think he's done ok for himself.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,341
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    TSE also one of my favourite posters - and this proves that I'm not just fanning over Labourites

    Is a coincidence that you only talk about someone being a "favourite poster" of yours when they critique the Government?
    You're also one of my favourite posters - believe it or not.

    And I've never agreed with a single thing you've posted, I think ever
    If it helps I think you’re a juvenile, prissy, whining little c+cksucker
    Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?
    No, your sister’s. When she has enough cash
    What's your going rate?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 14,825
    Cookie said:

    Carnyx said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    Hmm. Tough on classicists and linguists. Do we have enough of the former and no need for the latter?
    I'm on board with this.
    No problem with people doing classics. Don't really see what the state should for it though.
    And we need linguists, sure, but I'd suggest there are far cheaper ways of becoming proficient in a foreign language, and that language degrees quickly get bogged down in.literature because there's not that much language left to study. People with A Levels in a language always seem fluent to me. (This from someone who did not get past GCSE German and for whom the ability to speak in a foreign language seems as bizarre and unobtainable as the ability to levitate - so I may be a bit off here.)
    Try hitching round Szechuan with A level Chinese.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,481
    dixiedean said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "@EuropeElects
    Germany, Allensbach poll:

    SPD-S&D: 27% (+3)
    CDU/CSU-EPP: 25% (-1)
    GRÜNE-G/EFA: 15.5% (-1.5)
    AfD-ID: 11% (+0.5)
    FDP-RE: 9.5% (-1)
    LINKE-LEFT: 6%

    +/- vs. 18-26 Aug

    Fieldwork: 1-7 September 2021
    Sample size: 1,258"

    A second poll with the government re-elected with a majority.
    This firm usually gives the main two parties higher percentages compared to the other pollsters. Not sure why.
  • tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    Agree, but you're talking about an instrumentalist, skills-based, vocational education, which is needed for some jobs. But education shouldn't just be about training for a job. And anyway, the thickest of the thick students I ever came across were nearly always doing business studies or computing.

    I'm talking about a love of learning, a thirst for knowledge, a world in which lorry drivers may wish to study Jane Austen at evening class, or care workers philosophy. Which reminds me, it was under Thatcher that some universities were pressurised into reducing or cutting out their philosophy courses. I hate the instrumentalist, every course must lead to a job discourse that dominates these days. But then I'm an idealist. We're talking at cross purposes really.
    One of the primary reasons I've done well in life is I had a fantastic education, I want everyone in the country to have that experience.

    What most people get isn't that and the ones that go to university end up with a lot of debt.

    I want that to end.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 3,327
    MaxPB said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    It's the first time I've been tempted by tax avoidance in my life, not because it's a lot of money, but because the government is no longer deserving of my very significant tax contribution. It's galling that rich old people are not paying their own way and costs are being lumped into working people.

    It has to be said, loads of my friends are feeling absolutely mutinous about this tax. Labour could capitalise on it really easily but they have a complete numpty in charge.
    Yep, I'm going to be minimising tax as far as possible. Following this change I've already made adjustments (more holiday, more sal sacrifice stuff) to make sure that the Government is going to get less tax from me this year than they would have otherwise.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 4,260
    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    I don't think Britons thicker than other nations, or at least would be reticent in suggesting it. 40-50% going on the tertiary degrees is not out of line with other developed nations, and even developing countries often educate 20% to that level. An educated workforce is a key to economic success in the modern world.

    The problem of British Universities is not the numbers of students going, it is the crap courses with minimal contact time that the Universities run.
    Well I agree with your final paragraph Foxy.
    And I'd argue that most degrees leave the educatee less ready for a job than had they spent the three years working.
    But we're often told that British universities consistently rank among the best in the world. And foreign students to to seem to want to pay for the experience.
    So I must admit I'm puzzled.

    On which subject, while I'm as in favour of learning for its own sake as the next man, having half of our youth spending a whole three years of their life learning for its own sake does seem a bit of an indulgence in a world in which we are being steadily bought by less self-indulgent nations.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,621
    CatMan said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    Agree, but you're talking about an instrumentalist, skills-based, vocational education, which is needed for some jobs. But education shouldn't just be about training for a job. And anyway, the thickest of the thick students I ever came across were nearly always doing business studies or computing.

    I'm talking about a love of learning, a thirst for knowledge, a world in which lorry drivers may wish to study Jane Austen at evening class, or care workers philosophy. Which reminds me, it was under Thatcher that some universities were pressurised into reducing or cutting out their philosophy courses. I hate the instrumentalist, every course must lead to a job discourse that dominates these days. But then I'm an idealist. We're talking at cross purposes really.
    Yes. I seem to remember OGH's son studied Philosophy. I think he's done ok for himself.
    Quite. I actually think that the quality of education is more important than what you study for most jobs that don't require specific technical or scientific skills and knowledge. Somebody who has been taught history well and is good at it will be much more employable than somebody who has been taught a vocational subject badly.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,140
    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.
  • CatMan said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    Agree, but you're talking about an instrumentalist, skills-based, vocational education, which is needed for some jobs. But education shouldn't just be about training for a job. And anyway, the thickest of the thick students I ever came across were nearly always doing business studies or computing.

    I'm talking about a love of learning, a thirst for knowledge, a world in which lorry drivers may wish to study Jane Austen at evening class, or care workers philosophy. Which reminds me, it was under Thatcher that some universities were pressurised into reducing or cutting out their philosophy courses. I hate the instrumentalist, every course must lead to a job discourse that dominates these days. But then I'm an idealist. We're talking at cross purposes really.
    Yes. I seem to remember OGH's son studied Philosophy. I think he's done ok for himself.
    Quite. I actually think that the quality of education is more important than what you study for most jobs that don't require specific technical or scientific skills and knowledge. Somebody who has been taught history well and is good at it will be much more employable than somebody who has been taught a vocational subject badly.
    Snobbery against degree is one of the worst aspects of modern British life.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,140

    CatMan said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    Agree, but you're talking about an instrumentalist, skills-based, vocational education, which is needed for some jobs. But education shouldn't just be about training for a job. And anyway, the thickest of the thick students I ever came across were nearly always doing business studies or computing.

    I'm talking about a love of learning, a thirst for knowledge, a world in which lorry drivers may wish to study Jane Austen at evening class, or care workers philosophy. Which reminds me, it was under Thatcher that some universities were pressurised into reducing or cutting out their philosophy courses. I hate the instrumentalist, every course must lead to a job discourse that dominates these days. But then I'm an idealist. We're talking at cross purposes really.
    Yes. I seem to remember OGH's son studied Philosophy. I think he's done ok for himself.
    Quite. I actually think that the quality of education is more important than what you study for most jobs that don't require specific technical or scientific skills and knowledge. Somebody who has been taught history well and is good at it will be much more employable than somebody who has been taught a vocational subject badly.
    Hah, you sound like my wife (history graduate from UCL)! She's a senior anti-money laundering person at an investment fund these days so there's a lot of truth to what you say.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 3,327
    edited September 8

    MaxPB said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    It's the first time I've been tempted by tax avoidance in my life, not because it's a lot of money, but because the government is no longer deserving of my very significant tax contribution. It's galling that rich old people are not paying their own way and costs are being lumped into working people.

    It has to be said, loads of my friends are feeling absolutely mutinous about this tax. Labour could capitalise on it really easily but they have a complete numpty in charge.
    I fully expect in 6-7 years the GE campaign being the Tories saying they will raise it to 2% and Labour talking about introducing new bands, of 0% through to 5%...
    The NHS can never have enough money in the eyes of the administrators in the trough and the ignorant public. At this point 40%+ of Govt. expenditure is spent by the DHSC, and we're fast becoming a money bonfire fuelled NHS with a country attached. Much like Prussia was an army with a country attached.

    Some of the stories I hear from my mates who work in the NHS are shocking, if anyone was serious about fixing the NHS they'd abolish most of the regional trusts, run procurement centrally (instead of the ridiculous duplication of roles and intra-NHS bidding wars), and execute IT staff and contractors until they get to a point where all the English NHS use the same software.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,744
    edited September 8

    Scott_xP said:

    Dan Hodges ( I know)

    Reshuffle speculation mounting tonight

    LATEST Senior Government sources confirming to me tonight there is definitely NO Cabinet reshuffle tomorrow. Put your phones back on silent everyone.
    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1435703465033052160
    Who knows, but the rumours have done their job of making the minions pliant for a key vote, and only a fool would throw away that power unnecessarily.

    Terrible as he is, Boris gets "Leader of the gang" dynamics.
    Maybe but Southgate bringing on Williamson as a late sub for centre half was a huge mistake.

    Rumours he was looking for Rashford when the goal went in are being denied but …
  • eekeek Posts: 14,875

    Scott_xP said:

    Ex-Cabinet Minister on HSC tax: “It’s a fucking suicide pact, whatever we raise it to it will never be enough. I hate it.”

    Me: “Wow, so you’re voting against it?”

    The MP: “I don’t see how I can.”

    🤷🏻‍♂️

    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1435611081045647367

    I see Tissue Price voted for it too

    The Conservative Party knew who they were electing when they made Johnson their leader. If they didn't, they weren't paying attention.

    They chose to ride the tiger anyway, because of his election-winning powers. (Most voters don't actually know Boris the Man, why should they, and Boris the Show is attractive.)

    And riding a tiger is great fun, until you want to dismount.
    Dismounting is easy, you just need to run quicker than 1 other person.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,481
    Scott_xP said:

    Ex-Cabinet Minister on HSC tax: “It’s a fucking suicide pact, whatever we raise it to it will never be enough. I hate it.”

    Me: “Wow, so you’re voting against it?”

    The MP: “I don’t see how I can.”

    🤷🏻‍♂️

    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1435611081045647367

    I see Tissue Price voted for it too

    These MPs don't have much backbone do they. If you don't like something, vote against it.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,491
    The polls get worse and worse for the CDU.
    image
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,481
    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,322

    I see England are running Kane et al into the ground. Now they are ahead, get Kane off.

    Loads of talent on the bench to see out the game.

    Dissed him to my mates at 21:01, humble pie consumed at 21:21….
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,140

    The polls get worse and worse for the CDU.
    image

    At this rate the SPD could conceivably get some really big momentum and finish on 33-37% with the only available government being the a grand coalition with the Union in the junior role.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,744
    Chameleon said:

    MaxPB said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    It's the first time I've been tempted by tax avoidance in my life, not because it's a lot of money, but because the government is no longer deserving of my very significant tax contribution. It's galling that rich old people are not paying their own way and costs are being lumped into working people.

    It has to be said, loads of my friends are feeling absolutely mutinous about this tax. Labour could capitalise on it really easily but they have a complete numpty in charge.
    I fully expect in 6-7 years the GE campaign being the Tories saying they will raise it to 2% and Labour talking about introducing new bands, of 0% through to 5%...
    The NHS can never have enough money in the eyes of the administrators in the trough and the ignorant public. At this point 40%+ of Govt. expenditure is spent by the DHSC, and we're fast becoming a money bonfire fuelled NHS with a country attached. Much like Prussia was an army with a country attached.

    Some of the stories I hear from my mates who work in the NHS are shocking, if anyone was serious about fixing the NHS they'd abolish most of the regional trusts, run procurement centrally (instead of the ridiculous duplication of roles and intra-NHS bidding wars), and execute IT staff and contractors until they get to a point where all the English NHS use the same software.
    I genuinely thought nothing could match the sheer bloody bonkerdom of nurses dancing around hospital beds at London 2012 but just maybe there is another peak to come.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 14,647
    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Ex-Cabinet Minister on HSC tax: “It’s a fucking suicide pact, whatever we raise it to it will never be enough. I hate it.”

    Me: “Wow, so you’re voting against it?”

    The MP: “I don’t see how I can.”

    🤷🏻‍♂️

    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1435611081045647367

    I see Tissue Price voted for it too

    These MPs don't have much backbone do they. If you don't like something, vote against it.
    If Mr Johnson has got it wrong, they're for dinner ...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p69OLjRoNcs
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,481
    MaxPB said:

    The polls get worse and worse for the CDU.
    image

    At this rate the SPD could conceivably get some really big momentum and finish on 33-37% with the only available government being the a grand coalition with the Union in the junior role.
    I think the Union might prefer to go into opposition, which means it'll be SPD plus Green plus hopefully the FDP rather than Linke.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222
    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,744
    sarissa said:

    I see England are running Kane et al into the ground. Now they are ahead, get Kane off.

    Loads of talent on the bench to see out the game.

    Dissed him to my mates at 21:01, humble pie consumed at 21:21….
    Did exactly the same. Contributing absolutely nothing. Oh, he’s scored.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222
    MaxPB said:

    The polls get worse and worse for the CDU.
    image

    At this rate the SPD could conceivably get some really big momentum and finish on 33-37% with the only available government being the a grand coalition with the Union in the junior role.
    If that ended up being the result I suspect Soder would take the CSU into opposition anyway
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,140
    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222
    edited September 8
    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Well to be fair they have been in power for 16 years, it is hardly that surprising they cannot sustain that forever
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 10,425
    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Ex-Cabinet Minister on HSC tax: “It’s a fucking suicide pact, whatever we raise it to it will never be enough. I hate it.”

    Me: “Wow, so you’re voting against it?”

    The MP: “I don’t see how I can.”

    🤷🏻‍♂️

    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1435611081045647367

    I see Tissue Price voted for it too

    These MPs don't have much backbone do they. If you don't like something, vote against it.
    It’s pathetic. Anyone with any sense should have given up on party politics long ago. It’s a house full of craven cowards.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,893

    Foxy said:

    //twitter.com/GuardianHeather/status/1434868457980444676

    In answer to your previous comments, I continue to identify as male.

    If I do decide to embrace my feminine animus, I shall signal the change by changing my name to Vixen.

    🦊
    Sorry for my mistake, Foxy.

    Hope you are otherwise well, Sir
    No problem! No reason to know my pronouns, and they don't really matter much to me.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 3,327
    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Well to be fair they have been in power for 16 years, it is hardly that surprising they cannot sustain that forever
    "Well to be fair they have been in power for 16 years, it is hardly that surprising they cannot sustain that forever"


    Finally, something that gives me optimism about British politics! Now we just beed the LDs to become relevant again.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222
    edited September 8
    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
    Utter crap.

    Most people in the North can afford to buy their own homes on an average income, most of us here in the South need an inheritance to help us on the property ladder from a grandparent or parents. I am certainly not going to be made to feel guilty by you, especially given you have openly said you want to abolish the NHS and seem to have zero empathy for pensioners not all of whom are well off and most of whom have paid into the system all their lives
  • HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Well to be fair they have been in power for 16 years, it is hardly that surprising they cannot sustain that forever
    Your party will have been in power for 14 years by the next election, while you cheer the loss of voters . . . 🤔
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 4,689

    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Ex-Cabinet Minister on HSC tax: “It’s a fucking suicide pact, whatever we raise it to it will never be enough. I hate it.”

    Me: “Wow, so you’re voting against it?”

    The MP: “I don’t see how I can.”

    🤷🏻‍♂️

    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1435611081045647367

    I see Tissue Price voted for it too

    These MPs don't have much backbone do they. If you don't like something, vote against it.
    It’s pathetic. Anyone with any sense should have given up on party politics long ago. It’s a house full of craven cowards.
    I'm not happy about it, but I have sympathy for the MPs. After all, what are Rory Stewart, David Gauke, etc, doing these days?
  • HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
    Utter crap.

    Most people in the North can afford to buy their own homes on an average income, most of us here in the South need an inheritance to help us on the property ladder from a grandparent or parents
    So as a Councillor in the South what is your policy to fix that problem?

    Or is your attitude to just have no solution?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,897

    I'm not happy about it, but I have sympathy for the MPs. After all, what are Rory Stewart, David Gauke, etc, doing these days?

    Preserving their dignity
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
    Utter crap.

    Most people in the North can afford to buy their own homes on an average income, most of us here in the South need an inheritance to help us on the property ladder from a grandparent or parents
    So as a Councillor in the South what is your policy to fix that problem?

    Or is your attitude to just have no solution?
    Tighten immigration laws to reduce demand, reduce foreign investment into London property, restrict new affordable homes for first time buyers to those who have lived in the local area for 7 years or more
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,893
    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    pigeon said:

    It is said London will be hit the hardest by the 1.25% charge

    It was so funny when a conservative mp said to Adam Boulton that television presenters on £400 000 will need to find another £4,500

    Yes it is really funny that a pensioner like you is getting an increase whilst us workers have to pay a lot more tax so you can enjoy life more and bequeath your family a nice house.

    Yes, I've just calculated how much extra I have to pay for this.
    Yes, I can imagine you've been burdened with a big fat extra bill. Even for us ordinary mortals who don't work for SwankyWankyBank plc it's still a good few hundred quid a year. For starters. I don't think that any of us believes that it'll stay at 1.25% for very long.
    To be honest I don't mind paying extra tax, even when my personal allowance was stolen, and my tax was whacked up to 50% there was an element of doing this for the greater good and that we were all in this together, now there's the government protecting their client vote, which is what Labour used to do.
    Did you oppose David Cameron when he brought in £9,000 a year tuition fees?
    No, I thought it would be a good way to stop people who really shouldn't go to university going.

    One of the big policy errors of my lifetime was Mrs Thatcher/John Major then Blair upping the university target of having 40-50% of students go to university.

    It is bloody stupid going to ready the history of needlework as a tool of oppression by the patriarchy at the University of Brighton with low job prospects at the end of it with £40k worth of debt at the end of it.

    Personally I'd end tuition fees for STEM, medicine, computing, engineering, history, and law degrees.

    Degrees the country really needs
    I'll have you know that my better half did an MA in the History of Fashion at the University of Brighton. Very rigorous it was too. Her first degree was in Performing Arts at a 'good' university. She went on to be successful enough to marry me.

    And seriously, it would be a miserable old world if we didn't have the scope for people to study the arts and humanities. There's nothing wrong with education for education's sake. It contributes hugely to a civilised society.
    I'm someone who over the last fifteen years has looked at lots of CVs of graduates and then see their qualitative and quantitative skills in pre interview tests I do wonder about some universities and the degrees and I think you've racked up £40k worth of debt for this? I'd be asking for a refund.
    I don't think Britons thicker than other nations, or at least would be reticent in suggesting it. 40-50% going on the tertiary degrees is not out of line with other developed nations, and even developing countries often educate 20% to that level. An educated workforce is a key to economic success in the modern world.

    The problem of British Universities is not the numbers of students going, it is the crap courses with minimal contact time that the Universities run.
    Well I agree with your final paragraph Foxy.
    And I'd argue that most degrees leave the educatee less ready for a job than had they spent the three years working.
    But we're often told that British universities consistently rank among the best in the world. And foreign students to to seem to want to pay for the experience.
    So I must admit I'm puzzled.

    On which subject, while I'm as in favour of learning for its own sake as the next man, having half of our youth spending a whole three years of their life learning for its own sake does seem a bit of an indulgence in a world in which we are being steadily bought by less self-indulgent nations.
    The rankings are mostly based on research, which is often quite removed from the undergraduate experience. Indeed research rankings are very much based on postgraduates, who often are foreign graduates.
  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 653
    We should maybe hold back on allowing assisted suicide if we can't agree on a route to fund care.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Well to be fair they have been in power for 16 years, it is hardly that surprising they cannot sustain that forever
    Your party will have been in power for 14 years by the next election, while you cheer the loss of voters . . . 🤔
    Every party needs to go into opposition for a period to refresh itself, no democracy should be a one party state
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,899
    MaxPB said:

    The polls get worse and worse for the CDU.
    image

    At this rate the SPD could conceivably get some really big momentum and finish on 33-37% with the only available government being the a grand coalition with the Union in the junior role.
    Do remember that others are 10% in that poll, so you only need 45% to get a majority, not 50%. And if Linke failed to make the cut, then you'd only need 42.5%. And that'd be a fairly easy SPD + Green coalition.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,899
    Andy_JS said:

    "@EuropeElects
    Germany, Allensbach poll:

    SPD-S&D: 27% (+3)
    CDU/CSU-EPP: 25% (-1)
    GRÜNE-G/EFA: 15.5% (-1.5)
    AfD-ID: 11% (+0.5)
    FDP-RE: 9.5% (-1)
    LINKE-LEFT: 6%

    +/- vs. 18-26 Aug

    Fieldwork: 1-7 September 2021
    Sample size: 1,258"

    That's a very different poll from the others - in particular CDU/CSU are high, and FDP low.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 29,621
    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Their problem is that they're no longer Merkel's party. I think they'd be solid if she was sticking around.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,140
    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
    Utter crap.

    Most people in the North can afford to buy their own homes on an average income, most of us here in the South need an inheritance to help us on the property ladder from a grandparent or parents. I am certainly not going to be made to feel guilty by you, especially given you have openly said you want to abolish the NHS and seem to have zero empathy for pensioners not all of whom are well off and most of whom have paid into the system all their lives
    You're impoverishing the working poor to protect your inheritance. Feel guilty.

    I've said from the beginning the tax should be raised by merging NI and income tax and keeping the £12.5k threshold. That means low income pensioners would see no tax rises, the working poor would see a tax reduction and pensioners on middle income, those who can afford it, would see a tax rise. I'd also tax unearned income at the same rate as earned income.

    Once again, your solution is to tax the working poor to allow rich old people to pass their assets on to their middle aged children who are already well off. You stand to benefit from it so you're in favour. It's the ultimate act of selfishness to be in favour of a tax on the poor to protect your future wealth.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222

    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Their problem is that they're no longer Merkel's party. I think they'd be solid if she was sticking around.
    They are very much Merkel's party, Laschet is her anointed heir.

    Had they been led by the more conservative Soder by contrast polls show they would be doing rather better
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222
    edited September 8
    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
    Utter crap.

    Most people in the North can afford to buy their own homes on an average income, most of us here in the South need an inheritance to help us on the property ladder from a grandparent or parents. I am certainly not going to be made to feel guilty by you, especially given you have openly said you want to abolish the NHS and seem to have zero empathy for pensioners not all of whom are well off and most of whom have paid into the system all their lives
    You're impoverishing the working poor to protect your inheritance. Feel guilty.

    I've said from the beginning the tax should be raised by merging NI and income tax and keeping the £12.5k threshold. That means low income pensioners would see no tax rises, the working poor would see a tax reduction and pensioners on middle income, those who can afford it, would see a tax rise. I'd also tax unearned income at the same rate as earned income.

    Once again, your solution is to tax the working poor to allow rich old people to pass their assets on to their middle aged children who are already well off. You stand to benefit from it so you're in favour. It's the ultimate act of selfishness to be in favour of a tax on the poor to protect your future wealth.
    No I am not, 1.25% NI for the NHS and social care is hardly impoverishment.

    You don't pay NI or income tax for earnings under £10,000 either.

    NI should be kept and ringfenced for the state pension, JSA and healthcare as it was originally set up to do.

    You are also wrong. Most children and grandchildren of property owners in the South and London on average incomes need an inheritance to buy property, they are not asset wise well off. Most under 40s in the North and Midlands however can buy their own properties even on an average income with few problems and without assistance as house prices are so much cheaper north of the Watford gap
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 29,074
    Just catching up, but I thought I ought to welcome @Philip_Thompson to the club.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222

    Just catching up, but I thought I ought to welcome @Philip_Thompson to the club.

    I am sure Sir Ed is preparing both your gold card LD memberships as we speak
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 29,621
    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Their problem is that they're no longer Merkel's party. I think they'd be solid if she was sticking around.
    They are very much Merkel's party, Laschet is her anointed heir.

    Had they been led by the more conservative Soder by contrast polls show they would be doing rather better
    So what? People voted and would still vote for Merkel, they won't for Laschet no matter how anointed he is.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,893
    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
    Utter crap.

    Most people in the North can afford to buy their own homes on an average income, most of us here in the South need an inheritance to help us on the property ladder from a grandparent or parents. I am certainly not going to be made to feel guilty by you, especially given you have openly said you want to abolish the NHS and seem to have zero empathy for pensioners not all of whom are well off and most of whom have paid into the system all their lives
    You're impoverishing the working poor to protect your inheritance. Feel guilty.

    I've said from the beginning the tax should be raised by merging NI and income tax and keeping the £12.5k threshold. That means low income pensioners would see no tax rises, the working poor would see a tax reduction and pensioners on middle income, those who can afford it, would see a tax rise. I'd also tax unearned income at the same rate as earned income.

    Once again, your solution is to tax the working poor to allow rich old people to pass their assets on to their middle aged children who are already well off. You stand to benefit from it so you're in favour. It's the ultimate act of selfishness to be in favour of a tax on the poor to protect your future wealth.
    No I am not, 1.25% NI for the NHS and social care is hardly impoverishment.

    You don't pay NI or income tax for earnings under £10,000 either.

    NI should be kept and ringfenced for the state pension, JSA and healthcare as it was originally set up to do.

    You are also wrong. Most children and grandchildren of property owners in the South and London on average incomes need an inheritance to buy property, they are not asset wise well off. Most under 40s in the North and Midlands however can buy their own properties even on an average income with few problems and without assistance as house prices are so much cheaper north of the Watford gap
    Class 1 NI starts at a threshold of £6240 annual income.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,140
    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
    Utter crap.

    Most people in the North can afford to buy their own homes on an average income, most of us here in the South need an inheritance to help us on the property ladder from a grandparent or parents. I am certainly not going to be made to feel guilty by you, especially given you have openly said you want to abolish the NHS and seem to have zero empathy for pensioners not all of whom are well off and most of whom have paid into the system all their lives
    You're impoverishing the working poor to protect your inheritance. Feel guilty.

    I've said from the beginning the tax should be raised by merging NI and income tax and keeping the £12.5k threshold. That means low income pensioners would see no tax rises, the working poor would see a tax reduction and pensioners on middle income, those who can afford it, would see a tax rise. I'd also tax unearned income at the same rate as earned income.

    Once again, your solution is to tax the working poor to allow rich old people to pass their assets on to their middle aged children who are already well off. You stand to benefit from it so you're in favour. It's the ultimate act of selfishness to be in favour of a tax on the poor to protect your future wealth.
    No I am not, 1.25% NI for the NHS and social care is hardly impoverishment.

    You don't pay NI or income tax for earnings under £10,000 either.

    NI should be kept and ringfenced for the state pension, JSA and healthcare as it was originally set up to do.

    You are also wrong. Most children and grandchildren of property owners in the South and London on average incomes need an inheritance to buy property, they are not asset wise well off. Most under 40s in the North and Midlands however can buy their own properties even on an average income with few problems and without assistance as house prices are so much cheaper north of the Watford gap
    For someone earning £25k with kids losing £200 from their pay is not going to be easy to afford.

    Honestly, it's like talking to a brick wall. You epitomise the current Tories, selfish and clueless.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,621

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Well to be fair they have been in power for 16 years, it is hardly that surprising they cannot sustain that forever
    Your party will have been in power for 14 years by the next election, while you cheer the loss of voters . . . 🤔
    "Your party". Brilliant, PT. Never thought I'd see the day.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,140

    Just catching up, but I thought I ought to welcome @Philip_Thompson to the club.

    We gave him a warm welcome earlier. I believe @Casino_Royale is set to join us in the next few days as well.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Well to be fair they have been in power for 16 years, it is hardly that surprising they cannot sustain that forever
    Your party will have been in power for 14 years by the next election, while you cheer the loss of voters . . . 🤔
    "Your party". Brilliant, PT. Never thought I'd see the day.
    He voted for Blair and Farage, it is nothing new
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 14,647
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
    Utter crap.

    Most people in the North can afford to buy their own homes on an average income, most of us here in the South need an inheritance to help us on the property ladder from a grandparent or parents. I am certainly not going to be made to feel guilty by you, especially given you have openly said you want to abolish the NHS and seem to have zero empathy for pensioners not all of whom are well off and most of whom have paid into the system all their lives
    You're impoverishing the working poor to protect your inheritance. Feel guilty.

    I've said from the beginning the tax should be raised by merging NI and income tax and keeping the £12.5k threshold. That means low income pensioners would see no tax rises, the working poor would see a tax reduction and pensioners on middle income, those who can afford it, would see a tax rise. I'd also tax unearned income at the same rate as earned income.

    Once again, your solution is to tax the working poor to allow rich old people to pass their assets on to their middle aged children who are already well off. You stand to benefit from it so you're in favour. It's the ultimate act of selfishness to be in favour of a tax on the poor to protect your future wealth.
    No I am not, 1.25% NI for the NHS and social care is hardly impoverishment.

    You don't pay NI or income tax for earnings under £10,000 either.

    NI should be kept and ringfenced for the state pension, JSA and healthcare as it was originally set up to do.

    You are also wrong. Most children and grandchildren of property owners in the South and London on average incomes need an inheritance to buy property, they are not asset wise well off. Most under 40s in the North and Midlands however can buy their own properties even on an average income with few problems and without assistance as house prices are so much cheaper north of the Watford gap
    Class 1 NI starts at a threshold of £6240 annual income.
    He's rounding up to the nearest 10k.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 29,074
    HYUFD said:

    Just catching up, but I thought I ought to welcome @Philip_Thompson to the club.

    I am sure Sir Ed is preparing both your gold card LD memberships as we speak
    Why do you think that? It's conceivable that I might vote LibDem at the next election, but only because after 50-odd years of voting Conservative, they might be a less awful alternative than the lot who have taken over the Conservative Party. Or I might vote Labour, although they don't seem to be a serious alternative at the moment. I doubt if I'll abstain - after all, an important reason why I was a Conservative in the first place was because I abhor the avoidance of difficult decisions - but I'm certainly not going to be supporting any of the current parties with any enthusiasm.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222
    edited September 8

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Their problem is that they're no longer Merkel's party. I think they'd be solid if she was sticking around.
    They are very much Merkel's party, Laschet is her anointed heir.

    Had they been led by the more conservative Soder by contrast polls show they would be doing rather better
    So what? People voted and would still vote for Merkel, they won't for Laschet no matter how anointed he is.
    Laschet's policies are virtually identical to Merkel's and Merkel had already led the Union to its lowest voteshare since 1949 in 2017.

    Expect the Union to move to the right in opposition and away from Merkelism
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,621
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Well to be fair they have been in power for 16 years, it is hardly that surprising they cannot sustain that forever
    Your party will have been in power for 14 years by the next election, while you cheer the loss of voters . . . 🤔
    "Your party". Brilliant, PT. Never thought I'd see the day.
    He voted for Blair and Farage, it is nothing new
    I don't care. It still gives me great pleasure to see Tories/ex-Tories fighting tooth and nail.

    The Labour Party is a sea of tranquility by comparison at the moment (especially since one remaining Corbynite jumped ship earlier).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 89,222
    edited September 8
    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
    Utter crap.

    Most people in the North can afford to buy their own homes on an average income, most of us here in the South need an inheritance to help us on the property ladder from a grandparent or parents. I am certainly not going to be made to feel guilty by you, especially given you have openly said you want to abolish the NHS and seem to have zero empathy for pensioners not all of whom are well off and most of whom have paid into the system all their lives
    You're impoverishing the working poor to protect your inheritance. Feel guilty.

    I've said from the beginning the tax should be raised by merging NI and income tax and keeping the £12.5k threshold. That means low income pensioners would see no tax rises, the working poor would see a tax reduction and pensioners on middle income, those who can afford it, would see a tax rise. I'd also tax unearned income at the same rate as earned income.

    Once again, your solution is to tax the working poor to allow rich old people to pass their assets on to their middle aged children who are already well off. You stand to benefit from it so you're in favour. It's the ultimate act of selfishness to be in favour of a tax on the poor to protect your future wealth.
    No I am not, 1.25% NI for the NHS and social care is hardly impoverishment.

    You don't pay NI or income tax for earnings under £10,000 either.

    NI should be kept and ringfenced for the state pension, JSA and healthcare as it was originally set up to do.

    You are also wrong. Most children and grandchildren of property owners in the South and London on average incomes need an inheritance to buy property, they are not asset wise well off. Most under 40s in the North and Midlands however can buy their own properties even on an average income with few problems and without assistance as house prices are so much cheaper north of the Watford gap
    For someone earning £25k with kids losing £200 from their pay is not going to be easy to afford.

    Honestly, it's like talking to a brick wall. You epitomise the current Tories, selfish and clueless.
    If you are on £25k in the North you can afford your own home with or without that £200. You and your kids also use the NHS it will go to.

    If you are on £25k in the South you cannot afford your own home with or without that £200 without an inheritance
  • AslanAslan Posts: 596
    rcs1000 said:

    I think we need to coin a new catch phrase for right of centre people who criticise the government in any way. I was thinking of

    "Why don't you fuck off and join the Liberal Democrats"

    I feel like the British right doesn't ostracize non-purists the way the British left and American right do.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,899
    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    That was something else my dad said which stuck with me a bit - any older person who isn't against this is a person without a conscience and has no empathy for the following generations. It matches up with my experience of posters in favour and against this policy on PB. He was ashamed of his own generation's selfishness tonight, he knows they've had it good with property prices being what they were when they were buying their houses in the 70s and 80s.

    Well I am under 40 and disagree.

    Yes here in the South housing is more expensive than it has been but I also know I will inherit far more than my parents or grandparents did too. So it works both ways
    Yes well you're just reaffirming what he said. Someone without conscience or empathy could have your picture next to it in the dictionary.
    Utter crap.

    Most people in the North can afford to buy their own homes on an average income, most of us here in the South need an inheritance to help us on the property ladder from a grandparent or parents. I am certainly not going to be made to feel guilty by you, especially given you have openly said you want to abolish the NHS and seem to have zero empathy for pensioners not all of whom are well off and most of whom have paid into the system all their lives
    You're impoverishing the working poor to protect your inheritance. Feel guilty.

    I've said from the beginning the tax should be raised by merging NI and income tax and keeping the £12.5k threshold. That means low income pensioners would see no tax rises, the working poor would see a tax reduction and pensioners on middle income, those who can afford it, would see a tax rise. I'd also tax unearned income at the same rate as earned income.

    Once again, your solution is to tax the working poor to allow rich old people to pass their assets on to their middle aged children who are already well off. You stand to benefit from it so you're in favour. It's the ultimate act of selfishness to be in favour of a tax on the poor to protect your future wealth.
    No I am not, 1.25% NI for the NHS and social care is hardly impoverishment.

    You don't pay NI or income tax for earnings under £10,000 either.

    NI should be kept and ringfenced for the state pension, JSA and healthcare as it was originally set up to do.

    You are also wrong. Most children and grandchildren of property owners in the South and London on average incomes need an inheritance to buy property, they are not asset wise well off. Most under 40s in the North and Midlands however can buy their own properties even on an average income with few problems and without assistance as house prices are so much cheaper north of the Watford gap
    For someone earning £25k with kids losing £200 from their pay is not going to be easy to afford.

    Honestly, it's like talking to a brick wall. You epitomise the current Tories, selfish and clueless.
    If you are on £25k in the North you can afford your own home with or without that £200. You and your kids also use the NHS it will go to.

    If you are on £25k in the South you cannot afford your own home with or without that £200 without an inheritance
    Ummm.

    In Greater Manchester, there aren't many three bedroom homes available for a four multiple on that £25k income.

    In fact, in the whole of Greater Manchester, I find exactly three properties. And it's fair to say they require extensive modernisation.

    https://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/houses/manchester/?beds_min=3&q=Manchester, Greater Manchester&results_sort=newest_listings&search_source=home
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 29,621
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    It's game over for Merkel's party. There isn't enough time for a recovery IMO.

    Their problem is that they're no longer Merkel's party. I think they'd be solid if she was sticking around.
    They are very much Merkel's party, Laschet is her anointed heir.

    Had they been led by the more conservative Soder by contrast polls show they would be doing rather better
    So what? People voted and would still vote for Merkel, they won't for Laschet no matter how anointed he is.
    Laschet's policies are virtually identical to Merkel's and Merkel had already led the Union to its lowest voteshare since 1949 in 2017.

    Expect the Union to move to the right in opposition and away from Merkelism
    Is the the CSU's vote under Söder going to go up this election?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,899

    HYUFD said:

    Just catching up, but I thought I ought to welcome @Philip_Thompson to the club.

    I am sure Sir Ed is preparing both your gold card LD memberships as we speak
    Why do you think that? It's conceivable that I might vote LibDem at the next election, but only because after 50-odd years of voting Conservative, they might be a less awful alternative than the lot who have taken over the Conservative Party. Or I might vote Labour, although they don't seem to be a serious alternative at the moment. I doubt if I'll abstain - after all, an important reason why I was a Conservative in the first place was because I abhor the avoidance of difficult decisions - but I'm certainly not going to be supporting any of the current parties with any enthusiasm.
    If the LibDem parliamentary party consisted mostly of people like Ed Davey, Daisy Cooper and Alistair Carmichael, then I don't think it would be a very hard choice.

    Sadly...
This discussion has been closed.