1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

"The Politics of Envy"

Discussion in 'Personal' started by MAGAorMIGA, Dec 27, 2018.

  1. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Gambling is a problem moreso than the tax affairs of the owners and should be highly regulated, I would campaign for that as I would anti drug legislation and other causes of social ills these things ruin lives.

    We have the NMW and many employers pay above it to attract and keep the right staff... Some don't but they often get a transient workforce. In any case if we voted appropriately the NMW could be increased further as it only affects our global competativeness.

    Not for long I expect it will either be spent or reinvested in that it another venture, wealthy people seldomly hoard money it gets devalued too quickly.

    Could you explain in a little more detail please.

    What are the alternative views, I'm still puzzled, the only one I can think of is Communism.
     
  2. Mangleworzle

    Mangleworzle Star commenter

    This is my point (to an extent) it's not black and white, capitalism or communism. If you choose capitalism it doesn't have to be full strength, no rules, screw 'em as much as you can, that aspect is down to individual choices by people in the capitalist system. In fact because I am criticizing aspects of the capitalist system, you are assuming that the only possible alternative is the other extreme.

    The alternative is not to let businesses and individuals do what they like without consequences, though this has been described as a "burden" on capitalism - Oh the horror! I see it as being in support of workers rights, conditions and paying back to society.

    There's plenty out there on it:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2013/12/18/qe-the-greatest-subsidy-to-the-rich-ever.html
    https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...s-greatest-financial-experiment-enriched-rich
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/aug/23/britains-richest-gained-quantative-easing-bank
    https://www.theguardian.com/busines...cious-effects-favour-wealthy-tax-middle-class
     
  3. MAGAorMIGA

    MAGAorMIGA Star commenter

    True but the average person has more disposable income as their tax has fallen (they either rent or own a cheap property which wouldn't attract much tax) and prices of goods are less as there is no sales tax on them.
     
  4. MAGAorMIGA

    MAGAorMIGA Star commenter

    Yes business property would be taxed differently from residential, and of course employers in particular would attract tax breaks. Foreigners owning property are subject to the taxes - are you proposing that they wouldn't be?
     
  5. MAGAorMIGA

    MAGAorMIGA Star commenter

    The dead no longer need the money. Why shouldn't the beneficiaries of the largesse pay tax on what they inherited?
     
  6. Photo51

    Photo51 Established commenter

    If there is more disposable income there has been a reduction in tax. I don't see where your £175 billion VAT replacement is going to come from.

    A reduction in property prices could not be allowed to cause a tax reduction otherwise the government tax take would reduce.

    Even more tax reductions?
     
  7. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    It appears that one extreme of Capitalism is being compared to a different version of Capitalism then, so as it's a continuum we have to be more precise in our description less you or anyone else is actually proposing the opposing extreme as I had suggested may have been the case.

    My understanding of QE is that it was seem as a solution to one issue but it appears to have caused others (as I have said before is always the case), although in this case as I understand it we are talking about disadvantaging the middle classes not the poor, is that right and if so is it a priority given the other important issues society has to face... Meanwhile I'm not sure we are still using QE are we?
     
  8. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    They do... 40% not enough for you?

    I fear that unless you are in an income bracket you simply have no idea what the implications of tax reforms might be... People and businesses can be asset rich but cash poor I used to call it money diaorea in and out equally quickly.

    We really ought to focus on minimising leakages from the circular flow, ensuring our balance of payments is healthy and yes ensuring UK domestic property is owned by UK based tax paying citizens/businesses... Although this too will have repercussions to British overseas companies and might result in subsequent relocations as yet unforeseen.
     
  9. MAGAorMIGA

    MAGAorMIGA Star commenter

    The overall tax take would be about at it is now - public services have to be paid for.
     
  10. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Are they not already?
     
  11. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    Surely you'd want to increase taxes if you want to cover public services? We are running a deficit and I believe you don't approve of austerity cuts so... you've got to find more money.
     
    Photo51 and needabreak like this.
  12. Photo51

    Photo51 Established commenter

    Show me some maths that shows the new MorM tax burden by income and wealth decile or just the tax burden on someome with a £500k house and I might be willing to agree.
     
  13. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    I recall one of the first threads I started on TES [after my latte vs. cappucino thread] was on the concept of a 100% inheritance tax.

    Doomzebra very kindly picked me apart on that one.
     
  14. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Were you/they for or against it?
     
  15. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Is there a link to it or was it too long ago @lanokia ?
     
  16. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    I was for it [it was a decade ago, I've changed my mind since] and Doomzebra was against it... for quite sensible reasons [lack of stable income for government, chance of someone spending all their wealth before death etc]
     
    needabreak likes this.
  17. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    Crikey...

    No I just had a search but it was on the old Opinion forum and that was all scrubbed by the *event we do not speak of* in 2015.
     
    needabreak likes this.
  18. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Just wondered... Interesting that it's still up for discussion here a decade later... Ahhh politics... It's futile!
     
  19. Mangleworzle

    Mangleworzle Star commenter

    Matron! Matron! He spoke of that event!

    ...oops.
     
  20. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    :D:D:D:D
     

Share This Page