[Politics] Starmer v Sunak *** Official Match Thread ***

[Pavilionaire]

How do you get a State Pension up to 25k other than by not drawing it for more than a decade?

I've not seen state pension that high, but I have seen some on c. £13K - £14K if they are a widower. If not other income and a Personal Allowance of £12,570 that's £430 - £1,430 taxable so £86 - £286 in tax due, a burden on the pensioner to understand and pay and a burden on HMRC to collect.

If only the Personal Allowance had gone up by even half the rate of inflation of recent years all state pension would be outside the scope of tax, this is a problem entirely of the Tories own making.

Yes, in my example above the Tories plan to give a Personal Allowance equal to the state pension, but not sure why pensioners should get a larger tax-free Personal Allowance than, say, my 18-year old son who is on c. £13K a year so IS exposed to tax whilst trying to save for a deposit on a property whilst running a car to get him to/from an apprenticeship.

 

[A mex eyecan]

I've not seen state pension that high, but I have seen some on c. £13K - £14K if they are a widower. If not other income and a Personal Allowance of £12,570 that's £430 - £1,430 taxable so £86 - £286 in tax due, a burden on the pensioner to understand and pay and a burden on HMRC to collect.

If only the Personal Allowance had gone up by even half the rate of inflation of recent years all state pension would be outside the scope of tax, this is a problem entirely of the Tries own making.

Yes, in my example above the Tories plan to give a Personal Allowance equal to the state pension, but not sure why pensioners should get a larger tax-free Personal Allowance than, say, my 18-year old son who is on c. £13K a year so IS exposed to tax whilst trying to save for a deposit on a property whilst running a car to get him to/from an apprenticeship.

As much as a higher PA for pensioners would suit me very nicely next May when I qualify for mine, it would be plain wrong. PA should be the same for all. Young have life tough trying to get started out and always will. If you want to try and make folk believe that we’re all in it together then let’s ensure that one doesn’t get an advantage over the other. Yes I know I’m simplifying matters but it’s just one area of many where disparities are just wrong.

 

[Mike Small]

I'm not sure it's complete BS.

Labour have made a bunch of promises and have not costed them up properly. Tories are trying to coax this out of them. I think the lie is the fact that it was a fully independent analysis.

It's a reasonable point , all these improvements to the NHS , increased defence spending, more money for stopping the boats etc .... Where's it coming from the country is broke.

Not for the top 1% it's not. They get richer and richer and richer and richer. Obscene wealth shafting everyone.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Just backed up my view I'm voting to get rid of the Tories (if I can find the motivation to vote) rather than for Labour.

I imagine a decent number of people are in the same boat.

 

[zefarelly]

Just backed up my view I'm voting to get rid of the Tories (if I can find the motivation to vote) rather than for Labour.

I imagine a decent number of people are in the same boat.

And again . . . . Apathy is why we're in this mess.



Everyones so spinless, apathetic , selfish and greedy . . . . Thats not a personal dig, its a national one!

 

[ozzygull]

Just backed up my view I'm voting to get rid of the Tories (if I can find the motivation to vote) rather than for Labour.

I imagine a decent number of people are in the same boat.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

How do you get a State Pension up to 25k other than by not drawing it for more than a decade?

Indeed.

Say it carefully. You* can't.

(I looked into it, sadly after the fact. But frankly I'd be astonished if I lived long enough to make the deprivation of immediate cash worthwhile. My dad died a couple of years after retiring at 60 (forced out, really), having taken the low lump sum option. Sod that. I'm already 66. Borrowed time and all that.

*Not you, obviously. I like you

 

[dwayne]

Not for the top 1% it's not. They get richer and richer and richer and richer. Obscene wealth shafting everyone.

And what will labour be doing to address this. Oh yea. F all.

 

[Weststander]

Not for the top 1% it's not. They get richer and richer and richer and richer. Obscene wealth shafting everyone.

Many in that category pay little UK direct tax. Offshore arrangements etc. They don’t pay the 45%.

How to ensnare them?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I've not seen state pension that high, but I have seen some on c. £13K - £14K if they are a widower. If not other income and a Personal Allowance of £12,570 that's £430 - £1,430 taxable so £86 - £286 in tax due, a burden on the pensioner to understand and pay and a burden on HMRC to collect.

If only the Personal Allowance had gone up by even half the rate of inflation of recent years all state pension would be outside the scope of tax, this is a problem entirely of the Tries own making.

Yes, in my example above the Tories plan to give a Personal Allowance equal to the state pension, but not sure why pensioners should get a larger tax-free Personal Allowance than, say, my 18-year old son who is on c. £13K a year so IS exposed to tax whilst trying to save for a deposit on a property whilst running a car to get him to/from an apprenticeship.

Because they want to bribe people who are more likely to vote for them would be my guess.

 

[dwayne]

Many in that category pay little UK direct tax. Offshore arrangements etc. They don’t pay the 45%.

How to ensnare them?

Wealth tax for people with more than 10 million in assets. Maybe 1/2%.

Labour ain't doing shiz though.

It will be the status quo under them with perhaps less corruption.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

And again . . . . Apathy is why we're in this mess.



Everyones so spinless, apathetic , selfish and greedy . . . . Thats not a personal dig, its a national one!

People have apathy because of the options, it's not just a UK problem either, look at our US cousins.

 

[ozzygull]

Labour ain't doing shiz though.

It will be the status quo under them with perhaps less corruption.

well at least less corruption would be a start

 

[Bozza]

 

[chip]

well at least less corruption would be a start

Or just different corruption. Achanges is as good as a rest

 

[Bry Nylon]

And again . . . . Apathy is why we're in this mess.

TL;DR

 

[zefarelly]

People have apathy because of the options, it's not just a UK problem either, look at our US cousins.

Go and spoil your paper . . .it still gets counted. . . .or vote monster raving looney . . .I have in the past!

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

So Labour 'leaving this gap' is your justification for the Leader of the country being forced to lie about it multiple times on TV ?

The reason every single party has this 'gap' is because the election was only called a week and a half ago and nobody has published a costed manifesto yet. Although you may expect the party responsible for it to have a bit of a head start ?

But it's definitely Labour that are the only ones 'with a gap' isn't it. Despite your newly found centrist 'I'm really uncommitted at this election' stance, I find I'm not totally convinced

Interesting Article in the Tory bible 'The Spectator' today. Maybe you haven't read it yet ?

On Sunak’s maths, Tories will lift taxes by £3,000 per household​

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/on-sunaks-maths-tories-will-lift-taxes-by-3000-per-household/

But this is what was so disappointing about Starmer. Anyone with half a brain cell could see he had so many open goals like this… and he took none of them.

Rishi lying would’ve been called out in the media anyway, but he wouldn’t have looked so clueless and weak if he’d spotted all of these clear Sunak errors.

 

[ROSM]

But this is what was so disappointing about Starmer. Anyone with half a brain cell could see he had so many open goals like this… and he took none of them.

Rishi lying would’ve been called out in the media anyway, but he wouldn’t have looked so clueless and weak if he’d spotted all of these clear Sunak errors.

It would have taken more than 45 seconds ro have said much of this. Also it has now been assessed that starmer on average got less than 35 seconds to talk whereas sunak got 43 seconds unchallenged plus on average 10 seconds of butting in each question.

So c50% more talking time which over an hour programme is huge

 

[Machiavelli]

It would have taken more than 45 seconds ro have said much of this. Also it has now been assessed that starmer on average got less than 35 seconds to talk whereas sunak got 43 seconds unchallenged plus on average 10 seconds of butting in each question.

So c50% more talking time which over an hour programme is huge

Where is your source with this? (It accords with my experience of the debate, but we always ought to be sceptical of our experiences of such things.) If your source is robust, then at the very least Etchingham should never be able to chair such a thing again, if not ITV should be disqualified from hosting such debates. I'm not sure these debates actually add much to our understanding of the (two) main parties.