Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Petitions and activism

To ask you to sign this petition to tax wealth rather than attacking the most vulnerable members of society?

320 replies

QuestionableMouse · 15/04/2025 18:22

https://www.change.org/p/tax-wealth-don-t-cut-disability-support

I've signed it.

If the cuts do ahead thousands of people are going to be badly affected (me included due to long COVID which has left me chroniclly unwell)

Sign the Petition

TAX WEALTH – DON'T CUT DISABILITY SUPPORT

https://www.change.org/p/tax-wealth-don-t-cut-disability-support

OP posts:
Overthebow · 15/04/2025 22:58

qbqbq · 15/04/2025 19:14

I won’t sign it. Be careful what you wish for.

Whilst I don’t support cuts in support for disabled people, I don’t support a wealth tax either. The two should shouldn’t [edit] be thought of as one or the other.

The highest earners are already keeping us afloat. Google tells me that 28% of all income tax collected is paid by the top 1%. It would be so easy for them to bugger off abroad. There are companies (I think I saw them advertised here even) that will sort it all out for you. And these people are obviously highly employable. I do get that the very wealthy with over £10 million of assets, are a much smaller number, apparently 0.04% of us. I assume it’d be even easier for them to bugger off abroad. Why would they stick around if they are going to be pickpocketed?

Most people have given this wealth tax policy zero thought aside from thinking that “get money from rich people” and “it won’t be me paying”.

No I am not one of them!

How about a wealth tax of 1% on people who have £100k or more of assets instead of £10m? With your house and pension pot, millions upon millions of us would fall into that category - bet it wouldn’t be so popular then. I’d be more likely to support it if it was at £100k rather than £10m. I still wouldn’t support it, not just because I would be liable, but because the top people would be liable for so much that they’d bugger off anyway and we’d be even more screwed than we are now.

I am nearly 50. I went to university with people who have now emigrated. Hong Kong, USA, Singapore…these people aren’t ever coming back. They are all high earners with loads of skills. There is nothing for them here.

Edited

I definitely wouldn’t support that. We have around £300k assets if you include house equity and pension pots. We’re in our 30s with young children and high childcare fees. We may have these assets but we don’t have cash, we’d have to sell our home if a 1% asset tax was imposed on us.

QuestionableMouse · 15/04/2025 23:05

SpottedDonkey · 15/04/2025 22:50

I won’t sign it. My concern would be that in practice any proposed ‘wealth tax’ wouldn’t just hit billionaires, it would also clobber hard-working middle class professionals who already pay far too much tax.

I also fully support the government’s proposed benefit changes which are designed to slow the growth of the benefits bill which is currently bankrupting the country by creating stronger incentives for those who can work to do so. And for those people to contribute to society rather than wasting their lives on benefits because they allegedly have anxiety / depression / ‘long covid’ etc etc.

Why put Long Covid in quotes?

I went from working 40+ hours a week to being bed bound with it and it has had a significant impact on my health generally. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9112/#:~:text=Of%20these%2C%201.3%20million%20had,shortness%20of%20breath%20(48%25).

You're just another person lashing out at the most vulnerable members of society.

OP posts:
Cynic17 · 15/04/2025 23:11

Absolutely not.
You do know that the rich already pay way more than their fair share of tax? And I speak as someone on minimum wage, so this really doesn't affect me.
But the "politics of envy" is unattractive.

Maybe educate yourself about the Laffer curve, OP?

indigovapour · 15/04/2025 23:11

@FruityCider which loopholes?

And do you mean to suggest that higher earners should simply pay ever more tax until they CAN’T afford it?

We need to broaden the tax base and reduce the benefits bill.

Ethelflaedofmercia · 15/04/2025 23:53

Sorry but no.

I’m poor, I’m on UC and living under the breadline but I don’t agree with taxing people into oblivion. They will simply leave the UK. I/we have no rights to another persons money, they already pay tax! Then the casts amount of VAT they’ll most likely pay on goods etc..

Do you just want to ti the rich upside down and give them a shake?

qbqbq · 16/04/2025 00:29

Overthebow · 15/04/2025 22:58

I definitely wouldn’t support that. We have around £300k assets if you include house equity and pension pots. We’re in our 30s with young children and high childcare fees. We may have these assets but we don’t have cash, we’d have to sell our home if a 1% asset tax was imposed on us.

That’s exactly my point. It would suck for you for the reasons mentioned but it’d suck for them (the v rich) for other reasons.

Shwish · 16/04/2025 06:22

Overthebow · 15/04/2025 22:58

I definitely wouldn’t support that. We have around £300k assets if you include house equity and pension pots. We’re in our 30s with young children and high childcare fees. We may have these assets but we don’t have cash, we’d have to sell our home if a 1% asset tax was imposed on us.

With assets of £300k nobody is suggesting YOU would be paying more. It clearly says 10m+

Shwish · 16/04/2025 06:23

indigovapour · 15/04/2025 23:11

@FruityCider which loopholes?

And do you mean to suggest that higher earners should simply pay ever more tax until they CAN’T afford it?

We need to broaden the tax base and reduce the benefits bill.

Not earners no. Tax wealth. Not work.

Lollipopsicle · 16/04/2025 06:38

littlebilliie · 15/04/2025 22:35

THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this.

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay £1.

The sixth would pay £3.

The seventh would pay £7.

The eighth would pay £12.

The ninth would pay £18

And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20.” Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a 100% saving).

The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).

The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).

The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).

The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).

And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).

Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10"

"Yes, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me"

"That's true" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "We didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill.

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

Professor of Economics.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

I was just about to post this same thing. Some people just don’t get it, sadly.

Sandylittleknees · 16/04/2025 06:42

I disagree with taxing assets.

A penny on income tax would be better. Taxing assets is taking what people have - a very different concept to taking money based on spending choices or on income.

Political decisions should never be based on envy.

what you are suggesting is that someone with assets of 10 million would have to pay 2 million in tax over 10 years. That is not reasonable.

Overthebow · 16/04/2025 06:46

Shwish · 16/04/2025 06:22

With assets of £300k nobody is suggesting YOU would be paying more. It clearly says 10m+

The pp I was replying to was suggesting taxing those with assets over £100k as an alternative.

Bumpitybumper · 16/04/2025 06:47

I think this is a terrible idea and absolutely will not be signing the petition.

I fundamentally disagree with taxing wealth. It destroys the notion that you ever truly own anything as technically the government can come and place a burden on any asset you own. This is fundamentally wrong.

The welfare system(including disability benefits) needs to be reformed. Stop looking for cash cows and money trees to avoid this.

Limer · 16/04/2025 06:47

No way. Wealth taxes don't work. The very few places that have tried have all abandoned the idea.

There was a good episode of More Or Less covering this - still available on BBC Sounds.

Marchitectmummy · 16/04/2025 06:51

Nope do not agree with the principle for all the reasons others have stated.

OP you've pushed back on the diet advice but frankly you should listen to it. Paying £3 for bread is a an unnecessary luxury which is unreachable for your budget however making bread from scratch with gf flour is far cheaper. Why not try that.

You are coming across very dismissive and entitled.

Tryingtokeepgoing · 16/04/2025 06:57

The wealthy are leaving the UK at record rates, and the incentive to start new businesses in the UK reduced as a result of government policy. Further actions to make the UK a less attractive place would seem shortsighted, and likely to lead to reductions growth and tax revenue over time.

The reality is, if we want better services and support, everyone needs to pay more tax. And that means taxing the majority, not the minority. 1p on income tax would raise £10 billion or so every year, and that would increase as the economy grows. Taxing wealth at an arbitrary level might raise £24 billion in the first year, but it’d raise less and less in subsequent years as capital flows out if the UK, so it’s not even a sustainable solution to the problem.

Bumpitybumper · 16/04/2025 07:04

Tryingtokeepgoing · 16/04/2025 06:57

The wealthy are leaving the UK at record rates, and the incentive to start new businesses in the UK reduced as a result of government policy. Further actions to make the UK a less attractive place would seem shortsighted, and likely to lead to reductions growth and tax revenue over time.

The reality is, if we want better services and support, everyone needs to pay more tax. And that means taxing the majority, not the minority. 1p on income tax would raise £10 billion or so every year, and that would increase as the economy grows. Taxing wealth at an arbitrary level might raise £24 billion in the first year, but it’d raise less and less in subsequent years as capital flows out if the UK, so it’s not even a sustainable solution to the problem.

The problem is that if the welfare bill and other costs keep increasing in the way that they have been then tax rises will never stop. We absolutely need to get a grip of this.

IDontHateRainbows · 16/04/2025 07:08

LoyalAquaHiker · 15/04/2025 19:00

Oh come on you know why.
The alright jacks will get it in the end. They've got the pretty little house they bought because they got lucky with age and health but what they don't realize is that the reason their local council isn't cutting their hedge anymore is that they're spending ALL their money on social care. And that's where all this money will go when disabled people end up homeless or at risk because of poor mental health.

This is true. My local council has started charging for green bin collection and pared down blue bin, council tax is basically a forced charity donation now which I'm not saying I mind, but it is to fund the needy. A healthy working person gets sod all back from council tax.

CaptainFuture · 16/04/2025 07:11

TizerorFizz · 15/04/2025 18:44

@QuestionableMouse Do not use emotional blackmail. It’s not the fault of those who pay the most tax that you feel hard done by. Or presumably don’t work. If anything it’s the fault of those who pay no tax at all. Or very little. Millions of people. We seem to never learn that a jealousy tax backfires. We need well off people paying tax. We are already seeing them go.

Absolutely and do you actually think that if this 'tax people who have more than me' actually happens.... the money will come to you directly or where you want it to go?
How much will be enough?

Viviennemary · 16/04/2025 07:13

No I wouldn't sign this sort of petition. Welfare payments do need to be reformed. Not more and more tax to pay higher welfare bills.,

CaptainFuture · 16/04/2025 07:15

QuestionableMouse · 15/04/2025 23:05

Why put Long Covid in quotes?

I went from working 40+ hours a week to being bed bound with it and it has had a significant impact on my health generally. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9112/#:~:text=Of%20these%2C%201.3%20million%20had,shortness%20of%20breath%20(48%25).

You're just another person lashing out at the most vulnerable members of society.

@QuestionableMouse who are the 'most vulnerable members of society' and who decides it?

hairbearbunches · 16/04/2025 07:39

God, some of the apologist rubbish that’s been written on here is depressing. When you’ve got a group of ultra high net worth individuals - Patriotic Millionaires - literally pleading with governments to change tax rules to tax them more - we need to sit up and listen. And people who couldn’t hope to have the kind of money and assets the PMs have got bleat about them being taxed enough already whilst whining about how shit public services are.

Taxing wealth at the same rate as earnings would be a start.

IDontHateRainbows · 16/04/2025 07:50

hairbearbunches · 16/04/2025 07:39

God, some of the apologist rubbish that’s been written on here is depressing. When you’ve got a group of ultra high net worth individuals - Patriotic Millionaires - literally pleading with governments to change tax rules to tax them more - we need to sit up and listen. And people who couldn’t hope to have the kind of money and assets the PMs have got bleat about them being taxed enough already whilst whining about how shit public services are.

Taxing wealth at the same rate as earnings would be a start.

Millionaires don't generally need to plead for anything. Any ultra rich that bothered about the needy would have set up their own charitable trust. And many are into philanthropy, all the big charities have philanthropy teams whose job is to convince rich people to give them money

Just the stingy ones we would need to tax

hairbearbunches · 16/04/2025 07:55

IDontHateRainbows · 16/04/2025 07:50

Millionaires don't generally need to plead for anything. Any ultra rich that bothered about the needy would have set up their own charitable trust. And many are into philanthropy, all the big charities have philanthropy teams whose job is to convince rich people to give them money

Just the stingy ones we would need to tax

We don’t need charity. We need to tax assets and wealth at the same rate as earnings. Philanthropy is little more than ego, and a tax dodge in many cases

indigovapour · 16/04/2025 07:58

@Shwishmy post was in reply to another poster, quite clearly. Taxing wealth was not the subject of that post.

For what it’s worth, taxing wealth, much of which is comprised of unrealised and uncertain gains is also a daft idea.

Viviennemary · 16/04/2025 08:02

The wealthy will just put their money into off shore accounts or register as non doms like Rishi Sunaks wife did. The welfare bill is far too high. When even Labour is talking about reductions then it's obvious it's absolutely unsustainable.

Swipe left for the next trending thread