- May 8, 2018
- 10,624
Particularly as they’ve only seen 38% of the first £25,140 above £100k
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] The Labour Government
- Thread starter Super Steve Earle
- Start date
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
£66bn now?
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Over a period of 42 years though......£66bn now?
Fair enough. Missed the radio this morning as dog walking with a mate.
Pay per mile sounds like it would either need telematics or the installation of even more traffic cameras?
Strong inference is that some see it as akin to a 'tax rise', or a breach of the manifesto promise on taxes.
Good spot. And anyone mentioning working people alongside bus fare cap is clearly trying to muddy the water.
I haven’t said it’s a tax.
Hometownglory
Well-known member
- Jan 12, 2014
- 647
Agreed, so hopefully removing this tax break will allow money to be directed by the state in providing this specialist care in state schools instead? I suspect that there are a significant amount of SEN children in state schools that could also do with this specialist care! This is exactly why a two tiered educational system is fundamentally wrong. Access to a high quality education is a right of every child, not a select few, regardless whether they are SEN or not.
Last edited:
Apparently a surprisingly high number of people drive with little black boxes in their cars to help reduce their insurance premiums. Presumably, they monitor speed and/or distance travelled and/or location and must be relatively inexpensive.
In Singapore cars are fitted with little black boxes that communicate with devices placed around roads to record road usage. I'm not sure that could work here though, given our road network, and the use of ANPR cameras also feels unworkable here.
I guess given the move to electric vehicles, revenue from fuel duty is only going to go one way - unless it is continually raised to offset EV adoption - so something will need to be done to replace that lost money, and allow EV owners to contribute.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,767
I'm not sure of the relevance of whether this bus subsidy is a tax or not 
The simple fact is that It's another £300M of unfunded, unbudgeted money that it seems the majority want the Government to spend but without raising any taxes. So maybe someone has a suggestion of where should we take this money from ?
The simple fact is that It's another £300M of unfunded, unbudgeted money that it seems the majority want the Government to spend but without raising any taxes. So maybe someone has a suggestion of where should we take this money from ?
Yes they do. My business indirectly encourages them to through some of our tech. That's 'telematics'.
The take up is nowhere near high enough for it to replace tax at the moment but usage based taxation could accompany usage based insurance in the future. It's a fair way off and certainly won't be ready for Wednesday which is why I thought the poster I quoted was talking about maximum bus fares per mile.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,767
Pay by usage has always seemed fairer to me, but given the extra wear and tear of electric cars, how long can they remain outside of this ?
No one will. As someone said to me in the pub before the game on Saturday, in a discussion about NSC and this thread, "it's mostly a thread full of people who don't want to pay for public services".I'm not sure of the relevance of whether this bus subsidy is a tax or not
The simple fact is that It's another £300M of unfunded, unbudgeted money that it seems the majority want the Government to spend but without raising any taxes. So maybe someone has a suggestion of where should we take this money from ?
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,501
People seem happy enough to pay for WFA. People are pretty angry about that cut.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,767
Without wishing to appear pedantic, I believe most people support the policy, but are angry about the cut off level it's been implemented at.
There are a huge number of extremely wealthy getting the WFA that I'm not happy to pay for (and that is in no way minimising the issue around the implementation).
Out of interest where do you think the Government should be looking to raise money to address the critical state of so many areas of the country ?
Last edited:
No, you haven't specifically. But the first two sentences of your post give the impression that the two are linked by association (that's how I read it anyway - even if it wasn't what you were meaning!).
Fair enough.
I don’t actually think it’s an anti-poor policy.
It’s still cheaper than it was before the £2 cap was introduced.
I don’t think this or the winter fuel payment are bad policies in theory.
What I do think is that for a party who rode to power on a “we will improve the lot of the average Briton” ticket, their timing and communication has been worse than dreadful.
I want Labour to remain in power. I worry that they are making themselves unelectable due to their shambolic PR.
My main concern too. I think they have been quite unprepared PR-wise, and it's letting them down.
Ah - he's back - must have been quite a meal.I'm not sure of the relevance of whether this bus subsidy is a tax or not
The simple fact is that It's another £300M of unfunded, unbudgeted money that it seems the majority want the Government to spend but without raising any taxes. So maybe someone has a suggestion of where should we take this money from ?
As you're on top of the numbers, can you let us know how much the rise to a £3 cap will be costing, and how it's being funded.
But, more importantly for me personally, as I take serious offence at someone intimating I'm a liar, can I please have that list of multiple tax rises that I have spoken against please, particularly given:
1. The WFP change is not a tax rise, but the removal of a benefit. As stated numerous times, I'm absolutely supportive of the removal of the universality of the benefit which meant many wealthy people have been receiving £200/£300 they have no need for. However, as also stated numerous times, I'm in full agreement with the likes of Age UK and Martin Lewis that the implementation of the policy is dangerous and cruel. It leaves many very poor and vulnerable people fearing for this winter and will almost certainly result in ill health and death.
2. The bus cap change is not a tax rise, but a subsidy shift. I've provided no view on whether it should continue at the current level - I remain completely open-minded. Government money is finite and needs to be directed in the best way possible. Your numbers on how much the rise to £3 will cost, and how that expenditure is being funded will be great in helping me understand that.
3. Employers NI rise is a tax rise. I don't believe it to be a tax on working people, and I'm happy to pay it.
So - the list of taxes I have posted I am against please, and there's no need to cover 1-3 above, as I already have.
I'm going to try and persuade a demented old lady that the weather is nice enough to go outside this afternoon, so please excuse the apparent tardiness of my response, but I will reply to your list later this afternoon/evening.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,501
I’d start by increasing tax on the wealthiest in society, crack down on nom-doms, off-shore corporations and huge companies like Amazon who pay pennies in tax relative to their fair share.
What I wouldn’t be doing with any hope of not being a one term wonder would be scraping figurative pennies hitting the worst off in society.
They rushed into WFA, which their own studies right up until last year said was important in saving the lives of thousands of indigent pensioners each winter.
It was poorly communicated, poorly planned with not enough checks and balances in place, no massive front and centre campaign to get those eligible onto pension credits (which, of course, they don’t actually want as it would cost multiple times what they’re saving from paying WFA) and all done very late in the year giving people very little time to adjust and make savings to accommodate this cut.
I fully appreciate you, @Guinness Boy and other Labour loyalists will not budge on this, or criticise anything your party does. That is your right. Much as it is for the hardcore Tory supporters on here. But there’s no point truly in having a reasoned debate where one side of the discussion thinks it’s their duty to defend everything the government does, right or wrong, because it’s their team.
You see this in football too, the tribalism. You could have one of our players walk up and punch an opposition player in the face out of nowhere, and more than one person on here will defend their actions because of the shirt they’re wearing.
WFA is a f*** up. A massive f*** up which is very likely to massively hurt their chances of a second term, because all those pensioners - if they survive the coming winters - are going right back to the Tories.