[The Weeping Angel]

The reason I didn't post a link was because I was reading through the I newspaper in a newsagents.

[kreuzberger]

The reason I didn't post a link was because I was reading through the I newspaper in a newsagents.

Oh! This preposterous nonsense goes to a different school? Got it.

[The Weeping Angel]

Just fuck off.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Is Grok any good?

I asked


Has Labour taxed wealth?

And got this reply:

Yes, since taking office in July 2024, the Labour government in the UK has introduced several measures that can be considered forms of wealth taxation, targeting assets and income sources typically associated with higher-net-worth individuals. While Labour explicitly ruled out a broad "wealth tax" on the richest in society during the 2023 campaign (as stated by Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves), they have implemented policies that effectively increase taxes on wealth in specific areas. Here are some examples based on actions taken by March 18, 2025:
VAT on Private School Fees: Labour has applied a 20% VAT to private school fees, effective from January 1, 2025, for terms starting on or after that date. This targets wealthier families who can afford private education, ending the previous VAT exemption.

Inheritance Tax (IHT) on Agricultural Land: The government has reformed agricultural property relief, bringing some farming estates into the scope of inheritance tax. From April 2026, a 20% tax rate will apply to agricultural assets exceeding £1 million, affecting wealthier landowners and farmers.

Abolition of Non-Dom Status: Labour is phasing out the "non-domiciled" tax status, which allowed wealthy individuals living in the UK to avoid tax on foreign income. This change aims to raise revenue from rich residents with international wealth, with transitional measures starting in April 2025.

Increased Stamp Duty on Second Homes: The Stamp Duty Land Tax surcharge for additional properties (like second homes or buy-to-let investments) was raised from 3% to 5%, effective from October 30, 2024. This impacts wealthier individuals who own multiple properties.

Higher Air Passenger Duty on Private Jets: Labour increased the Air Passenger Duty for private jet flights, doubling the rate for domestic and short-haul flights to £78 per passenger from April 2025, targeting a luxury associated with the ultra-wealthy.

These measures align with Labour's manifesto pledge not to raise taxes on "working people" (defined loosely as those reliant on income from work rather than wealth), while still generating revenue from wealth-related sources. Critics argue these are incremental rather than a comprehensive wealth tax, but they undeniably shift the tax burden toward those with significant assets or high-income potential from non-work sources.
So, while Labour hasn’t introduced a single, overarching "wealth tax" as some might envision (e.g., an annual levy on net worth above a threshold), they have taxed wealth through targeted policies since entering government.

[Oboogie]

Is Grok any good?

Generally? I'm not sure.
However it does amuse me that it identifies Elon Musk as the biggest spreader of disinformation.

[kreuzberger]

I believe that things are nuanced by how you frame the question.

Exhibit B:

Has Labour taxed wealth sufficiently?

Historically, UK taxation of wealth was higher—post-World War II top income tax rates exceeded 90%, and inheritance taxes were more stringent. Today, the effective tax rate on the wealthiest remains lower than on average earners due to reliance on income and consumption taxes rather than wealth or assets. Labour’s current approach—raising £40 billion in the 2024 Budget through various tax hikes and borrowing—avoids systemic wealth redistribution, focusing instead on funding public services and investment (e.g., £100 billion over five years for infrastructure).

Supporters of Labour’s strategy might argue it balances fiscal responsibility with growth, avoiding policies that could deter investment. Critics, including left-leaning voices, contend it preserves inequality, with the richest 1% still undertaxed relative to their wealth—estimated at £653 billion for billionaires alone in 2022 by the Equality Trust. Without a comprehensive wealth tax or broader reform, they say, Labour’s measures are insufficient to reverse decades of growing disparity or fund strained public services fully.

In short, Labour has increased some taxes on wealth since taking power in July 2024, but these are incremental rather than transformative. Whether this is “sufficient” hinges on whether one prioritizes stability and growth over aggressive redistribution—a debate that remains unresolved as of now.

[kreuzberger]

Just fuck off.

If you are going to post DMGT titles' content in order to further your distinctly non Labour-aligned agenda, you might want to reflect upon the name of this forum.

If that is too difficult to grasp, other entertainment options are available,

[The Weeping Angel]

I'm actually a member of the party so accusing me of having of a non-Labour agenda makes no sense.

[The Weeping Angel]

Oh btw here's the fucking article

https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/reg ... en-3580582

Last summer, Becky Sheaves did something she hadn’t done for almost 20 years: she voted Labour. Sheaves, a 57-year-old nursery owner who lives on a family farm in rural Devon, is based in a Conservative constituency that occasionally swings Liberal Democrat. She knew the Tories were going to lose the general election and decided, rather than gifting her vote to the Lib Dem challenger, to vote with her heart.

“I was one of only about 2,000 people to vote Labour here, but I wanted Sir Keir Starmer to know that I wanted him to win. I wanted the Labour candidate to know that I voted for him,” she says.

Sheaves – who voted Labour during the Blair years but moved her support to the Tories under David Cameron – was excited by the possibility of the country’s first female chancellor and a chance for Britain to rethink its priorities.

“I was really pleased that Labour had taken a shift firmly away from the extreme left,” she explains. “I was getting more and more concerned about the extremes of wealth in this country and I thought they might rein that in. I thought it would be more ‘for the people’ and that there would be a kinder vibe. I was quite reassured by Rachel Reeves; I thought she would do a really good job economically, and hoped they’d all be a bit more sane and sensible.”

Oh and before anyone comes at me with why didn't the post the link in the first place. There's a reason for that first read the article in the actual I not online and so couldn't post the link at the time.

[mattomac]

Nursery owner on a rural farm.

Very typical Labour female voter. Money has to come from somewhere and the just about managing and below have been the well that’s been plundered for far too long. It’s what people don’t get about Sadiq Knan’s targeting, he has often tried to freeze bus prices and has for the most part done so.

[The Weeping Angel]

Pretty nuanced thread on the government.

[davidjay]

That's some fair comment. The country feels as though we need a reset, and not the one the tinfoil hatters talk about. There's more than enough wealth to give everyone a reasonable quality of life but no-one seems willing to challenge the narrative of punching down. It doesn't help when the media are pushing the scapegoat agenda but surely a government with five years and a 170 majority should be able to do what's needed.

[The Weeping Angel]

That's true the problem is as Ben points out the good stuff gets ignored by people like employment rights or the rentiers bill.

[Abernathy]

Not sure about the “re-set” notion. Haven’t we already had one - last July ?

The adage “Rome wasn’t built in a day” springs to mind, and I think that rather than trying to “re-set” things, we need to be better at getting that message understood and appreciated. The inherited Tory £22 billion black hole narrative was a fair stab, but it doesn’t seem to have landed to the extent that it really needed to.

How do we get the public, especially the gullible (Brexit-voting) public, to understand that there aren’t any overnight fixes ? If we manage that, things’ll look better.

Consolation may be found in the likelihood that Starmer is working on the basis that all of the necessary/essential yet rather unpopular stuff (benefits reform, retention of the 2 child benefits ceiling, means testing winter fuel allowance eligibility) needs to be done at the start of a five year term in government, in order to get it over with and endure some (hopefully) temporary unpopularity and come out popular again on the back of a sound economy and improved public services once election time rolls round again in 4 years time. There has to be a long term political strategy behind this, and that’s my best guess as to what it is. Starmer has an incredibly tough job to pull off, though, not least because of the volatile and uncertain international climate engendered mostly by Trump/Putin, but also the Brexit legacy.

[davidjay]

One of the major problems is that Johnson was so corrupt that he poisoned the well for all politicians. A pair of glasses and a match ticket is no better than handing a friend a £50 million contract. Therefore everything Starmer does will be criticised and like all Labour leaders he seems desperate to placate those who will never vote for him.

[The Weeping Angel]

On the flipside he doesn't get any backing from those on the left either.

[davidjay]

On the flipside he doesn't get any backing from those on the left either.

He does according to Twitter.

[The Weeping Angel]

Not according to bluesky though. What's the fucking point everyone hates us let Nigel have a go and he can fuck things up.

[The Weeping Angel]

Steven is right this is suicide.

[NevTheSweeper]

Steven is right this is suicide.

There is a clear perception in the media that Labour simply doesn't know how to govern. It's like having a grown adult crapping the bed and figuring out how to clean up the mess. If they go on like this, this could be the last Labour government ever to be elected.