The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[badgerx16]

6 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

It's not their money.

True, but then again I continue to pay tax to help fund the NHS even when I'm not using it. What sort of chaos would ensue if everybody got a day-to-day input into Government spending ?

Edited Monday at 22:47 by badgerx16

[Sir Ralph]

27 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Source?

There are multiple sources

https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/andy-burnham-london-south-paying-north-england-5HjdcDp_2/
 

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/andy-burnham-south-paying-price-for-norths-economic-failure-x3mmmv58s

https://www.ft.com/content/08039dd6-0863-4836-806a-921151e398a1?syn-25a6b1a6=1

[tdmickey3]

2 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

There are multiple sources

https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/andy-burnham-london-south-paying-north-england-5HjdcDp_2/
 

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/andy-burnham-south-paying-price-for-norths-economic-failure-x3mmmv58s

https://www.ft.com/content/08039dd6-0863-4836-806a-921151e398a1?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Multiple speculative sources 

[Sir Ralph]

1 minute ago, tdmickey3 said:

Multiple speculative sources 

I agree not announced as policy yet. However these policies are said to be central to his strategy. If they aren’t put into place great but based on what I’ve read, they will be

[egg]

41 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I understand your point and I’ve no objection to the principle of increased investment in the north. However Burnham is proposing a change to individual’s contribution in the south to achieve this objective and reducing northerners tax bill to achieve this. 

You do post some bollox. 

[Sir Ralph]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

You do post some bollox. 

Oh the lefties are getting abusive again. How so? Have you actually read any of the articles - do you know what Burnhams anticipated policies are and his history of comments on the policies referred to in these articles?

Edited Monday at 16:48 by Sir Ralph

[Lord Duckhunter]

This is a ridiculous argument. If you take London out of it, there are some incredibly poor areas in the “south” & some affluent areas in the North. 
 

Laughable that Burnham is trying to position himself as an outsider set to march on Westminster & its London centric agenda. He’s a Westminster machine politician to his core, he only fucked off back “opp north” after Corbyn smashed him in he’s second failed attempt to become leader. 
 

It’s as big a blag as Boris’ “levelling up”, & will be about as successful. Like it or not, London is the key to economic growth, however hard you try any rebalancing or redistribution, if you take money and investment from London or load extra taxes on them , it affects everyone adversely. 

Edited Monday at 20:00 by Lord Duckhunter

[Weston Super Saint]

3 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

There are multiple sources

https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/andy-burnham-london-south-paying-north-england-5HjdcDp_2/
 

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/andy-burnham-south-paying-price-for-norths-economic-failure-x3mmmv58s

https://www.ft.com/content/08039dd6-0863-4836-806a-921151e398a1?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Two locked behind pay walls. The LBC one only talks about budgets.

Have you got a source for your claim that Southerners will be taxed more than Northerners, or is that just made up bollocks?

[egg]

3 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

Oh the lefties are getting abusive again. How so? Have you actually read any of the articles - do you know what Burnhams anticipated policies are and his history of comments on the policies referred to in these articles?

Leftie! Behave. There's a vast area between the left and the right side of political spectrum. Don't fall into the simpleton belief that politics is just left and right. 

You are talking bollox in suggesting that Burnham has said that southerners will be taxed more than northerners.

If I'm wrong, doubtless you can link me to something Burnham has actually said, not an opinion piece. 

 

[Sir Ralph]

28 minutes ago, egg said:

Leftie! Behave. There's a vast area between the left and the right side of political spectrum. Don't fall into the simpleton belief that politics is just left and right. 

You are talking bollox in suggesting that Burnham has said that southerners will be taxed more than northerners.

If I'm wrong, doubtless you can link me to something Burnham has actually said, not an opinion piece. 

 

You will be surprised to hear he hasn’t said “southerners will be taxed more than northerners”. Politically that would be very stupid.

However if you intend to apply what could be a 0.5% annual levy on property it will disproportionately impact the south (unless you want to argue that property values in the south are lower). Inheritance tax will also be revised which again will catch those with higher property prices (in the south). 

[Sir Ralph]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Two locked behind pay walls. The LBC one only talks about budgets.

Have you got a source for your claim that Southerners will be taxed more than Northerners, or is that just made up bollocks?

Im certain I understand more about the policies he supports and will likely bring in and the demographic of people it will impact. I recommend reading more on it before accusing people that are better informed than you. I’ll give you the simple conclusion from chat gpt. He talked about land tax and inheritance tax changes in the early 2010 and also earlier this year when he was campaigning. Read a bit more then pop back again 

If Burnham were in a position to shape national tax policy, the broad direction appears to be:

• less reliance on taxing earned income;
• more reliance on taxing accumulated wealth, land and property;
• reforming rather than simply increasing inheritance taxation.

The people most exposed would generally be:

• owners of high-value homes,
• landlords,
• those with large estates,
• people with substantial capital assets.

Since high-value property is disproportionately located in southern England, the financial impact would likely fall more heavily on the South overall, though there would be exceptions and the exact distribution would depend on the final design of any reforms.

 

Edited Monday at 21:31 by Sir Ralph

[badgerx16]

19 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

However if you intend to apply what could be a 0.5% annual levy on property it will disproportionately impact the south (unless you want to argue that property values in the south are lower). Inheritance tax will also be revised which again will catch those with higher property prices (in the south). 

Next you will be claiming that income Tax is unfair as somebody earning £50k pays more than somebody earning £25k.

[aintforever]

17 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Im certain I understand more about the policies he supports and will likely bring in and the demographic of people it will impact. I recommend reading more on it before accusing people that are better informed than you. I’ll give you the simple conclusion from chat gpt. He talked about land tax and inheritance tax changes in the early 2010 and also earlier this year when he was campaigning. Read a bit more then pop back again 

If Burnham were in a position to shape national tax policy, the broad direction appears to be:

• less reliance on taxing earned income;
• more reliance on taxing accumulated wealth, land and property;
• reforming rather than simply increasing inheritance taxation.

The people most exposed would generally be:

• owners of high-value homes,
• landlords,
• those with large estates,
• people with substantial capital assets.

Since high-value property is disproportionately located in southern England, the financial impact would likely fall more heavily on the South overall, though there would be exceptions and the exact distribution would depend on the final design of any reforms.

 

What tax system wouldn’t disproportionately effect London and the South East?

[Sir Ralph]

9 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Next you will be claiming that income Tax is unfair as somebody earning £50k pays more than somebody earning £25k.

You’ve gone from denying such a policy wouldn’t impact the southerners to now changing the subject to income tax. Im regularly reminded that there are too many people in this country that want others to pay for them and the politics of envy is rife. Sad state of affairs as aspiration is unfortunately being trodden on. 

Edited Monday at 21:47 by Sir Ralph

[trousers]

27 minutes ago, aintforever said:

What tax system wouldn’t disproportionately effect London and the South East?

A tax on whippets?

Edited Monday at 22:09 by trousers

[egg]

47 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

You will be surprised to hear he hasn’t said “southerners will be taxed more than northerners”. Politically that would be very stupid.

However if you intend to apply what could be a 0.5% annual levy on property it will disproportionately impact the south (unless you want to argue that property values in the south are lower). Inheritance tax will also be revised which again will catch those with higher property prices (in the south). 

So that's your point. 

By that argument, there's already be a north/south divide in terms of SDLT and IHT.

Ridiculous posting. 

[egg]

24 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

You’ve gone from denying such a policy wouldn’t impact the southerners to now changing the subject to income tax. Im regularly reminded that there are too many people in this country that want others to pay for them and the politics of envy is rife. Sad state of affairs as aspiration is unfortunately being trodden on. 

His point highlights how daft your point is. 

More value = more growth, so more gain down south. But your focus will ignore the cream and focus on the IHT at the other end, or the CGT if it's an investment. 

You'll be calling it two tier taxation next. 

[Sir Ralph]

26 minutes ago, egg said:

So that's your point. 

By that argument, there's already be a north/south divide in terms of SDLT and IHT.

Ridiculous posting. 

 

SDLT and IHT already fall more heavily on high value property which is mainly in the south. From what I’ve read Burnham will shifts greater tax burden on land and property so there will be an even greater impact on the south which I don’t believe is fair

Edited Monday at 22:35 by Sir Ralph

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, Sir Ralph said:

You’ve gone from denying such a policy wouldn’t impact the southerners......

Taxes impact everybody, North, South, East, and West.

....to now changing the subject to income tax.

Not changing the subject, demonstrating that percentage rated taxes can be perceived as disproportionate by those that have more that is impacted.

I'm regularly reminded that there are too many people in this country that want others to pay for them and the politics of envy is rife. Sad state of affairs as aspiration is unfortunately being trodden on. 

Class war bullshit. "I am regularly reminded" that there are too many people in this country that only appear happy when complaining about how unfair it is that they have to pay a fair share.

Aspiration should be granted the same opportunities regardless of geography or social status at birth, unfortunately it is not. When it comes to judging people on benefits, don't believe everything you read in the Mail or Express.

 

Edited Monday at 23:02 by badgerx16

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

A tax on whippets?

Music fan Burnham, does take a lot of his build the north policies from Devo.

When a problem comes along, you must whippet
Before the tax bill gets too long, you must whippet
When something's going wrong, you must whippet

Now whippet it into shape, shape it up, get straight
Go forward, move ahead, try to detect it, it's not too late
To whippet it, whippet it good

 

 

[Farmer Saint]

15 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

There are multiple sources

https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/andy-burnham-london-south-paying-north-england-5HjdcDp_2/
 

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/andy-burnham-south-paying-price-for-norths-economic-failure-x3mmmv58s

https://www.ft.com/content/08039dd6-0863-4836-806a-921151e398a1?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Have you read those articles? The first two are saying that traditionally the South has paid a disproportionate amount to fund the North's economic failure. Literally no mention of an increase in tax on the South.

It's as if you don't read what you post, but then we know that already as this is not the first, second, or even third time you've done this.

Edited yesterday at 08:12 by Farmer Saint

[Farmer Saint]

14 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

Oh the lefties are getting abusive again. How so? Have you actually read any of the articles - do you know what Burnhams anticipated policies are and his history of comments on the policies referred to in these articles?

Have you? I don't think you have because only the third one mentions anything like you've been arguing.

[egg]

5 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Have you? I don't think you have because only the third one mentions anything like you've been arguing.

He has to be on a wind up. That said, do you know that if I buy an ex council house in Lordshill, the SDLT is less than the SDLT on a house in Chilworth? To make it worse, the council tax is more in Chilworth. Bloody class divide, it's worse than the North south divide. 

[Weston Super Saint]

9 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

You will be surprised to hear he hasn’t said “southerners will be taxed more than northerners”. Politically that would be very stupid.

 

So you made this up then to prove your point?

15 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

I understand your point and I’ve no objection to the principle of increased investment in the north. However Burnham is proposing a change to individual’s contribution in the south to achieve this objective and reducing northerners tax bill to achieve this. 

 

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, egg said:

He has to be on a wind up. That said, do you know that if I buy an ex council house in Lordshill, the SDLT is less than the SDLT on a house in Chilworth? To make it worse, the council tax is more in Chilworth. Bloody class divide, it's worse than the North south divide. 

I think he must be. He literally can't make the same mistake every time, get called out on it, and then not do his due diligence again the next time. It's utterly crazy if he does, because he comes across as such an idiot.

[Osvaldorama]

Country is fucked but at least Starmer will be ok:

 

[Farmer Saint]

2 hours ago, Osvaldorama said:

Country is fucked but at least Starmer will be ok:

 

This was from 2013, when he was DPP, assuming as part of his golden goodbye? This won't be his contract now and will be to do with final salary pensions.

Not sure what your point is here. Not sure how it can be repealed either, or why it would be, it's very similar to the triple lock by the sound of things.

Edited 7 hours ago by Farmer Saint

[egg]

5 hours ago, Osvaldorama said:

Country is fucked but at least Starmer will be ok:

 

I'd suggest looking at why this was done. It basically meant that the DPP package was bought into line with a high court judge, so the pension for each DPP had to be tweaked. Nothing to see here, unless you're looking for something that isn't there. 

[Gloucester Saint]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

I'd suggest looking at why this was done. It basically meant that the DPP package was bought into line with a high court judge, so the pension for each DPP had to be tweaked. Nothing to see here, unless you're looking for something that isn't there. 

Yusuf is trying to distract from Nigel’s bungs and large-scale grifting, plus escaping the high volume of racism from their lovely party members in his inbox.

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Yusuf is trying to distract from Nigel’s bungs and large-scale grifting, plus escaping the high volume of racism from their lovely party members in his inbox.

How many times has Yusuf failed to be selected for a Reform election shortlist ?

[Gloucester Saint]

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

How many times has Yusuf failed to be selected for a Reform election shortlist ?

He failed the Reform window exam.

[badgerx16]

Just now, Gloucester Saint said:

He failed the Reform window exam.

I think their selection process is openly black and white.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

10 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

He failed the Reform window exam.

Is that the one where you have to lob a brick through a window, while chanting abuse?

[Gloucester Saint]

Just now, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Is that the one where you have to lob a brick through a window, while chanting abuse?

That’s part B and he was OK on that bit. 

[Gloucester Saint]

If Pakistan won’t play ball then economic sanctions, banning their students from our top universities or refusal to consider family visa and/or applications for asylum applications should all be on the table as levers to pull to enforce Ahmed and his family’s return there https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jy53n8q1do

Mahmood just enforced it with study visas with 4 nations https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2jy74895eo

Edited 1 hour ago by Gloucester Saint

[badgerx16]

6 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

If Pakistan won’t play ball then economic sanctions, banning their students from our top universities or refusal to consider family visa and/or applications for asylum applications should all be on the table as levers to pull to enforce Ahmed and his family’s return there https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jy53n8q1do

 

Until we are able to deport him, keep him in prison.

Edited 1 hour ago by badgerx16