Jeremy Corbyn wants to impose lifetime gift limits on children of £125,000

[ForTheLoveOfDoughnuts]

So we pay tax on what we earn. What we buy. And now this.. what's the point of working hard to help out our kids, for this to even be considered. Or AIBU?

And yet you’re whinging about paying tax @IsabellaLinton. Your husband’s job depends on the tax payer and the fact that his job’s harder is because of police cuts.

Wrong. It’s nothing to do with money. We were policed far more efficiently years ago with fewer police and smaller budgets. The police do not police any longer. They do not actively try to prevent crime. That is the root problem.

Lowest police numbers since the 1980s. The facts don’t support your argument.

fullfact.org/crime/police-numbers/

I am not understanding how you can possibly say what a gift is.

If I transfer £3500 into dds account (have been known to). That is a repayment not a gift.

Dd can organise and pay for a holiday which I then reimburse her for or it may be a few payments that she has made when I haven’t got my card on me. She has gone with Dp to buy a car for him then she has paid and Dp has reimbursed her.

These aren’t exact payments.

She might have done a bit of shopping, paid for some diy materials on top etc and we will round it up for the convenience.

Will we have to be far more stringent in keeping supermarket receipts and other receipts and add up to the penny how much repayments we have to make.

Can you imagine the man hours needed to calculate all this stuff.

If it is supposedly under £3000 per year will there be 1000s of people scouting everyone’s bank accounts to ascertain where every £50 has come from.

Funny how your points about your husband directly counter my poibt about him owing his training to the UK government.

Stuff that never happened in other words.

Oh and I didn't criticise you for posting often. That was anotger poster who has banged on about hard work and how much they earn, but wad able to post every 6 minutes

Virtue signalling ? Another soudbite point.

Crime fell every year of the 2000s with higher police budgets and more police on the beat.

Police budgets have fallen since 2010/11 as have numbers.

Look the facts up.

@Alsohuman

And how many of those are on the streets, where they should be?

^”You might also care about the number of frontline officers. There’s no hard and fast definition of who fits that description. The official definition has changed several times. At the moment, officers are categorised as one of frontline (like response teams, neighbourhood policing and front desk roles), frontline support (such as intelligence), business support (such as training) or not coded (such as national policing). Using that breakdown, there are 16% fewer ‘frontline’ officers since 2010.”

@Oliversmumsarmy as repeated often? anything under 3k per year as a gift wouldn't count.

Things like you have listed wouldn't count you want and example of how it works read the report or look at Irish Capital Acquisitions tax

So 16% fewer front line officer since 2010. Thank you for proving my point.

We give 10% of our net income to charity and both do voluntary work every week despite having young DC.

Virtue signalling?

Hello pot ...

Lowest number of police officers since 1981 in fact.

20,000 fewer than in 2010.

Police budgets down by 20 percent.

So 16% fewer front line officer since 2010. Thank you for proving my point

The point I’m making is that officers need to be on the street. Not policing Twitter - out in public and preventing crime. The numbers aren’t the problem. It’s what the ones we have actually do.

The facts on policing, inconvenient as it is, don’t support you.

I think its just rather suspect that my critique that society massively aided the success of your tax avoiding husband is conveniently countered.

Even if its true (which I doubt), through council housing and grammar schools you do owe your success to society.

Oh and strawman on the "hard for the left to stomach point".

You are both massively guilty of self attribution bias.

Also I left the charity point as I thought it was funny that you put it up there.

Someone else made a good point about the hypocrisy of it.

I've never virtue signalled here though I do think that's a soundbite argument and with a touch of the ad hom about it.

Not sure "but it would still be worse in Ireland" is the most persuasive tack, Zips.

I agree with oliversmumsarmy. This would cost so much to monitor and administer. It's not going to be practical at all.

It's hard to believe that the ever widening gap between the haves and the have nots would in any way constrict through any such tinkerings tbh.

Even if its true (which I doubt), through council housing and grammar schools you do owe your success to society

Success at grammar school isn’t down the individual who put the hard work and study hours in? Who knew.

I didn't say it would still be worse in Ireland, there, I used it as an example of a similar policy.

As gifts over 3k currently ( with some exceptions) already need to be declared, I'm not sure how much extra would need to be done.

I think that's a shit way to attack Zipee tbh. She might well be living on or belowthe breadline for all we know ... many are in the UK (no I'm not paying into your affairs, Zipee). There's no extra money to fucking give. People who can make substantial gifts to their kids are clearly NOT in this position.

As if anyone here pays more tax than they have to.

It's just a shit line of attack.

Prying not paying into affairs..

@Zipee, you have a very short memory. It’s not long since you were arguing that grammar schools aren’t a vehicle for social mobility. Suddenly they are because it suits your argument here. Which is it?

I think that's a shit way to attack Zipee tbh. She might well be living on or belowthe breadline for all we know

That figures.

Am I wrong? If I am, enlighten us.

I demand you virtue signal to prove me right about calling posters “grabby virtue signallers”.