Labour hate people like me

[Meadowtrees]

I feel sick at the thought of how much our lives are going to change.

This is not a thread to bash or criticise people nervous about Labour. It’s a place for those of us who are feeling very anxious to have a bit of space - it’s not something we are ‘allowed’ to say in public without being called ‘scum’ ‘selfish tories’ or similar. I’m not particularly linked to any party and not sure how to vote, I may spoil my ballot.

Labour have made it very clear that they intend to make us poorer and our lives harder.
I’m a woman - Labour intend to remove women’s rights
I’m rural - Labour aren’t interested in rural areas
I work in a private school - enough said
I have teens - I expect Labour to put vat on uni fees
We both work full time and have slogged our guts out to now be in a position where we have a comfortable (but not high) income - I expect to be taxed more heavily.
We have elderly parents - I expect the cost of care and inheritance tax to increase.

Maybe it’s selfish but we’re screwed and I don’t expect that what we lose will be put to efficient or good use. It feels like we will be punished for having worked hard and being ambitious.

@Flowery57 you might want to take a look at Patriotic Millionaires UK. They are the 'super rich', and are saying yep, tax us. They're lobbying hard for higher taxes for people like themselves because they want to live in a more equal society, which is inherently more stable and happier. They are a mix of inherited and self made wealth, and most definitely wouldn't leave if taxed more.

@twistyizzy "As much as being called a rich Tory twat"

If anyone called the OP that it was very rude. Her thread title was very offensive to ALL Labour voters. I was prepared to ignore it until she started to complain about being insulted.

@1dayatatime "If it's not a punishment and a reasonable tax raising measure then why does no other country tax education?"

It's not a tax on education. It's a tax on luxury education.

why does no other country tax education?

Because levels of tax in other countries are higher generally than they are in the UK, which is why their public services are better. Although the level of taxation in this country are at the highest level for 70 years, overall, we pay one of the lowest rates of tax. Hence our services are crumbling.

This thread is a shining example of people not wanting to pay more tax. Either that, or they don't mind taxes being raised for other people, just not when it affects them.

Indeed. You need to dig large holes to build houses. I’m very pleased with that manifesto promise.

@CurlewKate

"It's not a tax on education. It's a tax on luxury education"

OK thanks for your honesty on the "politics of envy" .

So your premise for justifying the tax is that the wealthy who can afford to pay for PS education have an unfair advantage over those that have to rely on state paid for education giving them "better " or "luxury " levels of education.

In this logic should private health care also be subject to VAT or should the level of VAT on a food shop at Waitrose differ from the level of VAT at say Aldi?

The proving point that this is solely based on the politics of envy is that despite the tax costing more to raise than the tax revenue it generates, most would still support it in order to "bash the rich".

A divided society where it is seen as acceptable to bash the rich is not going to generate the economic growth that Labour is relying on in order to balance their budgets.

should the level of VAT on a food shop at Waitrose differ from the level of VAT at say Aldi?

You do know there’s no VAT on food even if it comes from Fortnum and Mason’s food hall?

Of course private education is a luxury. There’s no envy involved in pointing that out.

Wouldn't it be better to have a better state education system where there is less of a differential between the education a child receives at state school verses the private system?

People perceive that their children will get a better education in the private system and view it as a necessity, not a luxury. My own experience would indicate that the education isn't necessarily better, but that is one for another thread.

The irony in the plan for the VAT on private schools is only be leaving the EU will Labour, if in government, be able to implement it.

I do not agree with it and think there will be so many legal challenges it will not come to fruition. KS has already announced exemptions, in addition to trying to ensure the schools affected will not be able to claim back VAT on purchases which may help mitigate their costs.

Most supplies of services are VATable unless they are exempt. So if Labour removes exemption from private schools then they will need to add VAT to fees. But since the schools will then be able to recover VAT from the supplies they purchase they may not need to charge the full cost to parents as they will be making savings on some of their costs of business.

See below for the full implications.

www.farrer.co.uk/news-and-insights/vat-on-school-fees-qa/

I am trying to find a link, but failing, which I am sure I read saying there would be attempts to stop the schools claiming VAT back. Of course it may just have been a bit of sabre rattling from any side of the discussion! If I find it I of course will post it.

Labour have said they will prevent retrospective claim back yes

@SeriaMau almost had me for a second there!

Where have you got the figures for that?! I've looked at the IFS and OFnS wealth calculators, and for a income of £66k (after income tax, NI etc) then the couple would be in the top 40% of the country, so the squeezed middle.

VAT isn’t a tax on luxury so your point is meaningless.

It’s a discretionary tax. That why it’s not applied to food. Private education is discretionary expenditure.

are you serious??? where are you getting this from??

(by the way, there is zero VAT on food unless in a restaurant. double zero is still zero)

@BIossomtoes

"should the level of VAT on a food shop at Waitrose differ from the level of VAT at say Aldi?"

"You do know there’s no VAT on food even if it comes from Fortnum and Mason’s food hall?"

Yes I am aware that there is no VAT on food which is why I specifically wrote that :

"should the level of VAT on a food shop at Waitrose differ from the level of VAT at say Aldi?

Did you know that both the Economist and the Financial Times have come out clearly in support of voting Labour in this general election? Both publications are broadly in favour of free enterprise, individual liberty, maintaining incentives to work and save etc and not bashing the rich for the sake of it!

The FT has supported the Conservatives more often than not over the decades, and the Economist didn't even support Tony Blair's New Labour in 1997 but preferred John Major's Conservatives. The Economist's editorial this week stated that Labour was in the best position to tackle the current lack of economic growth. The FT stated that unlike the Conservative party, Labour appears to want to govern for the whole country.

Or do you think the Economist and FT are all in on the conspiracy to bring in the evil wealth destroying Labouy party?

@BIossomtoes

"Of course private education is a luxury. There’s no envy involved in pointing that out"

Education itself is not a luxury. Private education is simply viewed as a "better" version of what is available from the state. That doesn't make it a luxury in the same way as Evian bottled water is not a luxury over tap water.

For "luxury" please read something that the better off have that I can't afford - whether that be a bigger house or a newer car or a fancier holiday. It is absolutely about the politics of envy.

Very sensible reply here I think.

All seems a little snowflake to me. Seem to recall that if democracy delivered something you didn’t personally like then you either knuckled down and accepted your side would get another go or it was so unacceptable you literally left the UK. Most people are in the former, not the latter category.

At least OP you are nowhere near the bottom of the pile in terms of living in the UK.

Quote from a lawyer who looks after the ‘super rich’:

The super-rich are already fleeing Britain amid fears Sir Keir Starmer will introduce a series of wealth tax rises if he becomes prime minister this week, a leading City lawyer has warned.

It’s The Telegraph and the headline is Starmergeddon. On those two counts I’m happy to dismiss it as alarmist nonsense.

I think if life is made a bit harder for you but you have things to fall back on, then you shouldn't really complain.

The current government have inflicted downright cruelty on the most vulnerable people in society and it has to stop. I do not want to be like America.