A judge has ruled that the wife of former DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson is unfit to face a criminal trial on sexual offences charges due to the state of her mental health.
Eleanor Donaldson, aged 60, will now face what is called a "trial of facts" rather than a normal trial.
That means a jury cannot find her guilty but will be asked to determine whether she committed the offences she is charged with. ... Dr Christine Kennedy told the court that Ms Donaldson was found to be "severely depressed", suicidal and suffering with "high levels of anxiety".
She said that on the balance of probabilities Ms Donaldson would not be able to instruct her legal team, could not follow the trial proceedings and would not be able to give evidence.
Happens regularly, happened in 2012 with a former MP.
Margaret Moran, the former Labour MP, has been ruled "unfit to plead" to charges of falsely claiming £80,000 in expenses and will not face trial.
The 56-year-old is suffering from severe depressive mental illness and extreme anxiety and agitation due to the stress of legal proceedings and issues in her childhood, a court was told.
She also suffered feelings of abandonment by the Labour party, and intense shame that her parliamentary career was over.
Next up, kitchen knives and playing on the motorway not safe enough for kids.
I watch History Matters (think it changed the name from 10 Minute History) and he can't say Adolf Hitler for censorship/demonetisation reasons. The idea more censorship and verification is a good thing is delinquent. It's propagated by the ignorant/naive and tech firms wanting more data to harvest.
Next up, kitchen knives and playing on the motorway not safe enough for kids.
I watch History Matters (think it changed the name from 10 Minute History) and he can't say Adolf Hitler for censorship/demonetisation reasons. The idea more censorship and verification is a good thing is delinquent. It's propagated by the ignorant/naive and tech firms wanting more data to harvest.
I don’t think he’s going to win, but he’s put in one hell of a campaign.
Pratt is an actor/celebrity type who lost his house in the big fire last year, and is furious that the city is getting in the way of letting people rebuild.
Primary is on June 2nd, top two go to a runoff in November unless one of the 14(!) candidates gets 50%.
I'm off to bed now, but tomorrow I'll do a little write up on the Los Angeles mayoral campaign.
TK;DR: Bass won't clear 50%, and is not particularly popular. But probably beats Pratt in November. (And Trump's super for Pratt probably does him no favours in the run off.)
If she faces Miller, though, then I could see her losing. Raman too would likely run her close in a the forced choice.
A party almost no one has heard of outside Twitter and Great Yarmouth will win? I cannot see it. Betting is small and bettors know little.
My assumption is that these aren't normal bettors. They're either online Restore supporters high on their own supply, or it's someone with enough money to throw it away to create a newspaper story about a surge in support for Restore by forcing the odds short.
Yes it’ll be someone trying to get a story running that Restore are in contention, it doesn’t take a lot of money at this stage to move the odds significantly, then the odds snapshot can be used in campaign leaflets, social media etc.
The only unknown is who’s betting, and what party or agenda they represent - look for which party is first out with advertising about betting odds…
Next up, kitchen knives and playing on the motorway not safe enough for kids.
I watch History Matters (think it changed the name from 10 Minute History) and he can't say Adolf Hitler for censorship/demonetisation reasons. The idea more censorship and verification is a good thing is delinquent. It's propagated by the ignorant/naive and tech firms wanting more data to harvest.
I've Just seen the latest and most significant poll which shows Farage and his fascists going in the wrong direction. I never thought the UK public would fall for the nasty little man and his army of grifters but it wasn't obvious who was going to knock him off his perch.
tt wasn't going to be Kemi. Too clever by half and leading a party few would welcome seeing again outside of their worst nightmares. Nor Starmer who for whatever reason the public wouldn't take to and never seemed to get it right.
Then out of the blue comes Manchester's blue eyed boy and everything just fell into place.....
I used to drink my morning espresso out of ordinary industrial coffee cups. Made by clay from a spray gun, sent on a conveyor belt into a kiln, packed by another machine, shipped 6,000 miles in a container, and sold to me through six layers of distribution. Total human contact: almost nil
Now I drink from this. Bloor Derby coffee can. Cast in Derbyshire from local clays in about 1815. Thrown or moulded by a named workman. Decorated in Imari-style with exquisite cobalt and gold by a painter whose number was 4 - it’s marked on the base - and whose hand can be traced on the asymmetric surface. Further gilded by a specialist. Fired in coal kilns by stokers. Sold to a specific Regency household - or possibly a coffee house. Then handed down or sold on. It is tiny and precious and it has endured and survived two hundred years of turmoil, attics, house-moves, two world wars, two pandemics, and now it fetches up in Camden
£21 on eBay
Mug
I suspect there's a NT visitor with a capacious bag and an ebay account
You can find stuff like this gathering dust in most provincial tat-o-ramas.
Next up, kitchen knives and playing on the motorway not safe enough for kids.
I watch History Matters (think it changed the name from 10 Minute History) and he can't say Adolf Hitler for censorship/demonetisation reasons. The idea more censorship and verification is a good thing is delinquent. It's propagated by the ignorant/naive and tech firms wanting more data to harvest.
I think he calls him the Angry Austrian Moustache-Having Man or something similar.
The swastika is also replaced with text explaining he's not allowed to show it.
I've also seen stuff on TwX (so could be wrong but seems genuine) of historical accounts being taken down entirely for showing what amounts to basic historical footage. Due to AI bots deciding it's worse than it is.
All while AI slop increases for subjects like science and history.
I think it also speaks to a deeper issue. I think he's unlikely to move Cooper from FO. Reeves will likely go to give Miliband a bigger role. Mahmood to stay in the Home Office. That's foreign policy and internal policy staying the same, with an expanded role for existing environmental policies. So the only point in a leadership change is what? That Labour has a stonking majority (pulling in different directions, mind) and Andy Burnham feels like he deserves to reap the benefit of that, despite his minimal input in winning it?
I've Just seen the latest and most significant poll which shows Farage and his fascists going in the wrong direction. I never thought the UK public would fall for the nasty little man and his army of grifters but it wasn't obvious who was going to knock him off his perch.
tt wasn't going to be Kemi. Too clever by half and leading a party few would welcome seeing again outside of their worst nightmares. Nor Starmer who for whatever reason the public wouldn't take to and never seemed to get it right.
Then out of the blue comes Manchester's blue eyed boy and everything just fell into place.....
He is not the messiah Roger. Think again. He is as bad as all.the other labour politicians who have no ideas for the country than to take money from.those who have and give it to those who don't work and live a life off the state that those who work can only dream of.
I don’t think he’s going to win, but he’s put in one hell of a campaign.
Pratt is an actor/celebrity type who lost his house in the big fire last year, and is furious that the city is getting in the way of letting people rebuild.
Primary is on June 2nd, top two go to a runoff in November unless one of the 14(!) candidates gets 50%.
I'm off to bed now, but tomorrow I'll do a little write up on the Los Angeles mayoral campaign.
TK;DR: Bass won't clear 50%, and is not particularly popular. But probably beats Pratt in November. (And Trump's super for Pratt probably does him no favours in the run off.)
If she faces Miller, though, then I could see her losing. Raman too would likely run her close in a the forced choice.
Okay, looking forward to it.
Agree that Trump needs to say as little as possible about Pratt, if asked say little more than that he thinks the ads are funny.
Pratt’s cutting through with people who hate Trump but want to see LA cleaned up. It’s a nonpartisan race so there’s no (R) or (D) on the ballot.
Raman’s candidacy seems to be to try and get Pratt out, she comes across as Bass’s best friend and only entered at the last minute.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
I've Just seen the latest and most significant poll which shows Farage and his fascists going in the wrong direction. I never thought the UK public would fall for the nasty little man and his army of grifters but it wasn't obvious who was going to knock him off his perch.
tt wasn't going to be Kemi. Too clever by half and leading a party few would welcome seeing again outside of their worst nightmares. Nor Starmer who for whatever reason the public wouldn't take to and never seemed to get it right.
Then out of the blue comes Manchester's blue eyed boy and everything just fell into place.....
He is not the messiah Roger. Think again. He is as bad as all.the other labour politicians who have no ideas for the country than to take money from.those who have and give it to those who don't work and live a life off the state that those who work can only dream of.
Listen to the track. It'll get rid of some of the gloom you see around you
Next up, kitchen knives and playing on the motorway not safe enough for kids.
I watch History Matters (think it changed the name from 10 Minute History) and he can't say Adolf Hitler for censorship/demonetisation reasons. The idea more censorship and verification is a good thing is delinquent. It's propagated by the ignorant/naive and tech firms wanting more data to harvest.
I think he calls him the Angry Austrian Moustache-Having Man or something similar.
The swastika is also replaced with text explaining he's not allowed to show it.
I've also seen stuff on TwX (so could be wrong but seems genuine) of historical accounts being taken down entirely for showing what amounts to basic historical footage. Due to AI bots deciding it's worse than it is.
All while AI slop increases for subjects like science and history.
Problem: Things like YouTube can only work if the "editorial" function is completely automated. But as of now, automated editorial judgement doesn't work. It's possible that it never will- if things go wrong, there's nobody responsible.
Whatever the frustrations of the old ways, when there were a small number of outlets with clear gatekeepers, they had some definite benefits for viewers.
A judge has ruled that the wife of former DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson is unfit to face a criminal trial on sexual offences charges due to the state of her mental health.
Eleanor Donaldson, aged 60, will now face what is called a "trial of facts" rather than a normal trial.
That means a jury cannot find her guilty but will be asked to determine whether she committed the offences she is charged with. ... Dr Christine Kennedy told the court that Ms Donaldson was found to be "severely depressed", suicidal and suffering with "high levels of anxiety".
She said that on the balance of probabilities Ms Donaldson would not be able to instruct her legal team, could not follow the trial proceedings and would not be able to give evidence.
The prospect of a long custodial sentence can do that to you
That was my thought. It must be pretty normal to feel anxious and depressed when facing such charges (particularly when you read between the lines in this particular case).
It seems astonishing that it should give you an out from having to face trial and the potential for conviction.
Well exactly. It's Northern Ireland though, so what did you expect? Hopefully the people that Jeffrey Donaldson has absolutely no connection to whatsoever have drawn the line at sorting out a similar get out for Jeffrey.
And I remember people casting doubt on my recounting how an NHS psychiatrist of my acquaintance was… encouraged… to give the right diagnostic reports on people facing trial.
I've Just seen the latest and most significant poll which shows Farage and his fascists going in the wrong direction. I never thought the UK public would fall for the nasty little man and his army of grifters but it wasn't obvious who was going to knock him off his perch.
tt wasn't going to be Kemi. Too clever by half and leading a party few would welcome seeing again outside of their worst nightmares. Nor Starmer who for whatever reason the public wouldn't take to and never seemed to get it right.
Then out of the blue comes Manchester's blue eyed boy and everything just fell into place.....
He is not the messiah Roger. Think again. He is as bad as all.the other labour politicians who have no ideas for the country than to take money from.those who have and give it to those who don't work and live a life off the state that those who work can only dream of.
Listen to the track. It'll get rid of some of the gloom you see around you
Good morning
Burnham should give a boost to labour and as a northerner knows how immigration is a big issue and has apparently said he will keep Mahmood as Home Secretary
Kemi has already pledged her support for Mahmood's proposals so we may at last be heading to consensus on immigration, the biggesr reason for the rise in Reform
Next up, kitchen knives and playing on the motorway not safe enough for kids.
I watch History Matters (think it changed the name from 10 Minute History) and he can't say Adolf Hitler for censorship/demonetisation reasons. The idea more censorship and verification is a good thing is delinquent. It's propagated by the ignorant/naive and tech firms wanting more data to harvest.
I think he calls him the Angry Austrian Moustache-Having Man or something similar.
The swastika is also replaced with text explaining he's not allowed to show it.
I've also seen stuff on TwX (so could be wrong but seems genuine) of historical accounts being taken down entirely for showing what amounts to basic historical footage. Due to AI bots deciding it's worse than it is.
All while AI slop increases for subjects like science and history.
Problem: Things like YouTube can only work if the "editorial" function is completely automated. But as of now, automated editorial judgement doesn't work. It's possible that it never will- if things go wrong, there's nobody responsible.
Whatever the frustrations of the old ways, when there were a small number of outlets with clear gatekeepers, they had some definite benefits for viewers.
I'd add that getting redress if the AI decides you're a fascist or abuser rather than someone just hosting a history channel is very difficult, even for bigger channels. Smaller ones just get crushed.
The corporatist death of Birmingham Recently there has been a rash of people on PB deprecating the corporatism of the 1945-1979 era, in particular its damage to the MIdlands. Previously I was only aware of @Luckyguy1983 holding this view (I think it came up during my Blob article), but apparently there's more than one of you. To try to put things in the one place, the three links below were listed by them in the past few days on PB
Both videos are incredibly simplistic in their conclusion. There is another one by the same guy stating how the MGB was the car that broke the British car industry. I thought without the political angle that wasn't particularly interesting for our audience. But this guy clearly has his own political agenda. I only posted as a bit of fun. I hope no one is earnest enough to take them at face value.
There is both more than a grain of truth that the Attlee and Wilson Governments had a hand in the decline of Birmingham, but he conveniently paints Thatcher as trying to stop the decline in 1981. It is a one subject focus and does not consider the economic policy of the 1980s. Neither does he consider (and PBers will like this) immigration on the social side of the city's recent evolution. Birmingham suffered from a specific Government intervention which didn't help but Birmingham isn't the only city suffering from post war decline.
The Tony Benn video also paints a specific politically inspired picture that Tony Benn and the Labour Government by creating British Leyland Motor Holdings in 1968 destroyed the British motor industry and his argument is superficially compelling. But British Leyland Motor Holdings was created to save BMC ( including Jaguar) and what it actually did was bring down Rover and Triumph too. Benn's decision to create the World's fourth biggest motor conglomerate with hindsight was a poor decision ( more recently see Stellantis and GM divesting itself of and culling brands).
They are really well made videos, I thought them clever and I enjoyed them, but I also have enough historical insight to question why they are so disingenuous and their conclusions so incredibly simply and generally wrong, but with a pinch of right.
I think it also speaks to a deeper issue. I think he's unlikely to move Cooper from FO. Reeves will likely go to give Miliband a bigger role. Mahmood to stay in the Home Office. That's foreign policy and internal policy staying the same, with an expanded role for existing environmental policies. So the only point in a leadership change is what? That Labour has a stonking majority (pulling in different directions, mind) and Andy Burnham feels like he deserves to reap the benefit of that, despite his minimal input in winning it?
I think you're right. I get the impression he's just hoisting all sorts of nonsense up the flagpole to see if anybody salutes but over the next few weeks he'll start applying his brain and realise that he needs a lot of those Zack voters and this isn't what they want to hear.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
The corporatist death of Birmingham Recently there has been a rash of people on PB deprecating the corporatism of the 1945-1979 era, in particular its damage to the MIdlands. Previously I was only aware of @Luckyguy1983 holding this view (I think it came up during my Blob article), but apparently there's more than one of you. To try to put things in the one place, the three links below were listed by them in the past few days on PB
Both videos are incredibly simplistic in their conclusion. There is another one by the same guy stating how the MGB was the car that broke the British car industry. I thought without the political angle that wasn't particularly interesting for our audience. But this guy clearly has his own political agenda. I only posted as a bit of fun. I hope no one is earnest enough to take them at face value.
There is both more than a grain of truth that the Attlee and Wilson Governments had a hand in the decline of Birmingham, but he conveniently paints Thatcher as trying to stop the decline in 1981. It is a one subject focus and does not consider the economic policy of the 1980s. Neither does he consider (and PBers will like this) immigration on the social side of the city's recent evolution. Birmingham suffered from a specific Government intervention which didn't help but Birmingham isn't the only city suffering from post war decline.
The Tony Benn video also paints a specific politically inspired picture that Tony Benn and the Labour Government by creating British Leyland Motor Holdings in 1968 destroyed the British motor industry and his argument is superficially compelling. But British Leyland Motor Holdings was created to save BMC ( including Jaguar) and what it actually did was bring down Rover and Triumph too. Benn's decision to create the World's fourth biggest motor conglomerate with hindsight was a poor decision ( more recently see Stellantis and GM divesting itself of and culling brands).
They are really well made videos, I thought them clever and I enjoyed them, but I also have enough historical insight to question why they are so disingenuous and their conclusions so incredibly simply and generally wrong, but with a pinch of right.
Does anyone know who is behind METTLE?
Hard to say because there is no details anywhere and as the domain name is a UK one its redacted.
I suspect to find out someone is going to have to tell nominet that it's a business so needs to display it's details but it's clearly well funded - if you go their website there is a free hardback book if you want to give them your details.
I think it also speaks to a deeper issue. I think he's unlikely to move Cooper from FO. Reeves will likely go to give Miliband a bigger role. Mahmood to stay in the Home Office. That's foreign policy and internal policy staying the same, with an expanded role for existing environmental policies. So the only point in a leadership change is what? That Labour has a stonking majority (pulling in different directions, mind) and Andy Burnham feels like he deserves to reap the benefit of that, despite his minimal input in winning it?
I think you're right. I get the impression he's just hoisting all sorts of nonsense up the flagpole to see if anybody salutes but over the next few weeks he'll start applying his brain and realise that he needs a lot of those Zack voters and this isn't what they want to hear.
A party almost no one has heard of outside Twitter and Great Yarmouth will win? I cannot see it. Betting is small and bettors know little.
My assumption is that these aren't normal bettors. They're either online Restore supporters high on their own supply, or it's someone with enough money to throw it away to create a newspaper story about a surge in support for Restore by forcing the odds short.
Yes it’ll be someone trying to get a story running that Restore are in contention, it doesn’t take a lot of money at this stage to move the odds significantly, then the odds snapshot can be used in campaign leaflets, social media etc.
The only unknown is who’s betting, and what party or agenda they represent - look for which party is first out with advertising about betting odds…
The only people pushing the Restore betting story appears to be people sympathetic to Restore.
Cautious optimism today that Andy Burnham might win this by-election and that he will therefore become PM. This is the reset that Labour needs and, in my view, the country.
I thought @Garethofthevale 's thread was excellent. I can see Labour getting back towards 30% in the polls, at least for a time, and he has enough northern street cred to hopefully see off Reform or Tory-Reform.
Many of you LibDems and Greens, and even some of you soft Conservatives, might need to hold your noses here for the greater good. This isn't all one-way: I know plenty of Labour people who voted for parties other than their own when Corbyn was in charge.
The alternative Reform-driven path would be horrific for Britain.
Next up, kitchen knives and playing on the motorway not safe enough for kids.
I watch History Matters (think it changed the name from 10 Minute History) and he can't say Adolf Hitler for censorship/demonetisation reasons. The idea more censorship and verification is a good thing is delinquent. It's propagated by the ignorant/naive and tech firms wanting more data to harvest.
I think he calls him the Angry Austrian Moustache-Having Man or something similar.
The swastika is also replaced with text explaining he's not allowed to show it.
I've also seen stuff on TwX (so could be wrong but seems genuine) of historical accounts being taken down entirely for showing what amounts to basic historical footage. Due to AI bots deciding it's worse than it is.
All while AI slop increases for subjects like science and history.
The problem isn’t moderation of content. The problem is moderation of content done on the cheap. The big tech companies sacked lots of staff and use automated tools, but the automated tools make these sorts of mistakes, blocking genuine historical content while letting through AI slop rage bait.
I think it also speaks to a deeper issue. I think he's unlikely to move Cooper from FO. Reeves will likely go to give Miliband a bigger role. Mahmood to stay in the Home Office. That's foreign policy and internal policy staying the same, with an expanded role for existing environmental policies. So the only point in a leadership change is what? That Labour has a stonking majority (pulling in different directions, mind) and Andy Burnham feels like he deserves to reap the benefit of that, despite his minimal input in winning it?
I think you're right. I get the impression he's just hoisting all sorts of nonsense up the flagpole to see if anybody salutes but over the next few weeks he'll start applying his brain and realise that he needs a lot of those Zack voters and this isn't what they want to hear.
His pitch to round up Green voters has to be similar to Starmer's pitch to win over Jezza voters. Perhaps Burnham will pay lip service to their concerns rather than throw them under the bus (or out of the party) like Starmer did.
I suspect despite being a disingenuous t*** Burnham is better at politics than Starmer.
Next up, kitchen knives and playing on the motorway not safe enough for kids.
I watch History Matters (think it changed the name from 10 Minute History) and he can't say Adolf Hitler for censorship/demonetisation reasons. The idea more censorship and verification is a good thing is delinquent. It's propagated by the ignorant/naive and tech firms wanting more data to harvest.
I think he calls him the Angry Austrian Moustache-Having Man or something similar.
The swastika is also replaced with text explaining he's not allowed to show it.
I've also seen stuff on TwX (so could be wrong but seems genuine) of historical accounts being taken down entirely for showing what amounts to basic historical footage. Due to AI bots deciding it's worse than it is.
All while AI slop increases for subjects like science and history.
The problem isn’t moderation of content. The problem is moderation of content done on the cheap. The big tech companies sacked lots of staff and use automated tools, but the automated tools make these sorts of mistakes, blocking genuine historical content while letting through AI slop rage bait.
Of course, the rage generates engagement. The system is seriously flawed.
I've Just seen the latest and most significant poll which shows Farage and his fascists going in the wrong direction. I never thought the UK public would fall for the nasty little man and his army of grifters but it wasn't obvious who was going to knock him off his perch.
tt wasn't going to be Kemi. Too clever by half and leading a party few would welcome seeing again outside of their worst nightmares. Nor Starmer who for whatever reason the public wouldn't take to and never seemed to get it right.
Then out of the blue comes Manchester's blue eyed boy and everything just fell into place.....
My tory-voting business acquaintance in Manchester loves Andy Burnham. Says he "has been brilliant for business". This is a guy who runs a pub and recently opened a restaurant there, neither of which is exactly easy-rider work.
When a politician cuts across the political divide like this, you need to sit up. Of course, the real test is whether he can replicate it nationally and electorally. But the last politician to reach out across the party divide like that was ... Boris. And before them, Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher. Now Andy Burnham is a long long way from those proven electoral geniuses but there's a potential sea-change coming in British politics.
A party almost no one has heard of outside Twitter and Great Yarmouth will win? I cannot see it. Betting is small and bettors know little.
My assumption is that these aren't normal bettors. They're either online Restore supporters high on their own supply, or it's someone with enough money to throw it away to create a newspaper story about a surge in support for Restore by forcing the odds short.
Yes it’ll be someone trying to get a story running that Restore are in contention, it doesn’t take a lot of money at this stage to move the odds significantly, then the odds snapshot can be used in campaign leaflets, social media etc.
The only unknown is who’s betting, and what party or agenda they represent - look for which party is first out with advertising about betting odds…
The only people pushing the Restore betting story appears to be people sympathetic to Restore.
It was quite a few years ago, when political “operatives” in the U.K. first tried creating stories by creating shifts in the betting market. Didn’t work and faded quite quickly.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
If anyone was wondering why Robert Kenyon (Reform's candidate) deleted his X account Bylinetimes have pulled it from the archives - it's as bad as you would expect.
I think it also speaks to a deeper issue. I think he's unlikely to move Cooper from FO. Reeves will likely go to give Miliband a bigger role. Mahmood to stay in the Home Office. That's foreign policy and internal policy staying the same, with an expanded role for existing environmental policies. So the only point in a leadership change is what? That Labour has a stonking majority (pulling in different directions, mind) and Andy Burnham feels like he deserves to reap the benefit of that, despite his minimal input in winning it?
I think you're right. I get the impression he's just hoisting all sorts of nonsense up the flagpole to see if anybody salutes but over the next few weeks he'll start applying his brain and realise that he needs a lot of those Zack voters and this isn't what they want to hear.
In which case... I'm out. Not that it matters, really.
My big concern about Andy is the Boris one... that his core skill is divining what his audience wants to hear and playing it back to them. It's an excellent skill to have if you want to win an election, but it does mean you will be rubbish once in office. Ming Vase is bad enough, but a screen that people can project anything into is worse.
There are lots of things that the public wants to be true- that there's a painless way out of the tax/spend dilemma, a way of making Brexit work, a way of keeping up with the modern world without joining it, a way of building enough houses with them being in nobody's back yard. In the main, they're aren't, but good luck saying that and getting elected.
I've Just seen the latest and most significant poll which shows Farage and his fascists going in the wrong direction. I never thought the UK public would fall for the nasty little man and his army of grifters but it wasn't obvious who was going to knock him off his perch.
tt wasn't going to be Kemi. Too clever by half and leading a party few would welcome seeing again outside of their worst nightmares. Nor Starmer who for whatever reason the public wouldn't take to and never seemed to get it right.
Then out of the blue comes Manchester's blue eyed boy and everything just fell into place.....
My tory-voting business acquaintance in Manchester loves Andy Burnham. Says he "has been brilliant for business". This is a guy who runs a pub and recently opened a restaurant there, neither of which is exactly easy-rider work.
When a politician cuts across the political divide like this, you need to sit up. Of course, the real test is whether he can replicate it nationally and electorally. But the last politician to reach out across the party divide like that was ... Boris. And before them, Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher. Now Andy Burnham is a long long way from those proven electoral geniuses but there's a potential sea-change coming in British politics.
I fear that you are once again placing too much trust in a politician who has chameleon qualities to say the least but, for the sake of the country, I very much hope you are right. A government that was genuinely focused on growth and resistant to an anti-growth agenda would be a welcome and positive change. We shall see.
Next up, kitchen knives and playing on the motorway not safe enough for kids.
I watch History Matters (think it changed the name from 10 Minute History) and he can't say Adolf Hitler for censorship/demonetisation reasons. The idea more censorship and verification is a good thing is delinquent. It's propagated by the ignorant/naive and tech firms wanting more data to harvest.
I think he calls him the Angry Austrian Moustache-Having Man or something similar.
The swastika is also replaced with text explaining he's not allowed to show it.
I've also seen stuff on TwX (so could be wrong but seems genuine) of historical accounts being taken down entirely for showing what amounts to basic historical footage. Due to AI bots deciding it's worse than it is.
All while AI slop increases for subjects like science and history.
The problem isn’t moderation of content. The problem is moderation of content done on the cheap. The big tech companies sacked lots of staff and use automated tools, but the automated tools make these sorts of mistakes, blocking genuine historical content while letting through AI slop rage bait.
Youtube is pretty much broken at this point, both for viewers and creators.
Quality content is having visibility reduced in favour of AI slop, and they have a big problem with fake copyright takedown notices leaking to demonetisation and account strikes.
Unless you have a couple of million followers, it’s pretty much impossible to interact with a human at Google.
I used to drink my morning espresso out of ordinary industrial coffee cups. Made by clay from a spray gun, sent on a conveyor belt into a kiln, packed by another machine, shipped 6,000 miles in a container, and sold to me through six layers of distribution. Total human contact: almost nil
Now I drink from this. Bloor Derby coffee can. Cast in Derbyshire from local clays in about 1815. Thrown or moulded by a named workman. Decorated in Imari-style with exquisite cobalt and gold by a painter whose number was 4 - it’s marked on the base - and whose hand can be traced on the asymmetric surface. Further gilded by a specialist. Fired in coal kilns by stokers. Sold to a specific Regency household - or possibly a coffee house. Then handed down or sold on. It is tiny and precious and it has endured and survived two hundred years of turmoil, attics, house-moves, two world wars, two pandemics, and now it fetches up in Camden
£21 on eBay
Personally I’m still using the stone bowl knapped lovingly by my ancestor Oog, head warrior of Oogland, to celebrate his marriage to Ugg, eldest daughter of Agg of Aggcave.
I think it also speaks to a deeper issue. I think he's unlikely to move Cooper from FO. Reeves will likely go to give Miliband a bigger role. Mahmood to stay in the Home Office. That's foreign policy and internal policy staying the same, with an expanded role for existing environmental policies. So the only point in a leadership change is what? That Labour has a stonking majority (pulling in different directions, mind) and Andy Burnham feels like he deserves to reap the benefit of that, despite his minimal input in winning it?
I think you're right. I get the impression he's just hoisting all sorts of nonsense up the flagpole to see if anybody salutes but over the next few weeks he'll start applying his brain and realise that he needs a lot of those Zack voters and this isn't what they want to hear.
In which case... I'm out. Not that it matters, really.
My big concern about Andy is the Boris one... that his core skill is divining what his audience wants to hear and playing it back to them. It's an excellent skill to have if you want to win an election, but it does mean you will be rubbish once in office. .
That's a non-sequitur
You can win elections by bringing the electorate on board, maintain sufficient integrity, and still be brilliant in office.
Look no further than Margaret Thatcher
Tony Blair had it too for the first two terms. Then his Idealpolitik took over from Realpolitik and the silly sod led us into the invasion of Iraq. Too much of a Messiah complex alongside his "Crusader" chum across the pond.
Pragmatism, Realpolitik, is good. It generally makes for the best leaders. No it's not ideal but it's also not as dangerous for us or the world.
A judge has ruled that the wife of former DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson is unfit to face a criminal trial on sexual offences charges due to the state of her mental health.
Eleanor Donaldson, aged 60, will now face what is called a "trial of facts" rather than a normal trial.
That means a jury cannot find her guilty but will be asked to determine whether she committed the offences she is charged with. ... Dr Christine Kennedy told the court that Ms Donaldson was found to be "severely depressed", suicidal and suffering with "high levels of anxiety".
She said that on the balance of probabilities Ms Donaldson would not be able to instruct her legal team, could not follow the trial proceedings and would not be able to give evidence.
At 60 as well. Either very unfortunate or very convenient for her.
I see you that, and raise you this:
He was sentenced to five years' imprisonment, but released after 10 months as he was believed to be suffering from Alzheimer's disease. He subsequently recovered.
If anyone was wondering why Robert Kenyon (Reform's candidate) deleted his X account Bylinetimes have pulled it from the archives - it's as bad as you would expect.
The Irish weather forecasts often use a construction like that - "temporary periods of dry weather between rain and showers."
It's a way of making a forecast with a lot of rain in it sound less depressing, because you're emphasising when it will be dry. Like saying it will be dry 10% of the time instead of saying it will be wet 90% of the time.
Basically, no-one likes bad news, so the weather forecast has to be dressed up in as positive language as possible, or people will stop listening to it.
What they're telling you is that there's a good chance of rain in June, but no-one wants to hear that, so they emphasise that it won't rain *all* the time.
Conclusion: I'd make the most of the May heatwave. It's possible it will end up being the warmest weather of the summer.
We’ll weather the weather, whatever the weather, whether we like it or not
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
OT. Streeting pretty good this morning in his chat with Nick Robinson. It shows the paucity of performance by Starmer over the last two years. This is what Labour expect from their Party. Not stupid rules on whether people can carry a pen with the ability to write 'Palestine Action'.
I used to drink my morning espresso out of ordinary industrial coffee cups. Made by clay from a spray gun, sent on a conveyor belt into a kiln, packed by another machine, shipped 6,000 miles in a container, and sold to me through six layers of distribution. Total human contact: almost nil
Now I drink from this. Bloor Derby coffee can. Cast in Derbyshire from local clays in about 1815. Thrown or moulded by a named workman. Decorated in Imari-style with exquisite cobalt and gold by a painter whose number was 4 - it’s marked on the base - and whose hand can be traced on the asymmetric surface. Further gilded by a specialist. Fired in coal kilns by stokers. Sold to a specific Regency household - or possibly a coffee house. Then handed down or sold on. It is tiny and precious and it has endured and survived two hundred years of turmoil, attics, house-moves, two world wars, two pandemics, and now it fetches up in Camden
£21 on eBay
Personally I’m still using the stone bowl knapped lovingly by my ancestor Oog, head warrior of Oogland, to celebrate his marriage to Ugg, eldest daughter of Agg of Aggcave.
Noom rating: immense
Modernist slacker.
What’s wrong with drinking your libations to Crom from the skull of your enemy?
If that was good enough in the Pliocene, it should be good enough now.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
OT. Streeting pretty good this morning in his chat with Nick Robinson. It shows the paucity of performance by Starmer over the last two years. This is what Labour expect from their Party. Not stupid rules on whether people can carry a pen with the ability to write 'Palestine Action'.
I've Just seen the latest and most significant poll which shows Farage and his fascists going in the wrong direction. I never thought the UK public would fall for the nasty little man and his army of grifters but it wasn't obvious who was going to knock him off his perch.
tt wasn't going to be Kemi. Too clever by half and leading a party few would welcome seeing again outside of their worst nightmares. Nor Starmer who for whatever reason the public wouldn't take to and never seemed to get it right.
Then out of the blue comes Manchester's blue eyed boy and everything just fell into place.....
My tory-voting business acquaintance in Manchester loves Andy Burnham. Says he "has been brilliant for business". This is a guy who runs a pub and recently opened a restaurant there, neither of which is exactly easy-rider work.
When a politician cuts across the political divide like this, you need to sit up. Of course, the real test is whether he can replicate it nationally and electorally. But the last politician to reach out across the party divide like that was ... Boris. And before them, Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher. Now Andy Burnham is a long long way from those proven electoral geniuses but there's a potential sea-change coming in British politics.
I fear that you are once again placing too much trust in a politician who has chameleon qualities to say the least but, for the sake of the country, I very much hope you are right. A government that was genuinely focused on growth and resistant to an anti-growth agenda would be a welcome and positive change. We shall see.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
The Irish weather forecasts often use a construction like that - "temporary periods of dry weather between rain and showers."
It's a way of making a forecast with a lot of rain in it sound less depressing, because you're emphasising when it will be dry. Like saying it will be dry 10% of the time instead of saying it will be wet 90% of the time.
Basically, no-one likes bad news, so the weather forecast has to be dressed up in as positive language as possible, or people will stop listening to it.
What they're telling you is that there's a good chance of rain in June, but no-one wants to hear that, so they emphasise that it won't rain *all* the time.
Conclusion: I'd make the most of the May heatwave. It's possible it will end up being the warmest weather of the summer.
You have absolutely zero evidence for this
It's obvious from my comment they a lot of what I am saying is inference and, dare I say it, extrapolation, so, of course, there isn't definitive evidence. And, also, long-range weather forecast are by their nature uncertain.
I've Just seen the latest and most significant poll which shows Farage and his fascists going in the wrong direction. I never thought the UK public would fall for the nasty little man and his army of grifters but it wasn't obvious who was going to knock him off his perch.
tt wasn't going to be Kemi. Too clever by half and leading a party few would welcome seeing again outside of their worst nightmares. Nor Starmer who for whatever reason the public wouldn't take to and never seemed to get it right.
Then out of the blue comes Manchester's blue eyed boy and everything just fell into place.....
My tory-voting business acquaintance in Manchester loves Andy Burnham. Says he "has been brilliant for business". This is a guy who runs a pub and recently opened a restaurant there, neither of which is exactly easy-rider work.
When a politician cuts across the political divide like this, you need to sit up. Of course, the real test is whether he can replicate it nationally and electorally. But the last politician to reach out across the party divide like that was ... Boris. And before them, Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher. Now Andy Burnham is a long long way from those proven electoral geniuses but there's a potential sea-change coming in British politics.
This conservative likes Burnham not least because, as I have said before, he is collegiate and pragmatic and undeniably succesful in Manchester
He may well be the reset we need to steer the country away from the divisive politics of Farage and Polanski
I expect him to be quite Blairite and I wish him well
OT. Streeting pretty good this morning in his chat with Nick Robinson. It shows the paucity of performance by Starmer over the last two years. This is what Labour expect from their Party. Not stupid rules on whether people can carry a pen with the ability to write 'Palestine Action'.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
How surprising, Labour want to tax more
I’m definitely not too worried about Dubai’s bounceback from the current situation. Who would want to start a business in Labour’s Britian?
Next you'll be telling us self-employed people don't look forward to quarterly tax returns. It's a small upside to my current situation that I'm below the threshold for that needless bullshit.
@Stuartinromford makes the connection between Burnham's OM and Johnson. I suspect he is correct and Burnham has to placate enough (possibly) in reality non-like-minded voters to be in a position to challenge Starmer. Do I think he should? And are there Johnsonian pitfalls?
Now I don't particularly like Burnham and his backstory is mixed. Staffs Health Board, very, very bad and Manchester (on the face of it) better.
Do I want Burnham to walk into Parliament on a disingenuous prospectus? Probably not.
Did I think Simonds was wise resigning? No.
Do I wanted to see Reform win the Manchester Mayoralty? No
Do I want Starmer replaced? Yes, but comparatively, what is wrong with Rayner? No Milliband, thank you.
Do I believe there are better candidates than Burnham to lead the Labour Party. Yes
Do I hope Burnham, should he replace Starmer to succeed? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham see off the challenge from RefCon? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham return Polanski back to his box? Yes.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
Taxing unrealised gains?
Equalising GCT and income means that everyone works for a salary and takes no risk.
Which means that those who do want to take a risk for a higher reward, go and do it somewhere else.
Would that it were, Mr Sandpit, would that it were.
The difficulty we have right now is that an awful lot of the country's capital is held by people who are able to accrue even more capital in ways that don't really involve risk or enterprise. It's a very agreeable lifestyle for those involved, but it sucks the life out of everyone else and end with one person holding all the capital and being declared the winner.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Firstly, capital gains tend to arrive in lumps. Let's say that I buy a business for £100k, work on it for ten years, then sell it for £200k. Every year I pay myself £20k from the business.
Over those ten years, the business's value has increased by £10k every year, so my yearly earnings are effectively £30k. If I'd realised that annually, and been taxed on it at the same rate as income, I would have paid basic rate tax on my increase in it's value. That seems fair and reasonable, and in total, at current tax rates, I would pay £34,860 in tax over the ten years.
Instead however, the reality is that for nine years I'll receive £20k pa and in year ten I'll get £120k. Tax that at the same rate as income and in the final year I'll get clobbered for a huge amount of tax (£39.5k) as I'll be into higher rate for £50k and additional rate for the last £20k. I'll therefore pay vastly more tax than if it had actually been income - the ten year number is £52,806, £18k more than if I'd realised the gains annually.
It gets worse however, because this doesn't begin to consider inflation. If I'd put my £100k I used for buying the business into an cash ISA for ten years at 4% (I.e just about tracking inflation) in year ten I'd have about £150k in there, and it would have a purchasing power broadly similar to £100k at the time I put it in there. So of my £100k "gain" in business value, only £50k is a really a gain, the rest is just tracking inflation, and if you treat it all as income in year 10 under, our current tax rates I'd pay £38k in tax on it, leaving me with an actual cash gain of £12k. Whoop whoop!
I can only assume Streeting doesn't want economic growth when he comes out with nonsense like this.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
Mixed feeling on this - on one hand, this will smash BtL to landlords (like me) on their unearned gains - a good thing for the housing market, making it less attractive to invest in.
On the other, that it doesn’t extend to primary residence Is going to make the house you live in even more attractive than it already is as a place to park your money. We really need CGT on that too.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Rupert has got the hair-plugged, turkey-toothed attention seeking endorsement. The votes gained in Makerfield by the backing of a resident of Portugal may even break single figures.
Scottish businessman and former Dragons' Den star Duncan Bannatyne has backed the far-right Restore Britain party to win their first MP
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
So why risk capital investing in anything, a business, shares etc etc, if you’re going to be penalised at a punitive rate ?
That's the thing - why take the risk and if you were taking the risk you would be making sure that in the year(s) where the profit was taking you were sat abroad. Italy have a tax rate of 7% if you play their games correctly...
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Firstly, capital gains tend to arrive in lumps. Let's say that I buy a business for £100k, work on it for ten years, then sell it for £200k. Every year I pay myself £20k from the business.
Over those ten years, the business's value has increased by £10k every year, so my yearly earnings are effectively £30k. If I'd realised that annually, and been taxed on it at the same rate as income, I would have paid basic rate tax on my increase in it's value. That seems fair and reasonable, and in total, at current tax rates, I would pay £34,860 in tax over the ten years.
Instead however, the reality is that for nine years I'll receive £20k pa and in year ten I'll get £120k. Tax that at the same rate as income and in the final year I'll get clobbered for a huge amount of tax (£39.5k) as I'll be into higher rate for £50k and additional rate for the last £20k. I'll therefore pay vastly more tax than if it had actually been income - the ten year number is £52,806, £18k more than if I'd realised the gains annually.
It gets worse however, because this doesn't begin to consider inflation. If I'd put my £100k I used for buying the business into an cash ISA for ten years at 4% (I.e just about tracking inflation) in year ten I'd have about £150k in there, and it would have a purchasing power broadly similar to £100k at the time I put it in there. So of my £100k "gain" in business value, only £50k is a really a gain, the rest is just tracking inflation, and if you treat it all as income in year 10 under, our current tax rates I'd pay £38k in tax on it, leaving me with an actual cash gain of £12k. Whoop whoop!
I can only assume Streeting doesn't want economic growth when he comes out with nonsense like this.
You’d hope that the government would come up with a system would take account of both of those issues to an extent - perhaps spread the liability over 5-10 years?
It’s the kind of thing that won’t survive contact with the OBR unless they do.
A judge has ruled that the wife of former DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson is unfit to face a criminal trial on sexual offences charges due to the state of her mental health.
Eleanor Donaldson, aged 60, will now face what is called a "trial of facts" rather than a normal trial.
That means a jury cannot find her guilty but will be asked to determine whether she committed the offences she is charged with. ... Dr Christine Kennedy told the court that Ms Donaldson was found to be "severely depressed", suicidal and suffering with "high levels of anxiety".
She said that on the balance of probabilities Ms Donaldson would not be able to instruct her legal team, could not follow the trial proceedings and would not be able to give evidence.
Happens regularly, happened in 2012 with a former MP.
Margaret Moran, the former Labour MP, has been ruled "unfit to plead" to charges of falsely claiming £80,000 in expenses and will not face trial.
The 56-year-old is suffering from severe depressive mental illness and extreme anxiety and agitation due to the stress of legal proceedings and issues in her childhood, a court was told.
She also suffered feelings of abandonment by the Labour party, and intense shame that her parliamentary career was over.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Firstly, capital gains tend to arrive in lumps. Let's say that I buy a business for £100k, work on it for ten years, then sell it for £200k. Every year I pay myself £20k from the business.
Over those ten years, the business's value has increased by £10k every year, so my yearly earnings are effectively £30k. If I'd realised that annually, and been taxed on it at the same rate as income, I would have paid basic rate tax on my increase in it's value. That seems fair and reasonable, and in total, at current tax rates, I would pay £34,860 in tax over the ten years.
Instead however, the reality is that for nine years I'll receive £20k pa and in year ten I'll get £120k. Tax that at the same rate as income and in the final year I'll get clobbered for a huge amount of tax (£39.5k) as I'll be into higher rate for £50k and additional rate for the last £20k. I'll therefore pay vastly more tax than if it had actually been income - the ten year number is £52,806, £18k more than if I'd realised the gains annually.
It gets worse however, because this doesn't begin to consider inflation. If I'd put my £100k I used for buying the business into an cash ISA for ten years at 4% (I.e just about tracking inflation) in year ten I'd have about £150k in there, and it would have a purchasing power broadly similar to £100k at the time I put it in there. So of my £100k "gain" in business value, only £50k is a really a gain, the rest is just tracking inflation, and if you treat it all as income in year 10 under, our current tax rates I'd pay £38k in tax on it, leaving me with an actual cash gain of £12k. Whoop whoop!
I can only assume Streeting doesn't want economic growth when he comes out with nonsense like this.
There was a time when you could offset inflation against cgt.
There has always been that tax year thing, it matters whether you receive your bonus in March or April.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
Taxing unrealised gains?
Equalising GCT and income means that everyone works for a salary and takes no risk.
Which means that those who do want to take a risk for a higher reward, go and do it somewhere else.
Would that it were, Mr Sandpit, would that it were.
The difficulty we have right now is that an awful lot of the country's capital is held by people who are able to accrue even more capital in ways that don't really involve risk or enterprise. It's a very agreeable lifestyle for those involved, but it sucks the life out of everyone else and end with one person holding all the capital and being declared the winner.
Besides- a good society costs; who should pay?
Nonsense
Much of the country's capital is held by pension funds. Even the so-called idle rich invest money via banks and funds. Perhaps if we made this country a more attractive place to invest we would have better outcomess.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Firstly, capital gains tend to arrive in lumps. Let's say that I buy a business for £100k, work on it for ten years, then sell it for £200k. Every year I pay myself £20k from the business.
Over those ten years, the business's value has increased by £10k every year, so my yearly earnings are effectively £30k. If I'd realised that annually, and been taxed on it at the same rate as income, I would have paid basic rate tax on my increase in it's value. That seems fair and reasonable, and in total, at current tax rates, I would pay £34,860 in tax over the ten years.
Instead however, the reality is that for nine years I'll receive £20k pa and in year ten I'll get £120k. Tax that at the same rate as income and in the final year I'll get clobbered for a huge amount of tax (£39.5k) as I'll be into higher rate for £50k and additional rate for the last £20k. I'll therefore pay vastly more tax than if it had actually been income - the ten year number is £52,806, £18k more than if I'd realised the gains annually.
It gets worse however, because this doesn't begin to consider inflation. If I'd put my £100k I used for buying the business into an cash ISA for ten years at 4% (I.e just about tracking inflation) in year ten I'd have about £150k in there, and it would have a purchasing power broadly similar to £100k at the time I put it in there. So of my £100k "gain" in business value, only £50k is a really a gain, the rest is just tracking inflation, and if you treat it all as income in year 10 under, our current tax rates I'd pay £38k in tax on it, leaving me with an actual cash gain of £12k. Whoop whoop!
I can only assume Streeting doesn't want economic growth when he comes out with nonsense like this.
You’d hope that the government would come up with a system would take account of that to an extent - perhaps spread the liability over 5-10 years?
Or a reduced rate of CGT for assets held long term.
Though I think the example above would not fall into the category of CGT, but rather Business Asset Disposal Relief, currently 18%.
@Stuartinromford makes the connection between Burnham's OM and Johnson. I suspect he is correct and Burnham has to placate enough (possibly) in reality non-like-minded voters to be in a position to challenge Starmer. Do I think he should? And are there Johnsonian pitfalls?
Now I don't particularly like Burnham and his backstory is mixed. Staffs Health Board, very, very bad and Manchester (on the face of it) better.
Do I want Burnham to walk into Parliament on a disingenuous prospectus? Probably not.
Did I think Simonds was wise resigning? No.
Do I wanted to see Reform win the Manchester Mayoralty? No
Do I want Starmer replaced? Yes, but comparatively, what is wrong with Rayner? No Milliband, thank you.
Do I believe there are better candidates than Burnham to lead the Labour Party. Yes
Do I hope Burnham, should he replace Starmer to succeed? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham see off the challenge from RefCon? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham return Polanski back to his box? Yes.
I believe my view on Burnham is a balanced one.
I don't see anything fantastic about Burnham except that of all the possible candidates he's got the best chance of seeing off Farage. He's been running perhaps the most Cosmopolitan City in the country without a social engineer like Mahmood anywhere to be seen and I'd like to think they'd give her short shift if ever she did show herself.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
How surprising, Labour want to tax more
Got to hand more of other people’s money to their client vote.
But, as they’re not pensioners but benefits recipients then that’s okay.
The tax raised couldn't be hypothecated, so it would probably be spent on pensioners. Pensioner benefits make up 55% of the welfare bill and that is only going to increase with the UKs demographics.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
Mixed feeling on this - on one hand, this will smash BtL to landlords (like me) on their unearned gains - a good thing for the housing market, making it less attractive to invest in.
On the other, that it doesn’t extend to primary residence Is going to make the house you live in even more attractive than it already is as a place to park your money. We really need CGT on that too.
Why is it a good thing for the housing market. It will shrink the availability of rental properties and not everyone wants to buy. Plenty want to rent.
CGT on a main home, if it ever came in (and it won’t) should allow for indexation and a paper gain in many cases is not a financial gain in real terms.
And this is the problem with politics today. Social media distorts people’s understanding of the world.
The woke liberals love to use NET, ie 700K high skilled out and majority of the 900K in either roasters in boats or low skilled. It is like changing £20 notes for tenners.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
So why risk capital investing in anything, a business, shares etc etc, if you’re going to be penalised at a punitive rate ?
Why is paying the normal marginal rate of income tax "being penalised at a punitive rate"?
Because you’re penalising people risking capital to invest and grow a business
You tax something, you generally get less of it unless it’s inelastic, so why would you want to tax entrepreneurialism and investment.
It’s a trade-off - if this avoids raising taxes on employment or directly on businesses then perhaps that’s a good thing? (Taken as given that a Labour government will be high tax).
Income taxes, VAT and recurring property taxes are the “best” taxes in terms of not shafting the economy, so shifting the burden to them and away from transactions and business is to be broadly encouraged IMO. Certainly far better than raising employer NICs, business rates or corporation tax.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
How surprising, Labour want to tax more
Got to hand more of other people’s money to their client vote.
But, as they’re not pensioners but benefits recipients then that’s okay.
The tax raised couldn't be hypothecated, so it would probably be spent on pensioners. Pensioner benefits make up 55% of the welfare bill and that is only going to increase with the UKs demographics.
‘It would probably be spent on pensioners’
No, only 55% of it by your yardstick and the welfare bill for non pensioner benefits is also sky rocketing and will go up more and more. Non pensioner benefits went up by 6.4% this year.
That is becoming unsustainable too. However PB only seems to want to beat up pensioners.
@Stuartinromford makes the connection between Burnham's OM and Johnson. I suspect he is correct and Burnham has to placate enough (possibly) in reality non-like-minded voters to be in a position to challenge Starmer. Do I think he should? And are there Johnsonian pitfalls?
Now I don't particularly like Burnham and his backstory is mixed. Staffs Health Board, very, very bad and Manchester (on the face of it) better.
Do I want Burnham to walk into Parliament on a disingenuous prospectus? Probably not.
Did I think Simonds was wise resigning? No.
Do I wanted to see Reform win the Manchester Mayoralty? No
Do I want Starmer replaced? Yes, but comparatively, what is wrong with Rayner? No Milliband, thank you.
Do I believe there are better candidates than Burnham to lead the Labour Party. Yes
Do I hope Burnham, should he replace Starmer to succeed? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham see off the challenge from RefCon? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham return Polanski back to his box? Yes.
I believe my view on Burnham is a balanced one.
I don't see anything fantastic about Burnham except that of all the possible candidates he's got the best chance of seeing off Farage. He's been running perhaps the most Cosmopolitan City in the country without a social engineer like Mahmood anywhere to be seen and I'd like to think they'd give her short shift if ever she did show herself.
What are you going to do next year when France becomes Bardellaland ?
Shouldnt you be threatening to leave and find a home in Manchester ?
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
So why risk capital investing in anything, a business, shares etc etc, if you’re going to be penalised at a punitive rate ?
That's the thing - why take the risk and if you were taking the risk you would be making sure that in the year(s) where the profit was taking you were sat abroad. Italy have a tax rate of 7% if you play their games correctly...
Presumably one of the reasons they're a basket case.
And this is the problem with politics today. Social media distorts people’s understanding of the world.
The woke liberals love to use NET, ie 700K high skilled out and majority of the 900K in either roasters in boats or low skilled. It is like changing £20 notes for tenners.
The article discusses how those specific views are mistaken.
And this is the problem with politics today. Social media distorts people’s understanding of the world.
The woke liberals love to use NET, ie 700K high skilled out and majority of the 900K in either roasters in boats or low skilled. It is like changing £20 notes for tenners.
To be fair on Labour, they have reduced gross non-EU immigration from 1.1 million under the Conservatives (!) to about 400,000 now. There’s no doubt that’s a huge fall. If they got that to zero we’d have significant net emigration as EU nationals continue to leave.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
So why risk capital investing in anything, a business, shares etc etc, if you’re going to be penalised at a punitive rate ?
That's the thing - why take the risk and if you were taking the risk you would be making sure that in the year(s) where the profit was taking you were sat abroad. Italy have a tax rate of 7% if you play their games correctly...
Presumably one of the reasons they're a basket case.
Nope, you need to be retired and move to towns that are suffering population loss. The point was that capital gains has to be lower than income tax because it can be gamed in so many ways.
So as another example the US where you use your shares as collateral for loans - so you never "earn" the money.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
So why risk capital investing in anything, a business, shares etc etc, if you’re going to be penalised at a punitive rate ?
Why is paying the normal marginal rate of income tax "being penalised at a punitive rate"?
Because you’re penalising people risking capital to invest and grow a business
You tax something, you generally get less of it unless it’s inelastic, so why would you want to tax entrepreneurialism and investment.
It’s a trade-off - if this avoids raising taxes on employment or directly on businesses then perhaps that’s a good thing? (Taken as given that a Labour government will be high tax).
Income taxes, VAT and recurring property taxes are the “best” taxes in terms of not shafting the economy, so shifting the burden to them and away from transactions and business is to be broadly encouraged IMO. Certainly far better than raising employer NICs, business rates or corporation tax.
It’s not a taxing problem, it’s a spending problem!
That said, I agree that taxes on consumption and property are preferable to those on employers and investors.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
OT. Streeting pretty good this morning in his chat with Nick Robinson. It shows the paucity of performance by Starmer over the last two years. This is what Labour expect from their Party. Not stupid rules on whether people can carry a pen with the ability to write 'Palestine Action'.
He's a twat
You're certainly on form this morning. Tractor had a puncture?
@Stuartinromford makes the connection between Burnham's OM and Johnson. I suspect he is correct and Burnham has to placate enough (possibly) in reality non-like-minded voters to be in a position to challenge Starmer. Do I think he should? And are there Johnsonian pitfalls?
Now I don't particularly like Burnham and his backstory is mixed. Staffs Health Board, very, very bad and Manchester (on the face of it) better.
Do I want Burnham to walk into Parliament on a disingenuous prospectus? Probably not.
Did I think Simonds was wise resigning? No.
Do I wanted to see Reform win the Manchester Mayoralty? No
Do I want Starmer replaced? Yes, but comparatively, what is wrong with Rayner? No Milliband, thank you.
Do I believe there are better candidates than Burnham to lead the Labour Party. Yes
Do I hope Burnham, should he replace Starmer to succeed? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham see off the challenge from RefCon? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham return Polanski back to his box? Yes.
I believe my view on Burnham is a balanced one.
I don't see anything fantastic about Burnham except that of all the possible candidates he's got the best chance of seeing off Farage. He's been running perhaps the most Cosmopolitan City in the country without a social engineer like Mahmood anywhere to be seen and I'd like to think they'd give her short shift if ever she did show herself.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
Totally agree with this. The practicalities are not straightforward but as a guiding principle it is bang on.
Taxing unrealised gains?
Equalising GCT and income tax means that everyone works for a salary and takes no risk.
Which means that those who do want to take a risk for a higher reward, go and do it somewhere else.
Whatever the demerits of Streeting's proposal, I don't think it includes taxing unrealised gains. He specifically put it forward as an alternative to that idea, which he criticised.
OT. Streeting pretty good this morning in his chat with Nick Robinson. It shows the paucity of performance by Starmer over the last two years. This is what Labour expect from their Party. Not stupid rules on whether people can carry a pen with the ability to write 'Palestine Action'.
He's a twat
You're certainly on form this morning. Tractor had a puncture?
Sharpening the pitchfork as we speak.
Also looking at the video from yesterday Rachel Reeves really shouldnt wear trouser suits she has a huge lardy arse.
@Stuartinromford makes the connection between Burnham's OM and Johnson. I suspect he is correct and Burnham has to placate enough (possibly) in reality non-like-minded voters to be in a position to challenge Starmer. Do I think he should? And are there Johnsonian pitfalls?
Now I don't particularly like Burnham and his backstory is mixed. Staffs Health Board, very, very bad and Manchester (on the face of it) better.
Do I want Burnham to walk into Parliament on a disingenuous prospectus? Probably not.
Did I think Simonds was wise resigning? No.
Do I wanted to see Reform win the Manchester Mayoralty? No
Do I want Starmer replaced? Yes, but comparatively, what is wrong with Rayner? No Milliband, thank you.
Do I believe there are better candidates than Burnham to lead the Labour Party. Yes
Do I hope Burnham, should he replace Starmer to succeed? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham see off the challenge from RefCon? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham return Polanski back to his box? Yes.
I believe my view on Burnham is a balanced one.
I don't see anything fantastic about Burnham except that of all the possible candidates he's got the best chance of seeing off Farage. He's been running perhaps the most Cosmopolitan City in the country without a social engineer like Mahmood anywhere to be seen and I'd like to think they'd give her short shift if ever she did show herself.
What are you going to do next year when France becomes Bardellaland ?
Shouldnt you be threatening to leave and find a home in Manchester ?
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn0pky4zpxxo
Next up, kitchen knives and playing on the motorway not safe enough for kids.
I watch History Matters (think it changed the name from 10 Minute History) and he can't say Adolf Hitler for censorship/demonetisation reasons. The idea more censorship and verification is a good thing is delinquent. It's propagated by the ignorant/naive and tech firms wanting more data to harvest.
(Link for those who don't get it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alois_Hitler )
TK;DR: Bass won't clear 50%, and is not particularly popular. But probably beats Pratt in November. (And Trump's super for Pratt probably does him no favours in the run off.)
If she faces Miller, though, then I could see her losing. Raman too would likely run her close in a the forced choice.
The only unknown is who’s betting, and what party or agenda they represent - look for which party is first out with advertising about betting odds…
tt wasn't going to be Kemi. Too clever by half and leading a party few would welcome seeing again outside of their worst nightmares. Nor Starmer who for whatever reason the public wouldn't take to and never seemed to get it right.
Then out of the blue comes Manchester's blue eyed boy and everything just fell into place.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmBxVfQTuvI
The swastika is also replaced with text explaining he's not allowed to show it.
I've also seen stuff on TwX (so could be wrong but seems genuine) of historical accounts being taken down entirely for showing what amounts to basic historical footage. Due to AI bots deciding it's worse than it is.
All while AI slop increases for subjects like science and history.
‘ 🚨 BREAKING: Rachel Reeves will announce "Great British Summer Savings" tomorrow
She will outline plans to cut import taxes on over 100 food items, including biscuits, chocolate, fruit and nuts’
https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2057215835018592661?s=61
‘ 🚨 BREAKING: Rachel Reeves will announce "Great British Summer Savings" tomorrow
She will outline plans to cut import taxes on over 100 food items, including biscuits, chocolate, fruit and nuts’
https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2057215835018592661?s=61
Agree that Trump needs to say as little as possible about Pratt, if asked say little more than that he thinks the ads are funny.
Pratt’s cutting through with people who hate Trump but want to see LA cleaned up. It’s a nonpartisan race so there’s no (R) or (D) on the ballot.
Raman’s candidacy seems to be to try and get Pratt out, she comes across as Bass’s best friend and only entered at the last minute.
And some people think he’s on the labour right.
‘ could’ being the operative word too.
‘’ Wes Streeting has this morning set out his tax plans - specifically bringing capital gains tax into line with income tax
He says that the current system is unfair because it penalises work
Higher or additional rate taxpayers will pay 24% on gains in the current financial year. Streeting said that the rates should mirror income tax bands - so 40% for higher rate taxpayers and 45% for additional rate taxpayers
He says that the approach could raise £12billion a year
Streeting said: “A member of my family is a cleaner in Lancashire. She pays a higher tax rate on her salary than her landlord pays for the growing value of the home she lives in. She slogs her guts out, he puts in far less effort, yet the state rewards him more than her. And we wonder why people are angry.
“The system is penalising work. It’s not fair and it’s bad for our economy. We need a wealth tax that works. A pound made from simply owning assets should not be taxed less than a pound made from a hard day's work. We can do it in a way that is pro-growth, pro-entrepreneur and pro-work.”’
https://x.com/steven_swinford/status/2057331624530849841?s=61
Whatever the frustrations of the old ways, when there were a small number of outlets with clear gatekeepers, they had some definite benefits for viewers.
Burnham should give a boost to labour and as a northerner knows how immigration is a big issue and has apparently said he will keep Mahmood as Home Secretary
Kemi has already pledged her support for Mahmood's proposals so we may at last be heading to consensus on immigration, the biggesr reason for the rise in Reform
There is both more than a grain of truth that the Attlee and Wilson Governments had a hand in the decline of Birmingham, but he conveniently paints Thatcher as trying to stop the decline in 1981. It is a one subject focus and does not consider the economic policy of the 1980s. Neither does he consider (and PBers will like this) immigration on the social side of the city's recent evolution. Birmingham suffered from a specific Government intervention which didn't help but Birmingham isn't the only city suffering from post war decline.
The Tony Benn video also paints a specific politically inspired picture that Tony Benn and the Labour Government by creating British Leyland Motor Holdings in 1968 destroyed the British motor industry and his argument is superficially compelling. But British Leyland Motor Holdings was created to save BMC ( including Jaguar) and what it actually did was bring down Rover and Triumph too. Benn's decision to create the World's fourth biggest motor conglomerate with hindsight was a poor decision ( more recently see Stellantis and GM divesting itself of and culling brands).
They are really well made videos, I thought them clever and I enjoyed them, but I also have enough historical insight to question why they are so disingenuous and their conclusions so incredibly simply and generally wrong, but with a pinch of right.
Does anyone know who is behind METTLE?
I suspect to find out someone is going to have to tell nominet that it's a business so needs to display it's details but it's clearly well funded - if you go their website there is a free hardback book if you want to give them your details.
He is more likely to be Blairite than Corbynite
Cautious optimism today that Andy Burnham might win this by-election and that he will therefore become PM. This is the reset that Labour needs and, in my view, the country.
I thought @Garethofthevale 's thread was excellent. I can see Labour getting back towards 30% in the polls, at least for a time, and he has enough northern street cred to hopefully see off Reform or Tory-Reform.
Many of you LibDems and Greens, and even some of you soft Conservatives, might need to hold your noses here for the greater good. This isn't all one-way: I know plenty of Labour people who voted for parties other than their own when Corbyn was in charge.
The alternative Reform-driven path would be horrific for Britain.
I suspect despite being a disingenuous t*** Burnham is better at politics than Starmer.
Burnham has shown in Manchester that pragmatic business-driven focus can bring great results. As the report out today shows, Manchester has been the leading city for reducing inner-city deprivation.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/may/21/manchester-centre-for-cities-deprivation-andy-burnham
My tory-voting business acquaintance in Manchester loves Andy Burnham. Says he "has been brilliant for business". This is a guy who runs a pub and recently opened a restaurant there, neither of which is exactly easy-rider work.
When a politician cuts across the political divide like this, you need to sit up. Of course, the real test is whether he can replicate it nationally and electorally. But the last politician to reach out across the party divide like that was ... Boris. And before them, Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher. Now Andy Burnham is a long long way from those proven electoral geniuses but there's a potential sea-change coming in British politics.
Remember last time Burnham was the left wing frontrunner until he decided abstaining on benefit cuts was the winning strategy.
https://bylinetimes.com/2026/05/20/reading-the-riot-act-reform-uks-makerfield-by-election-candidate-during-the-summer-of-trouble/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=jetpack_social
My big concern about Andy is the Boris one... that his core skill is divining what his audience wants to hear and playing it back to them. It's an excellent skill to have if you want to win an election, but it does mean you will be rubbish once in office. Ming Vase is bad enough, but a screen that people can project anything into is worse.
There are lots of things that the public wants to be true- that there's a painless way out of the tax/spend dilemma, a way of making Brexit work, a way of keeping up with the modern world without joining it, a way of building enough houses with them being in nobody's back yard. In the main, they're aren't, but good luck saying that and getting elected.
They all are. They all are.
The real craft is to hold onto as much integrity as you can muster whilst at the same time appeasing a fractured and disparate electorate.
Give me Realpolitik any day over Idealpolitik
c.f. @Mexicanpete
I'd have gone down the day before.
Quality content is having visibility reduced in favour of AI slop, and they have a big problem with fake copyright takedown notices leaking to demonetisation and account strikes.
Unless you have a couple of million followers, it’s pretty much impossible to interact with a human at Google.
Noom rating: immense
You can win elections by bringing the electorate on board, maintain sufficient integrity, and still be brilliant in office.
Look no further than Margaret Thatcher
Tony Blair had it too for the first two terms. Then his Idealpolitik took over from Realpolitik and the silly sod led us into the invasion of Iraq. Too much of a Messiah complex alongside his "Crusader" chum across the pond.
Pragmatism, Realpolitik, is good. It generally makes for the best leaders. No it's not ideal but it's also not as dangerous for us or the world.
Maybe there's some mileage in a "what were you ashamed of, Bobby?" campaign?
Following a massive dust storm caused by the opening of the Aston Villa trophy cabinet
What’s wrong with drinking your libations to Crom from the skull of your enemy?
If that was good enough in the Pliocene, it should be good enough now.
No need for your fancy pants “tools”….
How surprising, Labour want to tax more
Rather than just talking a good game.
Equalising GCT and income tax means that everyone works for a salary and takes no risk.
Which means that those who do want to take a risk for a higher reward, go and do it somewhere else.
Only way I would travel to London on a morning is for a meeting after 12...
So what's your point?
He may well be the reset we need to steer the country away from the divisive politics of Farage and Polanski
I expect him to be quite Blairite and I wish him well
Now I don't particularly like Burnham and his backstory is mixed. Staffs Health Board, very, very bad and Manchester (on the face of it) better.
Do I want Burnham to walk into Parliament on a disingenuous prospectus? Probably not.
Did I think Simonds was wise resigning? No.
Do I wanted to see Reform win the Manchester Mayoralty? No
Do I want Starmer replaced? Yes, but comparatively, what is wrong with Rayner? No Milliband, thank you.
Do I believe there are better candidates than Burnham to lead the Labour Party. Yes
Do I hope Burnham, should he replace Starmer to succeed? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham see off the challenge from RefCon? Yes.
Would I like to see Burnham return Polanski back to his box? Yes.
I believe my view on Burnham is a balanced one.
The difficulty we have right now is that an awful lot of the country's capital is held by people who are able to accrue even more capital in ways that don't really involve risk or enterprise. It's a very agreeable lifestyle for those involved, but it sucks the life out of everyone else and end with one person holding all the capital and being declared the winner.
Besides- a good society costs; who should pay?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/21/voters-across-parties-believe-uk-net-migration-is-rising-despite-sharp-drop
And this is the problem with politics today. Social media distorts people’s understanding of the world.
Firstly, capital gains tend to arrive in lumps. Let's say that I buy a business for £100k, work on it for ten years, then sell it for £200k. Every year I pay myself £20k from the business.
Over those ten years, the business's value has increased by £10k every year, so my yearly earnings are effectively £30k. If I'd realised that annually, and been taxed on it at the same rate as income, I would have paid basic rate tax on my increase in it's value. That seems fair and reasonable, and in total, at current tax rates, I would pay £34,860 in tax over the ten years.
Instead however, the reality is that for nine years I'll receive £20k pa and in year ten I'll get £120k. Tax that at the same rate as income and in the final year I'll get clobbered for a huge amount of tax (£39.5k) as I'll be into higher rate for £50k and additional rate for the last £20k. I'll therefore pay vastly more tax than if it had actually been income - the ten year number is £52,806, £18k more than if I'd realised the gains annually.
It gets worse however, because this doesn't begin to consider inflation. If I'd put my £100k I used for buying the business into an cash ISA for ten years at 4% (I.e just about tracking inflation) in year ten I'd have about £150k in there, and it would have a purchasing power broadly similar to £100k at the time I put it in there.
So of my £100k "gain" in business value, only £50k is a really a gain, the rest is just tracking inflation, and if you treat it all as income in year 10 under, our current tax rates I'd pay £38k in tax on it, leaving me with an actual cash gain of £12k. Whoop whoop!
I can only assume Streeting doesn't want economic growth when he comes out with nonsense like this.
On the other, that it doesn’t extend to primary residence Is going to make the house you live in even more attractive than it already is as a place to park your money. We really need CGT on that too.
Scottish businessman and former Dragons' Den star Duncan Bannatyne has backed the far-right Restore Britain party to win their first MP
https://x.com/scotnational/status/2057189053284471195?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
But, as they’re not pensioners but benefits recipients then that’s okay.
So Streeting wants to tax people at full whack on the real value of their assets not increasing at all?
It’s the kind of thing that won’t survive contact with the OBR unless they do.
There has always been that tax year thing, it matters whether you receive your bonus in March or April.
You tax something, you generally get less of it unless it’s inelastic, so why would you want to tax entrepreneurialism and investment.
Much of the country's capital is held by pension funds. Even the so-called idle rich invest money via banks and funds. Perhaps if we made this country a more attractive place to invest we would have better outcomess.
People in business these days seem to expect guaranteed gains with little or no risk and to pay no tax.
Though I think the example above would not fall into the category of CGT, but rather Business Asset Disposal Relief, currently 18%.
https://www.gov.uk/business-asset-disposal-relief
CGT on a main home, if it ever came in (and it won’t) should allow for indexation and a paper gain in many cases is not a financial gain in real terms.
It is like changing £20 notes for tenners.
Income taxes, VAT and recurring property taxes are the “best” taxes in terms of not shafting the economy, so shifting the burden to them and away from transactions and business is to be broadly encouraged IMO. Certainly far better than raising employer NICs, business rates or corporation tax.
‘It would probably be spent on pensioners’
No, only 55% of it by your yardstick and the welfare bill for non pensioner benefits is also sky rocketing and will go up more and more. Non pensioner benefits went up by 6.4% this year.
That is becoming unsustainable too. However PB only seems to want to beat up pensioners.
Shouldnt you be threatening to leave and find a home in Manchester ?
So as another example the US where you use your shares as collateral for loans - so you never "earn" the money.
That said, I agree that taxes on consumption and property are preferable to those on employers and investors.
Also looking at the video from yesterday Rachel Reeves really shouldnt wear trouser suits she has a huge lardy arse.