Would you pay more tax to boost defence spending

[trainermush]

Obviously we are now in a more precarious position & defence spending has been underfunded for some time. RR had just said we need to spend more money & she will but without breaking her fiscal rules,

"So we will stick to our fiscal rules. But recognising the priority of defence spending in the world that we live in today means that we will have to make difficult choices so that we can spend that money that is needed to keep our country safe."

Mulling it over & even though I think I pay enough tax I would pay more each month towards this (cut back in other areas) as opposed to labour cutting back on something else. I guess thinking about my dc & other loved ones has changed my mind somewhat now things appear more bleak. What do others think?
Conscription of young people terrifies me even though my dc are too young.

People saying 'No' to increased defence spending need to read the room.

Putin, Lavrov and Peskov may look like smart businessmen in suits but underneath they will push and keep pushing until they get what they want. Now Putin is saying that NATO must roll back its borders to the pre 1997 line. Now Trump's administration is saying the US can cut its defence spending by 8% pa compound. That is a significant reduction and the lines are drawing together for the US withdrawing from NATO.

In the meantime Russia is on a military war footing spending almost 50% of its GDP on weapons. Post any settlement of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the spending may slow down but in real terms it will continue at a pace not seen since the cold war. Putin wants the old USSR back and if he is successful he may want more. He is the most dangerous man on the planet, more dangerous than Trump.

The Royal Navy has 2 aircraft carriers, 6 destroyers and 8 frigates. The two assault ships are being retired in two weeks. We have 100 Typhoons, many of which are also being retired in a few weeks plus about 40 F35s. Then the army is about 70,000 of which no more than 20,000 have front line fighting roles. We are hollowed out.

If Starmer and Reeves keep talking about defence spending and not increasing it by at least £30 billion a year - starting with the mini-Budget next month - it will be too late. Taxes are going to rise, spending is going to be cut. The welfare bill is huge. Benefit spending increased by 15% to £275billion in 2023/24 so that is a good place for Reeves to start.

There is no sense in spending vast resources on those late in life, if it results in tens if not hundreds of thousands of our younger people getting called up and fighting in a WW3 that could have been avoided with a proper deterrent.

Time is of the essence.

Yay !!

And indirect tax increases will also hit those in the black economy who aren't paying the right tax on their incomes, as they'll at least be paying tax on their spendings, so that's something out of them.

Really. After 7 months. Who’s gonna win then ? Nige ? Kemi ? 😂

Interesting - what is "other" ??

I agree with all that. Tax rises AND cuts to the benefit bill are essential. It's time for RR and KS to step up and act for the good of the country, and forget the pathetic sixth form debating society politics of envy.

If Starmer and Reeves keep talking about defence spending and not increasing it by at least £30 billion a year

I thought it was 80bn so it's not as bad as I thought.

Isn't there some horrible prediction that of we had been invaded like Ukraine we would run out of ammunition in less than a week (probably less now as we have sent all our ammo to Ukraine). We do have nukes I suppose. Which must be such a comfort to all of us who have read On the Beach...

Badenoch won’t be the Tory leader at the next election. She’s proving her uselessness already. Four years is a very long time in politics, it’s extremely foolish to predict the result this far out.

I don't care if it's Wonko the Wonder Dog, anything's better than the bunch of muppets we have now !

Yes.

Because actual war and the tax for that is much worse, and much greater.

And indirect tax increases will also hit those in the black economy who aren't paying the right tax on their incomes, as they'll at least be paying tax on their spendings, so that's something out of them.

Yes, good point.

Looking at the polls, Nigel probably.

He’ll be history. His love affair with Trump puts him at odds with the vast majority of the population.

I took your suggestions - you offered up not shopping at Starbucks; not everyone does. You implied that reforming the corporation tax system would be difficult because it would require co-operation with other countries - I gave you FATCA as an example of a global tax change.

I'm still not clear on why ordinary tax payers should have to bear this burden, when there are a number of multi-nationals who could and should be contributing.

I would if they came here and tried to kill my children. Or if my boys had to fight them. Then I bloody well would have to. We fight for our family and our homes and our communities. Most people even if they think they aren't patriotic would fight for that. If the chips are down even Gen Z...

I'm still not clear on why ordinary tax payers should have to bear this burden, when there are a number of multi-nationals who could and should be contributing.

Capitalism

Spending is £60bn in 2025/26. That is 2.22% of GDP. To get it to 3% therefore is an increase of £21bn.

If you are suggesting an increase of £80 billion then that takes us to the 5% that Trump wants all NATO countries to spend. I personally do not have an issue with that, but realistically that means buying more from overseas and I doubt even the US has the capacity to service such a market overnight.

Just keep an eye on the polls. If there's no convincing alternative then it's Nigel. And young people definitely don't hate him..if we had to go to war would people want Keir Starmer with his nasal monotone or a person who can speak the language of patriotism convincingly. Whatever you think of Nigel Farage he can certainly do that.

Do we need to have such an adversarial relationship with Russia? Really?

Farage will shortly go to the rear or Reform. Even today he is relinquishing a share in the company.

Farage is not a leader and that is becoming increasingly clear. He is a catalyst nothing more and his role will diminish. Paradoxically, the leader on the right who may defeat Starmer may well come from the military.

No.

I have very little money left each month as it is and could not afford to pay even more taxes.

If it wants to find funding for defence the Government should first take a good look at how much public money is wasted, included the bloated civil service, and tax the wealthiest more rather than always see regular tax payers as an endless cash cow.

Not to mention that as long as we have people in this country who can't heat their home, feed themselves or find secure accommodation we need to stop spending so much on foreign aid.

I took your suggestions - you offered up not shopping at Starbucks; not everyone does. You implied that reforming the corporation tax system would be difficult because it would require co-operation with other countries - I gave you FATCA as an example of a global tax change.

Is it really controversial to suggest it would be easier to persuade Starbucks to do the moral thing by losing market share as opposed to setting up our own FATCA? Do you think there might be a reason so few countries do this?

Well, it's not like we would have a choice. Russia has always considered the UK (hilariously) a wily enemy and apparently Putin is the same. And we've learned the lesson of appeasing an aggressive dictator on the edge of Europe haven't we? Surely?

@Talonz thanks, just heard the 80bn figure on the radio