General Election 2015

[Torres]

I've heard it all now. Tory voters complaining that all Labour voters think about is a class war. It's been a class war for the last 5 years. A camel through the eye of a needle......

Nobody said that

[Hockey_saint]

Nobody said that

 

Should rephrase that. When you support a party with no mandate to lead who appear to be focussing on targeting those who are not of their ilk then perhaps mentioning class warfare at all is perhaps not the best idea.

[Torres]

Why not, is it only allowed to go one way?

[Joesaint]

Tell us of your understanding of the financial system. Please. Do you have any idea how money is created?

 

Of course I do, I also understand that we waste more money on servicing our debt then entire defense budget. If you want more spending power, you need private investment. That means government understanding good economics, and getting value for money for the tax payer, recognizing debt and living within our means. Not creating meaningless jobs and saying they somehow pay into the system through tax.

[Hockey_saint]

Why not, is it only allowed to go one way?

 

 

How many Labour MPs have you seen lately following the traditional labour (original, Unionistic ) line? Simply because it only appears to be going one way for the past 30 years.

[Hockey_saint]

Of course I do, I also understand that we waste more money on servicing our debt then entire defense budget. If you want more spending power, you need private investment. That means government understanding good economics, and getting value for money for the tax payer, recognizing debt and living within our means. Not creating meaningless jobs and saying they somehow pay into the system through tax.

 

OR, you can run government services in a productive, profit-making manner and plough the money back from said (kinda sovereign wealth fund companies like the current government are trying to do with companies like Ordnance Survey). We don't need to sell off the family jewelry to be profitable.

 

All I'm saying, is that whilst services should be run for a profit, we don't need to point blank sell them off. but rather lease them and keep a tight reign.

 

I just think private business has it's place, but when it comes to national services such as rail, gas, electric, water etc it should be clear who the company are renting it from and not just sell it off completely like our last 3 governments.

Edited 22 April, 2015 by Hockey_saint

[CB Fry]

Just seen the #milifandom thing.

 

I think it's quite amusing that some people on twitter are saying "it's fake because it's run by a card carrying young Labour member". Well, yeah. Who else would start a Miliband hero worship thing on twitter? A retired Colonel? A 28 year old plumber in Sevenoaks? Neil Hamilton?

 

"Labour in own supporter expressing support hypocrisy scandal"

[shurlock]

Of course I do, I also understand that we waste more money on servicing our debt then entire defense budget. If you want more spending power, you need private investment. That means government understanding good economics, and getting value for money for the tax payer, recognizing debt and living within our means. Not creating meaningless jobs and saying they somehow pay into the system through tax.

 

 

This is like a post about Richard Chaplow reimagined for the Lounge. Stirring stuff.

[trousers]

Hey, don't get me wrong, I'm all for giving more money to charities. I'm just saying they play a very different role to Government and one can't possibly do the role of the other.

 

Agree. I'm not suggesting otherwise. They are complimentary recipients of my money.

 

I can't see how paying less tax and giving more to charity is in anyones interest.

 

I'm not advocating paying less tax in order to give more to charity....I think the balance is currently about right. I'm advocating not paying more tax so that I can maintain my existing levels of charity giving.

Edited 22 April, 2015 by trousers

[saintbletch]

Just to show my political balance...

 

 

 

* Farage's one looks photoshopped. In the original he was apparently he was standing in front of a sign about the Cury hUNT

 

** I looked for one about the Lib Dems, but apparently in the history of childish twitter photo-memes, nobody could be bothered to satirise Clegg, he's already doing a good enough... (you know the rest).

[Wes Tender]

Er, no. I got the lame joke. I think the phrase that best describes you is "not an original thought in your head". Sweet you are still patting yourself on the back for your "parody".

And me describing it as "moronic" is not "getting all precious". Yet another misfire.

 

Anyway, I accept your apology on your pitiful misunderstanding of my charity comment.

 

Go on deluding yourself if it makes you feel all superior. It doesn't bother me.

[SuperMikey]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32409909

 

Tories so desperate to fling mud at the SNP that they'll try and create controversy over a joke. What makes it even better is that it's a joke about the media perception of the relationship between Labour and the SNP, which is now fuelling even more commentary and fearmongering! The mind boggles.

 

Honestly, I can't wait for this election to be over with now so that our politicians can go back to acting like c*nts in a confined area (i.e. Commons) rather than being let loose on the general public. Why do these people run the country again?

[Lord Duckhunter]

What's the problem ? If Labour get in and introduce the tax, Ed M will pay it. Hardly controversial and certainly not ironic, ( it seems the Telegraph has recruited Alanis Morissette as their headline writer ).

 

Ed was asked today " so you live in a mansion " , his reply ? " No, that's just what we call it " . Everything you need to know about this tax summed up in one line , " that's just what we call it" . Even the word "Mansion" is classic labour class warfare . Ed doesn't live in a mansion (it's just what we call it) but the word implies rich bar stewards that need their pips squeaking .

 

This week the policy has been exposed for the nonsense that it is . Firstly , by Andrew Neil and secondly from Eds own mouth .

 

Dog whistle politics at its finest . In some ways I do hope Ed gets in , because when he makes a complete and utter horlicks of it ( like Hollande in France ) it might shut a few lefties up.

[Batman]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32409909

 

Tories so desperate to fling mud at the SNP that they'll try and create controversy over a joke. What makes it even better is that it's a joke about the media perception of the relationship between Labour and the SNP, which is now fuelling even more commentary and fearmongering! The mind boggles.

 

Honestly, I can't wait for this election to be over with now so that our politicians can go back to acting like c*nts in a confined area (i.e. Commons) rather than being let loose on the general public. Why do these people run the country again?

 

These people run the country as we have the politicians we deserve. They get slated for every little detail. Every little comment that some nobody in their party, they they probably have never met would have said two years ago.

 

That is why we have bland politicians

 

As for throwing mud, labour and SNP have been doing it all day every day. Like clockwork, labour have been saying that they will "save" the NHS from Tory destruction. Now, isn't that throwing mud around as the NHS is hardly in crisis than normal? It is proposed every single election by the Labour Party. They promise to "save" the NHS.

Edited 23 April, 2015 by Batman

[CB Fry]

Go on deluding yourself if it makes you feel all superior. It doesn't bother me.

It would be awful if anyone "deluded" themselves that they were somehow "superior" to other posters wouldn't it....

 

My tongue was so far in my cheek that it totally escaped your notice and allowed you to get all precious over it.

 

Good luck with your next razor-sharp "parody" that dopey old me could never hope to "notice".

[Verbal]

Ed was asked today " so you live in a mansion " , his reply ? " No, that's just what we call it " . Everything you need to know about this tax summed up in one line , " that's just what we call it" . Even the word "Mansion" is classic labour class warfare . Ed doesn't live in a mansion (it's just what we call it) but the word implies rich bar stewards that need their pips squeaking .

 

This week the policy has been exposed for the nonsense that it is . Firstly , by Andrew Neil and secondly from Eds own mouth .

 

Dog whistle politics at its finest . In some ways I do hope Ed gets in , because when he makes a complete and utter horlicks of it ( like Hollande in France ) it might shut a few lefties up.

 

Again, you seem unaware that the mansion tax was originally, and remains, a Liberal Democrat policy. They are remarkably similar still - both raising a shade over £1bn and affecting a tiny one-half percent of the population.

 

So to be accurate you should be screaming: Liberal Democrats! Class Warriors! Or some such nonsense.

 

Anyway, the good thing is that when the party with the most votes emerges from the election, which will be Labour as you say, the most likely alliance will not be the SNP but with the Lib Dems. A chance to redeem themselves after getting into bed with the fatuous Cameron. And the mansion tax will be on the statute book within months.

 

I like your comparison with Hollande - it demonstrates a continued underestimation of Miliband. The kind of underestimation that has given him what can only be called a good election, with your betters floundering with any damned thing they can come up with. It is, if nothing else, the funniest election in years.

[aintforever]

Ed was asked today " so you live in a mansion " , his reply ? " No, that's just what we call it " . Everything you need to know about this tax summed up in one line , " that's just what we call it" . Even the word "Mansion" is classic labour class warfare . Ed doesn't live in a mansion (it's just what we call it) but the word implies rich bar stewards that need their pips squeaking .

 

This week the policy has been exposed for the nonsense that it is . Firstly , by Andrew Neil and secondly from Eds own mouth .

 

Dog whistle politics at its finest . In some ways I do hope Ed gets in , because when he makes a complete and utter horlicks of it ( like Hollande in France ) it might shut a few lefties up.

 

To be fair 'Mansion Tax' is just a name it's been given. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence knows it doesn't just refer to a country estate with a large tree lined drive and it's own stable block and servant's quarters. I guess that rules you out though.

 

What name would make it acceptable for you lot? 'Large House Tax' wouldn't work because you can get a large house in Liverpool for a few quid. 'Expensive House Tax' wouldn't work because to many people any house is expensive.

[CB Fry]

To be fair 'Mansion Tax' is just a name it's been given. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence knows it doesn't just refer to a country estate with a large tree lined drive and it's own stable block and servant's quarters. I guess that rules you out though.

 

What name would make it acceptable for you lot? 'Large House Tax' wouldn't work because you can get a large house in Liverpool for a few quid. 'Expensive House Tax' wouldn't work because to many people any house is expensive.

In fairness I think we should all sit back and relish the UKIP supporting, fully paid up member of Nigel's "anti-establishment" people's army Lord Duckhunter complaining about "dog whistle politics". Arf.

 

Here boy, here Ducky, phweeeeeeeeeeeep.

[Wes Tender]

It would be awful if anyone "deluded" themselves that they were somehow "superior" to other posters wouldn't it....

 

 

 

Good luck with your next razor-sharp "parody" that dopey old me could never hope to "notice".

 

Apology accepted

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Again, you seem unaware that the mansion tax was originally, and remains, a Liberal Democrat policy. They are remarkably similar still - both raising a shade over £1bn and affecting a tiny one-half percent of the population.

 

So to be accurate you should be screaming: Liberal Democrats! Class Warriors! Or some such nonsense.

 

Anyway, the good thing is that when the party with the most votes emerges from the election, which will be Labour as you say, the most likely alliance will not be the SNP but with the Lib Dems. A chance to redeem themselves after getting into bed with the fatuous Cameron. And the mansion tax will be on the statute book within months.

 

I like your comparison with Hollande - it demonstrates a continued underestimation of Miliband. The kind of underestimation that has given him what can only be called a good election, with your betters floundering with any damned thing they can come up with. It is, if nothing else, the funniest election in years.

 

Well Hollande and Miliband seemed to be singing from the same hymn sheet a few years ago;

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18966541

 

That was until Hollande proved that there is no real alternative to austerity

Edited 23 April, 2015 by Sergei Gotsmanov

[Wes Tender]

Again, you seem unaware that the mansion tax was originally, and remains, a Liberal Democrat policy. They are remarkably similar still - both raising a shade over £1bn and affecting a tiny one-half percent of the population.

 

So to be accurate you should be screaming: Liberal Democrats! Class Warriors! Or some such nonsense.

 

Anyway, the good thing is that when the party with the most votes emerges from the election, which will be Labour as you say, the most likely alliance will not be the SNP but with the Lib Dems. A chance to redeem themselves after getting into bed with the fatuous Cameron. And the mansion tax will be on the statute book within months.

 

I like your comparison with Hollande - it demonstrates a continued underestimation of Miliband. The kind of underestimation that has given him what can only be called a good election, with your betters floundering with any damned thing they can come up with. It is, if nothing else, the funniest election in years.

 

Yes, it was a Lib Dumb policy and Labour seeing that they would have their support copied it. The LDs expected to raise £1.7 billion with theirs, so unless it has been badly costed Labour could learn something from them.

 

I might be mistaken, but I don't recall LD saying that Labour would have the most votes. They were two million short last time, so that is unlikely. Most commentators conclude that they will cosy up with the SNP and other smaller parties to take them over the line as the biggest grouping. Again, most commentators believe that the LD vote will be substantially reduced, so although they will undoubtedly try and whore themselves to the party that promises them a continued say in the governance of this country, it is doubtful that they will have enough MPs to enable them to be the sole additional party in any alliance other than with the Tories, who may also be able to ally with UKIP.

 

A bit difficult and far too early to claim that anybody has underestimated Milliband, on the basis that he is totally unproven in government. Has he even had a good election? That is a matter of opinion based largely on one's political allegiance, so I'm not surprised that you think he has.

[Batman]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3052011/Voters-dark-cuts-planned-parties-election-IFS-warns-two-weeks-polling-day.html

[Lord Duckhunter]

To be fair 'Mansion Tax' is just a name it's been given. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence knows it doesn't just refer to a country estate with a large tree lined drive and it's own stable block and servant's quarters. I guess that rules you out though.

 

What name would make it acceptable for you lot? 'Large House Tax' wouldn't work because you can get a large house in Liverpool for a few quid. 'Expensive House Tax' wouldn't work because to many people any house is expensive.

 

What about Property Duty?

 

What about Band 1 as we already have houses rated by bands?

 

No, there no good . You have to have a name that screams "we're hitting the rich", so "Mansion tax" it is.

 

Your point about Liverpool is a good one. If I owned a £1.9mil house in Liverpool area, I'm sure Id be wealthier than owning a £2.1 million one in London. So the common sense approach would be to band the top 2%/5%/10% (whatever you want) in every region. The problem with that is that if you're setting nationally paid taxes based on locality and cost of living, the natural extension of that is doing the same for benefits, public sector pay, and minimum wage. Lefties & Ed's union sponsors wont have that.

 

Until Labour can explain the basics and it's pretty basic , when it kicks in, what the rate is, then "anyone with an ounce of intelligence" knows its purely grandstanding to wet lefties.

[Verbal]

What about Property Duty?

 

What about Band 1 as we already have houses rated by bands?

 

No, there no good . You have to have a name that screams "we're hitting the rich", so "Mansion tax" it is.

 

Your point about Liverpool is a good one. If I owned a £1.9mil house in Liverpool area, I'm sure Id be wealthier than owning a £2.1 million one in London. So the common sense approach would be to band the top 2%/5%/10% (whatever you want) in every region. The problem with that is that if you're setting nationally paid taxes based on locality and cost of living, the natural extension of that is doing the same for benefits, public sector pay, and minimum wage. Lefties & Ed's union sponsors wont have that.

 

Until Labour can explain the basics and it's pretty basic , when it kicks in, what the rate is, then "anyone with an ounce of intelligence" knows its purely grandstanding to wet lefties.

 

You seem to have fixated on this idea that £2m is comparatively not much in London, that somehow there will be millions of people caught up in the mansion tax. Try going on to Zoopla with a top limit if £1.9m and see what you can buy in London. Basically an awful lot.

 

To repeat, the mansion tax will not affect 99.5% of the UK population. What it will do is address the ridiculous situation where council tax bandings stop at a point where someone one owning a £200 million mansion pays the same in council tax as someone in a £1.5m house.

 

To call this 'grandstanding' as a policy is woeful - a measure of the depths to which the Right have sunk in a craven defence of the indefensible. And as the mansion tax is proving popular, it's also a measure of how far out of touch the Right has become. All they're really left with is whinging about the diminution of some substantial tax advantage (the council tax top limit and inherited non-com status to name two glaring ones) to the rich, and if that doesn't work, playing the race card.

 

It's all so desperate and reeks of the kind of flailing around that comes from failure and political exhaustion. There's no equivalent of Rand Paul on the British Right - someone with whom I profoundly agree but at least has some ideas! The best you can do is Boris ****ing Johnson and a race-card-dealing dimwit with a dodgy suit and a short fuse.

 

So come up with a better idea to deal with this - or tell us who among the swivel-eyed might have one. Otherwise, good luck with the wagon you're fatally hitched to.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

You seem to have fixated on this idea that £2m is comparatively not much in London, that somehow there will be millions of people caught up in the mansion tax. Try going on to Zoopla with a top limit if £1.9m and see what you can buy in London. Basically an awful lot.

 

To repeat, the mansion tax will not affect 99.5% of the UK population. What it will do is address the ridiculous situation where council tax bandings stop at a point where someone one owning a £200 million mansion pays the same in council tax as someone in a £1.5m house.

 

To call this 'grandstanding' as a policy is woeful - a measure of the depths to which the Right have sunk in a craven defence of the indefensible. And as the mansion tax is proving popular, it's also a measure of how far out of touch the Right has become. All they're really left with is whinging about the diminution of some substantial tax advantage (the council tax top limit and inherited non-com status to name two glaring ones) to the rich, and if that doesn't work, playing the race card.

 

It's all so desperate and reeks of the kind of flailing around that comes from failure and political exhaustion. There's no equivalent of Rand Paul on the British Right - someone with whom I profoundly agree but at least has some ideas! The best you can do is Boris ****ing Johnson and a race-card-dealing dimwit with a dodgy suit and a short fuse.

 

So come up with a better idea to deal with this - or tell us who among the swivel-eyed might have one. Otherwise, good luck with the wagon you're fatally hitched to.

 

First page:

 

1.6m

 

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/#/for-sale/details/36629463?search_identifier=f62310f251f0f0a91794e4f9e2099b48

 

1.7m

 

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/#/for-sale/details/36628241?search_identifier=f62310f251f0f0a91794e4f9e2099b48

 

1.75m

 

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/#/for-sale/details/36628197?search_identifier=f62310f251f0f0a91794e4f9e2099b48

 

By the time it comes in these 3 could all be over £2m.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

1.85m

 

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/#/for-sale/details/36625987?search_identifier=648919eb73ace35d672602d73d04a40e

 

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/#/for-sale/details/36622990?search_identifier=648919eb73ace35d672602d73d04a40e

 

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/#/for-sale/details/36621867?search_identifier=648919eb73ace35d672602d73d04a40e

 

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/#/for-sale/details/36620650?search_identifier=648919eb73ace35d672602d73d04a40e

[shurlock]

First page:

 

1.6m

 

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/#/for-sale/details/36629463?search_identifier=f62310f251f0f0a91794e4f9e2099b48

 

1.7m

 

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/#/for-sale/details/36628241?search_identifier=f62310f251f0f0a91794e4f9e2099b48

 

1.75m

 

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/#/for-sale/details/36628197?search_identifier=f62310f251f0f0a91794e4f9e2099b48

 

By the time it comes in these 3 could all be over £2m.

 

House prices are going to increase 25% in three weeks? Now that really is creating things 'out of thin air'

Edited 23 April, 2015 by shurlock

[Torres]

House prices are going to increase 25% in three weeks? Come on, that is really creating things 'out of thin air'

 

New taxes will come into effect the day after the General Election, will they?

[shurlock]

New taxes will come into effect the day after the General Election, will they?

 

Happy to bet that all three won't be worth > £2m by the time any tax might come in. But keep plodding away.

[Torres]

To call this 'grandstanding' as a policy is woeful - a measure of the depths to which the Right have sunk in a craven defence of the indefensible. And as the mansion tax is proving popular, it's also a measure of how far out of touch the Right has become. All they're really left with is whinging about the diminution of some substantial tax advantage (the council tax top limit and inherited non-com status to name two glaring ones) to the rich, and if that doesn't work, playing the race card.

 

It's all so desperate and reeks of the kind of flailing around that comes from failure and political exhaustion. There's no equivalent of Rand Paul on the British Right - someone with whom I profoundly agree but at least has some ideas! The best you can do is Boris ****ing Johnson and a race-card-dealing dimwit with a dodgy suit and a short fuse.

 

So come up with a better idea to deal with this - or tell us who among the swivel-eyed might have one. Otherwise, good luck with the wagon you're fatally hitched to.

 

10/10 for the rant, Verbal. The second in two days too! Outstanding!

 

Anyway, if you must, why not tax people based on their actual ability to pay, rather than based on the value of an asset that they may have inherited, or bought a long time ago when they were more liquid, or bought way before the value inflated beyond their own imagination? Wouldn't that be fairer, albeit less eye-catching and without the rallying-call title?

[Torres]

Happy to bet that all three won't be worth > £2m by the time any tax might come in. But keep plodding away.

 

Didn't say they would, I'm just having a chuckle at your idea of new policies becoming law the day after a General Election. It's funny.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

House prices are going to increase 25% in three weeks? Now that really is creating things 'out of thin air'

 

I thought the policy was being brought in from January 2016, apologies if not. If you look at the others I have posted as well you get my point.

 

Either way, the point is you don't get alot for just under £2m in London.

Edited 23 April, 2015 by Unbelievable Jeff

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

You seem to have fixated on this idea that £2m is comparatively not much in London, that somehow there will be millions of people caught up in the mansion tax. Try going on to Zoopla with a top limit if £1.9m and see what you can buy in London. Basically an awful lot.

 

To repeat, the mansion tax will not affect 99.5% of the UK population. What it will do is address the ridiculous situation where council tax bandings stop at a point where someone one owning a £200 million mansion pays the same in council tax as someone in a £1.5m house.

 

To call this 'grandstanding' as a policy is woeful - a measure of the depths to which the Right have sunk in a craven defence of the indefensible. And as the mansion tax is proving popular, it's also a measure of how far out of touch the Right has become. All they're really left with is whinging about the diminution of some substantial tax advantage (the council tax top limit and inherited non-com status to name two glaring ones) to the rich, and if that doesn't work, playing the race card.

 

It's all so desperate and reeks of the kind of flailing around that comes from failure and political exhaustion. There's no equivalent of Rand Paul on the British Right - someone with whom I profoundly agree but at least has some ideas! The best you can do is Boris ****ing Johnson and a race-card-dealing dimwit with a dodgy suit and a short fuse.

 

So come up with a better idea to deal with this - or tell us who among the swivel-eyed might have one. Otherwise, good luck with the wagon you're fatally hitched to.

 

By grandstanding I think he means that it is a flagship policy with no substance used as a rallying cry to appeal to the 'core' vote. Nobody knows how much it will raise, how it will be implemented and what the charge will be. It is just a glossy name. Even Jamie Reed does not seem to understand what it will mean.

 

http://order-order.com/2015/04/22/jamie-reed-bottles-brillo-rematch/#_@/WyQ_5vvq99q/MQ

 

In principle I think that you are right a mansion tax probably does have some legs but the chief objection is that there is an assumption that living in a big house, especially in London, equates to being a high earner and that is often not the case. It also rather naively encourages people to buy a second home rather than live in one big house.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Didn't say they would, I'm just having a chuckle at your idea of new policies becoming law the day after a General Election. It's funny.

 

Can you try not to quote him in future, he's on my ignore list for a reason? Cheers!

[Torres]

Can you try not to quote him in future, he's on my ignore list for a reason? Cheers!

 

I want to kiss and cuddle Unbelievable Jeff

 

Sorry.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Sorry.

 

[shurlock]

Didn't say they would, I'm just having a chuckle at your idea of new policies becoming law the day after a General Election. It's funny.

 

My mistake and some very clunky syntax, I construed "in these 3" as Jeff saying three weeks.

 

HTH

[Torres]

My mistake and some very clunky syntax, I construed "in these 3" as Jeff saying three weeks.

 

HTH

 

No worries shurlock, I was imagining the panic in Whitehall when Ed stops talking about this happening in the first 100 days and starts talking about the first 10 days.

 

Unbelievable Jeff is my hero

 

[Unbelievable Jeff]

My mistake and some very clunky syntax, I construed "in these 3" as Jeff saying three weeks.

 

HTH

 

Surely in that case you'd have had a go at me for not knowing it won't happen at the time of election results? The sentence does not lend itself to that interpretation. I smell bull.

[shurlock]

I thought the policy was being brought in from January 2016, apologies if not. If you look at the others I have posted as well you get my point.

 

Either way, the point is you don't get alot for just under £2m in London.

 

I don't really get your point, though. House price growth in the capital is clearly slowing and converging on the national average of 5% annual growth (and in turn that is slowing).

 

On one level, this is all moot: flexibilities will almost certainly be brought in so that the threshold will adjust to changes in house price. So no jeff, the bogeyman of a london bedsit in Dagenham suddenly falling foul of the mansion tax ain't going to happen anytime soon. That said, the gaffe in Telford Park is pretty nice.

[shurlock]

Surely in that case you'd have had a go at me for not knowing it won't happen at the time of election results? The sentence does not lend itself to that interpretation. I smell bull.

 

No I genuinely read three weeks, jeff. I know how policy works just as you know how retail fashion works. You'll just have to defer to my superior knowledge on this one

[solentstars]

I've heard it all now. Tory voters complaining that all Labour voters think about is a class war. It's been a class war for the last 5 years. A camel through the eye of a needle......

not all tory voters are brain deed and me,me,me brigade but all partys have there stupid brigade,especially when they use childish terms like leftys whatever that is,or sandel wearing brigade,i thought all that nonsence died out in the 80,s. i for one think there should be another council tax band for property's over a million.

[shurlock]

10/10 for the rant, Verbal. The second in two days too! Outstanding!

 

Anyway, if you must, why not tax people based on their actual ability to pay, rather than based on the value of an asset that they may have inherited, or bought a long time ago when they were more liquid, or bought way before the value inflated beyond their own imagination? Wouldn't that be fairer, albeit less eye-catching and without the rallying-call title?

 

Why? Classic liberals, even Adam Smith and David Ricardo (shock horror), argued for the taxation of property where increases in value stemmed not from individual labour or contributions i.e. renovating your house but natural and social circumstances i.e. broad rises in market. For them, the distinction between earned and unearned income was a matter of fairness and justice. It's not a surprise that it was the lib dems who first tried to reconnect with this tradition.

 

Perhaps worth reading up before getting your kickers in a twist and frothing about class warfare and the politics of envy being the only things that motivate such policy ideas.

Edited 23 April, 2015 by shurlock

[Unbelievable Jeff]

I don't really get your point, though. House price growth in the capital is clearly slowing and converging on the national average of 5% annual growth (and in turn that is slowing).

 

On one level, this is all moot: flexibilities will almost certainly be brought in so that the threshold will adjust to changes in house price. So no jeff, the bogeyman of a london bedsit in Dagenham suddenly falling foul of the mansion tax ain't going to happen anytime soon. That said, the gaffe in Telford Park is pretty nice.

 

It's slowing at the moment due to the impending threat of the Mansion Tax, and as I've said before I do expect to see a massive change in the London property market.

 

However I am just showing, literally from the first page on Zoopla, that you don't get much for just under £2m, and if you don't think that many properties in London are owned by middle class 50 somethings or older owners who have owned a property for 10 years plus and seen their property rise exponentially, to whom £10k is a reasonable amount of money, then I think you are mistaken.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

No I genuinely read three weeks, jeff. I know how policy works just as you know how retail fashion works. You'll just have to defer to my superior knowledge on this one

 

I'm sure you did know about it, I just think in your rush to try and trip me up on this one you just didn't think. Has all the hallmarks of your usual responses to my posts.

[Wes Tender]

Why? Classic liberals, even Adam Smith and David Ricardo (shock horror), argued for the taxation of property where increases in value stemmed not from individual labour or contributions i.e. renovating your house but natural and social circumstances i.e. broad rises in market. For them, the distinction between earned and unearned income was a matter of fairness and justice. It's not a surprise that it was the lib dems who first tried to reconnect with this tradition.

 

Perhaps worth reading up before getting your kickers in a twist and frothing about class warfare and the politics of envy being the only things that motivate such policy ideas.

 

Taxes based on property size which assume a connection to the size of a house to the occupant's wealth are hardly anything new. There was a window tax introduced in 1696 which ran for 150 years. Even then, people attempted to avoid paying it by blocking up some of their windows, in much the same way that they will find ways of avoiding paying as much of this so-called Mansion Tax.

 

Torres' opinion didn't seem to constitute much getting of knickers in a twist, or frothing at the mouth, but it does appear that this sort of intemperate language has come from both you and Verbal this afternoon, so it seems that nerves have been touched to have elicited such a response.

[CB Fry]

It's slowing at the moment due to the impending threat of the Mansion Tax, and as I've said before I do expect to see a massive change in the London property market.

 

However I am just showing, literally from the first page on Zoopla, that you don't get much for just under £2m, and if you don't think that many properties in London are owned by middle class 50 somethings or older owners who have owned a property for 10 years plus and seen their property rise exponentially, to whom £10k is a reasonable amount of money, then I think you are mistaken.

 

There are loads of properties available in London for less than £2m, though. Loads.

[shurlock]

It's slowing at the moment due to the impending threat of the Mansion Tax, and as I've said before I do expect to see a massive change in the London property market.

 

However I am just showing, literally from the first page on Zoopla, that you don't get much for just under £2m, and if you don't think that many properties in London are owned by middle class 50 somethings or older owners who have owned a property for 10 years plus and seen their property rise exponentially, to whom £10k is a reasonable amount of money, then I think you are mistaken.

 

Election uncertainty and the prospect of a mansion tax are only part of a multitude of factors affecting the slowdown in London prices - a trend that has been observable since early 2014 and that has hit most parts of the London property market, not just the high end -two observations that are hard to reconcile with your hypothesis.

 

Either way, aren't falling house prices are a good thing?

 

The facts speak for themselves: the number of London properties in the £2m> bracket are still in the overwhelming minority.

 

And, finally, perhaps its a personal prejudice: but do I have much sympathy for middle class 50 somethings who've seen the value of their property 'rise exponentially' by sitting on their arses and, in the main, doing jacks**t to contribute to that rise, when all that's being asked of them is that they pay a fraction of that windfall in tax which can be used to build new homes etc?

 

Nah not really.

Edited 23 April, 2015 by shurlock

[CB Fry]

Election uncertainty and the prospect of a mansion tax are only part of a multitude of factors affecting the slowdown in London prices - a trend that has been observable since early 2014 and that has hit most parts of the London property market, not just the high end -two observations that are hard to reconcile with your hypothesis.

 

Either way, aren't falling house prices are a good thing?

 

The facts speak for themselves: the number of London properties in the £2m> bracket are still in the overwhelming minority.

 

And, finally, perhaps its a personal prejudice: but do I have much sympathy for middle class 50 somethings who've seen the value of their property 'rise exponentially' by sitting on their arses and, in the main, doing jacks**t to contribute to that rise, when all that's being asked of them is that they pay a fraction of that windfall in tax which can be used to build new homes etc?

 

Nah not really.

Yeah but they've earned it by "doing the right thing". Like being fortunate to have been born at the front end of a housing boom. Not like the layabout scumbags without the foresight to be born in the correct era.

[Wes Tender]

 

And, finally, perhaps its a personal prejudice: but do I have much sympathy for middle class 50 somethings who've seen the value of their property 'rise exponentially' by sitting on their arses and, in the main, doing jacks**t to contribute to that rise, when all that's being asked of them is that they pay a fraction of that windfall in tax which can be used to build new homes etc?

 

Nah not really.

 

Sounds rather like the politics of envy to me and you also admit to being prejudiced against the biggest section of wealth creators in the country, the middle classes, mainly on the basis that most of them who make the effort to buy their house as a family home might actually be rewarded by seeing the value of their property increase. Why should they pay a tax on the increase of the property value? They have paid tax on their earnings and also taxes to buy the property. Then they pay taxes to live in the house and also many will be taxed on it as the most substantial part of their estate when they pop their clogs.

 

Thankfully, even if Labour thought along those lines, they have the sense to realise that it would be a disaster for them electorally.