This forum does not reflect the UK population on a whole. Just a more wealthy, intelligent educated section of it on average. (hard to believe)
What a horrible though
.David Blunkett wants a death tax.
- Thread starter Danthus
- Start date
What a horrible though
.This is rather basic but the state generates revenue by staking a claim on things like a portion of our income when it is earned and assets when they are transferred. This is used to pay for public services.
Inheritance tax is fine IMO, probably should be extended like this and a crackdown on trusts etc...
Much better to tax assets this way than proposals like the mansion tax.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,757
- Location
- Welling, London
There should be a cap, simple as.
If someone already owns their own house outright, earns a good income and is unlikely to ever be in financial difficulty, then the wealth should be distributed, but if said person has rent, a mortgage, normal job and lives day to day, then no, the state shouldn't get their parents house, they should get it and ensure their future is secured, which is something many parents work hard for.
But that distinction would be very hard to prove, so no, the whole idea should be scrapped. You work, you own your own house, it's your choice as to what happens to it when you're gone. Simple as.
If someone already owns their own house outright, earns a good income and is unlikely to ever be in financial difficulty, then the wealth should be distributed, but if said person has rent, a mortgage, normal job and lives day to day, then no, the state shouldn't get their parents house, they should get it and ensure their future is secured, which is something many parents work hard for.
But that distinction would be very hard to prove, so no, the whole idea should be scrapped. You work, you own your own house, it's your choice as to what happens to it when you're gone. Simple as.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Someone who gets it
I'm surprised I've not been called a communist or leftie loonie yet though.
You're a leftie loonie Communist.
So he recently moved into a house in London? Or did he simply buy a house/s which has significantly and disproportionally increased in value because of <lol economic reasons>? The latter here doesn't really count as "hard work" does it?
Bought it before the big increase.
However we moved from a £80k house to a £300k house. Which required some hard work on his behalf.. oh and being mortgage free took some doing.
Guess the <lol economic reasons>? was his reward...
Being able to buy a house for 80k was his reward for working hard. The house price increases were not a reward for anything, except good fortune.
That#s not to say he didn't continue working hard regardless, but you have to understand there are people working hard today who haven't had any of the good fortune.
When I die I want the estate I have worked hard to build up to pass to who I choose. It is my estate and I have paid tax all my life.
I do not wish to redistribute my estate to achieve some sort of social utopia where you can doss your life away or lets be kind, exhibit poor financial planning.
If it is the burden of social care we are talking about then lets restrict the amount of children you can have relative to your need for state support. Does that sound harsh? That is the decision made by many responsible families today. We would have liked more children but had to balance that off against how we wish to provide for them and what we need to do in order to achieve that.
I cannot believe this tax proposal would be popular with and hard working families unless you are going to say, only applies to rich people which I would also have an issue with.
I have a bigger issue with the Royals being exempt from inheritance tax
I do not wish to redistribute my estate to achieve some sort of social utopia where you can doss your life away or lets be kind, exhibit poor financial planning.
If it is the burden of social care we are talking about then lets restrict the amount of children you can have relative to your need for state support. Does that sound harsh? That is the decision made by many responsible families today. We would have liked more children but had to balance that off against how we wish to provide for them and what we need to do in order to achieve that.
I cannot believe this tax proposal would be popular with and hard working families unless you are going to say, only applies to rich people which I would also have an issue with.
I have a bigger issue with the Royals being exempt from inheritance tax
Think you misunderstood slightly. We had the £80k house. Then moved to a £300k house. Then that house ballooned in price.
Oh yes I agree. But does that really warrent adding another level of tax onto others? Purely because they have died and own a house.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 4,367
Tax corporations properly and we won't have situations like this maybe?
My view is it doesn't matter how much more you tax the rich or how much more you take from the rich.
On an individual level people will live in their same houses, wit htheir same jobs, with their same car.
I don't understand how people think their lives will be magically better bashing on the rich.
Agreed. And if you are not happy with what you've got, do something about it rather than bang on about how unfair life is.
Life is unfair. That is and always will be a fact.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- La France
Exactly.
The utter comedy of it all is that Labour Grandees like Blunkett have the means to ensure their children inherit everything without being taxed thanks to all their assets belonging to offshore shell companies.
It's about that we raised George Orwell to Nostradamus' level of prophecy.
Perhaps you've not been keeping up with current events? Our society is a lot less "fair", in terms of wealth distribution, than it was a few decades ago (eg, the 70s).
Educated people - economists, sociologists, etc - are saying that the divide is increasing, and that history does not paint a rosy picture when this has happened before.
If wealth isn't redistributed more than it is today, I would suggest that you look into having your own private protection. Because if you squeeze the bottom more as the next Tory govt inevitably will, and the rich carry on getting richer, the most likely outcome is social unrest. Again, it's not me saying this, but the experts.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- La France
Indeed. I've stopped investing in emerging markets and am now putting my savings into canned food and automatic weapons.
I can understand it in both ways. My parents worked their buts off their whole life to be able to live well, enjoy themselves and pass on what they earned to me when they go, as well as having a pretty lavish lifestyle once they retired and splurge on luxuries. So why should their hard work throughout their lives, where they have already dealt with taxation be penalised for lack of a better word when that gets passed on?
Although, as a few people have mentioned, the stress on care for the elderly has a major impact on the economy and this would help a lot, especially when it comes to the stinkin' rich few % in this country.
![( |-| |2 ][ $](/styles/overclockers/avatars/4.png){kind=avatar}
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 1,748
- Location
- Chesterfield
I consider myself being anti socialist and very much aligned with conservative and even slightly touching UKIP views however i think this idea is worth some consideration.
There has to be a method of wealth redistribution and inheritance taxes as they are don't seem to go far enough.
That said I think the income to the government should go towards tax cuts for all rather than "benefits".
There has to be a method of wealth redistribution and inheritance taxes as they are don't seem to go far enough.
That said I think the income to the government should go towards tax cuts for all rather than "benefits".