news & politics:discussion

[Neil]

37 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Yep, we need solar (on every roof), todal and hydro too. Those between them will have more than enough and add battery storage and we could manage with consumate ease.

Most residential solar systems now have a battery as a part of the system. if that was on every house it would be significant storage.

[Neil]

2 hours ago, steviewevie said:

You can claim back if purchase another house of similar or greater value within a year. People should not inherit wealth, they should earn it. Cut taxes on labour. Increase tax on capital/assets.

Obviously still some things I need to work through before discussing with Reeves 

I'm with you on that and its something I've said here many times over the years. This is the first time I can remember someone else saying it 

[Neil]

By the end of next year I should hopefully inherit a fair chunk, the result of my parents house profits. I've already committed to giving a chunk of that away so that the charity I'm involved with can have a hardship fund. will be named after my mum, won't be huge  but will be a pot of money they can give out to help somone in the sh*t.i think my mum would approve of that. I want to share a bit of my inheritance luck around.

[fraybentos1]

7 minutes ago, Neil said:

By the end of next year I should hopefully inherit a fair chunk, the result of my parents house profits. I've already committed to giving a chunk of that away so that the charity I'm involved with can have a hardship fund. will be named after my mum, won't be huge  but will be a pot of money they can give out to help somone in the sh*t.i think my mum would approve of that. I want to share a bit of my inheritance luck around.

Fair play 

[Skip997]

2 hours ago, steviewevie said:

You can claim back if purchase another house of similar or greater value within a year. People should not inherit wealth, they should earn it. Cut taxes on labour. Increase tax on capital/assets.

Obviously still some things I need to work through before discussing with Reeves 

Ah the old protestant work ethic.

Slave till you die. Never mind the physical and mental health problems, the stifling of creativity etc...

Edited September 8, 2023 by Skip997

[Neil]

5 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

Fair play 

Thank, can't be all talk. It would be a hardship fund for stroke survivors, most have to give up work. And will spend ages in hospital and their wages might stop but still need to pay things like rent and mortgage, etc.

When I was trying to think of what I could add, that was low work a discrestionay hardship fund seemed a great idea.

[Neil]

They can't catch the escaped terrorist so they say he must have help. He's outwitting the old bill which isn't a high bar.

[Nobody Interesting]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

So 2% of Tory voters would switch to Corbyn if he ran!?!?

[Skip997]

3 minutes ago, Neil said:

They can't catch the escaped terrorist so they say he must have help. He's outwitting the old bill which isn't a high bar.

It's interesting.

Makes me wonder how easy it would be to just "disappear" should I feel inclined.

[steviewevie]

26 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

Ah the old protestant work ethic.

Slave till you die. Never mind the physical and mental health problems, the stifling of creativity etc...

yeah, as opposed to the lazy catholic give it all to the church thing.

All I am saying is if we're ever going to get rid of inequality then we need to shift tax from labour to wealth.

Edited September 8, 2023 by steviewevie

[steviewevie]

14 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

It's interesting.

Makes me wonder how easy it would be to just "disappear" should I feel inclined.

he's ex army...knows what he's doing I guess. I wouldn't last a minute.

[squirrelarmy]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

yeah, as opposed to the lazy catholic give it all to the church thing.

All I am saying is if we're ever going to get rid of inequality then we need to shift tax from labour to wealth.

There’s 3 choices right now. 
 

Give it to your family.
Donate it to Church/Charity.
Do nothing and if you have no heirs then it goes to the estate of your local royal. 

[Nobody Interesting]

15 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

yeah, as opposed to the lazy catholic give it all to the church thing.

All I am saying is if we're ever going to get rid of inequality then we need to shift tax from labour to wealth.

but is the notional value of the building you live in actual wealth or does that only apply when you have more than one as an investment?

[Nobody Interesting]

12 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

There’s 3 choices right now. 
 

Give it to your family.
Donate it to Church/Charity.
Do nothing and if you have no heirs then it goes to the estate of your local royal. 

You can give to anyone, friends and even randomly selected strangers if you wish.

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

but is the notional value of the building you live in actual wealth or does that only apply when you have more than one as an investment?

it is if you sell up and move somewhere cheaper, or die and someone inherits it.

[Nobody Interesting]

So which government is going to remove the triple lock?

 

Pension triple lock bill could surge by up to £45bn a year by 2050

The triple lock now means an additional £11bn per year is spent on state pensions and the bill could add as much as £45bn per year by 2050.

Data from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) shows state financial support to pensioners is greater as a result of the triple lock.

Had the values of the basic state pension and the new state pension instead been determined by inflation or earnings growth since 2011, they would both now be around 11% lower, with a full new state pension worth around £180 per week and the basic state pension worth around £140 per week, the report said.

The analysis also indicates that the triple lock could potentially increase spending by anywhere between a further £5bn and £45bn per year, in today's terms, by 2050.

[fraybentos1]

3 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

So which government is going to remove the triple lock?

 

Pension triple lock bill could surge by up to £45bn a year by 2050

The triple lock now means an additional £11bn per year is spent on state pensions and the bill could add as much as £45bn per year by 2050.

Data from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) shows state financial support to pensioners is greater as a result of the triple lock.

Had the values of the basic state pension and the new state pension instead been determined by inflation or earnings growth since 2011, they would both now be around 11% lower, with a full new state pension worth around £180 per week and the basic state pension worth around £140 per week, the report said.

The analysis also indicates that the triple lock could potentially increase spending by anywhere between a further £5bn and £45bn per year, in today's terms, by 2050.

This is insane. The triple lock is so daft and no way tories remove it and Labour will be too scared to as well. I think it is here to stay. 

[Nobody Interesting]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

it is if you sell up and move somewhere cheaper, or die and someone inherits it.

The later is dealt with in inheritance tax.

If you are taxed on the equity when you ell up and move to somewhere cheaper then to make it fair you would have to be allowed to offset all costs (solicitors, removals and mortgage interest etc). If they did not allow that it would soon be challenged in court and would likely lose as it would be deemed unfair under UK law.

Once you remove all those costs there would be very little left to tax in most cases and how many people ever actually downsize or move somewhere cheaper? I would not think it is that many in the overall scheme of things and the negative headlines such a policy would generate (even though it effects very few) would mean no sane government would do it.

[Nobody Interesting]

Just now, fraybentos1 said:

This is insane. The triple lock is so daft and no way tories remove it and Labour will be too scared to as well. I think it is here to stay. 

If things carry on like they are then the pension age will have to go up lots and fast - but again, who on earth would do that?

[lost]

If I was young now I'd studying something that could lead to a job that can be done remotely from anywhere in the world. Both pension and NHS spending is going to be absolutely crippling for the next generation.

[gizmoman]

8 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

So which government is going to remove the triple lock?

 

Pension triple lock bill could surge by up to £45bn a year by 2050

The triple lock now means an additional £11bn per year is spent on state pensions and the bill could add as much as £45bn per year by 2050.

Data from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) shows state financial support to pensioners is greater as a result of the triple lock.

Had the values of the basic state pension and the new state pension instead been determined by inflation or earnings growth since 2011, they would both now be around 11% lower, with a full new state pension worth around £180 per week and the basic state pension worth around £140 per week, the report said.

The analysis also indicates that the triple lock could potentially increase spending by anywhere between a further £5bn and £45bn per year, in today's terms, by 2050.

The answer is pretty obvious, people need to understand what they read,

 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-pledges-not-increase-30852604

Keir Starmer has vowed that working people will not be hit by higher taxes if he becomes PM.

In an interview with the Mirror, the Labour leader pledged not to hike levies - including income tax.

 

Making the landmark promise, he said: “We will do nothing to increase the burden on working people, whether it comes to tax or anything else. They have paid a heavy price for the incompetence of the government after the last 13 years.”

 

Notice how he uses the phrase "working people", that clearly doesn't include pensioners, so he can reduce benefits or even increase taxes on pensioners and still keep to his promise, don't think this was a slip, that is the plan.

 

[steviewevie]

5 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

The later is dealt with in inheritance tax.

If you are taxed on the equity when you ell up and move to somewhere cheaper then to make it fair you would have to be allowed to offset all costs (solicitors, removals and mortgage interest etc). If they did not allow that it would soon be challenged in court and would likely lose as it would be deemed unfair under UK law.

Once you remove all those costs there would be very little left to tax in most cases and how many people ever actually downsize or move somewhere cheaper? I would not think it is that many in the overall scheme of things and the negative headlines such a policy would generate (even though it effects very few) would mean no sane government would do it.

ok, well if little left to tax so be it...but still tax it because some people make a lot.

and increase that inheritance tax too...tax it all. TAX TAX TAX. 

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, lost said:

If I was young now I'd studying something that could lead to a job that can be done remotely from anywhere in the world. Both pension and NHS spending is going to be absolutely crippling for the next generation.

The best thing anyone can do is choose their parents.

[Crazyfool01]

29 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

There’s 3 choices right now. 
 

Give it to your family.
Donate it to Church/Charity.
Do nothing and if you have no heirs then it goes to the estate of your local royal. 

Have it eaten in care costs ? 

[Nobody Interesting]

1 minute ago, gizmoman said:

The answer is pretty obvious, people need to understand what they read,

 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-pledges-not-increase-30852604

Keir Starmer has vowed that working people will not be hit by higher taxes if he becomes PM.

In an interview with the Mirror, the Labour leader pledged not to hike levies - including income tax.

 

Making the landmark promise, he said: “We will do nothing to increase the burden on working people, whether it comes to tax or anything else. They have paid a heavy price for the incompetence of the government after the last 13 years.”

 

Notice how he uses the phrase "working people", that clearly doesn't include pensioners, so he can reduce benefits or even increase taxes on pensioners and still keep to his promise, don't think this was a slip, that is the plan.

 

It would be a very brave move as the 'blue wall' that Labour need to win is full of pensioners so alienating them is a risk.......

The triple lock does need to go though so if they did it then great