|
Post by Totheleft on Jan 29, 2024 14:54:24 GMT
Urm supply and demand lowers wages hasnt supply and demand increased with much higher immigration now after FOM Stoped and have wages decreased has you say it does ? The number of EU nationals travelling into the UK for work WAS NEVER COUNTED. We were lied to, and the true scale only immerged when 6 million people applied to stay. It was obvious to anybody that worked in certain sectors that we had been absolutely flooded with cheap labour from Eastern Europe... hence people voted in their millions for Brexit. Immigration is not higher now, it was in the millions under FOM. A big part of the current immigration figure is not actually workers, it is the disgusting flooding of our universities with foreign students to make a fast buck. Finally, my employer (and many others) re-started in house training because they could no longer look to cheap EU labour, and as a result 20 young people per year are now trained up and earning £50k. Your proving the fact That Brevit campaign relied on lies I put a bit of Bate down and you fell for it. I Already know that that the large influx of the Record high of the Migrants who come to this Country realson was Family reasons and most likely Remain in this Country What pressure will this put on our inversructire Hospitals Schools, Housing ? Oh well you Brexiters Asked for it.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 29, 2024 17:32:24 GMT
I think you are missing my point. You put forward several measures to put more money in the pockets of (mainly) the lower paid. But that is more likely to stoke a consumer boom as they start spending (mainly on imports) than any long term investment in UK industry. The most obvious example is your desire for higher taxes on investment income - I would have thought that the experience of the 1950's & 60's would have been enough to show that highly taxing investment income does not lead to more investment. I actually proposed lower capital gains taxes for long term investments. But why should any other form of income be taxed more lightly than earned income? Why not a level playing field? It is a level playing field - what you are asking is that Dividend Income be taxed higher than earned income. Which is precisely the situation we had in the 60's where investment collapsed. No - it is basic economics that the lower paid spend a greater proportion of their income on consumables than the rich. Which explains why the rich have a greater proportion of their wealth invested. Now there are good arguments for tax cuts to give the poor more money to spend - it drives economic activity. But my point is that it doesn't necessarily drive investment and it is investment that we need to grow. Since the Financial crash the countries of Europe have stagnated due to high taxes and high regulation - the average person in the poorest State in the US is now richer than the average person in the UK, we are losing out while countries like the US, where taxes are lower and business investment encouraged, grow faster. That will not change with a consumer boom that sucks in more imports.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2024 21:16:20 GMT
I actually proposed lower capital gains taxes for long term investments. But why should any other form of income be taxed more lightly than earned income? Why not a level playing field? It is a level playing field - what you are asking is that Dividend Income be taxed higher than earned income. Which is precisely the situation we had in the 60's where investment collapsed. No - it is basic economics that the lower paid spend a greater proportion of their income on consumables than the rich. Which explains why the rich have a greater proportion of their wealth invested. Now there are good arguments for tax cuts to give the poor more money to spend - it drives economic activity. But my point is that it doesn't necessarily drive investment and it is investment that we need to grow. Since the Financial crash the countries of Europe have stagnated due to high taxes and high regulation - the average person in the poorest State in the US is now richer than the average person in the UK, we are losing out while countries like the US, where taxes are lower and business investment encouraged, grow faster. That will not change with a consumer boom that sucks in more imports. You clearly have not read properly what I have written. I have clearly stated that unearned income including dividends be taxed at the same rate as earned income, ie the same rate, not a higher rate. And I have advocated lower taxes on incomes financed by higher taxes on assets with lower rates of capital gains taxes for long term investments, which would all be designed both to promote economic activity and divert investment away from property assets into productive enterprises. Whilst also creating the conditions for more enterprising individuals lower down the pay scale to generate sufficient capital to start their own enterprises. Those choosing to invest in promising enterprises over the long term instead of in yet more bricks and mortar would actually pay less taxes in the form of capital gains under my proposals. We do after all seriously need to rein in further inflation of property prices whilst encouraging investment in business instead in order to promote prosperity and growth. Property price inflation is sucking investment away from more productive, growth creating, sectors of the economy. And are you seriously suggesting that the poor need to remain poor for the good of the economy, lest they otherwise spend their money on imported goods? Well perhaps if investment in home grown manufacturing was encouraged instead of in bricks and mortar we might be able to produce more of the goods they might want to buy at home. If we dont make anything much ourselves, importing goods is always going to be necessary. Keeping people so poor that they cant afford to buy anything is not an answer to this that serves the wellbeing of the people. You seem to be simultaneously arguing that the poor need to remain as poor as possible to avoid spending on imports whilst the rich need to be as rich as possible in order to have more money to invest. No wonder so many of you Tory types seem to be about serving the interests of the wealthy elites at the expense of the rest of us. You seem to want to actively oppose hard working people becoming more prosperous for the good of the economy. And yet you jump up and down in a total tantrum at any notion of those poor hard done by wealthy elites paying a penny more for anything. I see you as utterly self interested on this. Any economic model that relies on the masses remaining poor with only the rich having the resources to invest is not one that works for the people and should be discarded.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 29, 2024 22:20:12 GMT
It is a level playing field - what you are asking is that Dividend Income be taxed higher than earned income. Which is precisely the situation we had in the 60's where investment collapsed. No - it is basic economics that the lower paid spend a greater proportion of their income on consumables than the rich. Which explains why the rich have a greater proportion of their wealth invested. Now there are good arguments for tax cuts to give the poor more money to spend - it drives economic activity. But my point is that it doesn't necessarily drive investment and it is investment that we need to grow. Since the Financial crash the countries of Europe have stagnated due to high taxes and high regulation - the average person in the poorest State in the US is now richer than the average person in the UK, we are losing out while countries like the US, where taxes are lower and business investment encouraged, grow faster. That will not change with a consumer boom that sucks in more imports. You clearly have not read properly what I have written. I have clearly stated that unearned income including dividends be taxed at the same rate as earned income, ie the same rate, not a higher rate. It is currently taxed at the same rate - you are suggesting it is taxed at a higher rate. What I think you are forgetting is that wages come out of pre-tax income while Dividends come out of post-tax income. Who decides what these assets are?. For example, most people with pensions use funds for their investments and one of the most popular is the City of London Investment Trust (CTY), which has a long record of decent returns through good and bad times. Would this company be eligible for your lower capital gains rate? I have already said there are good reasons for increasing pay for the lower paid - just that investment in productive growth is not one of those reasons. Trying to pretend it is will not lead to an economy that is growing. Seems that you are still trying to fight the war of envy rather than tackle the basic problems in the UK economy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2024 12:46:16 GMT
You clearly have not read properly what I have written. I have clearly stated that unearned income including dividends be taxed at the same rate as earned income, ie the same rate, not a higher rate. It is currently taxed at the same rate - you are suggesting it is taxed at a higher rate.What I think you are forgetting is that wages come out of pre-tax income while Dividends come out of post-tax income. Who decides what these assets are?. For example, most people with pensions use funds for their investments and one of the most popular is the City of London Investment Trust (CTY), which has a long record of decent returns through good and bad times. Would this company be eligible for your lower capital gains rate? I have already said there are good reasons for increasing pay for the lower paid - just that investment in productive growth is not one of those reasons. Trying to pretend it is will not lead to an economy that is growing. Seems that you are still trying to fight the war of envy rather than tackle the basic problems in the UK economy. I have not suggested that dividends be taxed at a higher rate. Stop lying about what I said. I have said that all income should be taxed at the same rate as taxes on earned incomes and salaries. You say this is already happening which is all very well if true. Yet I know of people who pay themselves minimum wage whilst taking most of their income in the form of a huge dividend which they declare as capital gains and thus pay a much lower rate of tax. Removing this loophole is only fair. As for capital gains resulting from long term investments, I have actually advocated lowering these, so how does that compute with your groan inducing and utterly predictable if lazy charge that I am motivated by envy? Which is of course bullshit. I do not envy rich people beyond the simple thought that it would be nice to be so rich. I only feel a justified sense of grievance if they are avoiding paying their dues, or getting rich by making others poor. My best friend is a multiple property owning millionairess who has helped me out financially before and I do not in the least begrudge her what she has. She has worked hard for it, so enough of this lazy politics of envy crap. You impugn my motives rather than effectively challenge my arguments, which is a sign that you are losing the argument. Your poor hard done by rich people act, which you go off on at every opportunity, is getting rather predictable as well as tiresome. And transparent and boring.
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Jan 30, 2024 14:01:21 GMT
The number of EU nationals travelling into the UK for work WAS NEVER COUNTED. We were lied to, and the true scale only immerged when 6 million people applied to stay. It was obvious to anybody that worked in certain sectors that we had been absolutely flooded with cheap labour from Eastern Europe... hence people voted in their millions for Brexit. Immigration is not higher now, it was in the millions under FOM. A big part of the current immigration figure is not actually workers, it is the disgusting flooding of our universities with foreign students to make a fast buck. Finally, my employer (and many others) re-started in house training because they could no longer look to cheap EU labour, and as a result 20 young people per year are now trained up and earning £50k. Your proving the fact That Brevit campaign relied on lies I put a bit of Bate down and you fell for it. I Already know that that the large influx of the Record high of the Migrants who come to this Country realson was Family reasons and most likely Remain in this Country What pressure will this put on our inversructire Hospitals Schools, Housing ? Oh well you Brexiters Asked for it. Literally nobody listened to the campaigns, they had already made their mind up based on decades of experience of living inside the EU. There was two types of voters... ones that experienced first hand the true level of Eastern Europeans that had come to the UK... and the others who were blissfully ignorant. You are talking nonsense, student visas make up a huge amount of the net migration figures, and 85% of them leave after their studies: In the year ending September 2023, there were 486,107 sponsored study visas and 104,501 Graduate route visas granted to main applicants - sourced directly from UK Universities. Brexit was about cutting off THE MILLIONS of EU nationals that came to the UK each year. You only have to look at a population graph to see how our population rocketed under FOM. FOM is UNCONTROLLED immigration, where you have no idea on the figures or stand a chance of planning for it. We can now control immigration much more tightly, the Tories are just choosing not to because they don't want to turn off the cash to our universities!
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jan 30, 2024 14:10:04 GMT
Normally your posts are relatively sensible Dave. There are some seriously dodgy "facts" in that analysis however.
Not sure this thread needs to become another brexit one.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 30, 2024 17:53:10 GMT
I have not suggested that dividends be taxed at a higher rate. Stop lying about what I said. I have said that all income should be taxed at the same rate as taxes on earned incomes and salaries. You say this is already happening which is all very well if true. Yet I know of people who pay themselves minimum wage whilst taking most of their income in the form of a huge dividend which they declare as capital gains and thus pay a much lower rate of tax. Removing this loophole is only fair. Dividend income is declared as dividend income - it is nothing to to with capital gains. The reason that Dividend tax rates are lower than income tax rates is as I have already explained. Define what a long term investment is - you ignored the specific example I gave so what are you viewing it as?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2024 19:48:34 GMT
I have not suggested that dividends be taxed at a higher rate. Stop lying about what I said. I have said that all income should be taxed at the same rate as taxes on earned incomes and salaries. You say this is already happening which is all very well if true. Yet I know of people who pay themselves minimum wage whilst taking most of their income in the form of a huge dividend which they declare as capital gains and thus pay a much lower rate of tax. Removing this loophole is only fair. Dividend income is declared as dividend income - it is nothing to to with capital gains. The reason that Dividend tax rates are lower than income tax rates is as I have already explained. Define what a long term investment is - you ignored the specific example I gave so what are you viewing it as? So first you claim that dividend tax rates are the same as income tax rates. Then you say they are lower after all, citing excuses as to why that should be so. You are being highly inconsistent. My position on that is wholly consistent. Dividend income and all other incomes, subject to the following proviso on capital gains. should be taxed at the same rates as earned incomes. As laid out by the Tory party member whose idea it was, capital gains taxes should be levied at the same rate as income taxes, but get progressively lower the longer the investment term. The exact details of the taper is not something I am going to get into because that is open to negotiation, and I am open to persuasion and advice on that, but certainly anything less than a year would be a short term investment, whilst anything more than a decade would be a long term one. I would suggest that the former be taxed at the same rate as earned incomes whilst the latter be taxed at no more than half that at most, ideally even less. In between the rates would be determined by the length of the investment period. But I have no fixed targets in mind on that and am thus open to persuasion. It is the general idea I am arguing for.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 30, 2024 22:31:13 GMT
Dividend income is declared as dividend income - it is nothing to to with capital gains. The reason that Dividend tax rates are lower than income tax rates is as I have already explained. Define what a long term investment is - you ignored the specific example I gave so what are you viewing it as? So first you claim that dividend tax rates are the same as income tax rates. Then you say they are lower after all, citing excuses as to why that should be so. You are being highly inconsistent. My position on that is wholly consistent. Dividend income and all other incomes, subject to the following proviso on capital gains. should be taxed at the same rates as earned incomes. I have already explained this - Dividends are paid after tax. Salaries are paid before tax. Currently the capital gains rate on shares is 20% - increasing that to 40% and slowly reducing to 20% after 10 years doesn't strike me as very encouraging for investment. If it were reduced to zero after 10 years possibly. What the 10 year restriction would do is drive investment into safer long term shares and funds - I suspect that getting investments for startups and unicorns could be rather harder.
|
|