So people earning over £80k are wealthy, unless they are JC??

[usernamealreadytaken]

In an interview with Julie Etchingham, JC apparently said he's not wealthy, despite earning over £130k p/a, because of WHERE HE PUTS HIS MONEY (but he's not going in to that!). AIBU to think this is the most ridiculous statement he has managed to put out in recent weeks?

Given that Labour want the wealthiest in our society (earning over £80k) to pay more taxes, what Good Reason could he possibly have to not include himself in that bracket? Discuss :-)

Wouldn't surprise me fanjo

My wires are in a permanent state of disarray

fanjo

God yes...the amount of threads i have had to disappear from as i have realised that i am getting arsey and have misread

Its like shhhhhiiiittt back away, back away!!

Just give it a minute fanjo

Fanjo i said if they were grippy, tax begrudging and right wing and threatening to leave the country over tax then am happy for them to go ahead

Isn't that rather cutting your nose off to spite your face? "I'd rather they left and took their tax begrudging right wing money with them than trying to find an equitable way for them to stay and pay their fair share. We don't need their money anyway". Oh, wait...

Of course there would be others but, a bit like the Labour Party itself, not all replacements are created equal. I don't think this tax raise by itself will do a lot, I think it'ld be the one after that or the point at which the economy starts unraveling.

It's £2000 pa to us, hardly worth upping sticks for. It'd be the basket of other factors that mgbt do it.

Mind you, we have no dc in private educafuon and aren't employing anyone so it's only the tax rise for us.

Moreover, it was only a third of that with Labour in the mid 1990s, so it was Labour that trebled national debt over their so-called "prosperity" years!!!

They had to spend money to bring schools and hospitals up to a basic level after 18 years of decline under a Conservative administration which took us into the worst recession for decades.

Anybody who experienced education/the NHS as an adult/parent in the 80s & 90s knows what Labour did with all that money. It really made an astonishing difference.

This article in the Guardian is very interesting

Must of the high earners quoted appear to agree that they should be paying more income tax.

Front page of the Times, "those earning £100,000 would be hit with a marginal income tax rate of 73.2 per cent"

I think that is way more than is fair and I am pretty sure if I was paying it I would rather pay a very expensive accountant than give it to JC. And I bet that is exactly what would happen.

He clearly admitted to being 'well-paid'. That's not the same as being wealthy as we do not know where he puts his money (so we shouldn't). However, there is no suggestion in this interview that he doesn't agree that he should and will be paying more taxes? Roughly 5% of people earn over 80,000 in the uk and therefore there is no reason that this minority should pay more taxes to help the other 95% in the country.

I doubt it. I know someone in earning in that bracket (where already they pay 62% tax because you lose the single person tax allowance) and for it to go up to 73.2% because of the loss of the single person allowance is very unfair when the much higher earners don't have the same rate. In all the cases I am thinking about the people (lawyers) are paid under PAYE as employees with tax deducted at source. These people are employees and there is no scope to pay less tax unless they can keep under £100k if they pay a bit into a pension but even that is limited these days and if you need the money to pay £24k childcare in London and £40k on your mortgage then you cannot be putting it into a pension anyway . However of course no one is saying someone on a gross salary of £100k to £150k is badly off.

These high Labour rates are not going to happen but the Tories' rates are prettry high too and there is no chance they are going down. May is going to be elected precisely because she has taken the middle ground. She is going to be increasing taxes too not reducing them and we have one of the biggest sized and most expensive states in British history unfortunately.
I would like to halve the size of the state and reduce tax by large amounts.

Jjoy He clearly admitted to being 'well-paid'. That's not the same as being wealthy JC earns in excess of £130k pa. in my book, that makes him wealthy, and it would appear so in John McDonnell's definition too -

Direct quote from John McDonnell in April

Mr McDonnell told the BBC: “We want to get a system that is fair, so the corporations and the rich pay their way more and that means ending the tax giveaways to the corporations and also those in inheritance tax, capital gains tax and the bankers’ levy.

"The rich will be above £70,000 to £80,000 a year.”

If the rich aren't wealthy, then who the flippin' heck is?!?!?

He is actually - he donates to charity and claims tax relief - perfectly legal, but still tax avoidance. Calls in to question his morals too - everybody should pay more taxes for public services (except me, I'll put my taxes to use as I see fit).

Blackening his name is not something I had even considered. My problem with him is that he refuses to admit he is wealthy despite his own shadow chancellor effectively stating that he is, and that instead of paying his taxes towards public services he feels it is right to divert the money to a charity of his choosing instead.

You can bet your bottom dollar that if the other 1.3 million people earning in excess of £80k pa did that, the Labour Party would have them labelled as some kind of tax avoiding right wing scum.

If every higher tax payer behaved in the same way as him, tax receipts to the treasury would plummet - he is not leading by example unless the example is how to divert funds away from public services.

When you hold a very high profile public office you need to be very clear in your message - his message is "don't contribute to public services, you can choose to give your taxes to far worthier causes (but only if you're wealthy; the lower paid do not have that luxury)".

Humans are greedy, they look after number one, its inate, built in.
Politics and life revolves around this.
Rich Lefties assuge guilt through Labour, the working classes are far to cunning.