The Next General Election.

[Raja Clavata]

I’m not defending any of them but this MP wealth thing is surely a bit of a red herring. For the people who feel disenfranchised or impoverished it’s about voting for the party that best serves their interests.

At the top of any corporate or political tree there are always going to be people who are at the elite end of the personal wealth spectrum.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Hipocrites the lot of em!

[Rewulf]

What promise? 

What toxic deal? 

What £500 mill a week? 

[JohnfromUK]

11 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

I’m not defending any of them but this MP wealth thing is surely a bit of a red herring.

It is a complete red herring if you don't object to wealth, second home, private education to be available to everyone who works hard.  I have no problems at all with any of those things

However - if you campaign against the above - then it is hypocritical to take those benefits yourself.  I don't believe in taking money off 'the rich' more than is needed to run the country in an economical and efficient manner, and I don't believe in handouts to 'the poor' except for those who are elderly, ill, disabled, between jobs looking for work etc.

In particular I don't believe in paying one penny more than bare essentials to those who are able bodied (and minded) but simply too lazy to work.  It should NEVER be more lucrative to say at home idle than do a decent day's work.

Edited October 31, 2019 by JohnfromUK

[Mice!]

10 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

simply too lazy to work.  It should NEVER be more lucrative to say at home idle than do a decent day's work.

Are yes Labour voters, why work when the state provides.

And it's all the fault of those nasty mean rich Tories.

[Raja Clavata]

4 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

It is a complete red herring if you don't object to wealth, second home, private education to be available to everyone who works hard.  I have no problems at all with any of those things

However - if you campaign against the above - then it is hypocritical to take those benefits yourself.  I don't believe in taking money off 'the rich' more than is needed to run the country in an economical and efficient manner, and I don't believe in handouts to 'the poor' except for those who are elderly, ill, disabled, between jobs looking for work etc.

In particular I don't believe in paying one penny more than bare essentials to those who are bodied (and minded) but simply too lazy to work.  It should NEVER be more lucrative to say at home idle than do a decent day's work.

In total agreement. I was making an observation from a 3rd person perspective based on what should be the focus for people who are impoverished.

Yes Corbyn is a hypocrite but they are all just as bad as one another, Johnson is at best a bare faced liar. Pick whichever poison suits your taste the best, they have all demonstrated just how toxic they are.

I agree with your point on handouts but not everyone on low income or in poverty is a good for nothing lazy lay about.

By the same token as a PAYE tax contributor, some of which is at the highest rate, I do get more than slightly miffed by self employed friends who play every game under the sun to avoid paying tax that I have no choice over. Are those kind of people really any “better” than the spongers? I suspect a portion of each will blame the other to justify their actions...

[TIGHTCHOKE]

1 minute ago, Raja Clavata said:

In total agreement. I was making an observation from a 3rd person perspective based on what should be the focus for people who are impoverished.

Yes Corbyn is a hypocrite but they are all just as bad as one another, Johnson is at best a bare faced liar. Pick whichever poison suits your taste the best, they have all demonstrated just how toxic they are.

I agree with your point on handouts but not everyone on low income or in poverty is a good for nothing lazy lay about.

By the same token as a PAYE tax contributor, some of which is at the highest rate, I do get more than slightly miffed by self employed friends who play every game under the sun to avoid paying tax that I have no choice over. Are those kind of people really any “better” than the spongers? I suspect a portion of each will blame the other to justify their actions...

A very interesting point!

[SpringDon]

22 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

In total agreement. I was making an observation from a 3rd person perspective based on what should be the focus for people who are impoverished.

Yes Corbyn is a hypocrite but they are all just as bad as one another, Johnson is at best a bare faced liar. Pick whichever poison suits your taste the best, they have all demonstrated just how toxic they are.

I agree with your point on handouts but not everyone on low income or in poverty is a good for nothing lazy lay about.

  B y the same token as a PAYE tax contributor, some of which is at the highest rate, I do get more than slightly miffed by self employed friends who play every game under the sun to avoid paying tax that I have no choice over. Are those kind of people really any “better” than the spongers? I suspect a portion of each will blame the other to justify their actions...

Are you also slightly miffed by their lack of holiday, sick pay and employee rights? Maybe they would like to be on the paye gravy train but have no choice other than to be self employed.

[oowee]

1 minute ago, SpringDon said:

Are you also slightly miffed by their lack of holiday, sick pay and employee rights? Maybe they would like to be on the paye gravy train but have no choice other than to be self employed.

No just by their sponging and free loading from the rest of us. 

Those on PAYE are paying at the margins 100% tax rates often subsidising the self employed that have many more opportunities to avoid payment of their fair share. 

[Thunderbird]

Nothing stopping anyone setting up their own business, if they are prepared to put the thought and the work in, and take the risks. 

Millions of people have the very jobs that come with the paid holiday, employment rights, sick pay, pension etc etc precisely because someone, at some point, took that risk. 

[JohnfromUK]

23 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

By the same token as a PAYE tax contributor, some of which is at the highest rate, I do get more than slightly miffed by self employed friends who play every game under the sun to avoid paying tax that I have no choice over. Are those kind of people really any “better” than the spongers?

This is going a bit off topic, but people - ALL people - are different.  If you found some magical way of evening out the wealth redistributing it just like Corbyn and Co would like ........ in a short period, most of those who were 'poor' before will be poor again, and many of those who were 'rich' before will be getting rich again.  That is life - as they say.

We have an employment system here that includes employer deducted PAYE and NI - which is pretty much unavoidable.  WE have a 'self employment scheme that enables some offsetting against income - something that is in principle sound as they have to buy their own tools, protective clothing, van etc. as well as not getting paid holiday, employers pension scheme and other things employees often get.

The problem with all tax and government rules is that they are very complex, get 'fiddled with' annual by successive Chancellors increasing the complexity, administered by often low skill and low motivation staff and so easily abused by those who are exploitive or manipulative - as indeed is the benefits system.  The tax 'book of rules'

It is a very hard one to tackle with no easy answers, but here is an illustration of the problem;

Tolley's Yellow and Orange guides (the UK tax law bible used by lawyers and accountants as well as the revenue) now runs (2015-6 edition - it has grown more since) to an incredible 21,602 pages.  How can a lowly inland revenue administrator understand that?  How many loopholes and dodges will be immersed in there for clever accountants and lawyers to find?

[oowee]

1 minute ago, Thunderbird said:

Nothing stopping anyone setting up their own business, if they are prepared to put the thought and the work in, and take the risks. 

Millions of people have the very jobs that come with the paid holiday, employment rights, sick pay, pension etc etc precisely because someone, at some point, took that risk. 

Which is great and good luck to the honest ones but there are many thousands sponging off their neighbours by not paying their fair share of tax. They are no better than benefit cheats.

[SpringDon]

6 minutes ago, oowee said:

No just by their sponging and free loading from the rest of us. 

Those on PAYE are paying at the margins 100% tax rates often subsidising the self employed that have many more opportunities to avoid payment of their fair share. 

Don’t know who is paying 100% tax rates. But I will pass on the sponging and free loading labels. Imagine they would be well received by agency workers, those on zero hours contracts and those under ir35.

People choose to forgot that the rise in self employment is not always by choice. Many are worse off than a feather bedded employee. 

[Thunderbird]

5 minutes ago, oowee said:

Which is great and good luck to the honest ones but there are many thousands sponging off their neighbours by not paying their fair share of tax. They are no better than benefit cheats.

I suppose that's partly true but then no benefit scrounger ever employed anyone, except perhaps keeping their local drug dealer in funds. Personally I'd more easily look the other way if people take advantage of tax laws but still actually contribute to the economy. Remember VAT is a sales tax, so if people keep more of their profits they'll spend them and pay VAT so the exchequer probably gets it in the end anyway. 

Edited October 31, 2019 by Thunderbird

[oowee]

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

This is going a bit off topic, but people - ALL people - are different.  If you found some magical way of evening out the wealth redistributing it just like Corbyn and Co would like ........ in a short period, most of those who were 'poor' before will be poor again, and many of those who were 'rich' before will be getting rich again.  That is life - as they say.

We have an employment system here that includes employer deducted PAYE and NI - which is pretty much unavoidable.  WE have a 'self employment scheme that enables some offsetting against income - something that is in principle sound as they have to buy their own tools, protective clothing, van etc. as well as not getting paid holiday, employers pension scheme and other things employees often get.

The problem with all tax and government rules is that they are very complex, get 'fiddled with' annual by successive Chancellors increasing the complexity, administered by often low skill and low motivation staff and so easily abused by those who are exploitive or manipulative - as indeed is the benefits system.  The tax 'book of rules'

It is a very hard one to tackle with no easy answers, but here is an illustration of the problem;

Tolley's Yellow and Orange guides (the UK tax law bible used by lawyers and accountants as well as the revenue) now runs (2015-6 edition - it has grown more since) to an incredible 21,602 pages.  How can a lowly inland revenue administrator understand that?  How many loopholes and dodges will be immersed in there for clever accountants and lawyers to find?

Exactly like the benefits system then. The unscrupulous find a way around the rules. The benefit cheat is hounded but the self employed are often admired for their skill at circumventing the rules. They should be clamped down on and their assets removed. Corbyn has this part right but it should be an aim of all partys.

[JohnfromUK]

10 minutes ago, oowee said:

They should be clamped down on and their assets removed.

You cannot clamp down on them if they are not breaking the rules; that is the problem.  The rules are in many cases so complex and convoluted that in effect that are not understood and are open to challenge from clever lawyers and accountants - and hence not enforceable.  The rules need to be made simple, clear and enforceable - then they can be enforced.  That has defeated ALL governments, ALL of whom have promised to tackle avoidance - and none have had much success.

10 minutes ago, oowee said:

Corbyn has this part right but it should be an aim of all partys.

Corby does not have it right - he is simply stating what pretty much everyone knows - that there is a problem.  We all know that and have known for years and all governments have tried to tackle it.  He has no practical way of implementing it - nor any idea of how to tackle it and has suggested no solution that could realistically be implemented.

The man is an intellectual pygmy and would make zero progress against the (often very clever) tax lawyers and accountants.  He has two (grade E) A levels, and dropped out of a degree course in "Trade Union Studies".

Edited October 31, 2019 by JohnfromUK

[oowee]

1 minute ago, Thunderbird said:

I suppose that's true but then no benefit scrounger ever employed anyone, except perhaps keeping their local drug dealer in funds. Personally I'd more easily look the other way if people take advantage of tax laws but still actually contribute to the economy. Remember VAT is a sales tax, so if people keep more of their profits they'll spend them and pay VAT so the exchequer probably gets it in the end anyway. 

Agreed but why should high earners subsidise them through PAYE? Look at loans made by company directors to their own companies and paid back at favorable rates. Look at the problem many self employed have getting a mortgage when they have to show a profit before tax to be eligible for a mortgage. 

9 minutes ago, SpringDon said:

Don’t know who is paying 100% tax rates. But I will pass on the sponging and free loading labels. Imagine they would be well received by agency workers, those on zero hours contracts and those under ir35.

People choose to forgot that the rise in self employment is not always by choice. Many are worse off than a feather bedded employee. 

Salary from £100k to £113k is taxed at 45% and personal allowance reduces £1 for every £1 earned. Look also at loss of pension relief on higher salaries. On Paye you may be signed for pension payments that you have to make and then tax relief is removed. 

Happy to pay fair agreed rates of tax but not for self employed scroungers to milk the system. 

[Raja Clavata]

28 minutes ago, SpringDon said:

Are you also slightly miffed by their lack of holiday, sick pay and employee rights? Maybe they would like to be on the paye gravy train but have no choice other than to be self employed.

I knew they’d be at least one who would cite this. Tax evasion is tax evasion pal. Your comment on PAYE displays a profound ignorance of the facts.

Do we take it from your reply that you are one of those poor souls forced to be self employed?

[oowee]

Just now, JohnfromUK said:

You cannot clamp down on them if they are not breaking the rules; that is the problem.  The rules are in many cases so complex and convoluted that in effect that are not understood and are open to challenge from clever lawyers and accountants - and hence not enforceable.  The rules need to be made simple, clear and enforceable - then they can be enforced.  That has defeated ALL governments, ALL of whom have promised to tackle avoidance - and none have had much success.

Corby does not have it right - he is simply stating what pretty much everyone knows - that there is a problem.  We all know that and have known for years and all governments have tried to tackle it.  He has no practical way of implementing it - nor any idea of how to tackle it and has suggested no solution that could realistically be implemented.

The man is an intellectual pygmy and would make zero progress against the (often very clever) tax lawyers and accountants.  He has tow (grade E) A levels, and dropped out of a degree course in "Trade Union Studies".

It is not beyond the tax system to disallow loans between director and company. To disallow dividend payments paid as salary.  To look at mortgage applications where 3 years of profits are made and for every other year the company returns no profit. Corbyn is right to look to tackle these sponging low life. If labour has the ability to see such a noble proposal through to delivery is another matter. 

[JohnfromUK]

2 minutes ago, oowee said:

It is not beyond the tax system to disallow loans between director and company. To disallow dividend payments paid as salary.

No problem at all with changing the rules to disallow things seen as abuse/avoidance.  But what is needed is simple clear rules that can be policed and enforced.  I have absolutely no problem with coming down hard on those who break the law.  But you cannot complain when people simply follow the rules ............ even if you do not agree with those rules.

It wants doing properly - then enforcing.  I do not believe for one instant that Corbyn, Swintom, or for that matter Farage would do that any more than any other government has.

[Thunderbird]

Back a bit on topic, what worries me more about labour is that (perhaps because so few of them have ever had a private sector job) they seem to be under the impression that it's simply a case of "employee = good / employer = bad/rich/greedy etc." when in fact the truth is mostly very different. I have no issue with going after corporate giants that pay minuscule tax but expecting a small business to pay 16 year olds a tenner an hour is madness. 

As is banning 'worker' status and zero hours contracts, the evidence for which is that it very often suits the worker. Look at bank nurses, to pick one example. Or supply teachers, to pick another. 

Edited October 31, 2019 by Thunderbird

[Rewulf]

16 minutes ago, oowee said:

Exactly like the benefits system then. The unscrupulous find a way around the rules. The benefit cheat is hounded but the self employed are often admired for their skill at circumventing the rules. They should be clamped down on and their assets removed. Corbyn has this part right but it should be an aim of all partys

How is it 'just like the benefits system'? 

One contributes nothing, and takes everything. 

The other contributes very little, but takes nothing. 

Give me 10 self employed people fiddling their tax, over one benefits claimant with 5 kids, any day of the week. 

And siting Labour as being on the ball in this? They have been a party for as long as I can remember, that virtually encourages benefits culture, they have the worst record on unemployment, spending, mismanagement... Need I go on? 

And then you talk about how unfair it is taxing high earners? 

Have you seen labour's plans for this! 😹

[Raja Clavata]

As an example one of the friends in our circle who is self employed always takes the bill after meals to offset against his business after paying cash for his share. 

Sometimes there are upwards of a dozen of us which effectively means he’s dining for free.

Regarding the lack of holidays, he is affectionately named Judith (Chalmers) and plenty of his jaunts home and abroad manage to go through his company books.

This is just one example.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

3 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

As an example one of the friends in our circle who is self employed always takes the bill after meals to offset against his business after paying cash for his share. 

Sometimes there are upwards of a dozen of us which effectively means he’s dining for free.

Regarding the lack of holidays, he is affectionately named Judith (Chalmers) and plenty of his jaunts home and abroad manage to go through his company books.

This is just one example.

Well he's your friend, you choose to mix with such people.

[oowee]

9 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

As an example one of the friends in our circle who is self employed always takes the bill after meals to offset against his business after paying cash for his share. 

Sometimes there are upwards of a dozen of us which effectively means he’s dining for free.

Regarding the lack of holidays, he is affectionately named Judith (Chalmers) and plenty of his jaunts home and abroad manage to go through his company books.

This is just one example.

And at the same time claim R&D grants for international visits, attended by the rest of the family members. Look at the vat avoidance (giving and receiving). Even Greece has found a way to crack down on this by insisting on electronic payments. 

11 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

How is it 'just like the benefits system'? 

One contributes nothing, and takes everything. 

The other contributes very little, but takes nothing. 

Give me 10 self employed people fiddling their tax, over one benefits claimant with 5 kids, any day of the week. 

And siting Labour as being on the ball in this? They have been a party for as long as I can remember, that virtually encourages benefits culture, they have the worst record on unemployment, spending, mismanagement... Need I go on? 

And then you talk about how unfair it is taxing high earners? 

Have you seen labour's plans for this! 😹

Tax high earners by all means but do not allow self employed spongers or benefit scroungers to milk the system. I suspect that tax evasion / avoidance by the self employed is worth the total cost of the benefit system several times over.  The focus should be on the self employed end of the telescope. 

 

Edited October 31, 2019 by oowee