THE FOURTH OF JULY

[niemeyjt]

Time to revisit the Laffer curve with all this talk of 90% tax rates . . . the guys likely to be impacted by this are the same as those who decide where they and their companies are domiciled.

Remember, 45% (or 50%) of something is more than 90% of nothing.

 

[Spectric]

yes, a lot of land is owned by conglomerates, insurance companies etc

I think the church of England owns a huge amount of land, the National trust also owns a huge amount but that is to protect it for the future and the Railways.

the guys likely to be impacted by this are the same as those who decide where they and their companies are domiciled.

But should we make exceptions just because we want revenue rather than a level playing field where we all contribute fairly, if everyone paid in then there might not be a need for very high tax bands, just plug the loop holes first.

 

[sploo]

The problem for Sunak (despite him being merely a classic Tory boy who's totally disconnected from the realities of life for the majority of the public)

Both Rishi and Kier come from relatively normal backgrounds - Rishi somewhat more prosperous but hardly privileged stinking rich.

They have both been very successful in their chosen careers - apparently Kier is estimated to have ~£7m. What separates them is that Rishi also married into wealth.

Knowing how the realities of life affect normal people is not a job requirement, although empathy is important.

Always get the impression from Rishi that he's somewhat bemused and confused at the realities of life for the "little people" (e.g. ).

Granted it's possible Starmer is the same, but maybe just keeps it a little quieter.

 

[RobinBHM]

Spot on! The answer could be to reverse this trend

You want income tax raised.

There’s no income tax on assets

No they don't. Very few contemporary landlords actually build houses, they just own them. Rent controls, or if landlords all dropped dead, the properties would still be there

Jacob if rent controls are introduced, it means that landlords may sell up. The property will go to a person with enough savings for a deposit and a large enough salary to get a mortgage.

The result is less rental properties or substandard ones.

Rent controls are a symptom not a solution, evidence shows they don’t work.


There is no solution to housing crisis currently because the real solution is much lower property prices and no political party can win an election on such a policy.


Personally I would like a mass council house building programne and get rid of housing associations.One of the biggest costs to councils is housing benefit, having their own houses would save on that and it would make housing more affordable

 

[Jacob]

That’s not actually that much…???

UK land mass is roughly 24.4m hectares, population is around 66.97m (2022) which makes average ownership 18.2 hectares ..?

Average farm in the UK is 88 hectares .. yes, a lot of land is owned by conglomerates, insurance companies etc, but they tenant this to a lot of small farms and tbh who really wants to own 10,000Ha in the far north of Scotland ..?? It has near zero value for anything other than wild grazing or wind farms !

The value of the land is reflected in the rent or purchase price you have to pay for the privilege of living or working on it. Doesn't seem to be anywhere near zero. How could this be? https://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-prices/highlands-and-islands.html
If it really is worthless maybe the state should do these poor landowners a favour and compulsory purchase it all at a generous token price?

 

[Jacob]

You want income tax raised.

There’s no income tax on assets

Tax on assets too, of course.

Jacob if rent controls are introduced, it means that landlords may sell up.

Yes, good. Who needs landlords?

The property will go to a person with enough savings for a deposit and a large enough salary to get a mortgage.

Yes that's the general idea. Prices would fall of course and more houses could come into public ownership.

The result is less rental properties or substandard ones.

Landlords selling up don't destroy the houses, they would still be there

Rent controls are a symptom not a solution, evidence shows they don’t work.

I see you are arguing on the side of the landowners and wealthy again! Its amazing how many people willingly leap to the defence of the very rich!
The big issue is that the free market doesn't work, it needs regulating more equitably; rent controls, security of tenure, standards imposed, etc.

There is no solution to housing crisis currently because the real solution is much lower property prices and no political party can win an election on such a policy.

No solution? Thats OK then just give up and vote tory! Or Labour as it currently is.

Personally I would like a mass council house building programne and get rid of housing associations.One of the biggest costs to councils is housing benefit, having their own houses would save on that and it would make housing more affordable

Well yes. Main thing ideally is to get rid of the notion of "social" housing as though the people needing them are especially needy or deficient in some way and should have 2nd best. All housing should be "social" housing. Many different ways of managing it of course, to achieve the same ends, public/private ownership, housing associations, charities, etc.
It's very odd how many people nowadays own two or more houses and live off the backs of their neighbours. It's become normal; social parasites on social housing. The disastrous sell off of council houses was a big force in that direction, many of them ending up in the rental market and cranking up inequality across the board.

 

[Jacob]

Time to revisit the Laffer curve with all this talk of 90% tax rates . . . the guys likely to be impacted by this are the same as those who decide where they and their companies are domiciled.

Thats OK they can't take the land/buildings and other assets with them and they still need a market for whatever they do.

Remember, 45% (or 50%) of something is more than 90% of nothing.

Top tax rates at the end of WW2 were in the high 90s and still high when Thatcher got in and reduced it to 60%. Economy went into slow decline thereafter, along with tax rates.
The Laffer curve was always just a bad joke!

 

[niemeyjt]

Ask Amazon and the like about it - globalisation has changed things - taxation is based on "bum on seat" - and the Internet has changed all that.

90% taxation was Dennis Healy of Labour in 60s - hence the Beatles song "Taxman"

 

[Jacob]

Ask Amazon and the like about it - globalisation has changed things - taxation is based on "bum on seat" - and the Internet has changed all that.

There are no mass movements of the wealthy when tax rates change. Even the Laffer curve puts top sustainable tax at 70%. Funny how Reagan and Thatcher ignored that!

90% taxation was Dennis Healy of Labour in 60s - hence the Beatles song "Taxman"

Economy post war was booming. We built NHS, council houses....etc etc

 

[PDW125]

The value of the land is reflected in the rent or purchase price you have to pay for the privilege of living or working on it. Doesn't seem to be anywhere near zero. How could this be? https://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-prices/highlands-and-islands.html
If it really is worthless maybe the state should do these poor landowners a favour and compulsory purchase it all at a generous token price?

That’s a great ideology but in practice doesn’t work as what would the state do with it ..?? There are huge swathes of moorland up through Achnashellach and Monar for example that are uninhabitable because of the terrain and lack of infrastructure - what do you suggest the state does with it..? Parcel it up and give it to people ..? Shall we also give them 2 chickens a sheep and a cow too and then they have the start of self sufficiency ..!?

 

[mark w]

Bit of history here:

Best Prime minister we never had.

 

[Jacob]

That’s a great ideology but in practice doesn’t work as what would the state do with it ..?? There are huge swathes of moorland up through Achnashellach and Monar for example that are uninhabitable because of the terrain and lack of infrastructure - what do you suggest the state does with it..? Parcel it up and give it to people ..? Shall we also give them 2 chickens a sheep and a cow too and then they have the start of self sufficiency ..!?

Not ideology it's simple economics. What you were saying that large areas of the highlands have no value. Asset tax would be on the parts which do have value. Looking at house prices in the highlands, values seem to be not that different from the UK

 

[mark w]

I've read through all of the posts, what I've found heartwarming is the almost overwhelming agreement that the Tories need to go and Rwanda is a bad idea to say the least.
Astonishingly I find myself in almost total agreement with Jacob (if only he'd accept that honing guides are a force for good ), except for voting Green, Glastonbury (my home town) has had a Green majority council for years, the only thing that has flourished here are the weeds.

 

[stuart little]

What relevance does that have, and how would things be different today if Brown (no relation) hadn't sold off the gold reserves?

Well, now, if we still had it, it could now be sold (@ much higher price?), & used to fund NHS & re-build our road system!
They probably resent paying out to do the roads, because the way Putrid Pootin is going, there won't be any!!!!!!!!

 

[Jacob]

I've read through all of the posts, what I've found heartwarming is the almost overwhelming agreement that the Tories need to go and Rwanda is a bad idea to say the least.
Astonishingly I find myself in almost total agreement with Jacob (if only he'd accept that honing guides are a force for good ), except for voting Green, Glastonbury (my home town) has had a Green majority council for years, the only thing that has flourished here are the weeds.

Maybe I'm wrong about honing guides? And the millions of woodworkers who managed without them since the beginning of time?
I'll have another go with one, I've got several in a drawer somewhere, haven't touched them for years.

 

[John Brown]

I've read through all of the posts, what I've found heartwarming is the almost overwhelming agreement that the Tories need to go and Rwanda is a bad idea to say the least.
Astonishingly I find myself in almost total agreement with Jacob (if only he'd accept that honing guides are a force for good ), except for voting Green, Glastonbury (my home town) has had a Green majority council for years, the only thing that has flourished here are the weeds.

On the other hand, the idea that the Tories need to go to Rwanda is a great idea.

 

[whereistheceilidh]

That’s a great ideology but in practice doesn’t work as what would the state do with it ..?? There are huge swathes of moorland up through Achnashellach and Monar for example that are uninhabitable because of the terrain and lack of infrastructure - what do you suggest the state does with it..? Parcel it up and give it to people ..? Shall we also give them 2 chickens a sheep and a cow too and then they have the start of self sufficiency ..!?

Already been done.....it is called Crofting....always had to have at least 2 other jobs to survive......

 

[Jacob]

Not ideology it's simple economics. What you were saying that large areas of the highlands have no value. Asset tax would be on the parts which do have value. Looking at house prices in the highlands, values seem to be not that different from the UK

Just had a quick look at crofting. Scotland is amazingly feudal.
They should have taken back the land after the clearances. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crofting
William Wallace and Robert the Bruce must be spinning in their graves! Not to mention Rob Roy!

 

[sploo]

On the other hand, the idea that the Tories need to go to Rwanda is a great idea.

Sounds perfectly fair to me. I mean, it is a safe country. Ahem.

 

[NickVanBeest]

I don't vote... Not because I don't want to vote, but as an expat I'm not allowed to, even though they get to spend my tax money! Bloody sprouts! Revoking my right to vote for the candidate that I feel will do the best with the money I give them (willingly, as I could start dodging tax like most of the rich and famous!)

We should adopt something else from Australian system: voting plight, i.e. everyone eligible HAS to vote, and it's punishable by fines if you don't.

Always amazes me that the citizens want the rights of a democracy (i.e, freedom of whatever they stand for, etc) but forget that democracy actually has plights as well: for it to work, everybody HAS to vote! Not voting is telling the government that you agree with their viewpoint, whatever it may be, as you don't seem to have an opinion, and are thus happy to have all decisions made for you!

The only problem with the plight to vote is that the current ballot system rejects spoiled ballots as being not counted/cast votes. If these were properly counted, and happened to win the majority, it could be a big message to all candidates that the people in the constituency reject all of them, and thus the election should immediately be voided, and redone, until an actual candidate wins more votes than the spoiled ballots.

And then, as a counter balance, the system needs the possibility to recall this elected individual when it (as I don't want to say he or she, as IMNSHO politicians are barely human) reneges on the promises that got it elected in the first place. This recall would need a quarter of the constituents to agree that promises have been broken, and that would be enough to cause a new election in said constituency.

Hmmm... I need more wine to solve the rest of the democratic process...