To think it is clear where Corbyn will get the money from?

[malificent7]

Taxes of course... especially the rich.
Which is how it should be.

For me the "rich" are the people who inherit titles, heavily evade inheritance and income tax through highly paid accountants and offshore accounts, and have never done am actual "day of work" in their life.

Booph can you name some of these people?

inky
Because it's actually a miniscule amount of the population that choose not to work and "scrounge" but the media would have us believe that it's millions. I know this is a left wing Guardian article and it's 4 years out of date now but it does have some interesting statistics around benefits and people's perceptions: www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/06/welfare-britain-facts-myths

People believe that over a quarter of benefits are claimed fraudulently when in fact under 1% are, which is of course still too high an amount, but this statistic just goes to show that people are quick to judge based on little or no facts.

There seems to be widespread belief that the highest earners deserve it because they work 60-70 hour weeks regularly. Cetainly many of them do, but just as many don't. I work 50-60 hours a week for £26,000. I don't think other people deserve less than me because I work a lot. I choose to work that much. I could choose to work 37 hours a week for not much less I imagine, and probably for more in many jobs.

Growing up, I lived in a council house with my parents reading the Daily Star and the Mail. It was only during school and university that I realised what utter biased shit most of the media spout (including the left papers).

I do want to make it clear that I don't begrudge anyone for the way they vote though!

Bad are you talking about people who've done that under the Tories?

Labour wants to improve the NHS and many doctors support this as documented by the medics who have spoken out against the cuts as have senior police and teaching unions. There are loads of articles and videos of doctors etc urging people to vote labour. Speaking to a dr yesterday who is regularly overworked because of cuts and understaffing. Labour have explicitly said they want to fund the NHS and increase staffing.

Booph - how can they know what % of benefits are claimed fraudulently? If they knew they were fraudulent, it would be stopped. 1% is the detection rate or someones estimate, not the fraud rate.

If LVT was anything like 3% our bill each year would be around£25-30000. That is taking out of the equation our house is worth £xxxxxx

Or given it is supposedly the amount your property has increased since wonderful facilities have been built and therefore you are able to make use of these wonderful facilities. Would our little area be exempt.
No public transport, no pavements, single track roads with passing spaces. No street lights, no police, the residents after complaining about some car speeding incidents got a letter saying the police weren't interested in policing our area. No shops no doctors or dentists. No church.
The only facility the residents of this area get is our bins are emptied fortnightly and we have the post man.

If Corbyn wants to do what he says, he can't just do it by taxing the 5%, he's got to tax the general population more. But that doesn't get you votes.

For those who say that companies didn't leave before when tax rates were higher - they did: WPP and Informa are two notable examples. They returned when the corporation tax rate was cut. From a corporate perspective the combination of Brexit / higher corporation tax / higher personal tax for the executives is only going to push them more towards leaving than staying.

You can promise money for everything and everyone if you know there is no chance of being elected and actually implement your manifesto.

dapple

www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11251904/Wealth-is-good-and-the-UK-has-lots-of-it.html

We do well compared to the rest of Europe but approximately 1500 of the ultra rich inherited their wealth. It's not necessarily a bad thing but people were questioning how we would define rich, and that was my answer.

www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwood/2014/03/inequality

"If one assumes that an economy functions best if the most talented people rise to the top, then inherited wealth rigs the deck. There is a lottery effect; if your parents owned property, or die early (before they spend their savings on nursing care), then you have a big advantage over others who may be just as hard-working or talented. Wealthy people already pass on a lot of advantages to their children; they can afford better education, and a better environment at home (more books, quiet places to study etc)."

I work for a mid sized family business. I earn around £30k. Dh is a teacher who earns £29k.

My parents the business owners are close to retirement. They employ 30 people. They have very little saved in pensions themselves because they've invested in the business. They are hoping to pass itvonto me & my brother.

There have been a lot of increased costs recently such as auto enrolment etc. A lot of similar businesses have gone under. In fact they were able to give jobs to one person whose previous firm went under.

A rise in corporation tax will hit them hard. That close to retirement they may decide not to bother with the stress & just close down. That will be 30 jobs gone.

I think that sometimes many people confuse an equal society with a fair society. They are not always the same thing.

Im not referring to welfare here... im referring to public services...

Aren't welfare and public services intrinsically linked? And Corbyn is using the same funding stream for both. Higher taxes are going to pay for everything apparently

If you tax the rich to much, they take their money elsewhere.

At what point are you deemed to be rich?

It's a lot lower than you think

On the Duke of Westminster - IHT will have been paid on personal assets (relatively small). The trusts (most of the wealth) pay a tax on assets every 10 years, which works out as equivalent to IHT every 40 years. This enables them to plan how to pay it rather than have a fire sale every time each one dies. This is not tax avoidance or mitigation, just planning. They pay the same amount of tax as they would have without the trusts.

mmmm - bet he claimed every relief going though! Agricultural relief, business rates relief...