|
Like, sure, taxing inherited wealth as normal income would be an even better policy, and this one is a bit arbitrary, but it's still better than the status quo
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 09:39 |
|
|
If your inheritance tax only targets the poorest end of the "people with things of value to inherit" scale and the tax actually goes to private entities, what you have managed to create is a regressive inheritance tax which gets paid 100% to Capital. Which is impressively terrible. I see no reason to support it. You are literally concentrating the wealth of what may not even qualify as petty bourgeoisie, into the hands of banks and land monopolists. That is actually worse than the status quo. You are taking from the people who have the least amount of material possessions that can qualify as capital, and giving it to organizations that have shitloads of it. This in no way can be considered redistributative in the socialist sense. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 19:53 on May 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If your inheritance tax only targets the poorest end of the "people with things of value to inherit" scale and the tax actually goes to private entities, what you have managed to create is a regressive inheritance tax which gets paid 100% to Capital. Things...worse under the Tories? 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Like you can almost invariably assume that anything a tory does is actively worse than not doing anything but I feel it necessary to state that it is still true in this instance.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Wow. This one? It's awesome. It's good, but it's not this one
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
It's such a loving shitshow of a policy that I really don't get anyone trying to defend it. They're going to have to roll back on it. You might as well defend the Poll tax.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If your inheritance tax only targets the poorest end of the "people with things of value to inherit" scale and the tax actually goes to private entities, what you have managed to create is a regressive inheritance tax which gets paid 100% to Capital. Prince John posted:I have a few objections: I for one am shocked to see all the well-informed, educated and handsome posters in this, the UKMT thread, who don't realise: 1) That 100k of the value of the home will always be protected under these proposals (up from £23k), meaning that low-value home owners will get to pass on more of their wealth, and... 2) That the care fees will be recouped after the death of the elderly person (and their surviving partner, if applicable), so the caree won't have to worry about selling their house and moving out to pay for care. Usually the standards in this thread are much higher
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:It's such a loving shitshow of a policy that I really don't get anyone trying to defend it. They're going to have to roll back on it. You might as well defend the Poll tax. The poll tax effected everyone. This harms at most people sharing an inheritance of over £100,000
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Bape Culture posted:Let's force ALL property into the hands of a handful of tycoons because... communism?! Howay lads. Nobody arguing for this lovely dementia tax is a communist. pointsofdata posted:Like, sure, taxing inherited wealth as normal income would be an even better policy, and this one is a bit arbitrary, but it's still better than the status quo No, it's "doing something". And doing something for the sake of doing something is actually rarely better than the status quo. It's a poorly thought out policy which will benefit nobody but the renter class & the banks. gently caress that noise. Do something about scam trusts that allow the aristocracy to avoid 40% inheritance tax on their multi-billion pound estates before worrying about your granny's house if she needs end-of-life care.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
Care costs are only going up now that they're fining employers for hiring foreigners.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:It's such a loving shitshow of a policy that I really don't get anyone trying to defend it. They're going to have to roll back on it. You might as well defend the Poll tax. It's almost as if it was made up on the fly after the PM surprised everyone including her own loving policy people by calling a snap election. Utter shambles of a country.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Lots of people ITT getting antsy about their prospective inheritances diminishing lol.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:The poll tax effected everyone. This harms at most people sharing an inheritance of over £100,000 You really are dumb as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Morton Salt Grrl posted:I for one am shocked to see all the well-informed, educated and handsome posters in this, the UKMT thread, who don't realise: 1) People with lots of money won't have to do anything with their houses at all for the same reason they currently don't. End of life care cutting into the inheritance is only a concern for people without much to inherit. 2) Does absolutely nothing to address the fact that this is is still forcing low income people to fork over money to private care providers because there is no state alternative, that rich people would do anyway because they can afford it. It is a byzantine method of privatizing healthcare and is bad for all the reasons that privatizing healthcare is bad full stop. So get hosed you smug oval office.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
The Graun did a funny https://twitter.com/GdnPolitics/status/865282170071461888
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
Morton Salt Grrl posted:I for one am shocked to see all the well-informed, educated and handsome posters in this, the UKMT thread, who don't realise: Before you accuse others of not reading the policy you might want to yourself. Nobodies home is taken under the current system. I.e if you have a home of 240k then nobody pays any tax on that persons death irrespective of if that person was getting social care help. Under the new system anyone who owns a home worth more than 100k will lose EVERYTHING beyond 100k value of that house, and any other Assets they own / up to the value of the care costs. ukle fucked around with this message at 20:09 on May 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
ukle posted:Before you accuse others of not reading the policy you might want to yourself. 1) it is if they move to a care home 2)good
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If your inheritance tax only targets the poorest end of the "people with things of value to inherit" scale and the tax actually goes to private entities, what you have managed to create is a regressive inheritance tax which gets paid 100% to Capital. Is it better or worse than the system we have at the moment though? Currently people still pay for their care, but people who need to move into a care home are hit considerably more than people who can remain at home. One advantage I can see of the new system is removing the perverse incentive for elderly people to suffer at home rather than go into full time care because 'they'll take the house'. Unrelatedly I'm not sure launching the Tory manifesto from a Labour held seat was the best idea. BBC news starting the coverage by showing angry protests and shouting nurses outside.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:1) People with lots of money won't have to do anything with their houses at all for the same reason they currently don't. End of life care cutting into the inheritance is only a concern for people without much to inherit. This is my point in a v succinct way.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
Bape Culture posted:Let's force ALL property into the hands of a handful of tycoons because... communism?! Howay lads. If by a handful you mean one and the tycoon is called The State? Sounds good
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Hey yeah we need you to pay for all of your granny's home care bills but don't worry you can wait till she's dead to do it, because you see the other option is that we fund it centrally which means that the person granny worked for for 40 years might have to pay for her arthritis and that'd be unfair lol.jabby posted:Is it better or worse than the system we have at the moment though? Currently people still pay for their care, but people who need to move into a care home are hit considerably more than people who can remain at home. One advantage I can see of the new system is removing the perverse incentive for elderly people to suffer at home rather than go into full time care because 'they'll take the house'. Long term care is a loving shitshow and I see no benefit to finding ways to ship pensioners off to shithole carehomes so that rich cunts can take their houses.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Pistol_Pete posted:Lots of people ITT getting antsy about their prospective inheritances diminishing lol. "yes... this is the good communist thing that only the bourgeois can complain about..."
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
leadershit debate
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Looke posted:leadershit debate
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:1) it is if they move to a care home if you've got dementia you're either ending up in a care home or you're dead. Thats why everyone is calling it a Dementia Tax 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:1) People with lots of money won't have to do anything with their houses at all for the same reason they currently don't. End of life care cutting into the inheritance is only a concern for people without much to inherit. e: or indeed, they will pay far more if that rich person happens to not have dementia. Irony Be My Shield fucked around with this message at 20:17 on May 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
The whole policy might as well be called Buy to Die. Just getting the rest of those council houses that were bought with right to buy into the hands of Buy to Let landlords.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
It's OK lads mums gone to Dignitas
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Jose posted:if you've got dementia you're either ending up in a care home or you're dead. Thats why everyone is calling it a Dementia Tax Yeah and if you end up in a care home your kids get a bigger inheritance than under current policy!
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Perhaps a 500,000 limit would be more to this thread's taste?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:Perhaps a 500,000 limit would be more to this thread's taste? Just dumb as a bag of hammers.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
This is maybe a radical idea but I think care should be provided by the state seeing as you pay NI contributions most of your life
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Hey yeah we need you to pay for all of your granny's home care bills but don't worry you can wait till she's dead to do it, because you see the other option is that we fund it centrally which means that the person granny worked for for 40 years might have to pay for her arthritis and that'd be unfair lol.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
Inheritance tax is indeed a much fairer way of achieving the same thing. People do not need to be punished for having dementia and the rich should contribute more.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
Jose posted:This is maybe a radical idea but I think care should be provided by the state seeing as you pay NI contributions most of your life
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Labour made a thing: One Tory manifesto two years of failure 50 broken promises.pdf
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
It's also noteworthy that none of the Tory spending pledges, like £8 billion for the NHS, are costed in any way. I would expect to see the 'uncosted spending' attack line on Labour evaporate as a result.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Inheritance tax is indeed a much fairer way of achieving the same thing. People do not need to be punished for having dementia and the rich should contribute more. Agreed, although you're not punished, your inheritors just get a bit less
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 09:39 |
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:Nobody needs you to pay for your granny's care home bills. Your granny's estate will do that. You are not your granny, or your granny's estate. Then "We think your granny should fund her own care so that the really rich don't have to" Get hosed either way.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 20:27
|
|