Osborne prepares the ground for more cuts.

[Glaucus]

Wont make a difference, will only top up the governments back pocket, which obviously what they want. They don't care about sugar and the food industry, just look at alcohol and smoking. Taxes goes up but doesn't stop peole from buying them.

Education is the key not Tax but the government doesn't understand this as there is no profit for them.

But tax does pay for social affect. Tobacco brings in enough tax to subsidise the government after all heath care is taken into account.

And the no profit for them, makes no sense and childish. Do you think their wage is linked to the tax pot. The country is spending more money than it makes.

 

[FoxEye]

you cant rent anything is that area for 2 bedroom £302.33, so tell me hows does it push up rents?

If a tenant can afford £600 pm rent, and housing benefit gives him £150 pm, he can now afford £750 pm rent.

You don't just get housing benefit if you have no income.

It's kind of obvious that whatever top-up is given to renters, allows landlords to increase their rents by a similar amount. That housing benefit doesn't cover 100% of the rent is of no consequence at all.

It's the same with help to buy. Govt gives 1st time buyers an extra 20k? House prices go up by 20k. Just because the govt doesn't give buyers 100% of the house price does not mean the house price can't go up as a result.

And you'll forgive me for believing the Telegraph's analysis more than your own.

 

[The Running Man]

Is it not an illness in some respects, nature didn't get it quite right?

No. Just how being short or ugly isn't an illness. Neither is having small cleavage. It's pure cosmetics and should not be available on the nhs.

 

[Efour]

Wont make a difference, will only top up the governments back pocket, which obviously what they want. They don't care about sugar and the food industry, just look at alcohol and smoking. Taxes goes up but doesn't stop peole from buying them.

Education is the key not Tax but the government doesn't understand this as there is no profit for them.

I dont care about peoples health. I care about governments "making more money" in this thread.

 

[RaohNS]

A belated response of sorts:

1% wealth taken eg wealth of company may be £100bn. Take 1% that's a billion. Leverage this against the company. Same for individuals including the royals (their wealth is astonishing)

Anyone earning £400,000 tax at 80%. Nobody can earn more than £2m per year (including hiding money, share options, various loopholes etc. Re-introduce the 50% rate for £150-£399k.

At the end of the day people talk about cuts as purely money. Human cost is greater than any monetary value. As a moral guidance we could save a few billion by very simply enforcing on MPs what they have forced on everyone else: 25% reduction in MPs. Reduce their numbers to 450-475. Abolish the house of Liars.

Seize back the 6-10m cost of that bloody woman's funeral from her own pocket. Remove MPs pension generosity of 2x the best options and have them play a level playing field.

Cuts however aren't necessary, its more about making those who have vast sums of money, wealth that they physically cannot spend in a thousand lifetimes and using that to pop into infrastructure and so forth. There comes a point (around £100m imo) where anything extra is just too much. There are people who are so rich who can write cheques for a hundred thousand pounds and before its even cleared the money is recouped. Some are so rich they could buy a car and before the ink has even dried they have made that money back. If the wealthy are now doing so well... Why aren't the poor?

We know the oC is a bed of Tories and death to all the poor.

 

[The_Abyss]

A reduction to pension tax relief is, sadly, a nailed on certainty in light of these comments. Short term thinking, but consistent with the steps he's already taken to allow (taxable) access to pensions at retirement age.

 

[pinkpill]

If a tenant can afford £600 pm rent, and housing benefit gives him £150 pm, he can now afford £750 pm rent.

You don't just get housing benefit if you have no income.

It's kind of obvious that whatever top-up is given to renters, allows landlords to increase their rents by a similar amount. That housing benefit doesn't cover 100% of the rent is of no consequence at all.

It's the same with help to buy. Govt gives 1st time buyers an extra 20k? House prices go up by 20k. Just because the govt doesn't give buyers 100% of the house price does not mean the house price can't go up as a result.

And you'll forgive me for believing the Telegraph's analysis more than your own.

The max you can get is 300 pw HB for 2 bed, 90% of 2bed cost more that that.
You know there is a cut off for HB around 15k to 16 k so your rent is based on 750 per month its 9k per year HB is reduced by 65p in the pound after 6k, if you earn more than 17k you get no help.
HB does not push up rents.

I will give you an example over the past 4 years HB max rents have dropped, yet rents have risen how would you explain that?

The more money you throw at policies to get people to buy, will increase prices, as affordability would rise for those that can get government help to buy homes, and those that cant will be unable to buy.

Newspaper make a lot of revenue from property adverts, why would they want to close such a nice income stream.

.

 

[wordy]

It's either Labour or the Global economy's fault isn't it. Surprised the tories don't want to leave Europe, it'll give them something else to blame for their **** economic policies in 2 years time.

 

[thep02]

If we didn't pay the banker's debts to each other for them they wouldn't be able to feel good about themselves, then what sort of a world would it be?

Why they weren't allowed to go bankrupt and be replaced by better banks with less foolish staff is criminal iyam, Iceland should have been the model for the world.

 

[Rroff]

A belated response of sorts:

1% wealth taken eg wealth of company may be £100bn. Take 1% that's a billion. Leverage this against the company. Same for individuals including the royals (their wealth is astonishing)

Anyone earning £400,000 tax at 80%. Nobody can earn more than £2m per year (including hiding money, share options, various loopholes etc. Re-introduce the 50% rate for £150-£399k.

At the end of the day people talk about cuts as purely money. Human cost is greater than any monetary value. As a moral guidance we could save a few billion by very simply enforcing on MPs what they have forced on everyone else: 25% reduction in MPs. Reduce their numbers to 450-475. Abolish the house of Liars.

Seize back the 6-10m cost of that bloody woman's funeral from her own pocket. Remove MPs pension generosity of 2x the best options and have them play a level playing field.

Cuts however aren't necessary, its more about making those who have vast sums of money, wealth that they physically cannot spend in a thousand lifetimes and using that to pop into infrastructure and so forth. There comes a point (around £100m imo) where anything extra is just too much. There are people who are so rich who can write cheques for a hundred thousand pounds and before its even cleared the money is recouped. Some are so rich they could buy a car and before the ink has even dried they have made that money back. If the wealthy are now doing so well... Why aren't the poor?

We know the oC is a bed of Tories and death to all the poor.

I hope you are never in any position of power :S you want to make that money work to stimulate the economy not stifle it out of jealousy for people who've made a bit of money.

Slapping huge rates of tax on people who happen to be earning a decent bit of money is a horrid way to go about it.

 

[FoxEye]

I will give you an example over the past 4 years HB max rents have dropped, yet rents have risen how would you explain that?

Please do. The housing benefit (paid to private landlords) bill was £9 billion in 2014, close to £10 billion in 2015, and probably more again this year.

Are you saying rent is going down? Because that's not true anywhere. Neither is the housing benefit bill going down.

The more money you throw at policies to get people to buy, will increase prices, as affordability would rise for those that can get government help to buy homes, and those that cant will be unable to buy.

Newspaper make a lot of revenue from property adverts, why would they want to close such a nice income stream.

.

Yeah I'm not sure what you're saying. You're agreeing that government incentives to help new buyers are pushing up house prices, whilst at the same time saying that government help to pay the rent is pushing rents down?

OK.

 

[Efour]

It's either Labour or the Global economy's fault isn't it. Surprised the tories don't want to leave Europe, it'll give them something else to blame for their **** economic policies in 2 years time.

exactly.

 

[RaohNS]

I hope you are never in any position of power :S you want to make that money work to stimulate the economy not stifle it out of jealousy for people who've made a bit of money.

Slapping huge rates of tax on people who happen to be earning a decent bit of money is a horrid way to go about it.

It could and it did. It worked before and something has gone very wrong somewhere. That something is greed. Its not jealousy and equally you do know you are advocating fraud and championing it by that very first statement. People who make money, good on them, they work hard. Guess what... i work hard too.

I earn approximately £100,000 for my company each year and yet im paid less than 1/5th of that. Thats the system, i get it. Its not that obscene. What is obscene is a bank executive earning hundreds of times what their staff earn.

And to respond to your latter statement no it isnt. The richest have consistently had the highest tax cuts in the UK. There used to be a 99% and later 90%... strange how the rich still managed to be rich no? The biggest cuts have all been applied under Tories to help out their beyond rich mates.

You do know that arguably the most prominent economicforecaster advocates 80% tax on high earners (1%ers) didnt you?

 

[Danthus]

No. Just how being short or ugly isn't an illness. Neither is having small cleavage. It's pure cosmetics and should not be available on the nhs.

Gender dysphoria is recognised medical condition.

 

[Rroff]

It could and it did. It worked before and something has gone very wrong somewhere. That something is greed. Its not jealousy and equally you do know you are advocating fraud and championing it by that very first statement. People who make money, good on them, they work hard. Guess what... i work hard too.

I earn approximately £100,000 for my company each year and yet im paid less than 1/5th of that. Thats the system, i get it. Its not that obscene. What is obscene is a bank executive earning hundreds of times what their staff earn.

And to respond to your latter statement no it isnt. The richest have consistently had the highest tax cuts in the UK. There used to be a 99% and later 90%... strange how the rich still managed to be rich no? The biggest cuts have all been applied under Tories to help out their beyond rich mates.

You do know that arguably the most prominent economicforecaster advocates 80% tax on high earners (1%ers) didnt you?

Missing the point of what I'm saying (and no I'm not advocating fraud or anything like that) I'm saying we need to look beyond "simple" knee jerk taxation.

 

[pinkpill]

Please do. The housing benefit (paid to private landlords) bill was £9 billion in 2014, close to £10 billion in 2015, and probably more again this year.

Are you saying rent is going down? Because that's not true anywhere. Neither is the housing benefit bill going down.



Yeah I'm not sure what you're saying. You're agreeing that government incentives to help new buyers are pushing up house prices, whilst at the same time saying that government help to pay the rent is pushing rents down?

OK.

as rents rise more people look for rental help, tell me how much is the rental market worth in the UK, 10Billion HB is nothing compared to the total amount. rents are going up but the LHA is not going up, so explain to me how do you think HB increases rents when 90% of rents are 50 pound and more that the max LHA rate?
the argument back in 2009 was that HB was pushing up rents, they changed the whole system and reduce the amount telling people it would reduce rental prices , over 6 years the rents have been going up so that argument is not valid.

 

[RaohNS]

Missing the point of what I'm saying (and no I'm not advocating fraud or anything like that) I'm saying we need to look beyond "simple" knee jerk taxation.

But we can have a knee jerk reaction to putting hundreds of thousands out of work. The homelessness rate has exploded under the tories.

Its not knee jerk to say "your wealth has become so great that we are saying no to it".

Taxation is vital, the cuts are not. We are trying to advocate taking money from a few thousand people and companies vs society being affected

 

[FoxEye]

as rents rise more people look for rental help, tell me how much is the rental market worth in the UK, 10Billion HB is nothing compared to the total amount. rents are going up but the LHA is not going up, so explain to me how do you think HB increases rents when 90% of rents are 50 pound and more that the max LHA rate?
the argument back in 2009 was that HB was pushing up rents, they changed the whole system and reduce the amount telling people it would reduce rental prices , over 6 years the rents have been going up so that argument is not valid.

So what you're essentially saying, is that the rental market prices are entirely disconnected from people's ability to pay the rent.

And that even if it was complete unaffordable rents would continue to rise.

Which is bonkers. If and when rents exceed the ability of tenants to pay, rents will have to come down.

All the govt does by helping people to pay their rent is ensure that rents can keep rising.

Personally I would be looking to phase out housing benefit payments to private tenants. As well as phasing out "help to buy", which is similarly ensuring house prices can keep rising.

I'm not sure why you persist in saying there is no link here, despite many articles being published that maintain the govt is helping protect the bubble, and really not helping the market to find its own level.

 

[Destination]

A belated response of sorts:
1% wealth taken eg wealth of company may be £100bn. Take 1% that's a billion. Leverage this against the company. Same for individuals including the royals (their wealth is astonishing)
Anyone earning £400,000 tax at 80%. Nobody can earn more than £2m per year (including hiding money, share options, various loopholes etc. Re-introduce the 50% rate for £150-£399k.
At the end of the day people talk about cuts as purely money. Human cost is greater than any monetary value. As a moral guidance we could save a few billion by very simply enforcing on MPs what they have forced on everyone else: 25% reduction in MPs. Reduce their numbers to 450-475. Abolish the house of Liars.
Seize back the 6-10m cost of that bloody woman's funeral from her own pocket. Remove MPs pension generosity of 2x the best options and have them play a level playing field.
Cuts however aren't necessary, its more about making those who have vast sums of money, wealth that they physically cannot spend in a thousand lifetimes and using that to pop into infrastructure and so forth. There comes a point (around £100m imo) where anything extra is just too much. There are people who are so rich who can write cheques for a hundred thousand pounds and before its even cleared the money is recouped. Some are so rich they could buy a car and before the ink has even dried they have made that money back. If the wealthy are now doing so well... Why aren't the poor?
We know the oC is a bed of Tories and death to all the poor.

So in your world, if google, apple or face book had been founded and were based in the UK, 3 of the richest companies on the planet, you would 'take' their owner's wealth and redistribute it.
If someone could write a cheque for £100K and recoup it, you would make them, at an 80% tax rate.

None would remain in this nation, even JK Rowling wouldn't stomach that. Sorry JK I know you sold £100M in books last year but I'm having £80M of that, and you can make do.
She stayed and she paid her taxes that were due, and I thank her for not Lewis Hamiltoning, but the rest would scarper. They would be insane not to.

Thankfully this conceptual policy will never be reintroduced. Labour did have this madness in the 70s or so. Even they realised it didn't help, as evasion and avoidance became the rage. In fact, it probably stimulated it entirely, everyone became a forester, as there were ways out using that profession.

 

[Destination]

But we can have a knee jerk reaction to putting hundreds of thousands out of work. The homelessness rate has exploded under the tories.
Taxation is vital, the cuts are not. We are trying to advocate taking money from a few thousand people and companies vs society being affected

More are working than ever before too.
Homelessness isn't purely down to cuts and taxation.