• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

Gilzeantoscore said:
Cut in an inheritance tax at around 10% for estates over 10 million pounds in value. What would be controversial about that?
Click to expand...
We're still a country that has aspiration. Most people would like to think they would end up with a £10m+ estate by the time they die.

Inheritance tax increases are political suicide no matter how high the bar - people just have a moral objection to it.
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
Anyone want to suggest the most outrageous Murdoch hack inspired front page smear against Corbyn that will be coming up in the next ten days? How about Catholic School Girl Tells All: "Jezza was such a powerful lover, he nearly broke the bed."
Click to expand...
How about "Corbyn thinks people earning £80k are rich and wants to tax the arse off of them"?
 
scaramanga said:
Post- Brexit, if we're not trading freely with the EU then we absolutely have to have taxes low enough to make up for any extra cost of being outside the EU.

The EU wants to put a 10% levy on banking, cut taxes by 15%. 5% on car imports? Cut taxes by 10%.

If the EU wants to put up barriers then we'll just start a taxation war that they can't possibly win. They have too many countries not contributing, too many countries like France, Spain and Italy that can't/won't work for a living. Cut taxes enough and we can make the UK the everything capital of Europe.
Click to expand...

I think that is probably what the government would try to do but I am not convinced that it would work. We are too small a market to bother basing yourself here to get access to it and tax breaks would not be adequate compensation for financial services not getting access to the EU and barriers in the supply chain for manufacturing. I think that we would have to see radical changes in the city and largely give up on manufacturing.
 
milo said:
I think that is probably what the government would try to do but I am not convinced that it would work. We are too small a market to bother basing yourself here to get access to it and tax breaks would not be adequate compensation for financial services not getting access to the EU and barriers in the supply chain for manufacturing. I think that we would have to see radical changes in the city and largely give up on manufacturing.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by financial services "not getting access to the EU"? I don't believe the EU is able to shut off access to its markets any more than anyone else can. They can put tariffs in place, to a maximum level of WTO standards, but a decent tax break would balance that immediately.

In terms of supply chain barriers, as someone who works for a company that buys and sells to and from both the EU and outside, those describing it as a problem are massively over-egging the pudding.

We still have to record and monitor everything in and out, we still have to track the sources. Only difference is that being in the EU means all that reporting goes to our government rather than that of the source/destination. For any organised business (and we don't carry a lot of office overhead for this kind of thing) there is no serious impediment to dealing with countries outside the EU. Anyone suggesting otherwise is no better than those grandstanding in front of the £350m bus.
 
scaramanga said:
What do you mean by financial services "not getting access to the EU"? I don't believe the EU is able to shut off access to its markets any more than anyone else can. They can put tariffs in place, to a maximum level of WTO standards, but a decent tax break would balance that immediately.

In terms of supply chain barriers, as someone who works for a company that buys and sells to and from both the EU and outside, those describing it as a problem are massively over-egging the pudding.

We still have to record and monitor everything in and out, we still have to track the sources. Only difference is that being in the EU means all that reporting goes to our government rather than that of the source/destination. For any organised business (and we don't carry a lot of office overhead for this kind of thing) there is no serious impediment to dealing with countries outside the EU. Anyone suggesting otherwise is no better than those grandstanding in front of the £350m bus.
Click to expand...

If we do not have passporting rights for financial services, our access will be dramatically reduced. Losing that will see more companies relocate jobs. If that happens the city will have to re-focus on sectors not affected by this.

How integrated are your supply chains? Do you have components moving back and forth several times during production?
 
If your passing on your residence, the amount passed on increases by 100k to the £425k threshold for a single person and 850k in total for the surviving spouse to pass on assets to to their children in 2017/18. By 2021 this will be 500k/£1m respectively.

Probably the most sensible and best thing Cameron introduced. Nothing obscene or wrong with this especially when people work their whole lives paying Tax/NI and shouldn't be taxed again.

In London, this doesn't go that far.
 
milo said:
If we do not have passporting rights for financial services, our access will be dramatically reduced. Losing that will see more companies relocate jobs. If that happens the city will have to re-focus on sectors not affected by this.

How integrated are your supply chains? Do you have components moving back and forth several times during production?
Click to expand...
We tend to have goods in, customer items in and then the completed items out. All are just in time and cannot ever be subject to delay. EU problems are as common as non-EU ones.

Passporting is just a matter of cost. Whether it's setting up an EU shell or paying fees, it's an avoidable issue. The government then just needs to cut tax appropriately.
 
So Corbyn's answer on small business was telling.

When asked how a small business is supposed to survive under his brutal punishment of hard work, Corbyn's answer was pretty much "I don't give a fudge about your business, all I care about is the welfare state and you're paying for it."

For a nation of small business owners, that spells ruin.
 
Had to turn the sound of when the old git started prattling on, but who the fudge told May to belt her suit with a belt that's too small and to put it just under her waist-height tits?
 
Last edited:
I thought Corbyn was a bit more comfortable with the audience than May. They both handled Paxo fairly easily imo, he's lost his edge. I think Faisal Islam would have done a better job interviewing them because he intervened with decent questions in the audience part of the debate.

Overall, it would have been better to see Corbyn and May in a direct debate, because then we would get more policy discussion.
 
the dza said:
I thought Corbyn was a bit more comfortable with the audience than May. They both handled Paxo fairly easily imo, he's lost his edge. I think Faisal Islam would have done a better job interviewing them because he intervened with decent questions in the audience part of the debate.

Overall, it would have been better to see Corbyn and May in a direct debate, because then we would get more policy discussion.
Click to expand...
I have to say, both surprised me.

May was warmer and more capable than I thought she could be and Corbyn has finally learned to be a politician and deflect questions that make him look bad.
 
scaramanga said:
So Corbyn's answer on small business was telling.

When asked how a small business is supposed to survive under his brutal punishment of hard work, Corbyn's answer was pretty much "I don't give a fudge about your business, all I care about is the welfare state and you're paying for it."

For a nation of small business owners, that spells ruin.
Click to expand...


But we aren't, we a re predominantly a nation of workers.
 
Re.small businesses, under a Labour government, the corporation tax rate is only being put up to 26% -- this is not particularly high, still lower than any other G7 nation currently is.

This is from the Labour Funding document that accompanied their manifesto:

Raising the headline rate to 21% from 2018-19, 24% from 2019-20 and £26% from 2020-21. Small Profits (below £300,000) rate is 20% from 2018-19 and 21% from 2020-21

Why is this is crippling to business? These rises are modest and the rate has been higher in the very recent past (28% in 2010).

The minimum wage increase is to be done by 2020, it's not an immediate rise to £10 p/h. 3 years away, it's currently at £7.50 for over 25s, this doesn't seem outlandish either. And higher pay at the lower end = reduced welfare bill due to less being paid out in tax credits and housing benefit.
 
Last edited:
the dza said:
Re.small businesses, under a Labour government, the corporation tax rate is only being put up to 26% -- this is not particularly high, still lower than any other G7 nation currently is.

This is from the Labour Funding document that accompanied their manifesto:

Raising the headline rate to 21% from 2018-19, 24% from 2019-20 and £26% from 2020-21. Small Profits (below £300,000) rate is 20% from 2018-19 and 21% from 2020-21

Why is this is crippling to business? These rises are modest and the rate has been higher in the very recent past (28% in 2010).

The minimum wage increase is to be done by 2020, it's not an immediate rise to £10 p/h. 3 years away, it's currently at £7.50 for over 25s, this doesn't seem outlandish either. And higher pay at the lower end = reduced welfare bill due to less being paid out in tax credits and housing benefit.
Click to expand...
The lower rate of tax was designed to offset the increase in wages and that already hasn't worked. Small businesses all over the country are collapsing under the weight of increased wages.

Those putting these wages in place don't understand the fine margins that small businesses work on. It's not unheard of at all for a business with a £750k wage bill to be making profits of £20-30k a year - small reward for the owner. A 4% increase in labour would wipe out all profits - a lower rate of tax does nothing for that business.

In the last month I've had to make 6 people redundant and another jumped before being pushed - all completely down to rises in the minimum wage. The company was doing fine before, but the new minimum wage made what was previously an unaffordable £300k investment in plant very affordable.

In a world where anyone from any country can undercut pretty much any of our goods or services, an artificially high wage is suicide.
 
scaramanga said:
The lower rate of tax was designed to offset the increase in wages and that already hasn't worked. Small businesses all over the country are collapsing under the weight of increased wages.

Those putting these wages in place don't understand the fine margins that small businesses work on. It's not unheard of at all for a business with a £750k wage bill to be making profits of £20-30k a year - small reward for the owner. A 4% increase in labour would wipe out all profits - a lower rate of tax does nothing for that business.

In the last month I've had to make 6 people redundant and another jumped before being pushed - all completely down to rises in the minimum wage. The company was doing fine before, but the new minimum wage made what was previously an unaffordable £300k investment in plant very affordable.

In a world where anyone from any country can undercut pretty much any of our goods or services, an artificially high wage is suicide.
Click to expand...

If all these businesses are folding under the weight of having to pay over 25s £7.50 an hour, why is unemployment so low?

The company I work for put the minimum wage to £7.50 for all staff, regardless of age. There's about 12 of us in the warehouse, another 100 or so in other areas of the company. Nobody lost their job and iirc, the CEO pulls in £250k per year. To me, if a company can't afford to stay afloat when having to pay staff £7.50 an hour (or £10 an hour by 2020) then that is a business that is far too reliant on the government topping up the wages of its workforce with in-work benefits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back