Join the Labour Party and save your country!

tangled_metal

I wonder if there's a North - South divide over HS2? What I mean despite examples of poor train routes down south in the whole there's a good network linking people to employment and other communication links and the capital. However up north there's less quality in trains linking cities in the North with each other and the South. Is the biggest opposition from the south who already have the massive transportation spends made on them?

Seriously I'm curious. The so called northern powerhouse is nothing without communication links. Has anyone tried the East - West rail links recently? Some of those trains were old when I was a kid and I'm mid forties. Anyone remember those trains with b the three seats one side of the aisle and two the other? Where half the coach faces one way and half the other?

We can get to London quicker than we can get to Newcastle for instance. London is approximately an hour longer to reach than Manchester by train for us. We live an hour by car away but it's longer by train. Having said that perhaps it's better HS2 went between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle first then link up to London?

I'm just a greedy northerner with a chip on my shoulder perhaps. I can certainly only dream of a crossrail level of spending on new infrastructure in the North though. Can't see it happening with Etonians or London socialists in power.

bianchimoon

Tangled Metal wrote:

I wonder if there's a North - South divide over HS2? What I mean despite examples of poor train routes down south in the whole there's a good network linking people to employment and other communication links and the capital. However up north there's less quality in trains linking cities in the North with each other and the South. Is the biggest opposition from the south who already have the massive transportation spends made on them?

Seriously I'm curious. The so called northern powerhouse is nothing without communication links. Has anyone tried the East - West rail links recently? Some of those trains were old when I was a kid and I'm mid forties. Anyone remember those trains with b the three seats one side of the aisle and two the other? Where half the coach faces one way and half the other?

We can get to London quicker than we can get to Newcastle for instance. London is approximately an hour longer to reach than Manchester by train for us. We live an hour by car away but it's longer by train. Having said that perhaps it's better HS2 went between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle first then link up to London?

I'm just a greedy northerner with a chip on my shoulder perhaps. I can certainly only dream of a crossrail level of spending on new infrastructure in the North though. Can't see it happening with Etonians or London socialists in power.

I thought HS2 was just a way to get business talent from the North to London 10 mins quicker?

morstar

bianchimoon wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

I wonder if there's a North - South divide over HS2? What I mean despite examples of poor train routes down south in the whole there's a good network linking people to employment and other communication links and the capital. However up north there's less quality in trains linking cities in the North with each other and the South. Is the biggest opposition from the south who already have the massive transportation spends made on them?

Seriously I'm curious. The so called northern powerhouse is nothing without communication links. Has anyone tried the East - West rail links recently? Some of those trains were old when I was a kid and I'm mid forties. Anyone remember those trains with b the three seats one side of the aisle and two the other? Where half the coach faces one way and half the other?

We can get to London quicker than we can get to Newcastle for instance. London is approximately an hour longer to reach than Manchester by train for us. We live an hour by car away but it's longer by train. Having said that perhaps it's better HS2 went between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle first then link up to London?

I'm just a greedy northerner with a chip on my shoulder perhaps. I can certainly only dream of a crossrail level of spending on new infrastructure in the North though. Can't see it happening with Etonians or London socialists in power.

I thought HS2 was just a way to get business talent from the North to London 10 mins quicker?

It's crackers, getting to London is already fast and easy. saving a small fraction of the overall journey time (you have to get to and from the stations at either end) is neither here nor there and yet as stated, cross country travel is slow and very basic / down right shocking. I agree completely that HS2 is about draining the north more than enhancing it.

Stevo_666

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

morstar wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

Damn! I should really like this bloke. If he could really get behind business and show the economy is the salient driving force to the UK's prosperity.

He can't even buy a bike that is the right size.
Is he going for the highest stack competition?

I'm happy to let him off for that on a back compliant extension technicality.

If he gets in we'll probably all end up riding bikes to get around whether we want to or not.

If he gets in, it will be due to the complete disaster of the last two administrations rather than any direct effect of his own leadership.

Probably because he doesn't do leadership. It's his policies I'd be worried about.

You'll get to find out soon. Have you not heard, his alter ego, Bojo is planning on making big tax cuts and giving big public sector pay rises and getting us out of the EU on Oct 31st. They are pretty much exactly the same hair and fatness aside.

Got a link to anywhere that says Corbyn will cut taxes Rolf?

Seems to be all over the net and the news - take your pic. Seems to be a Trumpish knee jerk reaction to the negative feedback for his tax cut for high earners so now he is raising the NI threshold in the vague hope that nobody will notice that the numbers don't stack up. No need to worry really - he won't implement any of it; it's just for votes!

"Believe me, there is cash now available" he told host Sophie Ridge.

Why he thinks anyone should believe him I have no idea.

Raising the NI threshold in isolation may qualify as a tax cut but I was thinking more in overall terms. When you add in other known Corbyn plans such as hiking the corporate tax rate to 26% and lowering the threshold for the top income tax rate from £150k to £80k I'm pretty sure he isn't proposing to reduce the overall tax burden.

Phewww; he is backtracking already!

....in response to a question from the BBC, refused to guarantee above-inflation pay rises. He said:

I certainly think that you need to have decent pay in the public sector, absolutely.

When pressed again on this, he said:

I used to run large public sector organisations in London. I was very proud of what we did. And it’s very, very important when you’re in charge of a great public service, whether it’s the police or transport or local government, you’ve got to make sure that you understand their cares and their needs. And the only way to get the reform that you sometimes need in public services is to be their champion and their support.

So, public sector has been underpaid wrt inflation for years, they are valued, they will get a pay rise but it won't be above inflation. I'm sure I can't see any fundamental contradiction in there. Almost as crazy as the idea that you can be in favour of a deal and in favour no deal at the same time!

Rolf, if a politician offers to cut say £100m from one particular tax but increases other taxes by £1 billion at the same time it's a bit tricky to claim he is reducing taxes. Didn't think that I would need to clarify something that obvious

surrey_commuter

morstar wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

I wonder if there's a North - South divide over HS2? What I mean despite examples of poor train routes down south in the whole there's a good network linking people to employment and other communication links and the capital. However up north there's less quality in trains linking cities in the North with each other and the South. Is the biggest opposition from the south who already have the massive transportation spends made on them?

Seriously I'm curious. The so called northern powerhouse is nothing without communication links. Has anyone tried the East - West rail links recently? Some of those trains were old when I was a kid and I'm mid forties. Anyone remember those trains with b the three seats one side of the aisle and two the other? Where half the coach faces one way and half the other?

We can get to London quicker than we can get to Newcastle for instance. London is approximately an hour longer to reach than Manchester by train for us. We live an hour by car away but it's longer by train. Having said that perhaps it's better HS2 went between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle first then link up to London?

I'm just a greedy northerner with a chip on my shoulder perhaps. I can certainly only dream of a crossrail level of spending on new infrastructure in the North though. Can't see it happening with Etonians or London socialists in power.

I thought HS2 was just a way to get business talent from the North to London 10 mins quicker?

It's crackers, getting to London is already fast and easy. saving a small fraction of the overall journey time (you have to get to and from the stations at either end) is neither here nor there and yet as stated, cross country travel is slow and very basic / down right shocking. I agree completely that HS2 is about draining the north more than enhancing it.

I am a huge believer in the benefits in the mobility of workers. Fast rail links between the major northern cities would help businesses recruit the right people and the people to get better jobs.

- 1st thing Boris will do is cancel it as there is no way he will want his name attached to a major piece of transport infrastructure

rjsterry

It's never been just about journey time. Capacity is far more of an issue.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... ssures.pdf

rjsterry

Surrey Commuter wrote:

morstar wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

I wonder if there's a North - South divide over HS2? What I mean despite examples of poor train routes down south in the whole there's a good network linking people to employment and other communication links and the capital. However up north there's less quality in trains linking cities in the North with each other and the South. Is the biggest opposition from the south who already have the massive transportation spends made on them?

Seriously I'm curious. The so called northern powerhouse is nothing without communication links. Has anyone tried the East - West rail links recently? Some of those trains were old when I was a kid and I'm mid forties. Anyone remember those trains with b the three seats one side of the aisle and two the other? Where half the coach faces one way and half the other?

We can get to London quicker than we can get to Newcastle for instance. London is approximately an hour longer to reach than Manchester by train for us. We live an hour by car away but it's longer by train. Having said that perhaps it's better HS2 went between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle first then link up to London?

I'm just a greedy northerner with a chip on my shoulder perhaps. I can certainly only dream of a crossrail level of spending on new infrastructure in the North though. Can't see it happening with Etonians or London socialists in power.

I thought HS2 was just a way to get business talent from the North to London 10 mins quicker?

It's crackers, getting to London is already fast and easy. saving a small fraction of the overall journey time (you have to get to and from the stations at either end) is neither here nor there and yet as stated, cross country travel is slow and very basic / down right shocking. I agree completely that HS2 is about draining the north more than enhancing it.

I am a huge believer in the benefits in the mobility of workers. Fast rail links between the major northern cities would help businesses recruit the right people and the people to get better jobs.

- 1st thing Boris will do is cancel it as there is no way he will want his name attached to a major piece of transport infrastructure

surrey_commuter

Tangled Metal wrote:

I wonder if there's a North - South divide over HS2? What I mean despite examples of poor train routes down south in the whole there's a good network linking people to employment and other communication links and the capital. However up north there's less quality in trains linking cities in the North with each other and the South. Is the biggest opposition from the south who already have the massive transportation spends made on them?

Seriously I'm curious. The so called northern powerhouse is nothing without communication links. Has anyone tried the East - West rail links recently? Some of those trains were old when I was a kid and I'm mid forties. Anyone remember those trains with b the three seats one side of the aisle and two the other? Where half the coach faces one way and half the other?

We can get to London quicker than we can get to Newcastle for instance. London is approximately an hour longer to reach than Manchester by train for us. We live an hour by car away but it's longer by train. Having said that perhaps it's better HS2 went between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle first then link up to London?

I'm just a greedy northerner with a chip on my shoulder perhaps. I can certainly only dream of a crossrail level of spending on new infrastructure in the North though. Can't see it happening with Etonians or London socialists in power.

That is a great quiz - do you live in Leeds

If not can you clarify if you are an hour by car from London or Manchester?

awavey

bianchimoon wrote:

I thought HS2 was just a way to get business talent from the North to London 10 mins quicker?

no its generally about the government spending money to generate an economic boost for the best part of a decade, that it delivers a train service thats slightly quicker is largely beside the point

TheBigBean

rjsterry wrote:

It's never been just about journey time. Capacity is far more of an issue.

I wish they had just called it Capacity Expansion 2, and mentioned that, as an aisde, it would be slightly quicker.

tangled_metal

To answer SC (without re-quoting my long drawl) I live about an hour drive from Manchester and living near the west coast mainline there are fast trains to London. However whenever I've taken the train it's been very slow, stopping for mainline trains for example. But also having to change trains at least twice to get into the centre of Manchester. It used to be a straight train journey but the schedule changes seem to have reduced the number of those trains per day. Indeed even before the recent changes the schedule had reduced these direct Manchester trains.

Getting to Leeds is a nice train route but don't expect an express train. Newcastle is a train north to Carlisle I believe then across. The cross country from Carlisle to Newcastle isn't great or fast. Liverpool to Leeds IMHO should be on fast trains, anyone guess if that's right?

As stated up thread the powerhouse of the north really does need good rail transport between cities. North - South routes seem to be relatively OK in both East and West Coast lines, subject to capacity issues. East - west routes are a different matter. I did read something about it last week it two. It is affecting growth. However I suspect a HS2 that only linked northern cities would have less chance of getting the go ahead than one from London to Birmingham. There's a slim chance that after HS2 is built they might spend on extending up to Manchester and across to Leeds.

Stevo_666

McDonnell looking in detail at taxing anyone whom want to give their kids some financial support as well as bringing the large majority of family homes into IHT.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/john-mcdonnell-accused-of-tax-raid-on-londoners-amid-claims-80-of-homes-would-be-hit-by-planned-a4179371.html

rjsterry

Stevo 666 wrote:

McDonnell looking in detail at taxing anyone whom want to give their kids some financial support as well as bringing the large majority of family homes [in London] into IHT.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/john-mcdonnell-accused-of-tax-raid-on-londoners-amid-claims-80-of-homes-would-be-hit-by-planned-a4179371.html

£250K will get you a 3-bed house in quite a lot of the UK and then there's all those who don't even own property.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/family ... nder-250k/

Stevo_666

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

McDonnell looking in detail at taxing anyone whom want to give their kids some financial support as well as bringing the large majority of family homes [in London] into IHT.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/john-mcdonnell-accused-of-tax-raid-on-londoners-amid-claims-80-of-homes-would-be-hit-by-planned-a4179371.html

£250K will get you a 3-bed house in quite a lot of the UK and then there's all those who don't even own property.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/family ... nder-250k/

£250k will bring you into scope of this as Labour's proposed limit is £125k.

And that's not just about property or just on death - it's all gifts made over your lifetime. So looks like things like paying your kids uni fees or giving the something towards their wedding or deposit on a flat would count. Appealing?

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

McDonnell looking in detail at taxing anyone whom want to give their kids some financial support as well as bringing the large majority of family homes [in London] into IHT.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/john-mcdonnell-accused-of-tax-raid-on-londoners-amid-claims-80-of-homes-would-be-hit-by-planned-a4179371.html

£250K will get you a 3-bed house in quite a lot of the UK and then there's all those who don't even own property.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/family ... nder-250k/

£250k will bring you into scope of this as Labour's proposed limit is £125k.

And that's not just about property or just on death - it's all gifts made over your lifetime. So looks like things like paying your kids uni fees or giving the something towards their wedding or deposit on a flat would count. Appealing?

It's not enormously appealing (nor particularly workable - i mean, when does it stop being a gift and when does it start being a parent - tax returns for Christmas presents??!!) and I don't think it's necessarily the right solution, but it is at least an attempt to address the fundamental challenge that inheritance poses; it makes social mobility more difficult and reduces incentives to use your wealth effectively.

In the past I've argued for giving up all your wealth to the state when you die in an attempt to foster a more meritocratic economic system and that was shot down in flames because a lot of you felt it went against every instinct as a parent and that, in many cases, it would be a disincentive to work because if it's not for your kids, what's the point?

I'm still sympathetic to that it would be nice to have a discussion around the actual value of inheritance and what can be done to improve social mobility. It would make a nice change from the usual left-right culture wars.

rolf_f

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

morstar wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

Damn! I should really like this bloke. If he could really get behind business and show the economy is the salient driving force to the UK's prosperity.

He can't even buy a bike that is the right size.
Is he going for the highest stack competition?

I'm happy to let him off for that on a back compliant extension technicality.

If he gets in we'll probably all end up riding bikes to get around whether we want to or not.

If he gets in, it will be due to the complete disaster of the last two administrations rather than any direct effect of his own leadership.

Probably because he doesn't do leadership. It's his policies I'd be worried about.

You'll get to find out soon. Have you not heard, his alter ego, Bojo is planning on making big tax cuts and giving big public sector pay rises and getting us out of the EU on Oct 31st. They are pretty much exactly the same hair and fatness aside.

Got a link to anywhere that says Corbyn will cut taxes Rolf?

Seems to be all over the net and the news - take your pic. Seems to be a Trumpish knee jerk reaction to the negative feedback for his tax cut for high earners so now he is raising the NI threshold in the vague hope that nobody will notice that the numbers don't stack up. No need to worry really - he won't implement any of it; it's just for votes!

"Believe me, there is cash now available" he told host Sophie Ridge.

Why he thinks anyone should believe him I have no idea.

Raising the NI threshold in isolation may qualify as a tax cut but I was thinking more in overall terms. When you add in other known Corbyn plans such as hiking the corporate tax rate to 26% and lowering the threshold for the top income tax rate from £150k to £80k I'm pretty sure he isn't proposing to reduce the overall tax burden.

Phewww; he is backtracking already!

....in response to a question from the BBC, refused to guarantee above-inflation pay rises. He said:

I certainly think that you need to have decent pay in the public sector, absolutely.

When pressed again on this, he said:

I used to run large public sector organisations in London. I was very proud of what we did. And it’s very, very important when you’re in charge of a great public service, whether it’s the police or transport or local government, you’ve got to make sure that you understand their cares and their needs. And the only way to get the reform that you sometimes need in public services is to be their champion and their support.

So, public sector has been underpaid wrt inflation for years, they are valued, they will get a pay rise but it won't be above inflation. I'm sure I can't see any fundamental contradiction in there. Almost as crazy as the idea that you can be in favour of a deal and in favour no deal at the same time!

Rolf, if a politician offers to cut say £100m from one particular tax but increases other taxes by £1 billion at the same time it's a bit tricky to claim he is reducing taxes. Didn't think that I would need to clarify something that obvious

I'm not claiming anything - just commenting on what the papers are saying - argue it out with the BBC if you don't like it!

Politics though isn't it - trying to con someone into thinking that the break you are giving them won't be offset (or more) by a hike elsewhere. But it's getting silly now. At least in the past there seemed to be a serious attempt to come up with numbers that work. I heard a BBC reporter last night actually state words to the effect of "well, they don't really mean any of this" so their is almost no longer even a pretence that what they are saying they will do is something that they actually will do. They don't really deserve to get any votes at all.

Anyway, who is it for you who will rescue our country for us; Hunt or Bojo. I think Cake Stop are still waiting with baited breath.

rolf_f

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

I wonder if there's a North - South divide over HS2? What I mean despite examples of poor train routes down south in the whole there's a good network linking people to employment and other communication links and the capital. However up north there's less quality in trains linking cities in the North with each other and the South. Is the biggest opposition from the south who already have the massive transportation spends made on them?

Seriously I'm curious. The so called northern powerhouse is nothing without communication links. Has anyone tried the East - West rail links recently? Some of those trains were old when I was a kid and I'm mid forties. Anyone remember those trains with b the three seats one side of the aisle and two the other? Where half the coach faces one way and half the other?

We can get to London quicker than we can get to Newcastle for instance. London is approximately an hour longer to reach than Manchester by train for us. We live an hour by car away but it's longer by train. Having said that perhaps it's better HS2 went between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle first then link up to London?

I'm just a greedy northerner with a chip on my shoulder perhaps. I can certainly only dream of a crossrail level of spending on new infrastructure in the North though. Can't see it happening with Etonians or London socialists in power.

That is a great quiz - do you live in Leeds

If not can you clarify if you are an hour by car from London or Manchester?

He doesn't live in Leeds as it takes about 2hr 20 to get to London from Leeds and only an hour and a half or so to get to Newcastle.

And I'm not sure what trains he is talking about. If he is mid 40s then when the Pacers were brand new he'd have been about 10.

HS2 achieves nothing for me than an extra half hour at most in bed. Meetings in London will still start at the same time so there's no "business" benefit there.

tangled_metal

Actually I do remember when pacers came in. Felt so modern at the time. Not now of course.

However my train knowledge isn't good enough to tell you the train type we sometimes get the pleasure of. However it still has a walk in luggage compartment which is great for bikes! AFAIK they were only on trains a lot older than the pacers.

rick_chasey

I do wonder if an outsized part of the HS2 appeal to politicians is their own commutes to and from constituencies and parliament....

If, say, parliament was moved to Birmingham, would the midlands suddenly see an influx of infrastructure investment in and out of Birmingham?

tangled_metal

Can people edit out the older quotes when trying to win those long arguments? They're starting to get a bit silly. On my phone I'm getting a long line of single letters in the earlier quotes. It makes me scroll quickly through and I'm missing the crux if your latest points.

tangled_metal

Rick Chasey wrote:

I do wonder if an outsized part of the HS2 appeal to politicians is their own commutes to and from constituencies and parliament....

If, say, parliament was moved to Birmingham, would the midlands suddenly see an influx of infrastructure investment in and out of Birmingham?

Why not move it to the geographical centre of the UK? Dunsop Bridge.

robert88

Rick Chasey wrote:

I do wonder if an outsized part of the HS2 appeal to politicians is their own commutes to and from constituencies and parliament....

If, say, parliament was moved to Birmingham, would the midlands suddenly see an influx of infrastructure investment in and out of Birmingham?

And they could build something more appropriate to the era (if not the country) in place of that crumbling Gothic pile that reeks of vanished imperial splendour. Mind you there's nothing like a bit of vanished imperial splendour to get people moving at Waterloo station.

TheBigBean

Stevo 666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

McDonnell looking in detail at taxing anyone whom want to give their kids some financial support as well as bringing the large majority of family homes [in London] into IHT.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/john-mcdonnell-accused-of-tax-raid-on-londoners-amid-claims-80-of-homes-would-be-hit-by-planned-a4179371.html

£250K will get you a 3-bed house in quite a lot of the UK and then there's all those who don't even own property.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/family ... nder-250k/

£250k will bring you into scope of this as Labour's proposed limit is £125k.

And that's not just about property or just on death - it's all gifts made over your lifetime. So looks like things like paying your kids uni fees or giving the something towards their wedding or deposit on a flat would count. Appealing?

Unpopular, but I like it. I'd just tax other gifts during lifetime as income.

john80

HS2 is just further commitment to the idea that we need more people going to London for a meeting and then getting home again. As if living over a 100 miles away from your workplace is a good idea. As people have pointed out it is really for capacity and the fact it is faster is just really applying modern standards to the track and rolling stock.

rjsterry

Stevo 666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

McDonnell looking in detail at taxing anyone whom want to give their kids some financial support as well as bringing the large majority of family homes [in London] into IHT.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/john-mcdonnell-accused-of-tax-raid-on-londoners-amid-claims-80-of-homes-would-be-hit-by-planned-a4179371.html

£250K will get you a 3-bed house in quite a lot of the UK and then there's all those who don't even own property.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/family ... nder-250k/

£250k will bring you into scope of this as Labour's proposed limit is £125k.

And that's not just about property or just on death - it's all gifts made over your lifetime. So looks like things like paying your kids uni fees or giving the something towards their wedding or deposit on a flat would count. Appealing?

I mentioned £250K as that was the figure the ES was hyperventilating about. £125K still gives plenty of scope for some help with uni costs, a wedding present and a deposit on a first home, and it's not as if you can't give more than that. It's a bit crude and I suspect designed as much for the headlines as for the actual economics of it, but I'm not fundamentally opposed to it.

kingstongraham

TheBigBean wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

McDonnell looking in detail at taxing anyone whom want to give their kids some financial support as well as bringing the large majority of family homes [in London] into IHT.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/john-mcdonnell-accused-of-tax-raid-on-londoners-amid-claims-80-of-homes-would-be-hit-by-planned-a4179371.html

£250K will get you a 3-bed house in quite a lot of the UK and then there's all those who don't even own property.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/family ... nder-250k/

£250k will bring you into scope of this as Labour's proposed limit is £125k.

And that's not just about property or just on death - it's all gifts made over your lifetime. So looks like things like paying your kids uni fees or giving the something towards their wedding or deposit on a flat would count. Appealing?

Unpopular, but I like it. I'd just tax other gifts during lifetime as income.

I do too - I think it's one of those things that feels like a terrible imposition but really isn't. It's unearned income as far as the recipient is concerned. Your kids aren't a charity.

shirley_basso

What about school fees?

Stevo_666

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

McDonnell looking in detail at taxing anyone whom want to give their kids some financial support as well as bringing the large majority of family homes [in London] into IHT.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/john-mcdonnell-accused-of-tax-raid-on-londoners-amid-claims-80-of-homes-would-be-hit-by-planned-a4179371.html

£250K will get you a 3-bed house in quite a lot of the UK and then there's all those who don't even own property.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/family ... nder-250k/

£250k will bring you into scope of this as Labour's proposed limit is £125k.

And that's not just about property or just on death - it's all gifts made over your lifetime. So looks like things like paying your kids uni fees or giving the something towards their wedding or deposit on a flat would count. Appealing?

I mentioned £250K as that was the figure the ES was hyperventilating about. £125K still gives plenty of scope for some help with uni costs, a wedding present and a deposit on a first home, and it's not as if you can't give more than that. It's a bit crude and I suspect designed as much for the headlines as for the actual economics of it, but I'm not fundamentally opposed to it.

Do you have kids? One issue here is that if this limit applies to the donor - and let's say they have 3 or 4 kids - they will be stuffed. Milking the rich for tax is one thing but this will impact a very large number of ordinary people (ordinary in the financial sense).

Also once this become clearer, people will either find a way round it, or go p1ss their money up the proverbial wall instead of giving their kids a helping hand in life. I.e. it will simply create avoidance as it is onerous - and dysfunctional behaviour.

Proper socialism, this one.

Stevo_666

Shirley Basso wrote:

What about school fees?

Probably, given Labours view of fee paying education. They haven't said yet.

Stevo_666

KingstonGraham wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

McDonnell looking in detail at taxing anyone whom want to give their kids some financial support as well as bringing the large majority of family homes [in London] into IHT.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/john-mcdonnell-accused-of-tax-raid-on-londoners-amid-claims-80-of-homes-would-be-hit-by-planned-a4179371.html

£250K will get you a 3-bed house in quite a lot of the UK and then there's all those who don't even own property.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/family ... nder-250k/

£250k will bring you into scope of this as Labour's proposed limit is £125k.

And that's not just about property or just on death - it's all gifts made over your lifetime. So looks like things like paying your kids uni fees or giving the something towards their wedding or deposit on a flat would count. Appealing?

Unpopular, but I like it. I'd just tax other gifts during lifetime as income.

I do too - I think it's one of those things that feels like a terrible imposition but really isn't. It's unearned income as far as the recipient is concerned. Your kids aren't a charity.

So why have any allowance?

These nasty bourgeois types giving their kids money, how dare they...