the troubadour

Rather the contrary. All too many become cynical with age and less responsive to others than themselves and immediate family.
That's where the me, me, me comes into focus. Not with the young. You really have it all back to front.


Actually a flat tax favours higher earners and is often cited as a fairer' way to collect impost. Which of course it isn't. Just favours higher earners.


Corbyn is on the right path anyway. People have had enough of austerity for decades and an over emphasis on a particular segment of society and want to restore a balance.

Beoz

Really? The voting stats tell it otherwise.

Thank you for backing my point. Sounds like we can put that one to bed then.

That could have sounded so good, if there were decades worth of austerity.

GarryP

Yeah, the old do tend to end up rejecting others, at the same time they crave community of those that they consider their peers. They close in, thus the attacks on immigrants, the young, anything different. We probably need an activity to open up their minds and stop them atrophying to fossils.

Also the more money you have, the more opportunity to use allowances, discounts and offsets - meaning they don't even pay the flat tax. First step is to put a stop to those, which would push up tax take without doing anything else.

Corbyn is better than the tories (you can't cut your way to greatness), but he still doesn't have any kind of plan as to how to fix things and make UK PLc work better. And THAT is what's really needed.

Beoz

Wrong. The more money you have, the easier it is to spend, which means tax. If we prevented people from making money, which is what you lefties want, then less people spend, which equals less tax.

Even for the battlers, there are investments for tax minimisation.

Take this quaint shack in back water Victoria.

41/70 Bailey Street Belmont Vic 3216 - Unit for Sale #125316210 - realestate.com.au

10% down ($16,000) and its yours

Despite what the press says, banks are still favouring investors over owner occupiers. Why? Negative gearing of course. Where's the risk when the investor has no risk. Providing it rents for whatever, the bank doesn't care.

ozzieeagle

There is plenty of money out there, and it wasn't earn't, just a lucky break in circumstance and history. Whats needed is to double the inheritance tax and force people to put money back into the economy by spending the surplus in their homes. This will also help alleviate the housing market. Tax the family home upon death, the baby boomers including myself got a free ride at the expense of the young. It's time to address this totally unfair situation.

Free education for the young, fix up the National Health and never ever let people get a free ride on property again.


I could have had free university, why is that "right" not allowed for the young of the following generations. Take it out of where we really prospered for free..... Housing.

Beoz

I don't necessarily agree a baby boomers luck is something that should be tapped into, especially on the home they live in and the inheritance for their children.

Luck is an important aspect to success and in many ways you create your own luck. You decided to buy once upon a time, rather than rent. You created that and it wasn't a free ride at all.

If you want to alleviate housing issues, look at reducing NG by scaling its use dependent on the amount of investment properties OR land tax ones investment properties based on the number. Sure you can have 2 (think of 2 as superannuation) but when you are at 10, you start paying a social penalty.

In the UK, under the Tories changes to buy to let have minimised tax advantages for investment properties. Who said the Tories were all about the rich. Even in Oz, under the Libs, slight tweaks to what is claimable appeared in the last budget. Easy done when property is booming. Any smart government would make these tweaks either way depending on the buoyancy of the property market.

ozzieeagle

Totally disagree it was a free ride, My place has gone up by at least 20 X Plus in the last 30 years. I'm also not sure why my children should benefit from that free ride. If people have surplus money for inheritance purposes then that should come in the form of trust fund. Not a lucky break on housing as the expense of the rest of society. I didn't do anything that I wouldn't have done if I'd have been renting. Ergo a totally tax free gain on my part.

I'd go further and tax shares as well..... Unless they are in trust funds, especially designated for use after death and never before and with some smaller element of tax on those as well.

Not sure why people have got a free ride from lucky breaks in shares and housing. Time to address this problem, the young have got the right target on this one.

Actually to break it down, it wasn't so much the young that changed the vote it was those in the 30 to 50 year bracket according to the latest stats..... They swung to labour like there was no tomorrow.


Using the above system, it also gives me the freedom from guilt to spend my surplus in the way I see fit, this also benefits society as a whole and lowers house prices, thus enabling more people to get into the housing market. Right now the benefits are going to an ever increasing smaller group who are benefiting more and more from the inequality. It really is time to sort this.

I refuse to be part of that Me Me Me group. I want Labour and or the Left to tax death like never before.

Beoz

But you haven't had a free ride. You took the risk to start with, you paid a mortgage, and even if you sold tomorrow, you still need somewhere to live. You really haven't made any money unless you move to the back end of Geelong, away from your comforts, friends, family.

An investment property on the other hand is different. If you had one of those for 30 years and sold it tomorrow, you pay capital gains tax.

This is why CGT is exempt on your home, but not on your investments.

I see it as young voters getting out there for their freebies without thinking about the consequences for all.

How do you figure this lowers house prices? Lets say there is an inheritance tax, what happens to that tax? If its used to give to people, like first home buyers, its only going to increase prices - more money people that have money, the higher the prices go. Simple economics. The lowering of interest rates, giving more people more purchasing power is the only reason why house prices have increased so much.

Sounds like you have yourself caught up in the left wing ideals where you take from the rich, but the harsh reality is, when it comes to housing, the more people have money to spend, the higher the prices go.

OzTennis

No advocation of flat rate income tax from me.

You are making out that there is there is a strong disincentive in the UK because the rich are taxed so much and they do so much for 'loonies' and 'students' (who aren't providers) which is your words and meaningless tosh.

I've posted figures on how more of the government revenue in the UK comes from taxes which are regressive in nature (NIC's, VAT, indirect) than income taxes. If you care to debate on reality rather than ideology post something sensible; otherwise I'll ignore the babble.

Beoz

That's correct. I pay the same rate of VAT as you. I earn more than you and shouldn't be penalised for buying things I want. If I want to buy a Ferrari and you can't then that's just tough titties. Don't worry, I will pay a great chunk of VAT on that.

On the other hand I pay more income tax than you. A flat rate of tax would be great for me, but its not about me me me and we would not financially function as a society if it were the case.

Any more resentful complaints?

OzTennis

Go away and learn what a regressive tax is then come back with a decent argument. You are suggesting when we both go to a UK supermarket that you prove your income at the till and pay less VAT than me. It's a tax on consumption; if you consume, you pay the same tax. The % of income is the relevant thing not the amount.

The above is a perfect example of me, me, me. For the record if I wanted to go out and buy a Ferrari (which for you would be for no other reason than look at me, me, me and what I can afford) I could.

OzTennis

Yes, no comment from you on how income tax rates and corporation tax rates have plummeted over the years and the shift to indirect/regressive taxes which doesn't suggest to me that the well off aren't better off and are more favourably treated than they used to be.

No argument about your idiotic comment about students.

You seem to believe and you certainly suggest that as people get older they come to their senses and realise the Tories are the only party to vote for. Only the young and stupid could vote for any other party. I can almost see the blue rinse dripping onto your posts.

Beoz

Actually its the opposite to me me me. If it were all about me I would support a flat rate of income tax. I don't.

Perhaps a re-read might sort you out.

Yes company tax rates have declined. While that doesn't directly suit a public servant it does assist job creation and retention for the masses and it should never be about me me me. It should be all about the masses.

OzTennis

You've obviously studied at Donald Trump University judging by the prevarication and tosh you come up with. Did you or did you not give the impression that the well off are paying too much income tax?

Do you honestly believe the well off and Tories are not motivated by self interest and the not so well off and non-Tories are? i.e. self interest is laudable in some but not in others.

OzTennis

Getting back to UK election fallout:

Theresa May told her party yesterday that she got them into this mess and she'll get them out.


The cabinet is divided between those still pushing for a hard Brexit (Fox, Davis etc who are now being called 'creationists') and those for a soft Brexit. Those Tory MP's in favour of a soft Brexit have been having secret talks with Labour, Lib Dems etc about striking a deal to have the numbers when it comes to a vote in Parliament.

Business confidence and the pound have plummeted and businessmen and business organisations are calling for negotiations to include single market/customs union.

Former PM John Major (who laid the foundations for the peace process in NI) is today saying he doubts the alliance with the DUP and its effect on the peace process. He said if the government locks itself into one side of the process then it can't be seen as an impartial honest broker. He said if the government paid cash for votes it won't go down well in other parts of the UK.

And in an unfortunate bit of timing, all this power sharing with the DUP comes a month before the annual marching season and the Orange Order want May to remove the bans on the most controversial of marches in return for their loyalty.