Mailwatch(ed) Forum

kreuzberger wrote: ↑Mon Mar 17, 2025 8:05 pm

Some might say we should turn to wealth taxes to fund more spending. This forgets that we have already raised taxes on the wealthy: on speculators who have driven up the price of family farms, on private jet users, on non-doms and by changing some inheritance tax rules.

Olympic class sophistry there, Dan. If the ultra wealthy were suffering more than the lightest of scuffs, the Telegraph would be doing a lot more than wheeling out him off that motoring programme.

Pathetic.

Labour should raise taxes on wealthy people

Labour raises taxes on wealthy people

Those rises don't count because reasons.

The wealthiest can live in Timbuckfuckintu for all I care, but a fair and equitable approach to CGT would still be deliciously domiciled in London. Taxing the fuck out of the bookies would also not be amiss.

And, if we are on the subject of penny-pinching, handing another 3bn quid to Tames Water's shareholders doesn't sit well with me when our poorest peers are about to be required to reach down the back of the sofa for the umpteenth time.

Dan Neidle's Portugal is a good example of why this perverse, inverse game of financial whack-a-mole will eventually run out of road - when the wealthy stumble across a low tax / low cost pot of unearned treasure, they will raid it for every last possible cent. Lisbon is basically broken on every measure.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Mon Mar 17, 2025 9:50 pm Those rises don't count because reasons.

Those reasons aren't rises in any meaningful form.

(Christ, you are more blisteringly dim than I ever thought possible.)

Two things

1. That 3 billion is a loan which Thames is trying to find a bank who will lend it to them it's not coming from the taxpayers money.

2. When will that road run out? I can't see Qatar or the UAE introducing a wealth tax. Neidle does suggest a numnber of aslternatives.

kreuzberger wrote: ↑Mon Mar 17, 2025 10:09 pm

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Mon Mar 17, 2025 9:50 pm Those rises don't count because reasons.

Those reasons aren't rises in any meaningful form.

(Christ, you are more blisteringly dim than I ever thought possible.)

You can't just dismiss Labour's tax rises out of hand.

Meanwhile

Are the Telegraph aware of this move? They'll go loco with rage.

Previous Chief Inspector of Schools, Amanda Spelman, has really attacked the government’s Education policy, seemingly for its restrictions on academies.

Antonia Bance (who is very good when not talking about assisted dying) says that none of the academies in her constituency have raised concerns about the new bill.

I think Spelman can from Ark, which is one of the better academy chains. There are lots of mediocre ones. I’ve never been clear what’s supposed to improve these.

My alternative to a wealth tax is the rest of us step up and pay more, broadly based, tax. Income tax better than NI. I agree with Neidle on Wealth Taxes.

But I accept that if the government doesn’t do this, then the calls for a wealth tax will grow because it’s certainly better than nothing.