David Blunkett wants a death tax.

Jono8 said:
I really hope this was a joke.
Click to expand...

No jokes. I could never trust someone with black eyes who has that fake sort of smile. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/telegraphwire/files/2014/09/blunkett-460_1215458c.jpg



We already have inheritance tax. Just not enough for their greedy coffers though is it. Now they want more of your money, mooooree...muhahaha

How about instead of stealing people hard earn wealth, they increase interest rates and stop propping up the house prices with first time buyer schemes. That way people can afford to buy homes and the house owning generations who all think they are millionaires can be brought down to size.
 
Last edited:
cheesyboy said:
That's the problem with you right wingers; you're not very clever - just read the words without thinking about the meaning ;)

I said I would happily see it as part of a more meritocratic system. i.e. one in which children all start from a more equal financial platform, at least insofar as IHT goes.

In the current system, where advantage is held by those with familial wealth, I wouldn't deliberately hamstring my kids.

But I'm not so arrogant as to believe that my actions don't mean my children gain an unfair advantage over some less fortunates.
Click to expand...

Your opener was hilarious. Right wingers aren't clever ;)

Ok, so you have more than enough money, left winger and think rich should do more for society and that the rich poor divide should be lessened. But yet you are not willing to lead by example and give to charity/ those who need it more.

Instead you are going to pass down your wealth to your children.

Think I got you.
 
balky12 said:
It's just not workable though? No tax from income, instead inheritence / death tax? People would just spend everything. Poor will remain poor.
Click to expand...

Well, I said asset taxes generally. I don't see why for example we couldn't reduce income taxes in favour of a yearly levy on assets (maybe something similar to council tax). If people do spend/invest everything instead of saving, you could make any losses in asset taxes due to the increased take in VAT.

If anything, I would say our current system discourages trying to work hard.

If we had:
Person A from a poor background who does everything right and land themselves a £150k+ job, and
Person B from a rich family, their parents gifted them a half million house, and a slightly cheaper one to let out, and did nothing all day.

Person A would pay a lot more taxes than person B, despite B probably being richer than A their whole life. That can't be exactly inspiring...
 
cheesyboy said:
In the current system, where advantage is held by those with familial wealth, I wouldn't deliberately hamstring my kids.

But I'm not so arrogant as to believe that my actions don't mean my children gain an unfair advantage over some less fortunates.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone would disagree with you - I certainly wouldn't. I started with nothing and it's important to me that I look after my family, now and in the future. If I can do some good along the way I will but not to the detriment of my own family I'm afraid. I'm certainly not "wealthy" but as a family we're past the years where we had to panic about the gas and leccy bill coming in.

Despite what some of the "you shouldn't share money with your children, give it to a stranger instead" brigade insist, my conscience is very comfortable that the amount of Tax and NI I pay along with normal charity type donations we all do is a significant contribution to the pot for overall welfare of people in the UK.

Whilst I firmly believe it's a fundamental responsibility of any civilised society to look after the poor, sick, elderly and infirm I also believe it's a safety net to get people back on their feet, not a life style choice to be funded by hard working class folks who have struggled to build a decent life for their familes.
 
Last edited:
balky12 said:
Your opener was hilarious. Right wingers aren't clever ;)

Ok, so you have more than enough money, left winger and think rich should do more for society and that the rich poor divide should be lessened. But yet you are not willing to lead by example and give to charity/ those who need it more.

Instead you are going to pass down your wealth to your children.

Think I got you.
Click to expand...

Again: the world isn't black and white, right winger. Stop trying to make it so.

Besides, your comment is as stupid as me saying you right wingers should turn down NHS healthcare or state education or something. You may believe those things should be privatised, but you'd be a fool to turn them down without good reason (such as being rich enough to comfortably opt for the private alternative).
 
Macro said:
I don't think anyone would disagree with you - I certainly wouldn't. I started with nothing and it's important to me that I look after my family, now and in the future. If I can do some good along the way I will but not to the detriment of my own family I'm afraid. I'm certainly not "wealthy" but as a family we're past the years where we had to panic about the gas and leccy bill coming in.

Despite what some of the "you shouldn't share money with your children, give it to a stranger instead" brigade insist, my conscience is very comfortable that the amount of Tax and NI I pay along with normal charity type donations we all do is a significant contribution to the pot for overall welfare of people in the UK.

Whilst I firmly believe it's a fundamental responsibility of any civilised society to look after the poor, sick, elderly and infirm I also believe it's a safety net to get people back on their feet, not a life style choice to be funded by hard working class folks who have struggled to build a decent life for their familes.
Click to expand...

You've been under the impression, for the entire thread it seems, that all the money from such a death tax would go into the pockets of the idle and undeserving.

The truth is, it would go into the general pot which is used for the entire state spending. This should mean taking less from elsewhere, such as PAYE or VAT. Would you not prefer people to be taxed (effectively) on windfall money they didn't work for than their actual earnings? Especially when the sums involved make these people among the richest in the country.
 
cheesyboy said:
Again: the world isn't black and white, right winger. Stop trying to make it so.

Besides, your comment is as stupid as me saying you right wingers should turn down NHS healthcare or state education or something. You may believe those things should be privatised, but you'd be a fool to turn them down without good reason (such as being rich enough to comfortably opt for the private alternative).
Click to expand...

You just said all right wingers aren't clever? :confused:

You don't have to be rich to have private health care. Just work for a company that has it?

Not even remotely close and you know it. I am all for supporting the poor through taxation, 'death tax' is a step too far in my mind. The NHS is a wonderful thing and I am glad those less fortunate can use it for free.

You have been saying the rich should give more, the rich don't give enough. Children of inheritance haven't earned it etc etc. (or atleast on the side of people who express these views)

But when your time comes you will leave it all to your children anyways.
 
cheesyboy said:
Again: the world isn't black and white, right winger. Stop trying to make it so.

Besides, your comment is as stupid as me saying you right wingers should turn down NHS healthcare or state education or something. You may believe those things should be privatised, but you'd be a fool to turn them down without good reason (such as being rich enough to comfortably opt for the private alternative).
Click to expand...

Why are all the poor and useless members of society always so left and anti-capitalist? they all want something for nothing, not only do they want something for nothing, but they literally want others people something for nothing.

Why don't you get a job and look after your own children. If your parents did not work hard enough to make a better life for you, then that is your problem and your parents problem. Why make it the problem of other people you have never met. Stop making excuses for being poor and become rich instead. Don't give me that lack of opportunity bs.
 
If it's the case of needing more to keep the NHS free although I don't even use it I'd happily pay another 1/2% tax. On the condition they remove the wasted management portions and increase frontline staff and pay.

1 or 2% very few people would miss and if that's the difference between public services and not having them it's an easy choice.

I'm still completely against death tax.

Regardless if they chased company taxes then we'd be an awful lot closer to breaking even yearly.
 
balky12 said:
You just said all right wingers aren't clever? :confused:

You don't have to be rich to have private health care. Just work for a company that has it?

Not even remotely close and you know it. I am all for supporting the poor through taxation, 'death tax' is a step too far in my mind. The NHS is a wonderful thing and I am glad those less fortunate can use it for free.

You have been saying the rich should give more, the rich don't give enough. Children of inheritance haven't earned it etc etc. (or atleast on the side of people who express these views)

But when your time comes you will leave it all to your children anyways.
Click to expand...

You're really struggling to comprehend what I'm saying.

gimping my own children doesn't change the world, but it does disadvantage them. I would have to be stupid, or something of an extremist, to do so.

I want the world to change such that all children start from a similar level - to allow the best to thrive, rather than just the fortunate to do so. I'm happy to let my kids fight it out from a level playing field - I have confidence in them.

Death taxes don't solve everything, but they can contribute. I support it for that reason.
 
anything I don't mind said:
Why are all the poor and useless members of society always so left and anti-capitalist? they all want something for nothing, not only do they want something for nothing, but they literally want others people something for nothing.

Why don't you get a job and look after your own children. If your parents did not work hard enough to make a better life for you, then that is your problem and your parents problem. Why make it the problem of other people you have never met. Stop making excuses for being poor and become rich instead. Don't give me that lack of opportunity bs.
Click to expand...

Poor people are actually more likely to be right-leaning than the middle classes. Where do you think the Guardian plucks its readership from?
 
Macro said:
Oh good, yes i'd love to hand over even more of my families hard earned money to offset your drain on the NHS.

Perhaps you could voluntarily contribute more yourself somehow or pay towards private health care rather than expecting me to foot the bill more that I already do?
Click to expand...

Private health care for myself would be prohibitively expensive, even though I am well paid. So my family should suffer because I happen to have been born with poor genes so you can pay less national insurance, right?

You appear to be confused how the NI system works. My wife, who has contributed to the NHS via NI for many, many years has taken out far less than she has put in. NI contributions go towards funding the NHS and some people will use less than they pay for, some more. That's how the system was designed. Also the more you earn the more NI you pay. If I had been fortunate enough to be born without bad genetics I'd be paying a lot of NI that would be going towards those who need the NHS more than me. I have no issue with that.


Selfishness, that's the problem nowadays. It's all me me me, and sod society or those lesser off.
 
I didn't think NI directly went to NHS moreso all tax went into a pot and was divided up to the various outlets.

I know that's not your point just making a query.
 
cheesyboy said:
You're really struggling to comprehend what I'm saying.

gimping my own children doesn't change the world, but it does disadvantage them. I would have to be stupid, or something of an extremist, to do so.

I want the world to change such that all children start from a similar level - to allow the best to thrive, rather than just the fortunate to do so. I'm happy to let my kids fight it out from a level playing field - I have confidence in them.

Death taxes don't solve everything, but they can contribute. I support it for that reason.
Click to expand...

I think this is where we differ. Taking more from the rich does not change the world. Poor and/ or lazy people will still live in their ****** houses with their stained carpets with their ****** cars.

As I said earlier. Take Warren Buffetts money off him. Divide it equally between everyone. Everyone gets a tenner.
 
balky12 said:
I think this is where we differ. Taking more from the rich does not change the world. Poor and/ or lazy people will still live in their ****** houses with their stained carpets with their ****** cars.

As I said earlier. Take Warren Buffetts money off him. Divide it equally between everyone. Everyone gets a tenner.
Click to expand...

You still don't understand.

it's not about taking what people have earned, or giving more away, but about allowing everyone to maximise what they can achieve by taking away some of the unfair advantages some hold.
 
cheesyboy said:
Poor people are actually more likely to be right-leaning than the middle classes. Where do you think the Guardian plucks its readership from?
Click to expand...

Non sense. Pretty much all of the people on welfare are anti-capitalist because it benefits them by voting for labour. They get a larger free lunch if they vote for labour so that is where their opinions lie. Pretty much most of the north east are anti-capitalist and no wonder why that region has the highest poverty rates. Same with scotland, most of them are anti-capitalist and vote left. A lot of them would vote for full blown communism if it meant a bigger free lunch or a free house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom