Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II

Who will you vote for?

  • Total voters
    1,453
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

D.P.

D.P.

D.P.

Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
32,623
Rroff said:
The data on it at the moment is all over the place and quite vague but some potential issues with people using it to force people to sell their land was highlighted in another thread also the fact that the levels mooted seem to be just initial levels for a much higher amount pushed through later once the system has been accepted and in place.

Corbyn seems intent in the long run in dragging everyone that has done half ok for themselves down in some hybrid form of something socialism like and by extension dragging society down as a whole as propping up those going nowhere in less fortunate position while dragging down those who are going somewhere who've been fortunate doesn't accomplish anything.



I don't know what the actual numbers are going to be yet but the ones being discussed can work out pretty hideous - for instance where I live people in terraced housing on one side of the road pay about 15% less in council tax than those in the detached and semi-detached on the other side of the road (which is pretty fair) - after these changes most of those on the terraced side will pay half what they do now in council tax while those on the other side will be paying between 2.5x and 4x what they do now.
Click to expand...


Land Value tax is used in the USA, along with taxing the value of your car and other property. Is the USA some kind of socialist country? Hardly, taxing property is perfectly rational, taxing land is even more logical because it is a fixed and finite resource. Taxing land doesn't negatively affect the economy unlike taxing income or taxing purchases, it does the opposite in making land used in more optimal ways. It is also inherently extremely fair. If you can afford to buy huge parcels of high valuable land then you can also afford to pay taxes on that land. If you can only afford a small house out in cheaper building areas then you will pay much less taxes. Exactly like in the USA, buy a nice 50K corvette and you pay 2% taxes on that every year on top of any other fees for usign a cra on public highways. Buy a speed boat, or a secodn holdiay home you don;t live in, well you are still going to have to pay taxes on the property.

Council tax is antiquated, illogical and unfair.
 

LOAM

LOAM

LOAM

Soldato
Joined
20 Oct 2004
Posts
13,104
Location
Nottingham
FoxEye said:
One of the recent developments 5 mins from me, on a brownfield site, has terraces of properties that have no garden at all. They back on to each other. There is no need for rear access to the property as there is no rear garden. So effectively what you have is two rows of terraced houses joined to each other.

Instead of
x_;;_x
x_;;_x
x_;;_x

where x is a house, ;; is an access lane to the rear of the property, and _ is a garden. What they've built here is

xx
xx
xx

And either side of the houses is a public road. Don't even have garages. Parking on street only.

We all said when they were built, "who wants to live in a concrete jungle like this? No front garden, no rear garden, no space for kids to play, all the houses backed on to each other..."

But I bet the developer made a killing :p
Click to expand...

Decisions like that though are still taken at local level (unless successfully appealed). There may well have been very specific reasoning behind the LA's decision to allow it. Density guidance does differ from LA to LA though, some place such as London allow for very dense development because of land value.

You could argue that something that slightly de-valued land may well reduce density values?
 

scorza

scorza

scorza

Caporegime
Joined
22 Jun 2004
Posts
26,684
Location
Deep England
LOAM said:
You believe that because that is what the press is telling you to believe. Look into his "personal baggage" around the IRA and it amounts to nothing. He's a pacifist so thinks that bombing each other isn't the answer. He maintains he had no contact with the IRA but met with Sinn Fein which it transpires was exactly what the government at the time was also doing, they just did it in secret.
Click to expand...
He denied being a pacifist on the recent C4 debate. Are you calling him a liar? He also implied that he supported the IRA killing British soldiers and government officials - it's only the bombing of civilians he wasn't too keen on.
 

n111ck

n111ck

n111ck

Soldato
Joined
31 Jul 2008
Posts
7,876
Location
N/A
scorza said:
He denied being a pacifist on the recent C4 debate. Are you calling him a liar? He also implied that he supported the IRA killing British soldiers and government officials - it's only the bombing of civilians he wasn't too keen on.
Click to expand...

It beggars belief that he could end up effectively in charge of our armed forces.

Although I suppose he would only need to talk to them when telling them to leave the falklands / gibraltar...
 

jimjamuk

jimjamuk

jimjamuk

Soldato
Joined
30 Nov 2007
Posts
2,989
Location
Bristol, UK
LOAM said:
You believe that because that is what the press is telling you to believe. Look into his "personal baggage" around the IRA and it amounts to nothing. He's a pacifist so thinks that bombing each other isn't the answer. He maintains he had no contact with the IRA but met with Sinn Fein which it transpires was exactly what the government at the time was also doing, they just did it in secret.
Click to expand...

Did you copy and paste this from somewhere else as I've seen this response almost exactly word for word

But no - you don't know what I believe or how I formed that opinion.
 

LOAM

LOAM

LOAM

Soldato
Joined
20 Oct 2004
Posts
13,104
Location
Nottingham
scorza said:
He denied being a pacifist on the recent C4 debate. Are you calling him a liar?
Click to expand...

No, its simpler than that, I didn't know he had denied it.

scorza said:
He also implied that he supported the IRA killing British soldiers and government officials - it's only the bombing of civilians he wasn't too keen on
Click to expand...

I think that was Maria Gatland, Tory MP for Croydon. Corbyn has repeatedly said he condemned the actions of both the UK government and the IRA.
 

D.P.

D.P.

D.P.

Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
32,623
Rroff said:
Not the right sort of development - it would increase the number of houses built with tiny tiny gardens.
Click to expand...


It really wont make a difference as you describe. A nice plot with a nice house and garden might pay 3K of LVT. A house next do with a larger garden might pay 3065, because the extra garden space wont add much value because the plot size is sufficient for one house. This isn't suddenly going to make drastic changes to people's gardens, because this isn't a garden tax as much as the gutter press want you to believe, its a land value tax and gardens don't have much value since you can't build on them.

New build already have relatively small plots sizes based purely on the price of land, a tiny amount of additional tax wont make that noticeably worse. One will just have to accept that new build priced for a lower budget will have smaller gardens, the LTV wont impact that.


The biggest impact will be for landowners with large amounts of very valuable land that is suitable for development. That will attract a high tax so the owner will either contribute more to the tax pool, or sell off some of the land for development which will help alleviate the housing situation.


As with any tax system there are winners and losers. The winners with council tax are rich people with big houses, big plots of land and multiple BTL properties who py a tiny fraction of tax compared to the value of property they own. The loosers are poorer people renting in a small flat that still have to pay high levels of council tax despite the fact they can't even afford to own the flat they live in and have no material assets of value. LTV turns the tables and the rich have to pay more of their fair share. Guess why the Tories are very much in favor of keeping a system where they get to pay less tax while those that can't afford it have to pay a substantial council tax bill.
 

LOAM

LOAM

LOAM

Soldato
Joined
20 Oct 2004
Posts
13,104
Location
Nottingham
jimjamuk said:
maybe deja-vu then! I'm sure this is the standard response to the Corbyn-IRA question from his supporters and have seen it elsewhere
Click to expand...

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-corbyn-on-northern-ireland

Have a read.

Edit, yes I understand I've just linked you to a media article. I think its valid though because A. We cant directly ask Corbyn about it and B. It appears to be an article that isn't giving a conclusion, simply stating what they have established.
 
Last edited:

jimjamuk

jimjamuk

jimjamuk

Soldato
Joined
30 Nov 2007
Posts
2,989
Location
Bristol, UK
LOAM said:
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-corbyn-on-northern-ireland

Have a read
Click to expand...

Thanks, so he hung around with the political wing of the IRA during the troubles and has had a really hard time trying to denounce the IRA terrorist organisation over several interviews until recently. Just because he's got a chance of getting into power has he shown any sort of distance between himself and the IRA / HAMAS / whoever else.

So - yeah not ever going to vote for him
 

wildman

wildman

wildman

Soldato
Joined
7 Nov 2002
Posts
7,516
Location
pantyhose factory
jimjamuk said:
haha you really are a joke - what a pathetic response
Click to expand...

But its true. It might not be your concern now, but the way we carry on dealing arms and supporting some of the worst nutters in that region and then go blow up some others means one day it will become all our problems. Your "doesn't impact me" line is the pathetic response in all of this because you will not take responsibility now and are basically saying I don't care someone else will have that problem latter. So you are the joke sunshine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom