Page 15 | A 1p / 2p raise to income tax should lawfully trigger a general election

TesChique · 2025-10-30T06:27:27+00:00

There are vague promises in manifestos, and there are those which are explicit and should be binding except in exceptional circumstances (war etc) If labour, or any party reneges on a core manifesto promise it should lawfully trigger a general election They have lied to the public. AIBU to think we need to see this change in law?

EasternStandard · 30/10/2025 16:22

hettie · 30/10/2025 16:04

ok... for the 6th formers- Having a taxation system is good (short handed as 'tax is good') because having a taxation system means you can have many many many things that would be left down to corrupt local provision that would cost you far far more and would quickly be taken over by war lords and militia. Without a taxation system we would all be clubbing together in unstable localised coalitions to fund roads, schooling, emergency services, blood banks, rubbish removal, water, sanitation etc etc. Riots and wars would ensue because something like water has to be moved about (If I can't 'buy' it locally). A taxation system also allows us to distribute risk and have economies of scale.
The private sector is completely incapable of allocating resources more usefully at a society wide level. Baked into the rules of incorporation is the demand that private companies serve one thing and one thing only- shareholders. A UK company is required to maximise profit. It is not in any way required or interested in whether looked-after children are cared for appropriately, or whether clean water is supplied or in preventing disease (we are about to hit an antibiotic crisis as it is not profitable to develop new ones). If a private company is invovled in any of those 'businesses' the only thing that makes sure it does those things is legislation and good oversight and governance (which we stopped doing well becaue- hey the market will sort it and stop all that red tape nonsene). The 'market' demands superseed human CEO's- a benevolent CEO who wants to provide clean water and make some money for shareholders will always be ousted for one that returns bigger profits whilst escaing the non existent scrutiny of regulators.
And my prediction of the 6th form level of debate has indeed been proven by this thread....
I refer you to my previous post- the boring middle ground is in fact the boring but most fruitful path- managed capitlalism. Companies and capital appropriatley shackled for the good of the nation, entrepeuneurs and risk takers still get to make much more money than wage slaves, but within limits and the private and public sector work in tandem to create better living standards for all. Not all this rabid nonsense about 'reduce tax' money will flow to the private sector and they will fix all ills (a reminder for those at the back we've been doing exactly that more or less since Thather and the big bang and I am still waiting for the promised land- plus we maanged to sell of all the family silver too). Not the other rabid nonsense of tax 'the rich' (whoever they are) and natioanilse everything and it will be nirvana.

What do you mean by ‘for the 6th formers’?

The problem with ‘tax is good’ line is you generally want to always increase something that is good. And that’s not the case with tax. It has a behavioural impact.

Bagsintheboot · 30/10/2025 16:22

hettie · 30/10/2025 16:04

ok... for the 6th formers- Having a taxation system is good (short handed as 'tax is good') because having a taxation system means you can have many many many things that would be left down to corrupt local provision that would cost you far far more and would quickly be taken over by war lords and militia. Without a taxation system we would all be clubbing together in unstable localised coalitions to fund roads, schooling, emergency services, blood banks, rubbish removal, water, sanitation etc etc. Riots and wars would ensue because something like water has to be moved about (If I can't 'buy' it locally). A taxation system also allows us to distribute risk and have economies of scale.
The private sector is completely incapable of allocating resources more usefully at a society wide level. Baked into the rules of incorporation is the demand that private companies serve one thing and one thing only- shareholders. A UK company is required to maximise profit. It is not in any way required or interested in whether looked-after children are cared for appropriately, or whether clean water is supplied or in preventing disease (we are about to hit an antibiotic crisis as it is not profitable to develop new ones). If a private company is invovled in any of those 'businesses' the only thing that makes sure it does those things is legislation and good oversight and governance (which we stopped doing well becaue- hey the market will sort it and stop all that red tape nonsene). The 'market' demands superseed human CEO's- a benevolent CEO who wants to provide clean water and make some money for shareholders will always be ousted for one that returns bigger profits whilst escaing the non existent scrutiny of regulators.
And my prediction of the 6th form level of debate has indeed been proven by this thread....
I refer you to my previous post- the boring middle ground is in fact the boring but most fruitful path- managed capitlalism. Companies and capital appropriatley shackled for the good of the nation, entrepeuneurs and risk takers still get to make much more money than wage slaves, but within limits and the private and public sector work in tandem to create better living standards for all. Not all this rabid nonsense about 'reduce tax' money will flow to the private sector and they will fix all ills (a reminder for those at the back we've been doing exactly that more or less since Thather and the big bang and I am still waiting for the promised land- plus we maanged to sell of all the family silver too). Not the other rabid nonsense of tax 'the rich' (whoever they are) and natioanilse everything and it will be nirvana.

Completely agree.

For those who think "tax is bad", I encourage you to think of what life would be like if we didn't have services like the fire brigade, schools, motorways, a system of law (how else would you fund courts or police), and other little niceties like rubbish collection and disposal.

Tax is what enables us to live in a civilised, clean, ordered, healthy, safe, educated society (and no matter what you might personally perceive, we do rank fairly high globally for all these things).

EasternStandard · 30/10/2025 16:24

Bushmillsbabe · 30/10/2025 15:17

Now, don't be talking common sense like that, it might annoy all the 'Robin hood' economists out there.

Time and time again it has been explained that increasing tax does not raise more money, it stifles the economy, sends the highest contributors abroad and reduces spending power. But still people call for 'tax the rich bast**ds', pretending that we don't rely on them to prop up our bulging public spend

Show quote history

Not sure why you’d quote this re common sense, I agree with you

hettie · 30/10/2025 16:28

Ok @EasternStandard if you are being completely pedantic I correct myself... A taxation system is good. Terribly sorry to use tax as a short hand for taxation system....

Chiseltip · 30/10/2025 16:48

SeriaMau · 30/10/2025 14:46

Tell me two of them.

Show quote history

Defence, and the NHS.

VivienneDelacroix · 30/10/2025 16:50

Frequency · 30/10/2025 06:32

I can't get too annoyed about a couple of hundred a year in tax when there are people struggling with disabilities who literally cannot afford to eat and keep their home warm. I'd much rather any tax rises or welfare cuts hit working people than the sick and disabled.

Anyone who was expecting to get away without paying more tax of some description has obviously not been paying attention.

Absolutely.

GasPanic · 30/10/2025 17:08

hettie · 30/10/2025 16:04

ok... for the 6th formers- Having a taxation system is good (short handed as 'tax is good') because having a taxation system means you can have many many many things that would be left down to corrupt local provision that would cost you far far more and would quickly be taken over by war lords and militia. Without a taxation system we would all be clubbing together in unstable localised coalitions to fund roads, schooling, emergency services, blood banks, rubbish removal, water, sanitation etc etc. Riots and wars would ensue because something like water has to be moved about (If I can't 'buy' it locally). A taxation system also allows us to distribute risk and have economies of scale.
The private sector is completely incapable of allocating resources more usefully at a society wide level. Baked into the rules of incorporation is the demand that private companies serve one thing and one thing only- shareholders. A UK company is required to maximise profit. It is not in any way required or interested in whether looked-after children are cared for appropriately, or whether clean water is supplied or in preventing disease (we are about to hit an antibiotic crisis as it is not profitable to develop new ones). If a private company is invovled in any of those 'businesses' the only thing that makes sure it does those things is legislation and good oversight and governance (which we stopped doing well becaue- hey the market will sort it and stop all that red tape nonsene). The 'market' demands superseed human CEO's- a benevolent CEO who wants to provide clean water and make some money for shareholders will always be ousted for one that returns bigger profits whilst escaing the non existent scrutiny of regulators.
And my prediction of the 6th form level of debate has indeed been proven by this thread....
I refer you to my previous post- the boring middle ground is in fact the boring but most fruitful path- managed capitlalism. Companies and capital appropriatley shackled for the good of the nation, entrepeuneurs and risk takers still get to make much more money than wage slaves, but within limits and the private and public sector work in tandem to create better living standards for all. Not all this rabid nonsense about 'reduce tax' money will flow to the private sector and they will fix all ills (a reminder for those at the back we've been doing exactly that more or less since Thather and the big bang and I am still waiting for the promised land- plus we maanged to sell of all the family silver too). Not the other rabid nonsense of tax 'the rich' (whoever they are) and natioanilse everything and it will be nirvana.

So if you are going to get into a technical discussion on economics, say what you mean properly rather than coming out with something ambiguous.

"tax is good" does not mean "having a taxation system is good" which is something different.

So if you don't want to be treated like a sixth former, don't write like one.

dressinggowns · 30/10/2025 17:09

"tax is good" does not mean "having a taxation system is good" which is something different.

How do you have tax without a taxation system?

GasPanic · 30/10/2025 17:15

dressinggowns · 30/10/2025 17:09

"tax is good" does not mean "having a taxation system is good" which is something different.

How do you have tax without a taxation system?

The thread discussion is "labour is increasing tax".

People are presenting arguments as to why that might be good. Or bad.

They aren't debating whether the concept of a taxation system is good or bad.

And it's reasonable to assume "tax is good" is a statement made in the context of tax rises or falls. Not a comment on whether a taxation system itself is a good or bad thing.

Unless you are hard of understanding of course.

VickyEadieofThigh · 30/10/2025 17:21

Linenpickle · 30/10/2025 06:35

I agree with you. You vote for people based on promises so if they duck up everything, oust them. Labour have been worse than truss, boris and Blair in one. Why should I pay more tax when they aren’t cutting costs.

Absolutely untrue.

EasternStandard · 30/10/2025 17:22

hettie · 30/10/2025 16:28

Ok @EasternStandard if you are being completely pedantic I correct myself... A taxation system is good. Terribly sorry to use tax as a short hand for taxation system....

Ok I think that initial line was a bit misleading and doesn’t really work. But I do agree with some of the other stuff you’ve posted and it makes more sense with the correction.

hettie · 30/10/2025 17:26

@GasPanic
I dunno, I'm someone who likes to participate in debate without having to worry too intensely about the precisnnes of my language and grammar. I mostly assume that people who want to debate big ideas can infer meaning and won't get locked into a debate about the linguistic detail. Obviously that's just a personal preference of how I would discuss things in real life with people and a working assumption. I don't know how people on the internet read or interpret things nor do I have a clue why someone would pick up on a linguistic imprecision over wanting to engage with a big picture debate . Each to there own I suppose... I did of cause clarify for those who were troubled by the imprecise language.
This is a a massive side bar to the very thorny issues being discussed so if no one minds perhaps we could return to those?

dressinggowns · 30/10/2025 17:28

Unless you are hard of understanding of course.

I completely understood @hettie's post. Sorry you didn't 🤷🏻‍♀️

dressinggowns · 30/10/2025 17:32

@hettie it was clear what you were inferring

nor do I have a clue why someone would pick up on a linguistic imprecision over wanting to engage with a big picture debate

Unfortunately this happens a lot on MNs.

GasPanic · 30/10/2025 17:46

hettie · 30/10/2025 17:26

@GasPanic
I dunno, I'm someone who likes to participate in debate without having to worry too intensely about the precisnnes of my language and grammar. I mostly assume that people who want to debate big ideas can infer meaning and won't get locked into a debate about the linguistic detail. Obviously that's just a personal preference of how I would discuss things in real life with people and a working assumption. I don't know how people on the internet read or interpret things nor do I have a clue why someone would pick up on a linguistic imprecision over wanting to engage with a big picture debate . Each to there own I suppose... I did of cause clarify for those who were troubled by the imprecise language.
This is a a massive side bar to the very thorny issues being discussed so if no one minds perhaps we could return to those?

Language and definition is everything in a serious debate.

If not you're just relegating yourself to the same level you claim others are at.

Yes in a debate with other sixth formers such as yourself you might get away with it. in a debate with anyone who knows what they are talking about you're going to get ripped to shreds.

No serious economist is going to come out with a statement "tax is good".

What does it mean ? Does it mean that tax is moral in some way ? That people who believe in taxation systems have superior moral beliefs to people that don't ?

Taxation systems I believe are amoral. A better way of framing it might be "taxation systems are a better way of allocating capital to the betterment of society". That might closer to the way a professional economist might frame it. Because language and definitions are important in discussions. And no one is clear on what "good" actually means.

So you might ask what is the relevance of any of this to the debate ? And my answer would be "quite". But remember you're the one who started it and you're the one who wanted to get technical arguing about something pretty much irrelevant to the greater topic discussion while making inprecise statements.

hettie · 30/10/2025 18:03

Nah ... It's not a serious debate is it 😂, and I'm guessing there are very few professional economists on this thread. I used language that I thought was appropriate for the potential audience. Which I was assuming hoping was somewhere above 6th form common room but below an LSE post-grad. I don't think I was getting particularly technical merely making a point that a taxation system and tax (in some form, the form of which everyone has different views on) is a good thing. Which is relevant to a debate about tax increases when part of the discussion has been about why we/I shouldn't pay tax. But instead of debating that and getting to your interesting point of your view that taxation is amoral (dunno how I feel about that taxation systems probably do come with some kind of moral perspective), We've spent pointless time on talking about the importance of precise language in a context that probably doesn't call for it (it's a Mumsnet thread).

nodramamama · 30/10/2025 18:05

We can't deny that since 2015 the country has nosedived.
Everything has changed then worsened a with COVID.
People are losing hope here. I'm happy to be slight less comfortable but pay more tax. They can't raise business costs again.
The world is laughing at us, no one is offering any deals worth anything.
Our standard of living must improve and get some hope back.
PS: All governments lie. The country has been spending too much for decades and now is desperate for someone/anyone to collaborate with to bring cash in

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 30/10/2025 18:10

Why is the world laughing at us? We’re a tiny insignificant island with waning power.

Europe may still be laughing because of Brexit. But on the whole they aren’t. As for US, less said the better.

nodramamama · 30/10/2025 18:22

Didimum · 30/10/2025 09:09

Can you explain that or is it just something you are repeating because you heard it on the tv.

Well, that’s patronising of you.

Brexit is both a leading and exacerbating cause of the UK’s economic problems because it’s made almost every other challenge worse. By cutting the country off from its biggest trading partner, it’s created new barriers for businesses, pushed up import costs and scared off investment that used to flow in when the UK was a gateway to the EU market. On top of that, the end of free movement led to worker shortages in everything from farming to hospitality, driving up costs and adding pressure to inflation. These effects have amplified all other global shocks – Covid, the energy crisis – because the UK lost the flexibility and resilience it once had. Brexit has made the UK uniquely vulnerable and almost impossible to recover, turning what might have been short-term bumps into deeper, longer-lasting economic strains.

DH and I both work in global trade, finance and economics, but sure – I got it off the TV 🙄

Edited

Show quote history

This needs to be read many times and understood by everyone. It's insane so many just wilfully pretend Brexit didn't literally add the biggest nail to the coffin, followed by COVID.

nodramamama · 30/10/2025 18:40

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 30/10/2025 18:10

Why is the world laughing at us? We’re a tiny insignificant island with waning power.

Europe may still be laughing because of Brexit. But on the whole they aren’t. As for US, less said the better.

Because the country made such a big deal of Brexit, assuming we'd be so much better off and we'd have countries lining up for deals with all our pompous Greatness, save a fortune by being separate from Europe etc. Stomped off into the corner separated , and no one else suffered as much.
We'll not be far off buying American bleached chicken...

TankFlyBossW4lk · 30/10/2025 18:42

Linenpickle · 30/10/2025 06:36

Business are bankrupt. People are squeezed. It can’t go on. We are a laughing stock of the world.

This is just rubbish

TwistyTurnip · 30/10/2025 21:37

TankFlyBossW4lk · 30/10/2025 18:42

This is just rubbish

Show quote history

How can you possibly say that? Most families most definitely are feeling the pressure. Reeves hike in employer NI contribution rates causes immense damage. And now it looks like she is going to put up income tax - so businesses will be hit yet again as people tighten their belts, which they inevitably will.

TankFlyBossW4lk · 30/10/2025 21:47

TwistyTurnip · 30/10/2025 21:37

How can you possibly say that? Most families most definitely are feeling the pressure. Reeves hike in employer NI contribution rates causes immense damage. And now it looks like she is going to put up income tax - so businesses will be hit yet again as people tighten their belts, which they inevitably will.

Show quote history

Most people have been feeling the pinch since over a decade of Tory austerity measures. There has been wage suppression throughout that time period.

We have had tax payers bailing out banks but no money for supporting public spending/infrastructure. These are the reasons we are all feeling the poorer. It's not just 14 months of Labour, it's 14 years of the Tory's ineptitude.

TwistyTurnip · 30/10/2025 21:55

TankFlyBossW4lk · 30/10/2025 21:47

Most people have been feeling the pinch since over a decade of Tory austerity measures. There has been wage suppression throughout that time period.

We have had tax payers bailing out banks but no money for supporting public spending/infrastructure. These are the reasons we are all feeling the poorer. It's not just 14 months of Labour, it's 14 years of the Tory's ineptitude.

Show quote history

The reason for the austerity measures was that Labour managed to bugger up the nation's finances the last time they were in power. Just look at the mess they've created over the past 18 months. Things were a lot, lot better under the Tories. But it's seen as 'cool' to hate the Tories, so some people will never change their minds.

Bluegrassdfly · 30/10/2025 22:01

EasternStandard · 30/10/2025 16:22

What do you mean by ‘for the 6th formers’?

The problem with ‘tax is good’ line is you generally want to always increase something that is good. And that’s not the case with tax. It has a behavioural impact.

Show quote history

We want to maximise the tax take. That doesn’t mean always making tax as high as possible.