Ed Balls pledges to raise taxes if Labour win election

lostinrates

ukcarper wrote: »

I can see it might be the thing that pushes people who are already considering it over the edge but I don't think the numbers would big enough to have a big impact on the economy.

Maybe not. . I certainly won't argue that it will, I don't know yet.


But if it won't impact the economy why the dickens tax them for it and not keep them here paying what they do pay rather than drive the out? :rotfl:

Tancred

lostinrates wrote: »

Actually there is a problem with your plan. A very real moral problem.

There are only so many houses. There aren't enough houses to go round and prices are being driven up ridiculously. So people who 'can afford' to buy (with debt) a more expensive house don't and those on lower incomes are FURTHER Compromised because there are even fewer houses available to them.

On the plus side, the 'rich person' has no debt, so can hoard money and wealth gap increases.

Sound fair?

Nonsense. House prices depend on the laws of demand and supply. If houses at the top end don't sell then they get reduced until they do - or go to the auction. Builders aim for the mid market in general, because that is where the bulk of the demand is. Yes, they do also like huge, expensive houses because that is where the big profits lie, but this has always been a niche market and always will be.

ukcarper

lostinrates wrote: »

Maybe not. . I certainly won't argue that it will, I don't know yet.


But if it won't impact the economy why the dickens tax them for it and not keep them here paying what they do pay rather than drive the out? :rotfl:

But are you saying the jobs will go and if they don't there aren't people here capable of doing them.

Fella

Bantex wrote: »

Racism/sexism etc has victims.
Lowish taxes for high earners does not.

There speaks a low earner, happy to see someone else's money taken off them & say it's no problem.

lostinrates

ukcarper wrote: »

But are you saying the jobs will go and if they don't there aren't people here capable of doing them.

No, I'm saying these jobs are doable from over seas in many cases. My husband has done his job from two other places in Europe. He was based in Brussels in his job, he could have been sent to Moscow, Paris, New York. He could theoretically do his job from anywhere.

If we chose to relocate and his employers were favourable his work would follow him. They wouldn't necessarily need to reemploy here.



There are PLENTY of people here FoR the jobs, that's the great news, . Sadly, in many cases there are too many being churned out for the jobs having invested thousands in post grad qualifications with little chance of using them. Increasingly infact recruiters at dh's firm are finding pure Brit applicants not quite 'broad spectrum enough in experience' though plenty are excellent applicants.


There is no shortage of applicants unless things have changes a lot.

That said, DH's dept have been advertising for three months for three roles in uk and not on uk applicant has been recruited for them....but I am sure that's an anomaly.

lostinrates

Tancred wrote: »

Nonsense. House prices depend on the laws of demand and supply. If houses at the top end don't sell then they get reduced until they do - or go to the auction. Builders aim for the mid market in general, because that is where the bulk of the demand is. Yes, they do also like huge, expensive houses because that is where the big profits lie, but this has always been a niche market and always will be.

Well that's the point...if houses at 'the bottom' are in demand they'll be more expensive, and more in demand making it harder for average and lower earners.

New stock is only a percentage of the house market!

ukcarper

lostinrates wrote: »

No, I'm saying these jobs are doable from over seas in many cases. My husband has done his job from two other places in Europe. He was based in Brussels in his job, he could have been sent to Moscow, Paris, New York. He could theoretically do his job from anywhere.

If we chose to relocate and his employers were favourable his work would follow him. They wouldn't necessarily need to reemploy here.



There are PLENTY of people here FoR the jobs, that's the great news, . Sadly, in many cases there are too many being churned out for the jobs having invested thousands in post grad qualifications with little chance of using them. Increasingly infact recruiters at dh's firm are finding pure Brit applicants not quite 'broad spectrum enough in experience' though plenty are excellent applicants.


There is no shortage of applicants unless things have changes a lot.

That said, DH's dept have been advertising for three months for three roles in uk and not on uk applicant has been recruited for them....but I am sure that's an anomaly.

You take your husbands jobs as the norm but how many would be able to do that I don't think the problem is as big as the government are making out and the numbers leaving would be small. Not that I'm saying that the rate should increase to 50% just that it would not be the disaster people are trying to make out.


The jobs might not be filled by Brits but that doesn't mean that people from overseas would not apply if the tax rate was introduced.

Tancred

Fella wrote: »

There speaks a low earner, happy to see someone else's money taken off them & say it's no problem.

The government decides what is your and what isn't - don't forget that.

Tancred

lostinrates wrote: »

Well that's the point...if houses at 'the bottom' are in demand they'll be more expensive, and more in demand making it harder for average and lower earners.

New stock is only a percentage of the house market!

Raising the top rate to 50% will not have such a dramatic impact - as always, you are exaggerating.

Oh, and I have a suggestion. Try getting a job yourself if you want more money - my wife works, believe it or not.

lostinrates

ukcarper wrote: »

You take your husbands jobs as the norm but how many would be able to do that I don't think the problem is as big as the government are making out and the numbers leaving would be small. Not that I'm saying that the rate should increase to 50% just that it would not be the disaster people are trying to make out.

Well, we 're such a tiny one percent I rather thought we were special :rotfl::rotfl:


My father at the end of his career was a one percent that absolutely couldn't have done his work from over seas. At all. But when things turned unpleasant there were discussions about ways too make it possible to have circumvented this.

Thankfully (IMO) the board voted over this by a tiny majority of one. It would, IMO, have been a Moral abhorrence.