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.

I suspect I won't get much sympathy, however, as usual, our household of one high earner, and one SAHM we always seem to fall into the tax trap. DH calculates with Labours new tax regime we will be several thousand pounds worse off per year. This includes the proposed 20% VAT on school fees.

DH earns 6 figures, and pays through PAYE in the 45% pay band. Some of his salary in the future may well fall in the 50%.

However our "household" income is not that much more than two potential earners of say, £50 or 60K, who will pay no extra tax, and still be able to claim certain benefits, and assuming they are not paying private school fees.

From a personal point of view, that really hurts, and honestly, living and working in the South East will be really hard to finance for.

I need to leave the UK. I am very much of the opinion that it's a dog eat dog as well as every man for themselves. Fed up of seeing wasters paid money for sitting on there bums while I work hard

Currently a household earning £90k:

90,000 - £23,946 tax and £5,764 NI
Household 1

50,000 - 7,948 and 4,964
40,000 - 5,948 and 3,764
Household 2 (eligible for child benefit)

So if assuming HH2 has two kids, they pay £4636 less in tax and get 1248 in CB.

I'm thinking it's time for household taxation.

And that's assuming the 90k is all income not any benefits in kind.

“However our "household" income is not that much more than two potential earners of say, £50 or 60K, who will pay no extra tax, and still be able to claim certain benefits, and assuming they are not paying private school fees.“

You mean child benefit? I can’t think of any others they’d qualify for?...

But also that family will have childcare to pay for which isn’t really optional if they want to work, where private school is what you choose to spend your income on, not something you have to pay to get your income to start with.

The thing is, is someone on 80k in the same league as JK Rowling, no, but then she’s not in the same league as James Dyson... there’s really not many people who can’t go, well they’ve got much more than me.

The point is that when one person earns more than 95% of the working population it’s very blinkered to think that that amount isn’t by pretty much any calculable method very high earnings.

Yes I would. I am surprisedat the amount of people who would vote Lib Dem. I know we should be voting for policies and not the person but Jo Swinson's voting record during coalition etc is shocking in some areas.

We pay a lot of tax. I am happy to be taxed. It does’t hugely affect my quality of life. We are lucky to be high earners. I would not cast a vote based on what party would leave me financially better off.

@tabulahrasa 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. I'd say it's have multi-disciplinary skills and knowledge as well as qualifications that makes you able to demand a high salary. You have to be highly numerate - for dh's role, usually an Economist, a mathematician or maybe a physicist. Knowledged based problem solver, excellent analytical thinker, amazing diplomat...you basically get thrown into a company, have to get up to speed very quickly, understand the problem, design a solution, get the right people in to fix the problem and make sure you don't piss off half the company who hate change and think you are a first class wanker, get them on board and keep the Top Person happy...it's a bit like having an interview everyday...client usually want blood.
And to keep it relevant to the thread, dh earns above £80k - we don't vote Tory (where we live they won't vote in Labour - so we will vote tactically) and none of dh's colleagues would ever admit to voting Tory either - it's social suicide. We'd prefer someone other than Corbyn but that's not enough to push us towards Boris - he's a lying, egotistical piece of shit who believes in nothing but Boris.

I'm thinking it's time for household taxation.

Women fought for decades to get separate/independent taxation. Do we really want to go back to joint taxation? Not for me.

What we need is an extension to the current transferable unused personal allowance - i.e. more of the allowance to be transferred, and then even better would be transfer of the basic rate band too.

But also that family will have childcare to pay for which isn’t really optional if they want to work, where private school is what you choose to spend your income on, not something you have to pay to get your income to start with

Is it not odd though, that paying for childcare is acceptable, but paying for schooling is not?

“I'd say it's have multi-disciplinary skills and knowledge as well as qualifications that makes you able to demand a high salary.”

Sure, that’s more or less my point though.

It genuinely wasn’t a judgement, if your DH has skills and knowledge that earn him that kind of salary, good on him.

But people generally aren’t earning that sort of salary because they’ve spent decades on minimum wage in that industry gaining experience and they don’t have more years at uni than lower pay grade qualified professions that require multiple degrees, they’re being paid for other skills.

Pay more tax. That way you might actually get state schools that are worth sending your kids to with qualified teachers teaching them, NHS health centres you can get an appointment with and a non-overworked doctor if you end up in A&E. And what about if you had a lovely library for your kids to go to as well.

Or, you can forget that you are already leading a privileged life (despite what you may feel) and you can buy private health insurance (the more that do, the more doctors and nurses work in private, so fewer for NHS) and pay for private schools/tutors/etc. You can go and buy your kids the latest books instead of using the library, but ultimately you are going to pay for the things you want and need. Don't forget though, there is no private A&E, for you or your family. That one you may regret not helping to pay for if or when you or someone you care needs it.

I hate in the UK that the media constantly tells you that it is all the poor people's fault and that everyone is against paying more tax. Instead, they could list all the things tax pays for and celebrate how good it is. It seems quite a weird thing in the UK that no one seems to want to pay yet happy to use everything and complain how bad it is or remove themselves from what the state provides (education and health) - a selfish attitude of 'Well, I can pay for it, so I will, the rest of you....tough!'.

Sadly it seems that the judiciary system is also now operating like this. If you have plenty of cash then you can persuade others to look the other way on a level that hasn't been seen before.

Labour may not be perfect but they are so laughably away from communism or even strict socialism that it is almost hilarious to see people in the UK claiming this. Look at it objectively. Ask your kids what things they see are important in the world and have a bloody look at what's around you.

Madness. I'm off to the supermarket so will leave you to it.

“Is it not odd though, that paying for childcare is acceptable, but paying for schooling is not?“

Who said either was acceptable or unacceptable? They’re just different things.

Pay for schooling, don’t pay for schooling neither will mean you can’t work and your children will still get schooled.

If you don’t pay for childcare you can’t work and there’s not a free alternative unless you happen to have family or friends that don’t work and are willing and able to do it.

Well you're not a 'normal' family in the sense that your DH is in the top 1% or whatever it is of earners. The vast majority of people are on a lot less than that. If your DH earns £82000 pa this will cost you about £8 a month. How much do you think that will affect your lifestyle? The tory's policies reduced the income of many of the poorest people in the country by a lot more than £8 a month. They didn't have much 'lifestyle' to lose as it was.

calculate.forlabour.com/

Just checked that calculator

Dh will be paying a shed load extra a month

He doesnt vote labour but isn’t too phased about paying the extra tax

He doesn’t love the idea...but is ok with it

I think there’s a difference between the rich paying their fair share (probably Lib Dem or moderate Labour sort of tax) and the rich being absolutely fleeced to the point that they’ll go part time to reduce earnings or emigrate (Far left labour Corbyn sort of tax).

I think the for the many not the few is a really clever, catchy slogan. It implies that you’re a selfish bastard if you don’t want things to be good for the “many”. However, I also think that it doesn’t add up financially. Where is the money coming from for the many? Logically, it has to come from the many as well as from the few. A few large contributions equate to piss all when they are spread amongst 65 million other people. I think that it doesn’t help having rich people plastered all over the newspapers (eg Walliams and the £100million or footballers holidaying in Barbados). They are such a teeny tiny minority and those kinds of people could emigrate overnight anyway. But plastered over the newspapers, it appears that there are loads of them compared to the rest of us. But there are not. There are so many millions of us.

So no I’d probably vote Lib Dem if I earned over 80k. As it is I’m not voting because I think both BJ and JC are extremists and I don’t think either is beneficial to the country.

@tabulahrasa they don’t have more years at uni than lower pay grade qualified professions that require multiple degrees, they’re being paid for other skills. I would say most people who come out of Uni are not qualified to do much - most of the learning is done on the job - I would say the same for a doctor, lawyer and a teacher...experience is where you learn most of you skills. At least that is what my friends who did these degrees tell me. They draw from a very small part of their degree, as does dh.

Nope. I fall into this bracket and not a chance I will vote for Corbyn and his tax policies. I have been living in a 2 bed flat in an average part of London for the last 10 years and am by no means rich (at all). I agree with pps that there is a huge difference between higher tax on the super rich and someone like me.

He doesn’t love the idea...but is ok with it

Meanwhile, in the privacy of the voting booth, the pencil glides almost of its own volition towards the blue box...

If your DH earns £82000 pa this will cost you about £8 a month. How much do you think that will affect your lifestyle? The tory's policies reduced the income of many of the poorest people in the country by a lot more than £8 a month. They didn't have much 'lifestyle' to lose as it was.

What about all of Labour’s other tax hikes? On the married couple’s allowance, on dividends, on capital gains tax, on inheritance tax, and on and on - to say nothing of the heavy taxes on the businesses that pay salaries in the first place. Their calculator’s a load of nonsense without taking all those factors into account.

Meanwhile, in the privacy of the voting booth, the pencil glides almost of its own volition towards the blue box

He knows that in our very very very safe conservative seat that they will get in whatever he does

He wont vote labour and he wont vote tory

Ive a horrible feeling he is going to spoil his vote by drawing a penis

If we were in a marginal seat then all bets would be off

But he loathes the tories...he met Pritti patel the other day, and that decreased the tory love

That calculator thingy has gone

Where’d it go

“experience is where you learn most of you skills.”

Totally, but experience as a teacher or lawyer or doctor is only going to give you skills for that and then promoted posts in that area.

You couldn’t be a head teacher at 55k and then get hired as chief envisioning officer, or your DH’s job which pay more.

Bear in mind I was just originally pointing out that’s it’s not strictly true to say that high earners are high earners because they’ve spent more time in higher education or have more experience, just that it’s different skills and experience rather than more after a certain level of earnings.

'I'm thinking it's time for household taxation.

Women fought for decades to get separate/independent taxation. Do we really want to go back to joint taxation? Not for me.'

But everything has moved on. Student loans - household income. Child benefit - highest earner (so no independent taxation there). Universal or tax credits - household income. The system works in favour of taking as much as possible and giving as little as possible.

Corbin has successfully pissed me off (lifelong left voter) enough by lumping dh in with the villains in his tin foil hat territory speech 'they don't want this' etc.