What Rachel Reeves does next? Surprised no thread on this yet. It's all over Twitter

[Sharingsomewisdom]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13764547/Rachel-Reeves-mulls-tax-hikes-spending-squeeze-raising-rents-social-housing-Chancellor-sees-Government-borrow-3bn-forecast-month.html

Or am I the only one interested what she is eying next? Any comment on the reasonableness or otherwise of Rachel's next focus?

20% of the electorate voted for Labour. Your comment that 34% of the electorate voted for Labour is demonstrably wrong.

Nowhere did I state that the CGT limit was introduced by Labour. I did however state that merging it with marginal rates of income tax would have significant negative impact in terms of attractiveness of investments. I may risk a 20% tax on profits if I feel bullish about a particular stock but I’m sure as heck not going to risk having to pay a 45% tax on it.

As is often the case with these types of conversations it is the less informed posters who shout loudest and make fools of themselves.

I did. But I am worried about the economy. Rachel Reeves is an ideologue and that concerns me. Also I said to dh I bet she'll suddenly discover that we don't have has much money as thought so she can comfortably do all the things that 'old Labour' would want- ie burden the middle classes and JAMS with tax hikes while simultaneously handing out money to whoevers union is on fleek that week.

Your comment that 34% of the electorate voted for Labour is demonstrably wrong.

It would have been if I’d said that. I didn’t though. Read what I said again. Slowly.

As is often the case with these types of conversations it is the less informed posters who shout loudest and make fools of themselves.

Indeed. I’ve noticed that too.

Where do you get the ‘ideologue’ thing from?
The rest is nonsense. The highest tax burden since the war came under a Tory government.

The highest tax burden since the war came under a Tory government

So when it goes up with Labour in power they'll be the highest tax burden since the war

I didn’t respond to your comment.

Nonsense? What is nonsense? Where are her tax rises for the ultra rich? Who has had pay rises in the last couple.of weeks?

Remind me how long it is since this government was elected - 49 days, isn’t it? Might it not be sensible to at least wait for the autumn budget before criticising? You don’t know where the inevitable tax rises will fall. Your ranting about “burdening the middle classes” is pure conjecture. And, yes - nonsense.

I'm sorry, but it's neither ranting or conjecture. The tax on education and the fuel benefit cap both fall squarely on the shoulders of the middle classes. If neither affect you then that's fine, but I haven't made either of them up.

I’ve lost £150 fuel allowance. Fine by me, I should never have got it in the first place.

The problem is there is a lot who will lose it and it won’t be fine by them

Tough shit. It’s going for everyone except those who really need it. There are millions of us who won’t even notice because we gave it away.

I'm guessing those who want it to go aren't on the basic state pension

Indeed they don't, as you've proved.

So we now we count people who don't vote? Johnson got little more and on that measure, we'd have never left the EU, perhaps you've a point!

Don't vote = you don't count.

As i said, it was the Tories who have slashed CGT thresholds and hiked Corp tax to a level only Corbyn planned to do, plus froze tax TH's, a decision that affects the lower paid the most.

Yet its Labour who are the party of high taxes!

As for CGT, of course you still would, you'll still be making money plus not all investments are particularly risky, gains on property? trackers? of course that should attract CGT at the sellers marginal rate.

The higher tax rate applies to gains, not losses.

No they don't, the MC cannot afford PS fees in the first place but equally they are well off enough not to need an extra £150 or so.

Who it does affect is those at the lower income levels who sit just above pension credit thresholds and that in my opinion is why its wrong.

Reeves needs to lower energy costs, removing the need for WFA, which tbh is miserly, would barely cover a months electricity for many people who feel the cold as they age

Delightful
like everything else there’s people literally a few pounds over the limit for pensions credit will lose it they really need it

As usual there’s a core of people who are “I’m alright jack fuck everyone else “

Hmm but your seemingly okay that she and all other MPs are allowed to continue to have energy bills on their second homes expensed back to them...courtesy of the tax payer. 🤔

I think everyone would agree that MPs earn enough to be able to pay their energy bills on their second home.

Maybe the government should crack down on their own house first and lead by example.

I’m guessing you’ve never had stock awards in your entire life as your response is about as coherent as one I’d get from my 3 year old.

This is one of the major issues with financial policy making. Most people giving their opinion don’t understand what they’re talking about but pretend they do.

The point is that it’s nonsense to bang on about raising taxes ‘like old Labour’ when Tories have done far more of it than old Labour ever did - and what have they spent it on? At least old Labour used it for the social good.

Wow so you learned all about their democracy, policing, sentencing on crimes and riots while you were on holiday!

I usually lounge around pool, eat, drink and sunburn too much. Suppose it takes allsorts to make a world 😂

Maybe people go on holiday to places where they have relatives? Or are interested enough to do some research.
I never lounge around pools getting sunburned. Not my thing. I read up a bit beforehand and go to interesting places.

yes I bet they do 🤔

Do what?
Visit places they have family ties to?
Research places they will visit to know what it might be like or what might be interesting?
Visit interesting places?
I don’t have abroad family so I can’t do that, but I can assure you I do the others.

Where did you go?

Capital gains tax used to be on the real gain after allowing for inflation - that was called "indexation" and that was sensible. However over time that went and it was applied to paper gains ignoring inflation which is very unfair. Yet people did have the 12k annual allowance the Tories brought right down and the 40% rate when there was the inflation allowance was brought down to 28% and now 24% for sale of a property because the inflation / indexation had gone. if CGT went up to say 40% not allowing for inflation over say the 50 years someone had owned the asset that would be a very high rate on what is not really the true price increase.