To feel utterly miserable about a future with Andy Burnham as PM?

[OneWarmHazelQuail]

I feel like I'm being stung in every possible way at the moment- £15 a day on tube to work, high mortgage costs, high energy costs, private schooling for SEN child (I was told state wouldn't be unlikely to assist him as he isn't mute or violent). My parents have had to help fund schooling it felt like my only hope as son has behavioural issues.

I also have an unsold old home that I have to rent out as it wouldn't sell. Buy-to-let mortgage costs, agent fees, maintenance and tax put me in a loss position.

I can't bear what the future holds with Andy Burnham. I have no doubt that he will find new and imaginative ways to keep me in this financial nightmare. I'm literally struggling from food poverty but regarded as rich by policy.

YABU- Andy Burnham is actually going to make things better

YANBU- I'm screwed

Equalising income tax and CGT is a terrible idea.

Two thirds of total tax take comes from income tax, national insurance, VAT and corporation tax. These are the big levers to pull if you want to increase government income.

CGT is currently about 1% of tax take. Equalising with income tax raises this to about 2.5%. It won’t bring in meaningful money.

In the early 90s around 50% or shares in uk listed companies were owned by uk pension funds, Gordon Brown took away their pension tax credit and it’s about 2% today. And we wonder why uk growth is sluggish.

Incentivising people to invest and take risks benefits us all in the long run. If you massively increase CGT people will stop investing and hold onto assets rather than sell them.

But saying tax wealth sounds good on tv/social media hence the reason it’s a popular phrase right now. Anyone with any common sense (or a calculator) knows it’s just a popular sounding phrase.

Who knew??? Are you serious?

I knew - it was pretty obvious that politicians didn’t have any plan because none of them could explain how exactly the riches would materialise and they were peddling a story that we will get all the benefits and no downsides which is OBVIOUSLY impossible.

It was also obvious that European countries would look out for their own interests- why would they give away something in a negotiation when they didn’t have to? Are you 5 years old not to know how negotiations work? Or is this a sense of British superiority that you’ll just get what you want?

there were no obvious opportunities to be afforded that anyone could spell out

And no other 5 people of similar worth will ever move into UK? Or 5 people leaving wouldn't create 5 similarish earning opportunities for other equally skilled people? Or there are no other ways to grow economically to offset this loss (if you think constant economic growth is the way to go). Again, genuinely.

Seriously? Brexit has damaged this country and the prospects of our young people massively as well as making it much easier for boat people to get here and not be sent straight back. Not to mention the debacle of Gibraltar and the fact that the so-called Conservative and Unionist government completely ignored the possible impact on Northern Ireland too.

There are absolutely no upsides to it at all.

That's fundamentally and objectively untrue

No one can send people straight back. Which EU country does this to any extent that it means much? It’s a few each year and we took more than sent back.

I’m not talking about owners of bog standard residential properties. London has a huge number of multi million properties bought purely for investment for capital gain. Many of them have never been lived in. If the owners of those let them out, the rents would be astronomical and generate a lot of tax. Win/win.

It's always interesting to see the nonsense posters come up with to justify their prejudices.

If asked, you'll be able to come up with documented links to back up your claims that the NHS, children's services etc etc are currently strugglng because the "foreigns treat their children differently", no one registered with a GP and "criminals ransacked charities". Right? But, I'm not asking because I know the answer.

In May 2010, the economy was growing, a small growth, but growth. 14 years of Conservative government later: 2 recessions, services fatally undermined by a needless, ill-considered and ineffective austerity programme, a hugely expensive, unecessary and regressive "reorganisation" of the NHS, a complete failure to establish a workable, integrated social care policy in the face of a rapidly aging population, a failure to establish a future-facing industrial growth strategy that covered the country, tax cuts for the wealthy, swingeing cuts to local government funding, a doubling of national debt, a loss of AAA credit rating (higher debt repayment charges), failure to invest in SEN, failure to invest in affordable rented housing, a failure to plan and prepare for events such as C-19, the waste of billions of £s in reactively (and ineffectually) dealing with C-19...Oh, and Brexit. Which is costing us £40bn a year, year on year.

In July 2024, the house Labour inherited had bulging walls and rising damp because the previous governments removed the foundations and gave the money to fix the roof and rotting windows to their mate, to buy a new yacht. The scaffolding's now gone up, repairs are in hand but the damage is not rectifiable overnight.

My problem is that I'm caught between both ends of the spectrum. I don't receive the support that I need from the state but I'm also having to spend funds I don't have because I'm in a loss making position so I can't fund enough of the support I need myself

As an aside, I think if you take the temp through an agency, the agency as the employer should be paying the SSP, not you.

All taxes are balancing acts between raising revenue and incentivising work, and that includes any putative property or wealth taxes.

Obviously they can’t be so high that people have no incentive to work or live here. Equally, if we start a wealth tax and some leave, more will stay who will be paying more, so we will still raise more tax. We need to get the levels right, that is all.

Also, it is not a ‘clobbering rich’ à la Dennis Healey, it is just getting them to pay a fair total tax rate. The very wealthiest pay less than 20% on average whereas the middle, especially if on PAYE may pay double that.

Sell the houses!! Downsize!!! Put your child in mainstream education! These are all choices you’ve made for yourself ffs

Of course, to hell with our disabled, let them die. I notice not a word in your post regarding the billions we spend on housing, feeding and clothing illegal immigrants or the ridiculous amount of F.A well hand out willy nilly. Paying for our own disabled and pensioners is a drop in the ocean compared to what we give away to those not born here and who have never and will never pay a penny into our pot.

same reasons what encouraged people to leave will mean that people may not move in (they’d also go to Dubai or Singapore)

many companies just move the role abroad and don’t necessarily replace it in the UK. Or pay less to the next replacement

So replacement is not guaranteed, the less attractive the country becomes and that’s just becomes a vicious circle

to be fair lots of high earners I know started moving in the last years of Tory government because COL was high already and quality of life was worsening more and more (particularly with NHS, policing and infrastructure underfinancing)

Oh it's going to be so awful when the super rich people who pay little to no tax leave. I'm dreading it. They'll definitely go, won't they? It's not just some stupid trope that gets trotted out every time anyone mentions the possibility of taxing them.

Can we give him a chance before writing him off?

For many people, the last two years have been a considerable improvement on the previous 14. But somehow, MPs have been convinced to bin Starmer, broadly because people have been convinced not to like him.

I have had some trepidation about Burnham because the one asset I have is a (heavily mortgaged) house in the outer part of London- I am a single parent work in full time and struggling but this was the one good thing I have - and this seems to be the one kind of wealth that he has in his sights. Which seems a bit unfair.

No second homes or private schools here.

But he needs to be given a chance I think.

One of the most worrying things about a Burnham Premiership is that none of us have any sort of idea of what policies he will implement. One of Starmer's biggest mistakes was not having a coherent plan for Government, Burnham may be even less prepared.

I feel nervous that the Labour Party has moved to the Left. In terms of basics, the UK economy is growing only marginally, so any new major policy initiatives need to come from tax. Which means I think that I and others will pay more and therefore have declining living standards. Starmer failed to deal with rising welfare costs, especially PIP and I do not think that Burnham will even bother.

How on earth do you think poor people managed under the tories?

State school system didn’t meet their kids needs, so they were put on part time time tables, people lost their jobs, and then their homes. I know people who were forced into bankruptcy because of their children’s unmet needs!

Ive volunteered for the local food bank and delivered parcels to women who have just been given a cancer diagnosis and are off sick but have to wait 5 weeks for benefits to kick in.

I mean, of course, it’s dreadful that your parents are having to step in to help with school fees but imagine there are some who’s parents aren’t able to do this!

I have figured that if I could sell my second home, use the funds to pay down the mortgage in the house I live in, and quit work, I could claim benefits and stay home. This would enable me to prioritise my own mental health and focus on finding support for my son whilst also being able to look after my baby daughter.

However, even if I did manage to sell my home, I would not want to take this route. I think it's a sad state of affairs that this is the best possible option. I want to keep working. The SEN process should be simplified, landlords should not be in a loss making position. It doesnt make sense to me that not working would effectively put me in a better position

that can be dealt with by putting in an uninhabited home tax. I’ve been advocating that for years. That’s a separate issue to the one at hand.

The people on benefits? You mean the pensioners? They are the biggest group of benefit recipients? Or do you mean the working poor - 35% of people on universal credit are employed and receive top up benefits.

Don’t be ridiculous.

You could sell both houses, use the equity to buy a smaller place with a smaller mortgage, and stop sending your child to private school.

You don’t seem willing to help yourself at all.

Such a shame there have been no other governments in power since Thatcher stepped down who could have reversed some of those changes.

Honestly, blaming Thatcher for everything is rather silly. Blair had plenty of time and political capital to undo some of what she did and he chose not to.

What services/benefits are you expecting to get back from the state that you currrently don't get? You get free education and healthcare. Your taxes also pay for state pensions, defence, policing and transport.

You've obviously got a bee in your bonnet about disability benefits. If you live in Scotland, you don't even have a Labour government.

End the benefits culture, cut the benefits bill. Fix that and other things will flow from it.