Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lotsofsnails)
    I think our society, as a society, leaves a lot to be desired
    We are in no worse state (and I would argue a better state) than we were 10 years ago. 10 knife crimes a year doesn't make a "broken society".
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cardozo)
    Gordon Brown is a nice guy, he's decent at what he did (apart from the shocking Gold error) but he's not a leader. He's not inspirational and he's not exactly passionate, atleast not in the way we want to see.
    See, this is where I disagree. Gordon Brown isn't charismatic, but that's not the same as lacking passion and leadership skills. It's true that charisma is part of leadership and he's not someone to motivate or engage with the country, but he is someone with drive, intelligence, a principles who motivates those who work with him and who is trusted by his cabinet. I wouldn't say he's a great leader by any means, but I don't think it's fair to say he's not a leader. I also think he's deeply passionate about his politics, however his lack of charisma means it's a quiet passion.

    Gordon Brown lacks charisma, but on most other measures of personal ability he's pretty good. Sadly charisma is more important than almost anything in politics these days.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    Above Post
    Charisma is what is required (he does have most of the qualities required I admit, but this is a major problem as a nations leader), especially in times like these. When you look back to the inspirational speaches of past leaders it's difficult to watch when he's talking about the way he wants the country to go.

    Especially now when times are tough, his job is difficult enough as it is. But due to his lack of inspiration to the public, the papers are all over him, he probably doesn't know which way is up.

    The lockerbie thing ... He could have come out straight away and said to the public, it's the scotish judicial system and something he has no control over. But he hid away and his advisors probably told him too, but the battering he's getting now he needs to get out there and start speaking to the public.

    This time now should be his pre-election he should be whipping up the voters and get them behind him, show he is the way forward. Unfortunatly possibly it's too far gone now.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I agree, he's not charismatic but he's got good leadership qualities in him. And he's a brilliant man.

    He's just not a 21st century politician. And it's a shame that he has to be.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    What is the labour partys opinion of inheritance tax?
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    If you asked me which (RL) party I supported I'd say Labour, and I actually quite like Brown and feel that he gets more than his fair share of blame. I would certainly vote Labour (to keep the Conservatives out) but often I think my opinions are closer to those of the Green party.
    (Original post by Adorno)
    it is disingenuous of a model political party in this model house of commons to utilise a party poltiical name from RL to whose values, priorities, and historical foundations they do not subscribe.
    So to which socialist party's values, priorities and historical foundations do you lot subscribe to?
    (Original post by paperclip)
    What is the labour party's opinion of inheritance tax?
    I personally do not feel that it would be right to raise the threshold.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LtCommanderData)
    I personally do not feel that it would be right to raise the threshold.
    Inheritance tax doen't exist in the TSR HOC, do you think this is right?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Personally 40% is too high. It should be reduced if not ended.

    Bona vacantia also should be ended, which is something I'm looking at.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LtCommanderData)
    So to which socialist party's values, priorities and historical foundations do you lot subscribe to?
    Well, I suspect we're more likely to be in keeping with the original:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociali..._Great_Britain
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Apart from that is revolutionary and anti-reformist.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by smalltownboy)
    Apart from that is revolutionary and anti-reformist.
    We have Alasdair :p:
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paperclip)
    Inheritance tax doen't exist in the TSR HOC, do you think this is right?
    Not personally, no.

    (Original post by Adorno)
    Well, I suspect we're more likely to be in keeping with the original:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociali..._Great_Britain
    The point I was making was that you criticise us for using the name of a RL party when we don't necessarily agree with everything they do/say/believe in and suggested that we could confuse voters because of this. If you are closer to that Socialist party, what about all the confused sods who vote for you because of their allegiance to the RL other socialist party (which calls itself the 'socialist party', closer to your own party's name than the 'socialist party of great britain' you associate yourself more closely with). And are you sure you aren't as different from them as we are from the RL Labour party?
    I'm not criticising the name of your party, I'm suggesting that it was wrong to criticise ours.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cardozo)
    Personally 40% is too high. It should be reduced if not ended.

    Bona vacantia also should be ended, which is something I'm looking at.
    (Original post by LtCommanderData)
    Not personally, no.
    I'm always surprised to see this view on inheritance tax within the labour party, a party who call themselves democratic socialists. I am especially surprised it to see it within a party that attempts to disassociate itself from nu-labour.

    Inheritance tax was introduced as a means of stopping the polarisation of wealth, the rich will have to pay it whilst the poor will avoid the tax. Rather then millions of pounds being transferred due to the lottery that is birth, the money is given to society, to fund beneficial things such as the NHS. An excellent demonstration of this is subletting property, were i to inherit £2,000,000 then i would be able to buy multiple properties, rent them to students or whatever and lead a pretty good life without really earning that money.

    People, especially the new right argue that capitalism is a meritocracy, people are incentivised into working harder by rewarding them with a higher salary. This means that the richest in society have earnt their way and deserve their rewards. As one cannot choose which family they are born to, how can you argue against an inheritance tax, yet claim we live in a meritocracy?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paperclip)
    I'm always surprised to see this view on inheritance tax within the labour party, a party who call themselves democratic socialists. I am especially surprised it to see it within a party that attempts to disassociate itself from nu-labour.

    Inheritance tax was introduced as a means of stopping the polarisation of wealth, the rich will have to pay it whilst the poor will avoid the tax. Rather then millions of pounds being transferred due to the lottery that is birth, the money is given to society, to fund beneficial things such as the NHS. An excellent demonstration of this is subletting property, were i to inherit £2,000,000 then i would be able to buy multiple properties, rent them to students or whatever and lead a pretty good life without really earning that money.

    People, especially the new right argue that capitalism is a meritocracy, people are incentivised into working harder by rewarding them with a higher salary. This means that the richest in society have earnt their way and deserve their rewards. As one cannot choose which family they are born to, how can you argue against an inheritance tax, yet claim we live in a meritocracy?
    I have personal reasons for my dislike for inheritance tax, I not being an MP for TSR Labour can feel how I like. It shouldn't suprise you anymore than if I were to be all for the death penalty (which i'm sure many labour, conservative and lib dems are up and down the country, when their parties claim they are all for life).

    As for Bona vacantia (I dont think you had a problem with this) but the system of lost inheritance going to the Prince Charles (+ the other duchy) and not the crown (in his land) can go and die.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cardozo)
    I have personal reasons for my dislike for inheritance tax, I not being an MP for TSR Labour can feel how I like. It shouldn't suprise you anymore than if I were to be all for the death penalty (which i'm sure many labour, conservative and lib dems are up and down the country, when their parties claim they are all for life).
    But the party is afterall, the sum of its members. You represent your party, and bills in your party will be discussed with you. My question was not only for socialist bills but looking at what are the opinions of labour party members.

    I think the popularisation of the term 'death tax' to replace inheritance tax takes away from the ideological thinking behind the position. And i think anyone that claims that we live in a meritocracy when wealth can simply accumulate through generations lives in a dream world.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paperclip)
    I'm always surprised to see this view on inheritance tax within the labour party, a party who call themselves democratic socialists. I am especially surprised it to see it within a party that attempts to disassociate itself from nu-labour.

    Inheritance tax was introduced as a means of stopping the polarisation of wealth, the rich will have to pay it whilst the poor will avoid the tax. Rather then millions of pounds being transferred due to the lottery that is birth, the money is given to society, to fund beneficial things such as the NHS. An excellent demonstration of this is subletting property, were i to inherit £2,000,000 then i would be able to buy multiple properties, rent them to students or whatever and lead a pretty good life without really earning that money.

    People, especially the new right argue that capitalism is a meritocracy, people are incentivised into working harder by rewarding them with a higher salary. This means that the richest in society have earnt their way and deserve their rewards. As one cannot choose which family they are born to, how can you argue against an inheritance tax, yet claim we live in a meritocracy?
    You quoted me and cardozo when we were giving different views. I am for inheritance tax for exactly the reasons you describe.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paperclip)
    But the party is afterall, the sum of its members. You represent your party, and bills in your party will be discussed with you. My question was not only for socialist bills but looking at what are the opinions of labour party members.

    I think the popularisation of the term 'death tax' to replace inheritance tax takes away from the ideological thinking behind the position. And i think anyone that claims that we live in a meritocracy when wealth can simply accumulate through generations lives in a dream world.
    Hence why parties change direction on many issues through generations. I view (on one matter) don't represent my party view anymore than your personal views on singular things represent your party in the real house of commons.

    If my younger sister was raped/murdered, I'd probably want to see the criminal hung. Therefore possibly you could say I want to see the death penalty reinstated. But my personal view on a matter will not make my arty re-instate it. Although the the sum of a parties members does make up it's policies i'm not part of the larger proportion.

    But looking at the matter of inheritance tax, possibly i'm blinded by my experience of it.

    Out of interest, possibly you can help me here:

    A friend of mines grandad is going mental (losing his mind at a slow rate), he's a millionaire and they're (friend, her mum and the dad) spending his money on everything from new cars to holidays. If he dies does everything they've spent so far count as inheritance tax if he dies within 7 years?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LtCommanderData)
    You quoted me and cardozo when we were giving different views. I am for inheritance tax for exactly the reasons you describe.
    Oh whoops, apologies.
    By 'not personally, no' i thought that you meant inheritance tax is wrong. I'm gonna use the excuse that it's the early morn :p:
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paperclip)
    Oh whoops, apologies.
    By 'not personally, no' i thought that you meant inheritance tax is wrong. I'm gonna use the excuse that it's the early morn :p:
    Don't worry, I forgive you, this early morning thing can be a problem

    EDIT: Just to make it all clear, by my initial response:
    (Original post by LtCommanderData)
    I personally do not feel that it would be right to raise the threshold.
    I meant it wouldn't be right to raise the amount of money before inheritance tax kicks in
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cardozo)
    A friend of mines grandad is going mental (losing his mind at a slow rate), he's a millionaire and they're (friend, her mum and the dad) spending his money on everything from new cars to holidays. If he dies does everything they've spent so far count as inheritance tax if he dies within 7 years?
    Ermm...don't know if i wanna help :p:
    There is a limit to how much you can 'gift' annually, so if it goes over this limit then it will be taxed. But the limit is per person (i think, haven't discussed this in a while!) so if you spread it out through enough people then you'll avoid the tax.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 8, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Are unpaid trial work shifts fair?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.