buctootim

Did the reasons for the bailouts pass you by? It was on the news you know. Its nothing to do with wanting to save a failing company per se - its the fact that they held the banking of millions of people and businesses. Suppose you banked with Lloyds or RBS. If they failed how would your salary get paid in, how would your mortgage, utilities etc get paid out, where would you get cash from? what would happen to funds held in SIPPS and other investments. Its naive in the extreme to think you could just let the banks fail, not worry about their £1.5trillion balance sheets - who owed what to who - and that 10million people could all transfer their banks accounts no problem to other banks who of course would have the capacity to cope with 10m new customers overnight.

I look after my cat well. She gets good food, healthcare and a comfortable place to sleep. That doesnt mean I have socialise with her and her cat buddies.

Because its an easy label for the unthinking.

Except that his was in Barnes and hers in Hammersmith, and they had different staff, oh and one was a girls school. Apart from that, same school.

Ive been out with her.

I know this isnt much help now - but many people choose houses dependent on the quality of the schools. It was part of the reason for me moving out of Brighton & Hove into leafy mid Sussex. The premium for a house in a good school catchment area (which you get back when you sell) is nothing compared to the cost of private education.

Who knew Anestis Zoumpoulakis was such a popular name? Another 744 of them at Lund University alone apparently.

I havent read the Spirit Level. Scandinavia is a high tax area, smallish cities, limited theatre and restaurant culture, comparatively difficult access to the rest of the world and lacking in that polyglot international money set London and New York have.

Yes but the point is there is a race to the bottom in offering low tax regimes for rich people just as there is for corporation tax. Britain is doing to the rest of the world (along with Switzerland, Monaco etc) what Luxembourg, Ireland etc have been doing to us on corporation tax.

Wealthy people like to live in places where there are good restaurants and shops, relatively low crime, relatively little extreme poverty facing them, good flight links and other people like them. Not many countries fit that bill. Their benefits to the UK are limited, we could certainly tax them a bit.

Is it better to have starbucks and Amazon and Google here not paying tax but employing people, or does it skew the market and disadvantage others? At least they employ people. What value is there in the UK collaborating in an international tax avoidance merry go round for individuals? Yes the majority of the super wealthy in the UK aren't Brits. Britain is one of the best tax havens for non UK citizens. So the wealthy Russians and Swedes and Germans live here and the wealthy Brits live in Switzerland and Monaco and mega wealthy people live happy tax free lives in the country of their choice.

The seriously rich aren't buying government bonds / gilts. Interest rates are at record lows, despite (or because of) record borrowing. Most really wealthy people put their cash with hedge funds where the best ones have averaged returns of 40%pa for the past 10 years, or in land and property. The minimum amount to be invested in hedge funds is often $5m and up - so excluding the plebs like you and me. The dangerous thing with them is that they make their money from volatility - they need crises, stock market crashes and company car crashes - they don't make 40% pa from stable markets. Its in their interests to rock the boat so they they can short sell - and where do their gains come from given the overall market value hasn't increased? - from the run of the mill asset managers, the people who are looking after the measly pension funds of the the plebs (thats you and me again). Money transfer from the middle class to the rich. Nice

For two reasons. 1. It doesn't work, there are always a myriad of ways around it. 2 I don't think its the job of government to be interfering in the price a landlord charges to rent a particular house, or the price Sansbury's charges for sugar. They should be resolving the strategic issue of lack of supply of housing, not trying to 'central plan' the inevitable consequence of a shortage - price rises.

Long term, its a crap idea. As a short term fix while they address affordability in better more strategic ways - particulalrly building more houses, its not a bad thing.

Just a billion huh. About as much as it would cost to reduce class sizes to 20 from 30 for 500,000 pupils. Hardly worth bothering with.

How else are you going to withdraw £5?

Im not a fan of the mansion tax - Id rather see such an increase in the supply of high quality houses that houses priced at £2m were truly exceptional cases. That said, until nirvana is reached, it seems an okay way to temporarily help plug a gap in public finances.

He's a conviction politician untroubled by focus groups. I'd have thought he'd be popular

Are you not able to understand what the article says? London had the highest house price inflation.

Bit harsh to claim being next to Fatpipes has devalued their new Fratton store by £6.3bn.

VAT on listing fees but no VAT on selling price unless the goods are new?

That will be news to Phillips, since they moved to new £30m headquarters last autumn and I was there last week. Tory voter mantra 1. We must reduce the deficit 2. We must reduce government spending 3. You cant cut any of the big cost centres - pensions, or health, or care homes, or care for the elderly services 4. You cant increase taxes 5. There is a big magic pot of waste somewhere which we can easily cut and solve all the problems.

Im not sure if his was a serious proposal. In any event investigations by HMRC into individuals liability for CGT and income tax are expensive and hard to prove. Requiring Sothebies, Christies, Philips, Amazon, Ebay etc to charge VAT on their used goods sales would be an easy and cheap fix which would address part of the problem.

I know yours is a purposely provocative post but even so there is a major industry in selling 'used' goods which is both untaxed for VAT and also where many of the sellers dont pay CGT or income tax. Why should a £1m auction item - classic car / painting / looted Assyrian pot be VAT free?

Can you not differentiate between an expert giving an objective opinion and someone writing from self interest? He's a London property developer.