Tories vow not to increase income tax for UK's richest

Watch this thread
Spratty
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7770581.html

Good thing they're looking out for everyone...
0
reply
ghibli2
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
No really news, we've always known that they protect the rich and the poor suffer.
4
reply
Lanterne Rouge
Badges: 8
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
(Original post by ghibli2)
No really news, we've always known that they protect the rich and the poor suffer.
You do realise that the top 1% pay 28% of all income tax, whilst the bottom 40% pay nothing? Millions of the poorest people in society no longer pay income tax under the Tories.

And do you also realise that decreasing income tax on the big business and the rich leads to more tax intake, which can then be invested into public services?

And you do realise that income inequality is at 31 year low?

Stop repeating this complete lie...
4
reply
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
(Original post by Lanterne Rouge)
You do realise that the top 1% pay 28% of all income tax, whilst the bottom 40% pay nothing? Millions of the poorest people in society no longer pay income tax under the Tories.

And do you also realise that decreasing income tax on the big business and the rich leads to more tax intake, which can then be invested into public services?

And you do realise that income inequality is at 31 year low?

Stop repeating this complete lie...
You don't expect the left to have the brain capacity to actually cross-reference the lies they read on social media do you?
1
reply
TheGuyReturns
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
(Original post by Lanterne Rouge)
You do realise that the top 1% pay 28% of all income tax, whilst the bottom 40% pay nothing? Millions of the poorest people in society no longer pay income tax under the Tories.

And do you also realise that decreasing income tax on the big business and the rich leads to more tax intake, which can then be invested into public services?

And you do realise that income inequality is at 31 year low?

Stop repeating this complete lie...
So? Should be higher. The 0.1% should have assets seized.
0
reply
The Great Game
Badges: 2
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
They already pay more than enough.
1
reply
Elephants r cute
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 5 years ago
#7
My friend claims her dad pays 60% lmao.
0
reply
Lanterne Rouge
Badges: 8
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
(Original post by TheGuyReturns)
So? Should be higher. The 0.1% should have assets seized.
I don't know if you're being serious or not (guessing not), but I will never understand why Labour are so anti-business and anti-successful people? They see being rich and running a business like its a crime, constantly target them, portray them as evil, and seemingly blame them for everything that goes wrong.

I honestly can't see anything wrong with it. The top 1% should be role models we aspire to be like through hard work and merit. And this comes from someone with a very working class family background. The idea that their assets should be seized is ridiculous.
0
reply
Erdon
Badges: 13
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
My father pays around half his earnings in tax whereas my mother gets taxed for being self-employed (despite the fact she's on a zero hour contract) we're a pretty middle class family, so honestly I think it's a good thing that they're (hopefully) not trying to increase those taxes. It honestly stresses out my dad and therefore this rebounds on the family - he pays more than enough (in my opinion).
0
reply
TheGuyReturns
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report 5 years ago
#10
(Original post by Lanterne Rouge)
I don't know if you're being serious or not (guessing not), but I will never understand why Labour are so anti-business and anti-successful people? They see being rich and running a business like its a crime, constantly target them, portray them as evil, and seemingly blame them for everything that goes wrong.

I honestly can't see anything wrong with it. The top 1% should be role models we aspire to be like through hard work and merit. And this comes from someone with a very working class family background. The idea that their assets should be seized is ridiculous.
It was 50/50 on the serious front.

Not everyone in the 0.1% is a Bill Gates, Elon Musk.

Some are middle of the road in their exploitation, like Jeff of Amazon.

Most of the 0.1% have their wealth due to ill gotten gains (Koch, Roman Abramovich etc...), or inheritance that they have avoided taxation on for generations.

The whole shtick about "'ard work" from the right is beyond laughable.
0
reply
ghibli2
Badges: 0
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report 5 years ago
#11
(Original post by Connor27)
You don't expect the left to have the brain capacity to actually cross-reference the lies they read on social media do you?
Learn to @ me mister wannabe cambridge boy with your abysmal 3A*s.
0
reply
MildredMalone
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
So? We should have a flat tax rate, why should the well off pay a higher percentage?
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report 5 years ago
#13
(Original post by Lanterne Rouge)
They see being rich and running a business like its a crime, constantly target them, portray them as evil, and seemingly blame them for everything that goes wrong.
They don't do economics, that alone being a ggod reason not to trust them with the economy. Even the tag of 'the rich' betrays that economic lack of understanding of how the world works, Conservatives call them entrepreneurs upon whom economic development and growth depend, the fewer of them and the fewer jobs for 'the poor' to go to. Pull the rug from under their feet and you're plotting your own disadvantage.

Of course there has to be a balance between wealth-creation and redistribution but we can't have someone completely bereft of understanding of either and with nothing but antagonism for what they don't see. Were Labour to win and one of the harsh realities the next morning would be the reaction in financial markets to the electing of a party that everybody with the slightest understanding of anything economic knows are not fit to the govern the economic picture.

Re-nationalizations? Ideologically driven, no economic case.

Minimum wage up even further? Ideology, not economics.

Borrow freely? Ideology.

Scrap zero-hours? Ideology.

Any economic friendly policies? You tell us.

Everything they do is driven by anything other than economics, that's why the price of selling our debt will go up as one of the consequences. International lenders upon we depend will be nore fearful about Britain's ability to pay them back with a few years down the road and will want added interest to take the risk. The pound will go down in anticipation of the wave of borrow and spend, interest rates may have to go up and everyone with a mortgage will feel it.

The consequences of Labour's economic illiteracy and ideological antagonism towards the economic system we have would ripple through society in a way that even their own voters would end up suffering from.

ps, actually... it may be more the ideological thing as ever. Maybe they even understand how capitalism works but because they believe Marxism can be made to work better they end up hating it just for that. Once again, nothing to do with economics.
0
reply
mojojojo101
Badges: 17
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
Report 5 years ago
#14
(Original post by zhog)
They don't do economics, that alone being a ggod reason not to trust them with the economy. Even the tag of 'the rich' betrays that economic lack of understanding of how the world works, Conservatives call them entrepreneurs upon whom economic development and growth depend, the fewer of them and the fewer jobs for 'the poor' to go to. Pull the rug from under their feet and you're plotting your own disadvantage.

Of course there has to be a balance between wealth-creation and redistribution but we can't have someone completely bereft of understanding of either and with nothing but antagonism for what they don't see. Were Labour to win and one of the harsh realities the next morning would be the reaction in financial markets to the electing of a party that everybody with the slightest understanding of anything economic knows are not fit to the govern the economic picture.

Re-nationalizations? Ideologically driven, no economic case.

Minimum wage up even further? Ideology, not economics.

Borrow freely? Ideology.

Scrap zero-hours? Ideology.

Any economic friendly policies? You tell us.

Everything they do is driven by anything other than economics, that's why the price of selling our debt will go up as one of the consequences. International lenders upon we depend will be nore fearful about Britain's ability to pay them back with a few years down the road and will want added interest to take the risk. The pound will go down in anticipation of the wave of borrow and spend, interest rates may have to go up and everyone with a mortgage will feel it.

The consequences of Labour's economic illiteracy and ideological antagonism towards the economic system we have would ripple through society in a way that even their own voters would end up suffering from.

ps, actually... it may be more the ideological thing as ever. Maybe they even understand how capitalism works but because they believe Marxism can be made to work better they end up hating it just for that. Once again, nothing to do with economics.
The austerity agenda of the Conservative party is just as ideologically determined and economically illiterate as you say Labour's policies are.


I mean taxes should definitely not go up for the incredibly wealthy, if that means that the rest of us need go without satisfactory healthcare or education, well, that's just a necessary price to pay for the good of the country...
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report 5 years ago
#15
(Original post by mojojojo101)
The austerity agenda of the Conservative party is just as ideologically determined and economically illiterate as you say Labour's policies are
Coincidentally enough, I've just caught Andrew Neiil quizzing Sturgeon on why they are sticking to 'austerity' on nurses' pay in Scotland and that was interesting because it hghlights how 'Tory austerity' may be something more than just not giving a damn for anyone. Of all people crying against it, Sturgeon is one of those who have made the most of it as a propaganda tool and so do Labour. Typical example of the clash between free-talk and responsible business, isn't it? She couldn't get out of that one, grounded to the real world in her offcial capacity, despite putting on a good fight you can only bend the truth up to a point. I'd rather see her as PM than Corbyn, she gets the real world quicker and is also a more articulate and interesting person to listen to.

I mean taxes should definitely not go up for the incredibly wealthy, if that means that the rest of us need go without satisfactory healthcare or education, well, that's just a necessary price to pay for the good of the country...
Yes, but it is not as if the Tories don't care. Thatcherism tells us that it doesn't matter how rich the rich get, what matters is how much better off as a consequence the poor are while they are doing so and that will always be proportionate to the gap between the two. It's all about setting the fine equilibrium point at which the rich will be happy to pay their tax and that where the poor are being let down, there are economic formulas to work it out. Con and Lab have very clear cut differences of opinion as to where that fine point may be, that is politics.

Labour could never be trusted to recognize the need for such balance, they would just keep 'soaking the rich' because they seem to reagrd them as the source of your problem (poverty) instead of the first solution to it (your way out of it, that's how Mrs. T saw it). They will have to the moment their funding gap widens to a point where they have no alternative, unless they revert to Tory austerity. They will not know when to stop spending, they will scare the wealth-creators out of this country eventually. Inevitably, it's always happened before and there is absolutely no reason it won't repeat itself. The Shadow Chancellor is a Marxist, not only he doesn't see the merits in our economic system, he thinks it would be better if everything was state owned! How could we could possibly expect such a radical thinker to grab that fine point of equilibrium at which 'taxing doing business' becomes counter-productive to the poor? Like trusting your finger to a piranha fish, that's what there is to expect.

That's the unequivocal difference between Tory and Labour on economics. Take your pick because economics are the basis for the social agenda in society, both Marx and Thatcher said so. What comes first, generating money or taxing it? Take your pick.
0
reply
yudothis
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#16
Report 5 years ago
#16
(Original post by Lanterne Rouge)
You do realise that the top 1% pay 28% of all income tax, whilst the bottom 40% pay nothing? Millions of the poorest people in society no longer pay income tax under the Tories.

And do you also realise that decreasing income tax on the big business and the rich leads to more tax intake, which can then be invested into public services?

And you do realise that income inequality is at 31 year low?

Stop repeating this complete lie...
https://www.ft.com/content/24e88c30-...5-b8b81dd5d080

Only one lying is you, income inequality took a hit because of their own doing. It has been going up again and will continue to go up.

In addition, Britain is one of the most unequal societies in the West.

Stop lying to yourself. Then stop lying to others.
0
reply
Dalek1099
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#17
Report 5 years ago
#17
(Original post by Lanterne Rouge)
You do realise that the top 1% pay 28% of all income tax, whilst the bottom 40% pay nothing? Millions of the poorest people in society no longer pay income tax under the Tories.

And do you also realise that decreasing income tax on the big business and the rich leads to more tax intake, which can then be invested into public services?

And you do realise that income inequality is at 31 year low?

Stop repeating this complete lie...
Should I believe you or practically every single economist?

"An IGM survey of economists found that not a single one of them agreed that a tax cut will increase revenue."

https://whistlinginthewind.org/2012/...-laffer-curve/

The only reason decreasing income tax leads to more intake is because of the rich not tax avoiding as much as its not worth it.
0
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#18
Report 5 years ago
#18
(Original post by Lanterne Rouge)
You do realise that the top 1% pay 28% of all income tax, whilst the bottom 40% pay nothing? Millions of the poorest people in society no longer pay income tax under the Tories.

And do you also realise that decreasing income tax on the big business and the rich leads to more tax intake, which can then be invested into public services?

And you do realise that income inequality is at 31 year low?

Stop repeating this complete lie...
You realise anyone who takes dividends as their main source of income is in that 40%?

ie any contractor.
0
reply
Dalek1099
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#19
Report 5 years ago
#19
(Original post by zhog)
They don't do economics, that alone being a ggod reason not to trust them with the economy. Even the tag of 'the rich' betrays that economic lack of understanding of how the world works, Conservatives call them entrepreneurs upon whom economic development and growth depend, the fewer of them and the fewer jobs for 'the poor' to go to. Pull the rug from under their feet and you're plotting your own disadvantage.

Of course there has to be a balance between wealth-creation and redistribution but we can't have someone completely bereft of understanding of either and with nothing but antagonism for what they don't see. Were Labour to win and one of the harsh realities the next morning would be the reaction in financial markets to the electing of a party that everybody with the slightest understanding of anything economic knows are not fit to the govern the economic picture.

Re-nationalizations? Ideologically driven, no economic case.

Minimum wage up even further? Ideology, not economics.

Borrow freely? Ideology.

Scrap zero-hours? Ideology.

Any economic friendly policies? You tell us.

Everything they do is driven by anything other than economics, that's why the price of selling our debt will go up as one of the consequences. International lenders upon we depend will be nore fearful about Britain's ability to pay them back with a few years down the road and will want added interest to take the risk. The pound will go down in anticipation of the wave of borrow and spend, interest rates may have to go up and everyone with a mortgage will feel it.

The consequences of Labour's economic illiteracy and ideological antagonism towards the economic system we have would ripple through society in a way that even their own voters would end up suffering from.

ps, actually... it may be more the ideological thing as ever. Maybe they even understand how capitalism works but because they believe Marxism can be made to work better they end up hating it just for that. Once again, nothing to do with economics.
Economists on the Labour Manifesto : https://www.theguardian.com/news/201...-economy-needs

Its also worth bringing up the history of Labour and the Conservatives on the economy:

Whilst Labour was in charge during a recession caused by a global financial crisis, the Conservatives under Thatcher actually caused a recession due to excessive cuts destroying the economy and her cuts were much less than what the Conservatives have currently been implementing.There was also Black Wednesday under John Major.

Also, before the Conservatives got into power Labour had got the economy growing again after the financial crisis but the Conservatives brought the economy straight into decline as soon as they got into power and almost took the country into a double dip recession but they were warned about by this by Labour's shadow chancellor under Brown Alistair Darling.

People will rant about how Labour are somehow responsible for the financial crisis or about how the economy ended up growing under the Conservatives but with a much slower growth than other countries and which was to be expected as the financial crisis was now over and which Labour had already achieved before the public voted them out.The Conservatives would have regulated the banks even less than Labour making the financial crisis even worse.

In conclusion, we can see that Labour have done better than the Conservatives given the global economic conditions they both had to face.

Its worth noting that given the large cuts that will be maintained and increased under the Conservatives along with a hard Brexit due to May's dreadful negotiation skills meaning we will get a no deal and will have to do trade with Europe under huge tariffs a massive recession destroying millions of jobs is likely and indeed the economy has already started to shrink.

Vote Tory for recession!

Economists have disagreed with the Conservatives excessive austerity:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...-10149410.html
0
reply
username1738683
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#20
Report 5 years ago
#20
(Original post by Dalek1099)
https://www.theguardian.com/news/201...-economy-needs

Its also worth bringing up the history of Labour and the Conservatives on the economy:

Whilst Labour was in charge during a recession caused by a global financial crisis, the Conservatives under Thatcher actually caused a recession due to excessive cuts destroying the economy and her cuts were much less than what the Conservatives have currently been implementing.There was also Black Wednesday under John Major.

Also, before the Conservatives got into power Labour had got the economy growing again after the financial crisis but the Conservatives brought the economy straight into decline as soon as they got into power and almost took the country into a double dip recession but they were warned about by this by Labour's shadow chancellor under Brown Alistair Darling.

People will rant about how Labour are somehow responsible for the financial crisis or about how the economy ended up growing under the Conservatives but with a much slower growth than other countries and which was to be expected as the financial crisis was now over and which Labour had already achieved before the public voted them out.The Conservatives would have regulated the banks even less than Labour making the financial crisis even worse.

In conclusion, we can see that Labour have done better than the Conservatives given the global economic conditions they both had to face.

Its worth noting that given the large cuts that will be maintained and increased under the Conservatives along with a hard Brexit due to May's dreadful negotiation skills meaning we will get a no deal and will have to do trade with Europe under huge tariffs a massive recession destroying millions of jobs is likely and indeed the economy has already started to shrink.

Vote Tory for recession!

Economists have disagreed with the Conservatives excessive austerity:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...-10149410.html
Alas, the real picture was something else. Conservative won three elections under Thatcher. To follow your logic, Britain must have thought for 18 years that under Labour it would have been even worse, for all the Tories' imperfections. There you go, it's all to do with the world of dreams and nothing at will with reality on the ground.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest

Were exams easier or harder than you expected?

Easier (38)
26.21%
As I expected (47)
32.41%
Harder (53)
36.55%
Something else (tell us in the thread) (7)
4.83%

Watched Threads

View All