First 100 days

[Iwishicouldflyhigh]

whoever you voted for, what are your thoughts after the First 100 Days?
I didn’t vote for Labour, but I was quite excited in their first few weeks as Keir got his head down and I was excited fir change.

Now I just feel deflated. Same old….freebiegate, nitpicking, infighting. A bit depressing really.

i don’t even think there was a decent alternative really….and that’s even more depressing!!!!!

The PP reached over the tips of their skis…

In general? The fact that a capitalistic society doesn't allow for anyone and everyone to become one of the few.

For me personally? I'd say I've the wrong personality traits tbh. I had the opportunity many years ago but chose a different path.But I earn well (and am more than happy to pay my fair share), work in a sector I care about and in a role that actually does good, have everything I need and would rather enjoy my life and work than earn more money than I could ever spend.

In general? The fact that a capitalistic society doesn't allow for anyone and everyone to become one of the few.

Well, it does
Charlie Mullins - Wikipedia

Edited to add:

For me personally? I'd say I've the wrong personality traits tbh. I had the opportunity many years ago but chose a different path. But I earn well (and am more than happy to pay my fair share)

It's great that you recognise that it's own personality traits which prevents most people from succeeding financially. Obviously there are some horrifying life circumstances for some people, but it's minority of cases. I dare to say that you are happy to pay what you consider to be your "fair share". The moment you see this share becoming more than what you think is fair you'll change your behaviour

The first para seeks to blame ‘the system’.

’More than happy to pay my fair share’

Fair share of what? Presumably, not much,
given your comments.

You see the problem…

Most people have no idea what their ‘fair share’ actually is. Or think that they are making a net contribution when infact they are not.

One of the benefits (and there are lots of negatives) of a digital currency would be for all citizens to receive an annual All taxes paid vs All benefits received statement. This might be enlightening!

ONS

Thanks for the patronising question. Their wealth is usually held in assets like shares, real estate, investments, art, etc, ect, which aren’t typically liquid, and obviously present challenges when it comes to taxation.

But just because their wealth is tied up in assets doesn’t mean it’s untouchable or that it shouldn't be taxed. Assets like shares generate huge returns through capital gains, dividends, debt leveraging and other income streams, and that's what wealth redistribution policies should be designed to target.

Now, why are you so quick to defend a system that doesn’t work for the vast majority of people? The concentration of wealth at the top has contributed to growing inequality and worsening social outcomes. The broader public sees little benefit from the structures that allow this obscene accumulation of wealth, with basic services severely underfunded, and millions struggling to get by.

Why are you so eager to preserve a system that leaves most people behind while a small group, that you'll never be part of, prospers exponentially? - that's an open question to everyone who constantly defends the status quo on these threads.

There is a growing sense that these uber wealthy should perhaps contribute more. This is a global issue; and perhaps a united approach might make some positive change here. But if the UK goes it alone; the money goes somewhere else and HMRC is left holding nothing.

A great number of these individuals made their wealth from luck, judgement, being in the right place. Blah blah. But mostly through the ability to take risk, and live with risk.

There is part of our national psyche; not to risk it all, and to stick in a job through fear that things might fail if they take a risk.

My wealth has exploded precisely because I left a comfortable low risk job. Carpe Diem as they say.

Sorry but you are plain wrong, and btw sticky assets like the ones you mention are often easier to target for taxation because they are illiquid - I hope that makes sense. The very high level wealth is mobile as the owners often have more than one nationality etc.

Otherwise wealth is often held in trusts within friendlier offshore jurisdictions to mitigate grabs by socialist governments. If you go after non-doms you will necessarily need to pursue trusts as well.

I can address your other questions separately but it’s important that your incorrect assertions are straightened out.

One person going from rags to riches is an exception not a rule. If capitalism enabled everyone to become rich it would cease to be capitalism.

I'm in the top band (have been since my 20's, even when I could have taken myself out of it) and live in Scotland so I'm probably paying more tax than you. I also don't currently think the system is fair, but more because I pay proportionally more than the likes of Sunak or Mullins, but I still pay.

But let me ask you this: can you explain why you think a system where 1% owns 24% of wealth, while 50% owns just 9% and inequality is growing every year, is a system worth preserving?

Do you not think that working to reducing inequality, where the gap between top and bottom is maybe only 100 times greater instead of 100,000 times, is something worth aspiring to?

Welcome to the club where Labour are about to take even more of you money away in further taxes.

I don’t think I’m "plain wrong" thanks. The stats tell us that the fabled mobility is a much smaller issue than it's made out to be, with 85% of billionaires living in their home country and less than 10% of UHNW individuals leaving the country in which they made their wealth.

But as you point out, many of the ultra-wealthy use trusts in offshore jurisdictions to shield their wealth and that's exactly why we need policies to address how wealth is shielded from taxation (and can borrow from other countries who already tackle this issue).

It’s not about making "grabs" but about ensuring that everyone contributes fairly to the system, especially when extreme wealth inequality is exacerbating public service underfunding and social and economic disparity.

I don't think there's any need for you to answer the other questions tbh, your evasiveness in the previous response speaks volumes and shows that we clearly have a fundamental difference in opinion on this topic.

You think the status quo of ever increasing inequality is enviable, I think we need to work to reduce it and create a fairer society that works for the many not the few.

I know this is hard for some to understand but I'm not bothered about it.

One of the reasons I didn't leave Scotland when the SNP increased our rates was because I was happy to contribute a few thousand extra a year to ensure the additional benefits we receive here continue, even though I don't benefit from them at all.

You are right. I do find that hard to believe.

I’m confident that you are in the minority amongst your fellow countryfolk.

The SNP make Labour look competent.

Why? Is it really so difficult to understand that I value things like free tuition, prescriptions, elderly care, youth travel, hospital parking or fair pay for public sector workers and council tax freezes for the people more than I value a couple grand in my pocket?

I’m confident that you are in the minority amongst your fellow countryfolk.

Scotland is generally more socialist in it's outlook so I wouldn't put money on it, but even if I am in the minority, so what?

Why would it be a bad thing to hold my own views instead of blindly following the majority?

The SNP make Labour look competent.

In your opinion. While I don't agree with a lot of what they do, they've always put Scotland first. From the small business bonus, that I did directly benefit from way back when, to the the things I've listed above.

I'd rather another 100 years of the SNP in Edinburgh than a single term of the Tories in Westminster.

Give that the tories announced a few years back there was no magic money tree and then almost immediately bribed the DUP for votes I think this tree might actually exist.

You are prime example of why the system is what it is and will never be what you are arguing for.

If I understand Scottish tax bands correctly you are somewhere between £42k and £125k.

You better be happy about paying few k or a lot of k more in taxes because statistically you have no escape. Statistically it's likely that you are over 30 and at this age and level of income it will be very difficult for you to uproot your life and move abroad. You won't do it for the sake of 2-3-5k. This is exactly why people like you (and me) will be taxed more and more.

At what level will you say enough is enough and change your behaviour drastically? 50%? 70%? you still need to feed your family, pay mortgage etc. So whatever crumbles Labour decide to leave you.

People in much higher brackets, who ironically already pay much more tax, have more choice even to reduce their hours. Ever wondered why lions share of GPs only work part time?

Those super wealthy ones, who not only pay taxes but generate jobs, they are mostly mobile and they will leave. See Charlie Mullins above.

We’re not talking about the top % of earners here; they’re an almost entirely different group from the top % of wealth holders. Someone earning £100k or £200k a year wouldn't be a target in my mind, it would be those who hold significant wealth.

But unfortunately the £100/£200 K people are more likely to be PAYE workers so the government will find it easier to target them. Hence people paying into their pensions and planning to retire earlier. It's all a shit show really.

You don’t sound like any top rate tax payer I know. Are you sure you understand what tax bracket you fit into?

Eh? None of it is “free”. Have you had a lobotomy or something? That can be the only explanation for someone wishing the SNP to continue to ruin Scotland for another 100 years.

This is unnecessary. PP said she's higher, not highest rate taxpayer. I know a lot of, majority I'd even say, of highest rate taxpayers (me included) who's value these things for "a couple grand in my pocket"

The issue is that it's never a couple of grand. It's a lot of grands and not much in return, e.g. not free tuition, no free childcare etc etc.

When we're also expected to pay for Mounjaro for unemployed...
I personally drew the line and decided to retire many years earlier than planned after being forced to move my DC from their school. So ill thought socialists policies do have their consequences.

“I am in the top band (have been since my 20’s…)”

In Scotland, that’s 47% on income over £125,140.

for context, on £125k; that’s £47,747 in income tax and £4,513 in National Insurance.

When we're also expected to pay for Mounjaro for unemployed...

No you are not. That is just today's click bait headline 🙄

The actual facts are that, subject to approvals, there will be a study to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of tirzepatide in weight loss, diabetes prevention, and prevention of obesity-related complications for adults with obesity.

The five-year study will also aim to collect data on healthcare resource utilisation, health-related quality of life and changes in participants’ employment status and sick days from work.

healthinnovationmanchester.com/news/greater-manchester-plans-to-partner-with-industry-on-a-new-study-to-deepen-understanding-of-a-weight-loss-medication/

It’s a headline being pushed by Labour. It’s a load of old shite, certainly, but it’s Labour’s load of old shite.