To wonder how the UK will look in 3 years time?

I dont "want taxes", I want to reduce inequality. Inequality is a threat to my country, my children and to democracy (see: Elon Musk).

I'm agnostic on how to get there. Progressive taxation is means not an end and if there are better alternatives then I'm open to them (genuinely).

This is an emergency, almost everyone will be harmed, and step one is simply getting people to see that. There are so many parallels with climate change. I remember when there was still genuine , mainstream debate about whether climate change was real, and everyone said that it would be nice if the UK was a couple of degrees warmer...

As with climate change, the solutions will be hard and complicated. But we can't even start to engage with that unless people realise there's a problem.

Average weekly earnings in Great Britain - Office for National Statistics

• Annual growth in employees' average earnings for both regular earnings (excluding bonuses) and total earnings (including bonuses) was 5.0%.

Growth of tax receipts of 3.5% on the top of 5% of wages simply says that tax base is reducing.

Then this:

Capital gains tax receipts fall after big cuts in allowances

Revenue falls 18 per cent in 2023-24 to £12.1bn as the UK’s efforts to increase revenues from the levy backfire

Yes I know that this allowance was cut by Tory but you want it even more?

Angela Rayner wants to charge Central London boroughs more council tax when all the families are already heavily incentivised to leave and they are having to close primary schools left right and centre.

Schools are closing because young people have stopped having dc, they are leaving it later, having less or just none. This isn't just a London thing but country wide. Brexit also meant more European families left London.

So you think if older people all left the country (after more than 40+ years of paying taxes) the health of the remaining obese population would magically improve? Of course you might also miss the 14% of all income tax that people over 65 contribute to the economy.

I was merely pointing out that all these things cost the NHS money and if a lot of these pensioners could see a way of spending their retirement years abroad with their state pension + an extra amount to pay for a health insurance policy and to stay out of the country then the money the NHS would have spent on their healthcare could be saved or freed up to spend on someone else’s healthcare plus less people on the waiting list for operations, specialists etc

Surely this would be too costly? Other countries spend more on healthcare so we would have to pay them more to take in old people. Also most countries don't want more old people...

It is the 100 billion sovereign debt. And the welfare bill. Neither are affordable and they are suffocating the remaining workers.

How would you reduce the welfare bill?

The sovereign bill isn't 100bn is it? I thought that was just the interest?

That’s why I said (in my previous posts) that the government would pay an extra amount to cover having their own health insurance policy and to stay out of the country

Where did I say I was prioritising anything. I was listing things that the NHS spends money on, especially older people in no particular order.

I was merely pointing out that all these things cost the NHS money and if a lot of these pensioners could see a way of spending their retirement years abroad with their state pension + an extra amount to pay for a health insurance policy and to stay out of the country then the money the NHS would have spent on their healthcare could be saved or freed up to spend on someone else’s healthcare plus less people on the waiting list for operations, specialists etc

Plus as they wouldn’t need a home in the UK they could rent out or sell if they own their own place or pass a tenancy onto a family member if they rent through the council or just give up a private tenancy. It would free up housing to get families out of B&Bs etc which must cost the government more than even a private rental would cost.

Whatever Labour are doing the pp will want more of - debt and taxes.

Where do you get this 50bn from...... One think tank came up with it, with 9bn as headroom....

Other economists say 15 to 20bn..... and its projected over 5 to 6 years..... missed that bit out.

Always Doom and Gloom, so as the IFS said, moderate tax increases, not the 50bn worth that you like to imply this October.

But yours are going elsewhere apparently …

I dread to think.
I'd rather bury my head in the sand like an ostrich.

Annoying I know but I just can't help it.....

As for your other point, there is really, really robust evidence that inequality damages social mobility. It's such a well established fact that it even has its own name.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Gatsby_Curve

It's kind of obvious really - there's a fixed amount of variation in income; the more that is explained by your starting wealth, the less there is left to be explained by your knowledge, intelligence, drive and hard work.

To put it another way, high inequality is the true social engineering, as it engineers things in favour of those born rich. If you want a meritocracy then reducing inequality should be your number one priority.

It is the 100 billion sovereign debt. And the welfare bill. Neither are affordable and they are suffocating the remaining workers.

Angela Rayner wants to charge Central London boroughs more council tax when all the families are already heavily incentivised to leave and they are having to close primary schools left right and centre. They should be working on incentivising successful people who bring their kids up well and send them to school and read to them, to continue to use the London excellent state schools and get deductions from taxes to be able to stay with their children! Add in the high PAYE, the ridiculous stamp duty on pretty much anything in London now, it just does not make sense to stay.

Thats not quite the full picture... you have to be able to pay for your healthcare, insurances are expensive, most retiring will have on going conditions, so these will need funding separately.
Then there are language requirements..... & some Tax issues.

The same pp wanted higher taxes a year ago and now we’re seeing a £50bn problem, which they want to deal with via more taxes.

How do you know the next round of tax increases won’t just do more of the same and create a bigger hole / reduction?

And who do you want to tax specifically? And how

If you are going as a pensioner (not expecting to work) you only have to prove passive income

Portugal €860 per month

Even Spain going as a couple you have to prove you have a €36,000 per year passive income. Which might sound a lot but the basic state pension is £230.25 per week. Add in an extra £100 per person on top of the state pension to stay out of the uk and you meet the requirements. Stay 5 years and you can get residency so if one dies you can stay anyway.

It is much easier if you are not looking to take jobs away from the people in that country.

Everyone with kids who can is leaving London. It’s a combination of both the high house prices and the taxes. It is not worth staying, working all hours to fund other people working part time with top ups. You can’t do both to people- most successful people do have a brain and can do basic maths so when the balance tips against them, they vote with their feet.

Funny how OP never returned...

Yes through our salaries and the 60 plus marginal tax rates via PAYE we are definitely paying for others and our 4 future workers with top grades will be welcomed elsewhere.

And @blossomtoes- you aren’t paying for us. You need 2 little future workers to replace yourselves and pay for your dotage.

I'm really confused by your response. To reiterate, most economists now believe that reducing inequality would promote growth. Can you explain how promoting growth would lower everyone's "level"?

Here is a graph of inequality versus GDP per capita. Let's hope they don't reduce inequality too much in Zambia, or they might end up being dragged down to the impoverished "low level" of the Netherlands...

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/gini-coefficient-vs-gdp-per-capita-pip?time=2023

And now we are meant to pay more council tax too. We are already paying for other regions.

Are you really? How very odd that Band D council tax in Westminster is £1,017.18, while in Hartlepool it’s £1,703.17. You chose to have four children and live in London. I had one and live in the Shires, why should I pay for your choices?

@Araminta1003 Gini index.

Oh yes London is super expensive, people look at the salaries and think WoW but living costs are insane.

Its rocketed since i worked there in the late 90s.

Can you share the wealth inequality index you are using?
For those of us in London who have to pay 10x more rent or for a house and then are paid more at work, but taxed through the roof with little to show for it at the end- when we are told we are “rich” compared to someone living somewhere much cheaper, it grates. And now we are meant to pay more council tax too. We are already paying for other regions. Why do taxes in this country not allow dedications for local living costs and the cost of children? I have 4 children - it’s really expensive. We have more than paid our way including for their state education and this country gives us nothing back. We would be better off in most other European countries, given where we sit professionally and on the tax scales. There are no incentives for people like us and our kids to stick around.