Another Labour Policy - Another Fail

Spartacus_Mills

aelitaman wrote: »

http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/7413/lord_desai_calls_ni_a_tax_on_jobs.html

Labour Peer Lord Desi now comes out and says NI rise is a tax on jobs and should be stopped and VAT raised including putting VAT on all currently exemped items, like food and baby clothes.

So now it is the Tories, Big business, CBI, Small business federation and the mainstream Labour Party all saying Labours planned hike in NI is a tax on jobs and does not help the economy.

It was widely spun at the time of the announcement that Darling and Mandleson were against it. So that leaves Brown and Balls as the only suportters.

Oh dear Labour election campaing falling apart at the seams.

No wonder they are only 6 points behind the Lib Dems.

ben500

These bigger busineses have been raking it in, now it's time for them to put their grubby little fingers in their pockets and give a little back they are bleating like slaughtered lambs. How many times over recent years have we seen them bragging about record profits? They need to !!!!!! and pay up. As moggylover said when push comes to shove it's always the worker that's looked to to make up any shortfall, those already in need penalised for the mistakes of the greediest in our society.

Kohoutek

Lol, why are some people so clueless? This is a tax on all businesses - big businesses, small businesses, profitable businesses, unprofitable businesses.

97% of all businesses in the UK employ 20 people or less. This will hit the proprietor of your local pub or the owner of your local hair salon as much or more as the likes of Barclays or BP.

Don't you think that if we're apparently recovering from a recession, a tax on jobs is a pretty terrible idea?

If you want fatcats to pay their fair share, then do it through personal taxes, not business taxes. As hopefully you know, in capitalism profits are often privatised and losses (such as imposed by high business taxes) are socialised. This won't 'penalise' the 'greediest in society', it will quite literally do the opposite of what you think because in this case the worker will makeup the shortfall, because jobs will be lost.

StevieJ

Kohoutek wrote: »

If you want fatcats to pay their fair share, then do it through personal taxes, not business taxes. As hopefully you know, in capitalism profits are often privatised and losses (such as imposed by high business taxes) are socialised.

Not sure what you mean in that context, I understood that to be a reference to moral hazard e.g. in the current environment a reference to banks and bailouts where the outrageous risks are taken knowing that the general public will pick up the pieces if failure occurs.

aelitaman

StevieJ wrote: »

Not sure what you mean in that context, I understood that to be a reference to moral hazard e.g. in the current environment a reference to banks and bailouts where the outrageous risks are taken knowing that the general public will pick up the pieces if failure occurs.

Also that when companies make losses they make people redundant so that the state pays for the period of unemployment. The business having made people redundant may return to profitability but not take the staff back on.

Kohoutek

StevieJ wrote: »

Not sure what you mean in that context, I understood that to be a reference to moral hazard e.g. in the current environment a reference to banks and bailouts where the outrageous risks are taken knowing that the general public will pick up the pieces if failure occurs.

Not specifically I meant that in the case of limited liability companies in a capitalist society, it's usually the case that if a business makes money, the owners and management of the business, not the workers, take the vast majority of profits through dividends and executive pay which is several multiples of workers' pay (so 'profit is privatised') and if a business loses money, the workers usually take the loss - they lose their jobs (so 'losses are socialised').

That's why I don't think taxes on businesses are a good idea if people want 'fatcats to pay their fair share', because they simply damage the business and cause jobs losses. The best pay to redistribute wealth from fatcats would be higher income taxes, higher capital gains taxes, higher inheritance tax, luxury taxes, higher stamp duty on expensive homes (as Labour have done).

leveller2911

As someone who has NO political leanings having read this thread from start to finish I have to say most of you on here are acting like a load of school kids, " Miss he stole my pencil", "Miss he pulled my hair"......... Some in hear need to f**king grow up..............

National Insurance was NOT introduced to be used by reckless governments to finance anything other than the care of the nations workforce , end off so why are people argueing over it, you should ALL be asking questions why the people you all vote for renege on the promises......

No debate in here tonight, nothing to see here, move along........

Spartacus_Mills

From the BBC ten o'clock news even the supine BBC seem to be of the view Mandy and Labour has scored an own goal on this. The momentum seems to be with the Tories on this one. Surprised at Labour and their lack of nailing this one. All they need are a group of businessmen who agree with their policy.

markharding557

kohoutek wrote:

That's why I don't think taxes on businesses are a good idea if people want 'fatcats to pay their fair share', because they simply damage the business and cause jobs losses. The best pay to redistribute wealth from fatcats would be higher income taxes, higher capital gains taxes, higher inheritance tax, luxury taxes, higher stamp duty on expensive homes (as Labour have done).

hasn't this already been done to some extent with the 50%tax band?

StevieJ

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

From the BBC ten o'clock news even the supine BBC seem to be of the view Mandy and Labour has scored an own goal on this. The momentum seems to be with the Tories on this one. Surprised at Labour and their lack of nailing this one. All they need are a group of businessmen who agree with their policy.

As I said before there will be plenty, those who feed off the Welfare state, unfortunately there may be someone new handing out the contracts after May.