[Politics] Sir Keir Starmer’s route to Number 10

[nicko31]

How? Details please.

Well you can start with voter suppression at the upcoming local elections, discussed at length on another thread....

 

[beorhthelm]

And do you know what works best?

Since all governments muck about with tax it is arguable that none know what works best.

However tax levels are not set to maximize government income. They are set to maximize voter approval and votes in the next election, balanced against the extent to which the tinkering will do damage to the economy.

I always found it amusing that the people who were crying about the damage done to the economy by the fact that the Bee Gees and Sean Connery were 'forced' by Labour to be 'tax exiles' were the same people moaning about their own tax burden. They should be honest and say that they are wealthy, could pay for private health, and education for the kids, and therefore don't wish to pay any tax. It is viewpoint. It is the 'working men and women and their families' argument that underpinned Thatcher's view that there is no such thing as society.

I happen to think differently, and that means viewing tax as necessary to fund the socialist elements of society that we hold dear, like the NHS, the armed services and state education.

here's a view you might agree with:

There is living tapestry of men and women and people and the beauty of that tapestry and the quality of our lives will depend upon how much each of us is prepared to take responsibility for ourselves and each of us prepared to turn round and help by our own efforts those who are unfortunate.

can you guess who? not on tax of course, social responsibility. the tax system is sadly manipulated as you say to gain favour with some group of the electorate, why they wont adopt flat taxes because they lose that.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

here's a view you might agree with:

can you guess who? not on tax of course, social responsibility. the tax system is sadly manipulated as you say to gain favour with some group of the electorate, why they wont adopt flat taxes because they lose the manipulation.

If you are a flat tax man like me, I salute you

My immediate thought was Thatcher. I am more cynical and don't consider that a voluntary system of social support would work. I am sure that the pretty and amusing would get plenty of help, but the ugly and dull would fare less well.

And it is nothing more than charity. Orwell had a lot to say about charity, the Salvation army in particular, in 'Down and out in Paris and London'.

 

[Machiavelli]

Other than Ed Milliband's enthusiasm for a new green industrial strategy there is little to get excited about what Starmer and Reeves have been offering this week.

The offer at the moment seems to be not make things worse but not make them much better. Banging on about growth isn't going to cut it, as Truss found out. It's wishful thinking not serious governance.

Agree with what you say about growth: it's a hostage to fortune, and I suspect that it'll come back to bite them. I don't know what they're basing their confidence on about freeing up unpacked potential or productivity gains. As other countries also are, we're in a low growth regime currently, and I'm not convinced that there are too many policy levers that could be used to shift us out of that. It would have been wonderful if Labour had/could say something more 21C about growth, and moving away from it and GDP as a measure, but that would be too much to expect from that cautious pair.
Also agree about Miliband's green industrial strategy, which is one of the most encouraging policies proposed with the prospect of being introduced in my lifetime.
I do think that Labour have actually moved a little bit more than what you claim, however. There are some interesting and radical proposals on education, for instance, and we also need to accept that they'll be inheriting a dreadful legacy, with little leeway for action on money to spend, and creaking public services, some of which are on their last legs alongside dire public sector pay which is long overdue a boost.

 

[Machiavelli]

it isnt that at all, its pragmatic reality imho. The old tax this or that for ideological basis rather than realism.

If it works and brings in more, great, Id be delighted, i dont know anyone whos non dom or super wealthy. But I genuinely don't think it will and history shows people and their moeny move, resulting in less tax take overall.

The logical question is, is that is the reality, is that still actually preferable? To enact ideological "class warfare" policies that do little or nothing to benefit treasury?

 

[Hotchilidog]

Agree with what you say about growth: it's a hostage to fortune, and I suspect that it'll come back to bite them. I don't know what they're basing their confidence on about freeing up unpacked potential or productivity gains. As other countries also are, we're in a low growth regime currently, and I'm not convinced that there are too many policy levers that could be used to shift us out of that. It would have been wonderful if Labour had/could say something more 21C about growth, and moving away from it and GDP as a measure, but that would be too much to expect from that cautious pair.
Also agree about Miliband's green industrial strategy, which is one of the most encouraging policies proposed with the prospect of being introduced in my lifetime.
I do think that Labour have actually moved a little bit more than what you claim, however. There are some interesting and radical proposals on education, for instance, and we also need to accept that they'll be inheriting a dreadful legacy, with little leeway for action on money to spend, and creaking public services, some of which are on their last legs alongside dire public sector pay which is long overdue a boost.

I shall judge them on what they do and my expectations are low so hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised. Given the utter mess they will inherit I am not expecting a magic wand to be wafted to fix it all. The damage done over the last decade or so will require more than one parliament to fix.

What I would like to see is an honest assessment of the issues we face and a genuine attempt to address them. If they refuse to raise additional revenue I am not interested in listening to them bang on about affordability for the 'things they would like to do'. Windfall taxes, tax havens, loopholes, the top rate and yes the equalisation of CGT should all at least be in the discussion as to how the government can raise revenue and actually get stuff done.

There also needs to be an honest discussion as regards the impact of Brexit. If the topic of CU or SM membership is not even brought up by the end of the first term it will be a dereliction of duty.

I will enjoy the hell out of an election night that promises the inglorious demise of the most wretched of governments, but after that the new government should be held to account in their efforts to get this country back on some semblance of a track.

I am not expecting miracles, I am however expecting us to be moving in the right direction no matter how slowly. Standing still is not an option.

 

[WATFORD zero]

What I would like to see is an honest assessment of the issues we face and a genuine attempt to address them. If they refuse to raise additional revenue I am not interested in listening to them bang on about affordability for the 'things they would like to do'. Windfall taxes, tax havens, loopholes, the top rate and yes the equalisation of CGT should all at least be in the discussion as to how the government can raise revenue and actually get stuff done.


There also needs to be an honest discussion as regards the impact of Brexit. If the topic of CU or SM membership is not even brought up by the end of the first term it will be a dereliction of duty.

I will enjoy the hell out of an election night that promises the inglorious demise of the most wretched of governments, but after that the new government should be held to account in their efforts to get this country back on some semblance of a track.

I am not expecting miracles, I am however expecting us to be moving in the right direction no matter how slowly. Standing still is not an option.

Well there is a pretty obvious way of helping the economy grow. All it would need is for this trend of the last 2 years to continue for another 18 months.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/987347/brexit-opinion-poll/

And I'm pretty sure that would prompt a discussion on CU or SM membership from any incoming Government

 

[Hotchilidog]

Well there is a pretty obvious way of helping the economy grow. All it would need is for this trend of the last 2 years to continue for another 18 months.

View attachment 159010
https://www.statista.com/statistics/987347/brexit-opinion-poll/

And I'm pretty sure that would prompt a discussion on CU or SM membership from any incoming Government

I would like to think so. If Labour do get a 100+ majority, as some polls suggest, it should give them enough electoral breathing room to at least explore the possibility.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I'm not a supporter of non doms, but I'd hazard a guess that the overall tax take that all non doms bring the treasury through primary and secondary taxation goes down not up when they move, as many will.
The only consideration should be what brings the most overall net revenue in taxation, that factors in reality of human nature.

This is fag packet economics.

I don't think it is as simple as a numbers game. In short, if people think that those at the top - like Non-Doms - are taking the piss then ordinary folk will start doing it too. I see evidence of people earning good money who don't need to cheat the system trying to put private expenses through their business or VAT Return, inflating "job expenses" on PAYE'd income, expensing loan capital as interest. All this is facilitated by an understaffed HMRC and a swathe of the accounting sector who are unqualified / do not hold a practising certificate.

Simplify the tax system, close loopholes for the rich, show you are trying to be fair and people generally will comply.

 

[peterward]

So asking non-doms to pay their fair share of taxes is 'idealogical class warfare' now ? I think I'm beginning to understand where you're coming from

No of course it isnt, im not defending non doms, but the main difference from the Tories taking from poor and lining their own pockets, to Labour going after wealth, is poorer people cant do much and the super rich can, and in the main will simply bugger off leaving you with whatever % of nothing.

Its all about sticks and carrots, and sometimes even suffering unpalatable people you have little in common with, if that still nets the greatest amount to the treasury.

If they go after non doms and get anywhere near 3B net at the end, It would be great.....who except the non doms would be upset? but genuinely believe its more ideaolgy driven and wont raise anything as great a soundbite as it is.
And lets remember what Non Doms are, they're people who are not from this country, who have wealth in another country, usually where their citizenship is, who are still obliged to pay tax on all UK earnings in this country.

Is it better to lose that UK tax and potentially vast amounts of secondary taxes like VAT etc?

What Starmer could and should do, is start reciprocaly sharing taxation records with other nations, make it compulsory for those in the UK claiming non dom status, to submit their taxation returns on their assets abroad, to ensure theyre not trying to play both off against each other or shift wealth to avoid taxes in both/multiple jurisdictions i.e if they're provably paying full Indian tax on Indian derived assets, they are only taxed on UK wealth as is, if they are not paying appropriate levels of taxation on foreign derived assests, the UK government has the right to then tax them more or global income.

Govt wants to encourage more not less money into the country. Every £1 gained in tax is great, every £1 lost isnt. We're never going to meet these people, nor have beers with them most likely, but if some of their cash is taxed and used, its shirley better than none.

Theres a decent chance, that some of our top foreign PL footballers who have earned large amounts outside UK before arriving could be in this category.

We'll see if it works in the fullness of time, as Starmer will win, lets hope it does

 

[peterward]

I don't think it is as simple as a numbers game. In short, if people think that those at the top - like Non-Doms - are taking the piss then ordinary folk will start doing it too. I see evidence of people earning good money who don't need to cheat the system trying to put private expenses through their business or VAT Return, inflating "job expenses" on PAYE'd income, expensing loan capital as interest. All this is facilitated by an understaffed HMRC and a swathe of the accounting sector who are unqualified / do not hold a practising certificate.

Simplify the tax system, close loopholes for the rich, show you are trying to be fair and people generally will comply.

nobody could argue with that.

 

[beorhthelm]

Theres a decent chance, that some of our top foreign PL footballers who have earned large amounts outside UK before arriving could be in this category.

yes they are, sports is the largest catagory of non-doms and most after London are in North West.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Very easy to say they will freeze council tax this year when not in power so its just words.

Interesting that @Steve Foster has liked your post, being a Conservative candidate for Withdean you'd have thought he might actually have something to say on this subject. Although you'd also think Timmy - aka @Falmerfourtickets - might have something to say as well. Or are our Conservative candidates keeping low profiles hoping people will vote for them regardless ?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I would like to think so. If Labour do get a 100+ majority, as some polls suggest, it should give them enough electoral breathing room to at least explore the possibility.

Starmer,
You own it, you better never let it go
You only get one shot, do not miss your chance to blow
This opportunity comes once in a lifetime

 

[Weststander]

I don't think it is as simple as a numbers game. In short, if people think that those at the top - like Non-Doms - are taking the piss then ordinary folk will start doing it too. I see evidence of people earning good money who don't need to cheat the system trying to put private expenses through their business or VAT Return, inflating "job expenses" on PAYE'd income, expensing loan capital as interest. All this is facilitated by an understaffed HMRC and a swathe of the accounting sector who are unqualified / do not hold a practising certificate.

Simplify the tax system, close loopholes for the rich, show you are trying to be fair and people generally will comply.

I’ve seen lying Chartered Accountants complicit in tax evasion, sweeping client tax fraud under the carpet.

Yes I know they’re anti-ML criminal offences.

 

[spence]

Extremely disappointed with the Conservatives from Boris until now. Could never vote for the radical left so either a small party or not bother.

 

[Questions]

It’s about getting a sentiment across that actually is explained in monetary terms… It’s what has been missing in Labour. It’s so simple it’s brilliant.. and we all hate fat cats don’t we ?

 

[WATFORD zero]

It’s about getting a sentiment across that actually is explained in monetary terms… It’s what has been missing in Labour. It’s so simple it’s brilliant.. and we all hate fat cats don’t we ?

Apparently not

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Extremely disappointed with the Conservatives from Boris until now. Could never vote for the radical left so either a small party or not bother.

You can safely vote for Starmer then. The radical left, he is not. I'd compare him to Cameron. So second thoughts, you probably wouldn't want to vote for him either.

 

[Nicks]

I bet a lot of people in this thread were quite happy with Boris when he put them all on Furlough with wages paid as well.
And in case you are wondering, I didn't get furloughed.