Indyref Part 4

[SantanaLopez]

Evening all :)

LadyCordelia you are rich and know nothing about poverty or financial struggles . You have so much money you wouldn't even notice if interest rates went up . Which would of course increase your mortgage payment, and probably lead to rents going up as so many rental properties are mortgaged.

The BBC article is interesting, if it's right, there isn't too much of a divide. I don't trust the polls though. I'd like to see the figures behind their stats though.

I haven't seen much of the BBC referendum coverage, I don't tend to read/watch the BBC news as they've been quite biased on another big issue. I've come to like newspapers more of late. :)

If you are paying £25k a year in come come tax then you are very rich, richer than 99% of the population.

Go into one of those threads where you can moan about how you're broke because of how much you have to spend on your nanny and private school fees.

Your lifestyle is on a different planet from the vast majority of the rest of the population.

You can't understand how it feels to be poor in an age of food banks, universal credit, atos, PIP, huge Uni debts, crazy house prices, wonga et al.

The polls are skewed in favour of no.

They poll people with landlines- they are older and more settled than the overall population and are more likely to be no voters.

Rose, stop trying to predict the future again.

I find it as infuriating and as insulting as you lot find me.

You do not know what is going to happen. Nobody does.

Weatherall - all of these things are likely to get very, very much worse under independence. There will be less money from taxes to pay for all these things. You may despise higher rate taxpayers (although I can't understand an attitude that is angry with someone for doing well) but they pay the bills for everyone else.

Higher (more sensible) interest rates should reduce the number of btl landlords, making more properties available for first time buyers.

This continuous extremely low interest rate we have now is not good for the economy.

It discourages saving and encourages high personal debt.

No wonder we are having a consumer driven recovery. It is a short term plan that damages long term growth, which needs to be manufacturing led.

We can make predictions based on fairly certain assumptions. Your assumptions are based on uncertain economics and a desire to win votes to a cause.

I also find, when anyone posts anything that is not comfortable for Yes voters, some of them attempt to close down the debate, rather than engaging with it.

Higher interest rates will drive more people into defaulting on mortgages, or being forced to choose between paying the banks and eating. More people will end up renting as they can no longer afford to buy. Market forces will drive up rents as more people compete for a smaller pool of properties.

In the very, very long term you might get an economy with a much higher proportion of rented properties - therefore property ownership will be only affordable by the few. Those who are looking to buy for the first time might find property is indeed very much cheaper. But they still won't be able to afford the repayments when interest rates are very high.

Rose- no they don't.

The UK has a regressive tax system. The poorest pay a higher proportion of tax than the wealthiest.

The super rich, like lady Cordelia can hire accountants to avoid as much tax as possible. Their contribution is minimal.

Income tax is only one form of tax.

Look at VAT, fuel duty, cigarette, alcohol and lottery duties- they are disproportionately paid by the least wealthy.

Reform of the tax system is one of the clearest reasons to vote yes and to design a system which is fair and meets the needs of the Scottish people.

Surely you cannot discuss independence without discussing what you think is likely to happen? Undoubtedly there are some voters who are just Yes or No regardless, who have a fundamental belief that one or the other is right. But most people aren't - most people are going to think about what might happen, what are the likely outcomes. And everyone will assign different probabilities to different outcomes. Their own experience, knowledge, hopes, fears will influence what they think might happen.

You find Rose's perception infuriating, but it's not wrong. It's just not yours.

I don't understand the hatred of higher rate tax payers. Most of them are perfectly normal people who have worked their way up to a good wage. The lower earning 60% of the population (figures for UK as a whole) are net recipients - we need the higher earners to balance that out. In Scotland, a high number of them are either directly working in, or indirectly impacted by, industries which would be hit hard in the event of independence.

Scotland has never had as high a proportion of mortgage holders as England.

We have a much bigger social rented sector than rUK.

Lots of Scottish people don't share the English obsession of owning a home at any cost.

People in Scotland are already having to choose between heating and eating. The economy isn't working for us now. That is why we want the change only independence can offer.

With the fiscal powers of independence we can build more social housing, affordable housing people can live in for life with no bedroom tax and no bank to be a slave to.

I don't think anyone hates higher rate tax payers either!

What I think people do object to is the idea that wealthier people are necessarily wealthier because they have worked harder, or they have some innately deserving quality. I'm sure we all know lots of very hardworking, intelligent, capable people people who are in low paid sectors. I think we have to acknowledge the contribution that everyone makes to the wider economy through their labour, and not just through their tax return, and get away from the narrow, misleading idea that higher rate taxpaying individuals "pay for it all". The vast majority of low paid workers in this country necessarily deliver more to their employers in terms of cost and value than they earn in take home pay. They wouldn't be employed otherwise.

Gosh weatherall where do you get this tosh from?

Higher (more sensible) interest rates should reduce the number of btl landlords, making more properties available for first time buyers
It can only reduce btl landlords by making mortgages more expensive, and that will make it equally more difficult for private buyers.*

This continuous extremely low interest rate we have now is not good for the economy.
It's good for the economy because it encourage investment in industry and jobs.

The polls are skewed in favour of no.

A lot of them do appear to be. I don't trust the Yes Scotland ones either, as I think most polls are 'tailored' to suit whoever is publishing it, but it's very clear that No has a big lead anymore, if any. It's my belief that Yes is slightly ahead, or going to be very soon, or it is neck and neck.

People in Scotland are already having to choose between heating and eating.

I was quite upset the first time I found out someone I knew couldn't afford to eat. And thanks to the damned regulations, had their benefits stopped because they were physically unable to move to attend their interview.

Lots of Scottish people don't share the English obsession of owning a home at any cost
Which directly contradicts your last post of needing more properties for first time buyers.

With the fiscal powers of independence we can build more social housing, affordable housing people can live in for life with no bedroom tax and no bank to be a slave to
You need money to do that, not 'fiscal powers'. With those higher interest rates internally, and being a risky investment on the international market, where is the cash coming from?

"It can only reduce btl landlords by making mortgages more expensive, and that will make it equally more difficult for private buyers"

Err, not really. It makes rental property a less attractive investment, but it doesn't necessarily make buying a house to actually live in a less appealing prospect. There are two very different motivations behind that sale.

And rose said: "More people will end up renting as they can no longer afford to buy". Have you seen what has happened to the private rental sector throughout this long era of record low interest rates? More people, and more families, are in private rented accommodation than ever before. And the obstacle to buying isn't the mortgage repayments and hasn't been for a long time. Most private renters now pay more in rent than they would in equivalent mortgage repayments. The issue for most first time buyers is of course saving the deposit, which is damn near impossible with no interest on savings and rising house prices. The WM government's only real response to the problem has been to prop up the bubble by putting public money into 'Help to Buy'. Underwriting 'subprime' mortgages with tax money. Madness.

Lots of Scottish people don't share the English obsession of owning a home at any cost
Which directly contradicts your last post of needing more properties for first time buyers.

To be fair she was talking about "lots of Scottish people", not all. Some of us aren't too bothered about owning a home, some of us want to and can't afford it...

On reading this thread it seems to me there is a coordinated assault on anyone wanting to vote yes, with negativity and prophecies of economic doom. The argument should not be an economic one as even DC admitted that an independent Scotland would be well off. The Westminster government is still trying to cling on to it's glory days of empire and colonies and being a international heavyweight....but those days are long gone and we need to evolve....so our policies, foriegn and home, must also evolve. Of all the countries that have gained independence not one has asked to go back and Scotland is in a much stronger finacial position than any of those. Believe it or not the referendum is not a vote for the SNP or Alex Salmond but a chance for a truer democracy where the people are better heard and represented. so I think a few ppl on here need to read more than the Daily Mail and address the bigger issues and possibilities and not just how important money is to them.

Criseyde there is an awful lot of commentary going around about hating "the rich", "the wealthy", and various comments which then turn out to mean anyone who is much above the HRT threshold. No they don't pay for everything and of course lower paid staff are essential to their employers. But that doesn't mean you (not you personally!) can just keep attacking those who earn more.

There have been numerous posts just on these threads attacking people as being greedy, selfish or not having a clue about the real world just because the poster perceives them as being well off.

Arf at me being super rich! I'm earning just more than half of what wee Eck earns, therefore by your reasoning he and all other politicians must have no understanding of what it is like to be poor?

Apparently he earns around £140,847.00. If even just half of that isn't seen as at least 'rich' then I'm very surprised. I don't know anyone who earns that much p.a. But I do agree that most, if not all, politicians don't understand true poverty.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with earning that amount or more, it isn't "super rich", but it definitely isn't an average wage.

captaincarter Nice post.