To wonder if all those gleeful about PIP cuts are going to welcome people with serious mental health conditions as colleagues and employees?

[Somethingthecatdraggedin7]

Given the amount of ableisism I see on MN I think the likelihood of people welcoming people with serious mental health conditions into their workplace is pretty low.
And yes, these people will very likely now be forced to try to work even though their condition makes it impossible. We are not just talking about some lazy twenty year old who expects to sit at home gaming due to his “anxiety” as many people seem to believe is the case. It will be people with significant impairments to social functioning.
Even if they get support to apply for jobs, and even if they then get the position (doubtful) how accommodating will colleagues or customers be if the person seems a bit odd, or gets adjustments workmates deem unfair?
This is going to be a total shit show.

And just looked up Sweden - 55.6% on income above £60,000!!

Thanks for the civilised response.

I agree that GDP per capita doesn't measure QoL. The fact the most of the countries I've listed have higher scores for almost all of the QoL metrics (e.g. human development index) than the countries you've listed is one of the reasons I'm so strongly in favour of reducing inequality.

You can believe what you like. I don’t give a shit. You’re showing yourself up.

Ok but that doesn't mean that the very richest are not paying a proportionately higher amount of tax versus the lower half, when compared to the UK. The rich pay lots of tax in Sweden, and it works just fine. The typical Swede is doing very well according to all the QoL indices.

Exactly. Compare that to the marginal rates here. We have a lot of cliff edges which are misunderstood. Then look at basic rates of tax etc.

@Andwhoisasking i just think the Nordic model is a completely different beast and would never work in a country like the UK for a multitude of reasons. There’s a reason why it hasn’t been adopted outside of Scandinavia.

I also don’t see how losing billions in tax revenues is going to help anyone. Sure, inequality statistics will improve, but only because there’s less at the top, not due to any improvement for those at the bottom. But then I’m beginning to think that’s all a lot of people care about in the UK.

The Italian’s have had huge success in luring the super rich leaving the UK to Milan, they can’t believe their luck. Same for Dubai.

There's a lot of unnecessary scaremongering going on.

PIP for the most disabled people is not being cut. People disabled with Serious mental Illness (SMI) on the SMI register eg schizophrenia, schizoaffective, Bipolar type 1 & some of the more severe personality disorders will be likely scoring more than 4 points in several descriptors anyway so their award will be unaffected.

Hi folks

Please keep it civil.

Thanks.

France has the highest tax burden in the world. It's not in Scandinavia. It's citizens have an excellent quality of life and it's attracting millionaires.

It won’t. Which is why we are now seeing the cuts we are. It’s a perfect storm. It’s not just headline rates of tax which are the issue. It’s a combination of tax, red tape, cliff edges, lack of incentive at every level. So on and so forth. Hence the huge brain drain, the majority of state dependents etc. Problem is, it means less for those who really need it. It started under BREXIT but it’s accelerated in the past year…

@CentralLimit France’s debt levels are beyond horrific. Unless it gets the pension obligations under control it is well on the way to bankruptcy.

Do you think Marine Le Pen’s polling numbers and the complete crisis in government reflects a country delighted with the state of play?

The rise of the far right reflects that inequality is growing in France like everywhere else. The link between the two is well documented. I'm certainly not holding France up as a wonderland - but the UK is worse on pretty much every metric of wellbeing. And countries like the US are worse still.

Article here on the link between inequality and the far right.

https://equalitytrust.org.uk/evidence-base/briefings/briefing-the-link-between-inequality-and-the-far-right/

@CentralLimit well in your own words, France has the highest debt burden in the world but it doesn’t seem to be helping much when it comes to inequality or social problems. Or fiscal stability for that matter.

@AzurePanda CentralLimit mentioned tax burden, not debt burden. A bit pedantic maybe, but if you're going use 'in your own words', it's good to get those words right. And they already said France wasn't perfect but doing better than UK on most important metrics, so not clear what your point was adding. You're going in circles rather than engaging, but I guess that's the strategy.
Bottom line, it's obviously not right, or sustainable, to push more people into poverty to placate the rich. They can pay, they just don't want to, and they make up any nonsense to stop us from trying it out. They know that if we ever do try, it'll work, and then we won't want to stop.

Sorry did you mean tax burden? Debt burden makes no sense so I'll assume so. Ok, so you seem to be claiming that France's tax system has caused inequality, debt, social problems and political instability. I'm sorry but this is just nonsense.

Inequality:
This is really obvious, but anyway... Over time, France's taxes have got less progressive, like all the other European countries. And this is why it's less equal than it used to be - as with all those other countries. It's not because of progressive taxation, it's because they've dialled it back. It still has highly progressive taxes relative to other countries, and is still a relatively equal country as a result.

Indebtedness:
Across countries, the relationship between indebtedness and progressiveness is negative, not positive - France's debt is in spite of it's relative progressiveness not because of it. The US, Italy and Greece are all much more indebted and much more unequal. The Scandi countries all score low on both. That's the general trend, not the one you imply.

Social problems/instability:
Again, both strongly associated with inequality - did you see the graph I shared? Honestly it's pretty strange to single out France as having social problems - it is totally unexceptional in Europe in this regard. As for the far right problem, why highlight France when the good old US of A have just actually elected the fascists? Are you going to blame their tax system? Didn't think so.

Yes sorry I meant tax burden and of course France has a wealth tax, specifically targeting high net worth individuals.

I’m not saying it’s tax system has caused inequality, simply that an unbelievably high tax burden like France’s doesn’t necessarily do much to help it.

I didn’t single France out for having social inequality, you raised it seemingly as an example of a highly taxed country which has excellent outcomes as a result. I disagree. Its finances and social cohesion are in trouble.

I agree if we keep losing the tax revenue as people leave I’m not sure we’ll see better outcomes.

If that's your concern you should support an exit tax, and/or limits on non-residents property ownership, and other similar options. We've had things like that in the past, and other countries have them now. The whole 'rich people are going to leave and then what?' stuff is desperate scaremongering. Our country worked better when we taxed the rich more, and the same pattern is true across the world. Just capitulating on inequality growth is the worst possible option.

Our country worked better when we didn’t have a totally out of control benefits system.

I’m not sure the response to tax causing people to leave is more taxes, ie an exit tax. You’d really skew behaviour if people thought that was in discussion.

If you look at why Reeves targeted PIP etc it’s because of the modelling around headroom. She’s committed to some figure in a few years time and if the policies reduce that amount she and Starmer will make cuts.

So tax receipts do have a direct impact on welfare.

Progressive taxes reduce inequality. That's just mathematics.

It's a shame you haven't engaged with anything I've written about the very well evidenced and pernicious effects of inequality. It's almost like...you don't care? Either about the poor or about evidence.

It worked better when we didn't have out of control inequality.

Well we have a great opportunity to see what impact higher taxes for the rich will have on the tax revenues of this country as it’s playing out right before our eyes.

The gap between rich and poor will no doubt “improve” but I sincerely doubt it’s going to improve anything for those at the bottom. How can it?