The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[Sir Ralph]

2 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Please can you ask, as very interested.

When you say future investments and Labour policy, which Labour policies are pushing them abroad?

 

I’ll ask a couple and let you know. It won’t matter as you won’t believe cause it doesn’t fit your narrative. Unfortunately it’s happened and is happening

[Farmer Saint]

4 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I’ll ask a couple and let you know. It won’t matter as you won’t believe cause it doesn’t fit your narrative. Unfortunately it’s happened and is happening

I have no narrative, so please do. I will await your answer.

Moving to Dubai is good for some people, but not the profile of people that you are talking about (that's why I have been challenging), but it will be interesting to see what they say.

Edited Monday at 15:37 by Farmer Saint

[whelk]

1 hour ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Don’t, because my wife has met him through work and was very impressed with how he interacted with everyone and on health and social care seriously knows his stuff. 

Also, gets a big tick and pint of something strong in the real ale department from me for cleaning up the enormous economic projectile vomit by Liz Truss and the wretched Institute of Economic Affairs. 

He summed up very well what some of the problems are with NHS and public sector 

Edited Monday at 16:24 by whelk

[Gloucester Saint]

7 minutes ago, whelk said:

He summed up very well what some of the problems are with NHS and public sector 

Comes from lived experience at the top level, not from Britannia Unchained nor John Moynihan’s latest ‘opinion-led’ waste of paper.

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

Question for both @Sir Ralph and @east-stand-nic, as Sir Ralph said he couldn't answer this the other day (even though they are his millionaire acquaintance's)

What would be the tax advantage for someone who's assets and businesses are UK based, to move to Dubai? On what taxes are they saving money?

I just want to see if either of you have an understanding of how it all works.

15% saving on all purchases (made in Dubai).

VAT

[hypochondriac]

On 11/08/2025 at 08:31, rallyboy said:

Nah. Why would I? Fuckwits on e-scooters and gap years, vandalising shit...

Do you support the government cracking down on peaceful protest?

Do you still believe that Israel is entitled to do whatever it takes in the name of self-defence, including murdering thousands of medical staff and 200 journalists, to facilitate and attempt to hide their ethnic-cleansing of Gaza? 

 

This however is a message I can get behind 

[egg]

15 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

This however is a message I can get behind 

Brilliant. And he has a Tony Hart look about him. 

[tdmickey3]

The easily led, gullible and stupid are justifying the tag....

 

Angry locals from Welsh town under investigation for online comments after mistaking youth group for asylum seekers | UK News | Sky News

[badgerx16]

12 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

The easily led, gullible and stupid are justifying the tag....

 

Angry locals from Welsh town under investigation for online comments after mistaking youth group for asylum seekers | UK News | Sky News

"Send them back" - ( to Scotland ). Taffs are an insular bunch.

Edited Tuesday at 14:18 by badgerx16

[Sir Ralph]

23 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

I’ll ask a couple and let you know. It won’t matter as you won’t believe cause it doesn’t fit your narrative. Unfortunately it’s happened and is happening

I’ve had a couple of replies - one the usual about income tax. This is your typical response. 

The second person I was told about IHT long term and reduced taxation on UK pensions. These guys are going to stay for longer but have significant funds. 

ill get some more feedback for you. I spoke to a couple of other people and their view was surprise at your view. Foreign Investment in real estate is also significantly smashed. They are also trying to force second home owners and property portfolio owners to sell but they have reduced the pool of buyers The more you dig the worse it gets. They are destroying the residential property market too, despite their key policy to grow the economy based on house building 

 

Edited Tuesday at 14:53 by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

38 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

The easily led, gullible and stupid are justifying the tag....

 

Angry locals from Welsh town under investigation for online comments after mistaking youth group for asylum seekers | UK News | Sky News

Do you agree with the way the illegal immigration system works in the UK?

[badgerx16]

17 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Do you agree with the way the illegal immigration system works in the UK?

Will harassing British children, probably on the basis of skin colour in this case, help solve any issues there might be ?

[Sir Ralph]

Just now, badgerx16 said:

Will harassing British children, probably on the basis of skin colour in this case, help solve any issues there might be ?

Not the question I asked. I wouldn’t harass anyone. Do you agree with the way the illegal immigration system works in the UK?

[badgerx16]

25 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Not the question I asked. I wouldn’t harass anyone. Do you agree with the way the illegal immigration system works in the UK?

It has issues, but I am not sure a "perfect" system exists. 

Are you happy with the way the legal immigration system in the UK works, given that the last census reports that over 10 million people living in the UK at that time were born overseas.

[Sir Ralph]

10 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

It has issues, but I am not sure a "perfect" system exists. 

Are you happy with the way the legal immigration system in the UK works, given that the last census reports that over 10 million people living in the UK at that time were born overseas.

Happy with the legal migration system

”Not perfect” is interesting. Most people would say it works badly. What do you think is wrong with the illegal immigration system?

Edited Tuesday at 15:43 by Sir Ralph

[badgerx16]

8 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Happy with the legal migration system.

”Not perfect” is interesting. What do you think is wrong with the illegal immigration system?

There should be an international arrangement that stops the cross channel boats, if only on humaintarian grounds, linked to a better arrangement of "safe and legal" routes for asylum seekers, thereby removing some of the incentive for people to try the boats. All said and done, the southern European countries have a far more difficult situation to deal with.

There will always be people attempting to get around immigration controls, we just need to reduce the numbers so that things are manageable and the statistics are less prone to malevolent manipulation and misinterpretation.

Edited Tuesday at 15:49 by badgerx16

[Sir Ralph]

1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

There should be an international arrangement that stops the cross channel boats, if only on humaintarian grounds, linked to a better arrangement of "safe and legal" routes for asylum seekers, thereby removing some of the incentive for people to try the boats. All said and done, the southern European countries have a far more difficult situation to deal with.

There will always be people attempting to get around immigration controls, we just need to reduce the numbers so that things are manageable and the statistics are less prone to malevolent manipulation and misinterpretation.

Appreciate the considered response. To start with I agree with some of the basic and principle  points about stopping boats crossing and reducing incentives. Do you believe they are mainly genuine asylum seekers?

I will add that the Conservatives weren’t much better this is more a point about the numbers - which hopefully you would agree aren’t manipulated by gives an idea of the scale of the issue.  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8e1xkwd74wo

Edited Tuesday at 16:54 by Sir Ralph

[whelk]

2 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

Foreign Investment in real estate is also significantly smashed

Brilliant

[Sir Ralph]

31 minutes ago, whelk said:

Brilliant

What do you do Whelk? I appreciate my terminology was crude but maybe engage with the point being made. Tell me why you disagree as that’s the bigger point - I’m intrigued. Tell me the positive or negative impact that Labour has had on property investment and housing delivery (one of their key policies) in the UK?

 

Im genuinely trying to engage with you on this so I would be keen to understand the point you are trying to make.

Edited Tuesday at 17:31 by Sir Ralph

[whelk]

21 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

What do you do Whelk? I appreciate my terminology was crude but maybe engage with the point being made. Tell me why you disagree as that’s the bigger point - I’m intrigued. Tell me the positive or negative impact that Labour has had on property investment and housing delivery (one of their key policies) in the UK?

 

Im genuinely trying to engage with you on this so I would be keen to understand the point you are trying to make.

Foreign investment in property in UK has contributed to the working man being priced out of home ownership. 70s, 80s and 90s even a single income working family could have aspirations of owning their home. Nowadays so difficult because the wealthy have so many assets and wanting more just compounding the issue.

i actually consider myself wealthy and done well in my career but I want a fairer more healthy society

[Sir Ralph]

7 minutes ago, whelk said:

Foreign investment in property in UK has contributed to the working man being priced out of home ownership. 70s, 80s and 90s even a single income working family could have aspirations of owning their home. Nowadays so difficult because the wealthy have so many assets and wanting more just compounding the issue.

i actually consider myself wealthy and done well in my career but I want a fairer more healthy society

Firstly thanks for engaging. I respectfully disagree- foreign investment resulted in a significant boom in housing in the noughties and after the 2008 recession. With that it helped the delivery of affordable housing and also a lot of jobs which the Treasury benefitted from.
 

Without investment, including foreign investment, affordable housing doesn’t get built at the same level or rate. That’s what’s happening now. So private and foreign investment in housing increases supply (thereby improving affordability) and allows the delivery of affordable housing alongside it. 
 

The issue of affordability has been a lack of house building to keep up with population growth so you could argue more foreign investment would have helped

Edited Tuesday at 17:48 by Sir Ralph

[tdmickey3]

3 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

Do you agree with the way the illegal immigration system works in the UK?

No but it’s historically like that and the current government are changing it.

 

[Sir Ralph]

Just now, tdmickey3 said:

No but it’s historically like that and the current government are changing it.

 

I didn’t criticise the current government- I think the conservatives didn’t have a handle and they are playing politics on it. I don’t think labour will be successful either as I think they will need a more radical approach to solve it.

[egg]

Just now, Sir Ralph said:

I didn’t criticise the current government- I think the conservatives didn’t have a handle and they are playing politics on it. I don’t think labour will be successful either as I think they will need a more radical approach to solve it.

What are your suggestions? 

[egg]

8 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Firstly thanks for engaging. I respectfully disagree- foreign investment resulted in a significant boom in housing in the noughties and after the 2008 recession. With that it helped the delivery of affordable housing and also a lot of jobs which the Treasury benefitted from.
 

Without investment, including foreign investment, affordable housing doesn’t get built at the same level or rate. That’s what’s happening now. So private and foreign investment in housing increases supply (thereby improving affordability) and allows the delivery of affordable housing alongside it. 
 

The issue of affordability has been a lack of house building to keep up with population growth so you could argue more foreign investment would have helped

The boom pushed up prices and made it less affordable. 

[Sir Ralph]

17 minutes ago, egg said:

What are your suggestions? 

This is a complex issue and there are pros and cons. I wouldn’t say I have the complete answer to address it but in my view you need to differentiate between legitimate refugees and others - that is what is attracting some less legitimate applicants. Unfortunately there are too many incentives at the moment so I would remove some of the incentives. As part of this you may need to leave the ECHR or lobby for its terms to change. I think all governments are currently trying to solve the issue with one arm tied behind their backs. There is a notable impact on local authority expenditure (not for the accommodation itself) which means that resources for other services are reallocated rather than going to existing sectors - eg social care. 

Edited Tuesday at 18:11 by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

14 minutes ago, egg said:

The boom pushed up prices and made it less affordable. 

Sorry i respectfully don’t agree. The foreign investment meant the houses were built in the first place. The backers were foreign investment otherwise they probably wouldn’t have been built or not at the rate they were. Why would an increase in housing provision reduce the affordability? Alternatively you would have less housing without foreign investment - you aren’t saying that would have meant prices reduced?

Edited Tuesday at 18:10 by Sir Ralph

[egg]

12 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Sorry i respectfully don’t agree. The foreign investment meant the houses were built in the first place. The backers were foreign investment otherwise they probably wouldn’t have been built or not at the rate they were. Why would an increase in housing provision reduce the affordability? Alternatively you would have less housing without foreign investment - you aren’t saying that would have meant prices reduced?

So you don't think the boom periods involved a boom in prices? And you're in real estate. Apparently. 

 

[badgerx16]

2 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

Do you believe they are mainly genuine asylum seekers?

 

The problem with classifying somebody as a 'genuine' asylum seeker is the lack of 'safe and legal' routes, forcing people who may be 'genuine' to seek an alternative route into the UK because they have no access to a legal path.

[egg]

16 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

This is a complex issue and there are pros and cons. I wouldn’t say I have the complete answer to address it but in my view you need to differentiate between legitimate refugees and others - that is what is attracting some less legitimate applicants. Unfortunately there are too many incentives at the moment so I would remove some of the incentives. As part of this you may need to leave the ECHR or lobby for its terms to change. I think all governments are currently trying to solve the issue with one arm tied behind their backs. There is a notable impact on local authority expenditure (not for the accommodation itself) which means that resources for other services are reallocated rather than going to existing sectors - eg social care. 

The question related to your point that growth needs radical government thinking. I'm not asking about illegal migration. 

On that, as there's the English Channel, people will get into boats and come here. As long as there's good weather, the numbers will increase.

But yes, we need to become a less attractive proposition. What incentives do you suggest should go? Housing? Health provision? 

[Sir Ralph]

1 hour ago, egg said:

So you don't think the boom periods involved a boom in prices? And you're in real estate. Apparently. 

 

What do you do @egg Respectfully I would like to reiterate the two key points:

1. The delivery of affordable housing is linked to private house building that was delivered in some cases through foreign investment. In high value areas this is often the way in which historically key workers, for example, can access housing. 
2. Your complaint is about foreign investment resulting in a lack of affordability- in fact it’s a lack of house building matching population growth, rather than an increase in housing. This has been documented to the nth degree in many places. This is why the current government is trying to promote what you would call a housing “boom”, albeit isn’t going to achieve it. One of those reasons is a lack of private, including foreign, interest and investment in the UK housing market due to government economic policies.

Your complaint maybe about the regeneration of areas where large scale new developments have come forward, in many places to revitalise areas, which are often in need to social and physical support. This often increases the cost of housing in these areas. However that funding comes from many sources and regeneration is something the Labour government is in fact very keen to see.

 

@egg @tdmickey3 and @whelk I note you all have similar views - I can promise you that private investment and wealth tends to have on balance a positive impact for the country. Thats just my view as a capitalist 

Edited Tuesday at 19:23 by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

27 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

The problem with classifying somebody as a 'genuine' asylum seeker is the lack of 'safe and legal' routes, forcing people who may be 'genuine' to seek an alternative route into the UK because they have no access to a legal path.

Fair point if the right checks and balances are in place through the legal routes I understand 

[Farmer Saint]

16 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

I’ve had a couple of replies - one the usual about income tax. This is your typical response. 

The second person I was told about IHT long term and reduced taxation on UK pensions. These guys are going to stay for longer but have significant funds. 

ill get some more feedback for you. I spoke to a couple of other people and their view was surprise at your view. Foreign Investment in real estate is also significantly smashed. They are also trying to force second home owners and property portfolio owners to sell but they have reduced the pool of buyers The more you dig the worse it gets. They are destroying the residential property market too, despite their key policy to grow the economy based on house building 

 

And herein lies the issue Ralph...the profile of these people don't pay income tax, and do not have pensions. These are not salaried individuals. You said they are investors and have businesses and assets in the UK - the thought that these people would be paid through income tax is laughable. I don't pay income tax, and although I have some money, I'm not on the scale of these people.

The fact that you also think that multi-millionaires would divulge their tax arrangements to a lay person like yourself, just cos you asked them, is very, very funny. Tax arrangements for the wealthy are incredibly complex, and a lot tend not be ethical so they would not share that. In addition to this, you falling into my income tax trap just shows how little you know about millionaires and tax.

So when you say income tax, what are they paying income tax on? What income tax were they paying in the UK that they're not paying now in Dubai?

 

Edited Wednesday at 07:01 by Farmer Saint

[Farmer Saint]

Oh, and one last thing @Sir Ralph, which Labour policy has increased income tax in this country? Income tax hasn't been changed since 2013...

[trousers]

16 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Oh, and one last thing @Sir Ralph, which Labour policy has increased income tax in this country? Income tax hasn't been changed since 2013...

As long as you don't count the thresholds not being raised in line with inflation....? #incometaxrisesbystealth

Edited Wednesday at 07:32 by trousers

[Farmer Saint]

3 minutes ago, trousers said:

As long as you don't count the thresholds not being raised in line with inflation.... #incometaxrisesbystealth

Absolutely, but again that was put in place by the Tories until 2026.

His whole argument was based on loads of his multi-millionaire business owner mates from "real estate" moving to Dubai due to Labour policies.

Edited Wednesday at 07:34 by Farmer Saint

[Sir Ralph]

1 hour ago, Farmer Saint said:

And herein lies the issue Ralph...the profile of these people don't pay income tax, and do not have pensions. These are not salaried individuals. You said they are investors and have businesses and assets in the UK - the thought that these people would be paid through income tax is laughable. I don't pay income tax, and although I have some money, I'm not on the scale of these people.

The fact that you also think that multi-millionaires would divulge their tax arrangements to a lay person like yourself, just cos you asked them, is very, very funny. Tax arrangements for the wealthy are incredibly complex, and a lot tend not be ethical so they would not share that. In addition to this, you falling into my income tax trap just shows how little you know about millionaires and tax.

So when you say income tax, what are they paying income tax on? What income tax were they paying in the UK that they're not paying now in Dubai?

 

Ok let’s say I’m making it all up. Which I’m not. They are in real estate, finance and insurance mainly just to correct you. I said I’m not a tax expert but I know these people that left and they didn’t get into any details other than referencing IHT as a key driver. Are you saying that isn’t true?
 

Also they are friends - so we talk about life and life decisions. I’m surprised you don’t know anyone at all that has left as the vast majority of people in business in London do if you have any sort of credentials.  I find that “very, very funny”. If you’re experience is certain levels of business then I understand your experience but that’s ok.
 

Also most very wealthy people I know never let on how much they earn, who they know or anything like that. You have done all voluntarily which indicates to me otherwise. I only responded when asked. I think it’s absolutely bizarre you defend labours policies as an alleged business man. 
 

We both don’t believe each other so let’s leave it there. 
 

https://www.ft.com/content/a3fc89ea-6e9a-4795-9d42-e555551d0a0f
 

https://news.sky.com/story/why-rachel-reeves-may-want-to-rethink-one-of-her-pivotal-policies-13408251

Edited Wednesday at 07:50 by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

14 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Absolutely, but again that was put in place by the Tories until 2026.

His whole argument was based on loads of his multi-millionaire business owner mates from "real estate" moving to Dubai due to Labour policies.

So you’re saying that labours policies have had no impact on wealthy people leaving the country? Is that what you really believe? Has it had a net positive effect then?

Edited Wednesday at 07:46 by Sir Ralph

[Farmer Saint]

8 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Ok let’s say I’m making it all up. Which I’m not. They are in real estate, finance and insurance mainly just to correct you. I said I’m not a tax expert but I know these people that left and they didn’t get into any details other than referencing IHT as a key driver. Are you saying that isn’t true?
 

Also they are friends - so we talk about life and life decisions. I’m surprised you don’t know anyone at all that has left as the vast majority of people in business in London do if you have any sort of credentials.  
 

Also most very wealthy people I know never let on how much they earn, who they know or anything like that. You have done all voluntarily which indicates to me otherwise. I only responded when asked. I think it’s absolutely bizarre you defend labours policies as an alleged business man. 
 

We both don’t believe each other so let’s leave it there. 
 

https://www.ft.com/content/a3fc89ea-6e9a-4795-9d42-e555551d0a0f
 

https://news.sky.com/story/why-rachel-reeves-may-want-to-rethink-one-of-her-pivotal-policies-13408251

Hmmm, your post above says it is mostly income tax reasons. When you say they are in Finance and Insurance, are these salaried individuals, because previously you said they were business and asset owners.

Secondly, what age are these people? Unless they are very old (so probably not salaried) if they were bothered about IHT they could start putting their money in trusts and transferring across to their kids.

You are clearly making it up as you go along - this is way beyond an "agree to disagree" stance.

Some high salaried individuals are moving to Dubai, but they have been for 20 years. That's not due to any tax laws, it's purely down to greed. Would you prefer to pay 45% tax on your salary, or 0%. It's that simple. Please note the 45% rate has been around since 2013.

 

[Farmer Saint]

7 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

So you’re saying that labours policies have had no impact on wealthy people leaving the country? Is that what you really believe? Has it had a net positive effect then?

Do you understand how wealth works?

And no I don't, for both questions, but I don't think it's changed much. A lot of people left post Brexit, for obvious reasons.

[Sir Ralph]

4 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Do you understand how wealth works?

And no I don't, for both questions, but I don't think it's changed much. A lot of people left post Brexit, for obvious reasons.

Ok well I didn’t vote for brexit. I doubt anyone with a business view would, in the same way I would be surprised if a majority of business people voted labour. So you agree at least that it has had a negative impact, albeit less than my experience.

You think I’m making it up and that’s fine. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you aren’t but are probably in a location or sector where you haven’t seen this.

 

Edited Wednesday at 08:00 by Sir Ralph

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, Sir Ralph said:

Ok well I didn’t vote for brexit. I doubt anyone with a business view would, in the same way I would be surprised if a majority of business people voted labour. So you agree at least that it has had a negative impact, albeit less than my experience.

You think I’m making it up and that’s fine. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you aren’t but are probably in a location or sector where you haven’t seen this.

 

That what has had a negative impact? What Labour policies are you bemoaning? 

Edited Wednesday at 09:13 by Farmer Saint

[Sir Ralph]

21 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

That what has had a negative impact? What Labour policies are you bemoaning? 

https://www.devere-group.com/uk-should-be-wooing-the-wealthy-warns-devere-ceo/

https://www.businessinsider.com/rich-used-to-flock-to-the-uk-now-theyre-fleeing-2025-6

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2025/jul/07/non-doms-labour-super-rich-leaving-the-uk

This is before the IHT changes that are going to made in the Autumn to offset the fact that the Labour Party cannot  address welfare reform, among other matters. The message to me is clear - don’t invest, don’t save, don’t be responsible- this is creating a bad business culture of low growth and government dependence, both in terms of dependence on welfare and a bloated / unproductive public sector.  
 

I have spoken to investors, asset holders, business owners etc across different sector over the past months and NOT ONE has had a positive response to Labours overall economic policies. Like I said before I liked the sound of some of their policies initially but I struggle to understand why you defend them so vehemently now. Are the people you are speaking to saying that there economic policies are doing a good job and encouraging investment? As a matter of principle would you say you are a capitalist? I think a number on here aren’t capitalist but more socialist in their views which means the positions of principle result in us never agreeing. 

 

Edited yesterday at 06:17 by Sir Ralph

[Whitey Grandad]

On 13/08/2025 at 08:53, Farmer Saint said:

Hmmm, your post above says it is mostly income tax reasons. When you say they are in Finance and Insurance, are these salaried individuals, because previously you said they were business and asset owners.

Secondly, what age are these people? Unless they are very old (so probably not salaried) if they were bothered about IHT they could start putting their money in trusts and transferring across to their kids.

You are clearly making it up as you go along - this is way beyond an "agree to disagree" stance.

Some high salaried individuals are moving to Dubai, but they have been for 20 years. That's not due to any tax laws, it's purely down to greed. Would you prefer to pay 45% tax on your salary, or 0%. It's that simple. Please note the 45% rate has been around since 2013.

 

"Greed is good"

[Farmer Saint]

2 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

https://www.devere-group.com/uk-should-be-wooing-the-wealthy-warns-devere-ceo/

https://www.businessinsider.com/rich-used-to-flock-to-the-uk-now-theyre-fleeing-2025-6

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2025/jul/07/non-doms-labour-super-rich-leaving-the-uk

This is before the IHT changes that are going to made in the Autumn to offset the fact that the Labour Party cannot  address welfare reform, among other matters. The message to me is clear - don’t invest, don’t save, don’t be responsible- this is creating a bad business culture of low growth and government dependence, both in terms of dependence on welfare and a bloated / unproductive public sector.  
 

I have spoken to investors, asset holders, business owners etc across different sector over the past months and NOT ONE has had a positive response to Labours overall economic policies. Like I said before I liked the sound of some of their policies initially but I struggle to understand why you defend them so vehemently now. Are the people you are speaking to saying that there economic policies are doing a good job and encouraging investment? As a matter of principle would you say you are a capitalist? I think a number on here aren’t capitalist but more socialist in their views which means the positions of principle result in us never agreeing. 

 

Where have I defended Labour's policies?

Look, I don't need you to post links to news stories, we've all seen them, most pushed by right wing media outlets.

What I have continuously asked is what Labour policies are pushing people abroad. You then cited Income Tax, which hasn't changed, and won't tend to be paid by the asset holders and investors. IHT is not now pushing people abroad, unless it's non-doms, as it's always been an issue. Why do you think I was advised in 2017 to buy a farm when I sold my business? Non-Dom rules were brought in by the Tories and refined by Labour, and I think they won't go as far as they are threatening, but honestly, I don't give a fuck about them. Perhaps if they move they will sell their property assets and this will reduce house prices.

The thing about super-wealthy people is where their wealth is. If they own wealth here, then that should be taxed. If they want to fuck off and sell their wealth, again, that would be good as it should flood with supply of property and push prices down.

And one last one for you this morning:

https://www.ft.com/content/14420f4a-06e0-40f6-b5b1-c4e0a36565f0?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwMKdwBleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHrN-mwO3qVnKyGrN3P88FNtnCex81byGYAH0uMHT4fi-Z3tUdhehDpFEzyRa_aem_b4SwCZfrdpRFO6U5wzzcVw

 

Edited yesterday at 08:01 by Farmer Saint

[Sir Ralph]

2 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

Where have I defended Labour's policies?

Look, I don't need you to post links to news stories, we've all seen them, most pushed by right wing media outlets.

What I have continuously asked is what Labour policies are pushing people abroad. You then cited Income Tax, which hasn't changed, and won't tend to be paid by the asset holders and investors. IHT is not now pushing people abroad, unless it's non-doms, as it's always been an issue. Why do you think I was advised in 2017 to buy a farm when I sold my business? Non-Dom rules were brought in by the Tories and refined by Labour, and I think they won't go as far as they are threatening, but honestly, I don't give a fuck about them. Perhaps if they move they will sell their property assets and this will reduce house prices.

The thing about super-wealthy people is where their wealth is. If they own wealth here, then that should be taxed. If they want to fuck off and sell their wealth, again, that would be good as it should flood with supply of property and push prices down.

And one last one for you this morning:

https://www.ft.com/content/14420f4a-06e0-40f6-b5b1-c4e0a36565f0?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwMKdwBleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHrN-mwO3qVnKyGrN3P88FNtnCex81byGYAH0uMHT4fi-Z3tUdhehDpFEzyRa_aem_b4SwCZfrdpRFO6U5wzzcVw

 

Bearing in mind non Dom’s bring in many multiples of income tax, capital gains tax and NI contributions, compared to your average UK resident, regardless of how much tax you think they should be paying, I don’t understand your eagerness for them to leave. 

Your only reason is that there will be more properties on the market. They will tend to own properties in high value areas in London and other areas. Again your position on non Dom’s leaving and flooding the market with new property to assist Joe Public isn’t likely at all - it will just mean expensive properties for others at possibly lower values.
 

Would you say you are a capitalist in your general economic position? No capitalist or entrepreneur I have met would take this view. They all have a drive to make money and be successful - some on here would call this selfish (naively in my opinion) but it drives jobs and the economy. If you aren’t, that’s fine, at least we understand one another’s principles with regards to mindset.

Edited 23 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[sadoldgit]

It would appear that the so called non dom exodus is just another conspiracy theory. Who would have thought it?

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2025/08/14/the-wealthy-have-not-gone/

[Sir Ralph]

18 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

It would appear that the so called non dom exodus is just another conspiracy theory. Who would have thought it?

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2025/08/14/the-wealthy-have-not-gone/

This is what you pulled out the bag? I’ll be very polite and say this has limited value as evidence.

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/about/

He advises the TUC - not a left wing at all. He probably thinks the Venezuelan Government is progressive. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Murphy_(tax_campaigner)

Can I ask what you do for a living? 

Edited 22 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[whelk]

39 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

This is what you pulled out the bag? I’ll be very polite and say this has limited value as evidence.

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/about/

He advises the TUC - not a left wing at all. He probably thinks the Venezuelan Government is progressive. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Murphy_(tax_campaigner)

Can I ask what you do for a living? 

There isn’t unquestionable data to prove any sort of mass exodus of millionaires. Although interesting that all forecast suggest the UK will still be 6th largest economy for the next 10 years. Labour psst.

Edited 22 hours ago by whelk

[Sir Ralph]

42 minutes ago, whelk said:

There isn’t unquestionable data to prove any sort of mass exodus of millionaires. Although interesting that all forecast suggest the UK will still be 6th largest economy for the next 10 years. Labour psst.

But I have given you a load. I’ve experienced it. I could debate the point if you knew or worked with people who may move as you might experience it or otherwise. Whelk - what do you do? Why will nobody explain their jobs.

Also if I quoted the Daily Mail you would laugh. This guy is a one man band socialist working out of his bedroom. If this is the scope of research data you guys are relying on that looks desperate., in my opinion.

Edited 21 hours ago by Sir Ralph