Would you vote Labour if you earned over £80,000?

[NoMansGE]

When doing more research on labours tax policies DH and I noticed that this starts from salaries of £80,000. This would effect our household as that is DHs salary. We both agree with their campaign for 'no more billionaires'.. but we aren't billionaires. We are a normal family who live a comfortable but far from luxury lifestyle. We're both torn how to vote, as it would usually be labour.

TheGoatIsHere I disagree. Once you get to a certain level of income money is different stuff. Below a certain level you need it. Once you have enough it is nice to have, nothing more. You should be taxed more on the stuff that is nice so that everyone can have what they need.

Boris’ racism is ok though? You know the post box and watermelon smile comments?

That watermelon smile comment is up there with "grab them by the pussy" in my book.

Sadly, I have no faith in us making a better choice than the Americans.

Yes I would. I can only dream of earning anywhere near 80k though. If I were that rich I'd happily give away money to help.

Listening to question time. Labour bloke equating ppl on £80k with billionaires and ppl owning Google.

I can't work. Ds is very unwell. I've had to apply for carers.
Dh earns £90k if you take benefits in kind into account.
Two people on £45k would still get child benefit and two personal allowances. I can pass some of mine to dh and save £250 i think pa?

Time to stop thinking of ppl like us as the elite.

“Time to stop thinking of ppl like us as the elite”

That amount seems pretty elite to me tbh.

There’s two of us working, with two student ‘children’ that we’re also supporting, we aren’t in debt, run two vehicles, own a house, can afford holidays and what have you... the difference between our combined annual income and your DH’s could buy a 2 bedroom flat.

Brexit will wreck the economy.
BJ's fine with that: "Fuck business!".

Does it? South east, house prices are v high, minimum loan for student dd so doesn't cover accommodation or living, - do you mean the difference would find a mortgage?

I do and always have.
No-one actually likes being taxed but the alternative of continued underfunding creates poverty and division. I grew up poor and I remember how hard it was- I can't imagine what its like now for people in that position.
For those complaining about the line - it is still a marginal rate of tax so you are still earning more than people below the line.

On the anti-Semitic point- I generally struggle to see how much is real and how much is propaganda - I don't believe the media is unbiased but equally I don't believe its all fake news as Corbynistas claim. The problem is its impossible to have a proper analysis in this political atmosphere (both in general and inside the labour party) - Corbyn's attitude towards Palestine and Israel is not inherently anti-Semitic in my opinion but others overstep the line - and there's no forum to discuss it.

I think it’s really sad that so many Jewish people think people don’t care. However I can’t help feeling that a lot of this is propaganda. No one denies there has been problems but equally the Torres has problems with Islama-phobia but this is rarely mentioned. There is no proof that Corbyn is anti Semitic.
Surely this election should be about what you feel is best for the country not the individual with a grudge.

I will be voting for the remain candidate most likely to win in my area ; Lib Dem.
Our household earns more than average but I believe in fair taxation and improved public services. Saying that, the current labour manifesto seems to go beyond improving services and into the realms of mid 20 th century idealism. I cannot see renationalisation for example coming off , the costs and logistics would be enormous for dubious benefits.

“Does it? South east, house prices are v high, minimum loan for student dd so doesn't cover accommodation or living, - do you mean the difference would find a mortgage?”

Scotland, so different student loan system and neither of mine covers accommodation and much much cheaper houses, but no, I mean an actual whole flat. I mean, not in a nice area...but...

Thing is I appreciate, 90k is not a billionaire and yes, child benefit works completely unfairly it should be universal or by household income.

But... 45k is still in the top 10% of earners, 2 people working full time on minimum wage are only earning about 35k between them, average wage is 27ishk.

So yes, a household income that puts you in the top 4% of households, even accounting for the extra expense of living in the southeast is pretty elite to most people.

My husband’s salary has just increased to this kind of level. I am happy for him to pay the extra in tax above the 80k threshold because I honestly believe that society has to support those who need it. We, too, use the NHS, will use state education for our kids etc etc...

I appreciate voting to your own family’s benefit to some extent but I couldn’t justify doing so in the circumstances above. Our ‘loss’ is not great enough, in my opinion.

80k+ is a very good salary and if you don’t think it is, you’re living in a bit of a bubble! Many of my friends (and clearly lots of mumsnet!) inhabit this bubble but it isn’t that difficult to see that the majority of this country aren’t as fortunate. If you’re struggling, it’s because of a high standard of living. Whether you view it as high or not, is another matter.

Floating voter here but voting Lib Dem, primarily because I'm a Remainer.

Labour under JC is completely a no-go for many of the reasons already stated on this thread.

Sticking to the issue of income & tax as opposed to the myriad of other reasons not to vote Labour for the forthcoming election : -

Increasing tax for 5% of taxpayers is a soundbite. The revenue increase anticipated isn't a big number relatively and income tax increases at the upper end in the past have actually decreased overall tax revenue because it proved a disincentive to work - unintended consequences!

I'm not opposed to income tax increases but it doesn't take a genius to realise that you need to tax a much larger slice of taxpayers than the top 5% to significantly increase tax revenue.

Why set it at £80K as opposed to £60K, the cut off for child benefit?
Obviously, not an election winner given the amount of disgruntled middle class voters affected by the loss of child benefit.

The number of taxpayers at the £80K & £125K bands are politically expedient because it is a small number and probably mostly PAYE. Ironically, the biggest group will once again be the higher paid public sector workers like doctors. They won't be the millionaires/super rich who are able to structure their income to minimise tax and I'm not talking about those on the margins of the tax bands.

I repeat, it's a soundbite and in reality, it won't even produce an extra £5bn in tax revenue imo.

I earn 4x the national average wage but pay about 10x the amount of tax than someone earning the average - I think I already pay more than my fair of the tax burden.

People seem to forget this. It's a very important point. The more you earn, the more tax you should pay....and we already do.

As a pp has said, JC likes to put someone earning 80k in the same camp as the billionaires he wants to eradicate, which is absolute insanity.

Nobody is saying that it's as simple as the higher you earn, the harder you work. It's not that simple, but very high paying jobs do require more skills, higher education, experience and expertise and this takes years to acquire.

There's a difference between taxing fairly, and punishing high success and ambition. That doesn't mean you aren't successful or ambitious if you earn an average salary, but there are degrees of it and that is reflected in your salary.

“very high paying jobs do require more skills, higher education, experience and expertise and this takes years to acquire.”

Only up to a certain point, 80k starts to take you out of qualified professional careers into made up job title territory...

I mean, I’m not entirely sure what a client procurer or business consultant does exactly but I’m very sure it’s not as skilled or expertised as things like doctor or lawyer...

@tabulahrasa The OP's Husband's entire salary (assuming £80k) would just about buy you a "park home" (or "trailer" if you were in the US) if you wanted to live, say, within 20 miles of the centre of Reading.

Also, the "average" cost of full-time childcare in Reading is now £13,340 per year, per child. If you have two children you will need £26,680 in cash, (after tax) just to pay for average childcare.

A family with a single income of £80k would have a take home pay of about £55k per year. After deducting the above childcare costs that would leave them with £23k a year. Rent on a two bed flat would be about £9k a year (if I use a low estimate) and the lowest council tax band is about £1.2k a year, so after those costs I guess that they would have about £1k per month before food, utilities, transport and clothing.

I have no doubt that £1k a month for food, utilities, transport and clothing for a family of three/four would still be a positive step forward for many families, but I don't think that it makes this family "rich". I am not sure that it would enable them to run two cars and take holidays as you have mentioned.

Labour are quite happy to treat the above family with just the same disdain that they reserve for multi-millionaires and they effectively encourage their supporters to take the same view.

“I am not sure that it would enable them to run two cars and take holidays as you have mentioned.”

They’re my cars and holidays on a household income of much less than 80k, closer to half that in fact.

Also your maths is flawed if there’s 2 parents and 1 income there’s no childcare costs.

Imagine earning £80K PA and grumbling about paying a whopping £8.80 a month more for the benefit of the country you live in.

We earn less than that in total income across the household.

If by paying more tax it would mean that we had real investment in education, the NHS, social care and public transport then hell yes, I'd be happy to pay more tax. Because those are the things that matter.

@tabulahrasa - dh is one of those consultants you refer too and on a job he'd be managing the very skilled lawyer you refer to, telling them what he needed from them and checking their work to make sure they met the brief he provided them with and he'd be all over the IT people making sure they were on tract, keeping the accountants and the board happy - so even though he is not a lawyer, IT consultant, Regulator or accountant - he does know enough about their jobs to keep them on their toes, and deliver a project on time - he has industry experience that is so wide reaching that his knowledge and experience saves his clients from making serious mistakes costing them quite a bit of money - which is why they can can justify paying him very generously. If you mentioned his name in the industry, people would know who he was - he has proved his worth repeatedly - any clearer? Maybe not...my Mum still thinks he's an accountant.

@bob1234bob, I completely agree.

“which is why they can can justify paying him very generously”

I wasn’t particularly commenting on whether it’s justified tbh, just that at the level where someone like me that doesn’t work in anything like that field is looking at a job title going... what is that? Management?...finance? Then it’s not often a qualification or specific trained expertise that’s the reason for the salary, it’s the managerial skills or whatever it is for that particular role.

The letter yesterday from John LeCarre et al was amazing and I applaud them. The Jewish chronicle which is a mainstream in offensive newspaper too the unprecedented action of appealing to non Jews not to vote labour on its front page last week.

Thank you for this, I've googled and read up around this. When the debates were on the other night, DH and I were discussing our vote. We are not, and never will be, conservative voters. We aren't really Labour. We are mix of Lib Dem and Green (I need to read up around the Lib Dem's this time around). I never ever tactically vote, it doesn't sit right with me. However I was considering doing it this time and voting for Labour. The thing holding me back the most was the concern around antisemitism.

I did my own googling and it is hard to find things that seem to be legitimate so the letter above was a better read. I'm not Jewish and know nobody who is. However I cannot vote for an antisemite. The very idea of Hitler repeating is terrifying and I think we can become too complacent. We forget that it CAN happen again.

I will do more reading around this and the other party's. I fear it's a waste of time though because so many people vote for whoever because "they always have" or they like just one policy.

God knows where my vote will go. Or what the point is. I can't not vote though. My mum's words ring in my ears..."women died to give you the vote young lady so get yourself down to do it!"