utilitymonster2.bsky.social
Utilitarian.
55 posts
11 followers
12 following
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Non-doms, private equity bosses, private school parents, wealthy landowners, shareholders, people who use private jets and the 4% of estates that pay inheritance tax were the first trade-offs (in the Budget).
comment in response to
post
My opinion comes directly from the Spanish government, which reported 632 million Euros a year in revenue, not from a think-tank with a vested interest in inflating its figures.
comment in response to
post
I really dislike such hyperbole. If that MP can’t figure it out, they shouldn’t be in Parliament because they’re clearly not across the detail of their Government’s policies.
comment in response to
post
There are always trade-offs. Corbyn and McDonnell were preparing to deliver £7 billion in Tory welfare cuts in 2017. But I am glad that 1 million low-paid workers will get sick pay, 4.5 million families will get a Universal Credit boost, and that people are coming off NHS waiting lists.
comment in response to
post
Public spending is rising by a huge amount in 2024/25 and 2025/26.
The article concerns 2026/27 to 2028/29, when it will only be rising by an average of 1.1% a year in real terms. I don’t think that can be classed as austerity.
comment in response to
post
That’s not a great response. I do expect people on the left to be a bit more responsive to evidence and data than people on the right.
Alas, we’re not much smarter or less emotional. And that’s why they win quite frequently.
comment in response to
post
Labour did raise taxation on the rich to the tune of £15 billion a year in the Budget.
We actually see tax rises on low and middle earners as a non-starter policy. The Nordic countries tax them more (and also set VAT at 25%, typically). That’s how they fund their services.
comment in response to
post
I am not. I am, however, concerned about what happened in the US this year, with millions of people who voted for Biden in 2020 staying at home or voting for third parties because his achievements weren’t highlighted enough and they didn’t think the alternative could be much worse.
comment in response to
post
Thank you for your considered response.
To be fair, as the Institute for Government note, she did reverse the Tories’ planned cuts to capital investment, relaxing her fiscal rules to borrow an extra £25-30 billion a year for infrastructure.
And Germany do have much lower borrowing costs than us.
comment in response to
post
Energy prices are much lower than they were in 2022 and 2023. Old people did not freeze — mortality was historically pretty low this winter, energy prices were lower than last winter, and they got a 8.5% income boost. My council tax did go up by 4.99%, amounting to £3.88 a month. I’m happy to pay.
comment in response to
post
One party cut inheritance tax, capital gains tax and the top rate of income tax when they were in office, and caused market turmoil when they tried to pass tens of billions more in tax cuts for the rich.
This Labour government has taxed the wealthy and boosted funding for public services:
comment in response to
post
This isn’t austerity. Public spending will still be rising by an average of 1.1% per year in real terms from 2026/27 to 2028/29. It’s much more than that in 2024/25 and 2025/26:
comment in response to
post
They’ve ended the onshore wind ban, expanded sick pay to 1 million low-paid workers, raised the minimum wage by 6.7%, taxed the wealthy to the tune of £15 billion a year to provide a real terms funding boost to all public services and NHS waiting lists are falling.
comment in response to
post
This isn’t austerity. Public spending is still set to rise by an average of 1.1% per year in real terms from 2026/27 to 2028/29, according to the article.
And all departments got real terms funding boosts for 2024/25 and 2025/26, with the NHS getting an extra £22.7 billion.
comment in response to
post
It already has been. Public services all got a real terms funding boost for 2024/25 and 2025/26. NHS waiting lists have fallen for five months in a row.
comment in response to
post
There are people on disability, illness and other benefits who are getting £33,000 a year. See the individual in this article, for instance:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...
comment in response to
post
Thanks for your reply - I was just saying that it isn't low and middle-income people who they've asked to pay more, but that it would probably have to be in the future.
We can't have Nordic levels of public service and welfare provision with American levels of taxation!
comment in response to
post
Thank you for your response. If her mobility is restricted, wouldn't she still be eligible? The mobility component of PIP remains without a threshold.
comment in response to
post
Just because someone put me on a block list, doesn't mean it's true.
comment in response to
post
They have raised £15 billion a year more from non-doms, private equity bosses, wealthy landowners, the 4% of estates that pay inheritance tax, private schools, private jets, capital gains tax and overseas buyers.
They're also raising £25 billion a year, disproportionately from big businesses.
comment in response to
post
That's because they tax low and middle-income people more. Value Added Tax is typically 25%.
comment in response to
post
There aren't many better options. If we want to fund welfare and public services, we will have to ask low and middle-income people to pay more (as they do in the Nordic countries, where VAT is also typically 25%). Average earners pay less in personal tax than at any point in the past 50 years.
comment in response to
post
Spain’s raised virtually nothing, and they had a lower threshold and a higher rate than that.
comment in response to
post
A wealth tax of up to 3.5% on assets worth over 3 million Euros, implemented by the Socialist government, only raised 632 million Euros (£500 million) in Spain.
www.reuters.com/article/tech...
comment in response to
post
Spain’s wealth tax (implemented by the Socialists) of up to 3.5% on assets of over 3 million Euros only raised 632 million Euros, or £500 million.
And he’s right that our tax system is already very progressive. The Nordic countries tax low and middle earners more.
ifs.org.uk/articles/how...
comment in response to
post
Those millionaires can make a voluntary contribution to the Treasury at any time.
There appear to be around 60 of them. There are over 3,000,000 in this country.
25% of pensioners are millionaires yet many complained about having the winter fuel allowance taken away from them.
comment in response to
post
There aren't many good options on the table. They've already taxed the wealthy to the tune of £15 billion a year.
They could break their manifesto promise not to raise income tax and employee NICs. They could raise inheritance tax to 45%, though that would only raise £1 billion a year or so.
comment in response to
post
They're boosting Universal Credit for 4.5 million families (on top of the £420 a year boost that 1 million households got in the Budget) and ending re-assessments for the severely disabled (giving them the dignity they deserve).
They're also expanding sick pay to 1 million low-paid workers.
comment in response to
post
The point was to end the strikes, get NHS waiting lists down, withdraw support for a proposed coal mine, ban bonuses for polluting water bosses, expand sick pay to 1 million low-paid workers, raise the minimum wage by 6.7%, end the onshore wind ban, and tax the wealthy to the tune of £15 billion.
comment in response to
post
"The average earner in the UK now has the lowest effective personal tax rate since 1975 — and one that is lower than in America, France, Germany or any G7 country... And it is from average earners that higher-tax countries in western Europe get much of their extra revenue."
comment in response to
post
It is a very progressive tax system, actually. The tax burden is at a record high yet average earners pay less tax than at any point in the past 50 years. A wealth tax would raise virtually nothing (it raised £500 million a year in Spain).
Here's the IFS:
ifs.org.uk/articles/how...
comment in response to
post
They were not "famously" exempted. The status is being scrapped and the Treasury expects the policy to raise the same amount of revenue over 5 years.
They are tweaking the Temporary Repatriation Facility.
A few hundred landowners (many of whom are tax avoiders) are not small food producers.
comment in response to
post
They already taxed the rich to the tune of £15 billion a year in the Budget, allowing them to provide a real terms funding boost to all public services for 2024/25 and 2025/26. NHS waiting lists have fallen for 5 months in a row.
comment in response to
post
They closed tax loopholes used by non-doms, private equity bosses, wealthy landowners and private schools. They've broadened the inheritance tax base. They raised capital gains tax, the windfall tax on the oil and gas giants, the levy on private jets and increased taxes on wealthy overseas buyers.
comment in response to
post
Republicans are cutting taxes for the rich and slashing Medicaid funding by tens of billions of dollars a year. Labour boosted NHS funding by £22.7 billion, in part by raising taxes on the wealthy, and waiting lists are falling.
Even here, they're boosting Universal Credit for 4.5 million families.
comment in response to
post
You can consult the documentation from the Budget, or re-watch Reeves' Budget speech, or just search up each item. They haven't communicated these policies well, but they have implemented them.
They're tweaking the Temporary Repatriation Facility, but are still scrapping the status.
comment in response to
post
They didn't bail out Thames Water. Taxpayers' money was not involved.
They did, however, ban bonuses for polluting water bosses in their Water (Special Measures) Bill.
comment in response to
post
You already did tax the rich in the Budget, to the tune of £15 billion a year. The average earner has the lowest personal tax rate for 50 years.
The Nordic countries fund their public services and welfare system through higher taxes on low and middle-income people. VAT is typically set at 25%.
comment in response to
post
Indeed. And Labour did, to their credit, increase taxes on second homes (raising capital gains tax, for instance) and wealthy overseas buyers.
comment in response to
post
There are closing the non-dom loophole. They've increased the windfall tax on the oil and gas giants. They increased capital gains tax on shareholders, narrowed loopholes used by private equity bosses and wealthy landowners, increased duties on private jets, ended exemptions for private schools.
comment in response to
post
Duties on tobacco and alcohol are designed to change people's behaviour.
Taxing the wealthy does change their behaviour, but not necessarily in the direction we'd want.
Of course we should tax the wealthy: Labour have already done so, and land and property taxation definitely needs an overhaul.
comment in response to
post
The point of public policy isn't primarily to send a message. It's to raise revenue for public services and welfare provision.
Most wealthy people pay some tax, and it's better to collect some than none at all.
comment in response to
post
A wealth tax would simply not raise many, many times more. Spain's wealth tax of up to 3.5% on fortunes of over 3 million Euros only raised 632 million Euros (or around £500 million) a year.
Most countries have abandoned their wealth taxes.
www.reuters.com/article/tech...
comment in response to
post
Of course - we wouldn't want wealthy left-wing voters to fear for their homes, would we?
The higher you set the threshold, the less revenue will be raised.
Spain's wealth tax had a lower threshold of 3 million Euros and only raised 632 million Euros (or £500 million).
comment in response to
post
What?
They broadened the inheritance tax base (meaning that the 4% of eligible estates will pay more), increased capital gains tax, closed or narrowed tax loopholes used by non-doms, private equity bosses and wealthy landowners, and ended tax exemptions for private schools.
comment in response to
post
Probably because cross-country evidence shows that wealth taxes don't work, and most have abandoned them.
Spain's wealth tax of up to 3.5% on assets over 3 million Euros raised a grand total of 632 million Euros a year (around £500 million).
comment in response to
post
Labour have closed or narrowed loopholes used by non-doms, private equity bosses and wealthy landowners, broadened the IHT base, ended tax exemptions for private schools, raised capital gains tax, and increased levies on the oil and gas giants, wealthy overseas buyers and private jets.
comment in response to
post
She is ending re-assessments for the severely disabled, giving them the dignity they deserve. She's increasing Universal Credit for 4.5 million families.
They will continue to receive a host of other benefits if they are in poverty, but they will also be more likely to seek work.