Corbynomics: A Dystopia

Conrad

Moby wrote: »

It is a tax on death and on inheritance. It will mean that in the end, the government will have taken the lion’s share of a lifetime earnings in taxes.


'

A main stay of left wing political ideology is that entrenched wealth and privilege should not become ever more concentrated in certain families. Re-distribution of these entrenched wealth piles is socialism in action.


The alternative is allowing certain families to become ever more drenched in concentrated inter-generational wealth. I see how many with land in my area has really hit the jack pot big time, and that includes ordinary detached home owners that happen to have bought a home back in the day with a large garden. So many examples I see now of ordinary people being paid many millions to offload their garden.


Loads of East end types near my work bought smelly old plots way back, to use as skip yards or for tacky small garden centres / pond suppliers / stone merchants / astro turf supplies / grubby pet centres / dog kennels etc etc - all now sitting on huge property wealth by accident. This new breed of cockney multi millionaire is a real thang now - I could show you vast areas like this all around outer London and into the shires

SORRY A BIT OFF TOPIC THERE - but this new breed really fascinates me - TOWIE is real and its everywhere - some are clients of mine and their true wealth and income bares no relation to their tax return small income - as I say income is vastly under estimated. Even on an island like Menorca you can find endless ranks of £700k villas mainly owned by these types of people - this idea only 5% of us are wealthy is a myth.

A typical thing I see near work is a bloke that runs an ice cream van at weekend festivals and is a cabby during the week (not every day), and owns a £1,5m house, with horses, a villa aborard etc - these people are 10 a penny

Moby

Conrad wrote: »

A main stay of left wing political ideology is that entrenched wealth and privilege should not become ever more concentrated in certain families. Re-distribution of these entrenched wealth piles is socialism in action.


The alternative is allowing certain families to become ever more drenched in concentrated inter-generational wealth. I see how many with land in my area has really hit the jack pot big time, and that includes ordinary detached home owners that happen to have bought a home back in the day with a large garden. So many examples I see now of ordinary people being paid many millions to offload their garden.


Loads of East end types near my work bought smelly old plots way back, to use as skip yards or for tacky small garden centres / pond suppliers / stone merchants / astro turf supplies / grubby pet centres / dog kennels etc etc - all now sitting on huge property wealth by accident. This new breed of cockney multi millionaire is a real thang now - I could show you vast areas like this all around outer London and into the shires

SORRY A BIT OFF TOPIC THERE - but this new breed really fascinates me - TOWIE is real and its everywhere - some are clients of mine and their true wealth and income bares no relation to their tax return small income - as I say income is vastly under estimated. Even on an island like Menorca you can find endless ranks of £700k villas mainly owned by these types of people - this idea only 5% of us are wealthy is a myth.

A typical thing I see near work is a bloke that runs an ice cream van at weekend festivals and is a cabby during the week (not every day), and owns a £1,5m house, with horses, a villa aborard etc - these people are 10 a penny

I agree with much of this...........artificially accumulated wealth through the property bubble needs to be re-distributed...........but as Polly Toynbee says:- ' Each individual will be left on their own to pay their way. The lottery of life and death will see some families paying a fortune and losing all but the last £100,000 of their property value, while the lucky who drop dead suddenly pay nothing. The NHS is a system designed to remove the cost of illness and frailty from the individual and pool the risk among all taxpayers. The same should happen with a national social care service, so everyone pays the same. The Labour plan in 2010, devised by Andy Burnham, did just that. The idea was that everyone with assets – the majority – on retiring would pay in a fixed capital sum, or have it attached to the value of their property. The sum might be around £30,000, the state paying in for those without assets. After that, all care would be free for all. The unlucky who suffer Alzheimer’s for a decade or more, using every last penny of the family’s wealth, would be protected. Everyone would know exactly what they would pay, pooling risk so no one is ruined by care costs. But to Conservatives, that smacks of socialism.'

setmefree2

On the plus side Moby - some families might choose to look after their relatives - rather than dump them in a state run home.

It also gives people a personal incentive to look after their health and stay mobile as long as possible.

antrobus

Moby wrote: »

I think Atlee's Govmt proves this wrong as a sweeping statement. It took the Govmt to face down the vested interests of private medicine to bring in the new system. The 'cradle to the grave' changes....nat. ins., state pensions, national education standards etc.

That's politics not economics.

Moby wrote: »

..A market economy is more successful I totally agree when you are referring to consumer products. It's not one or the other ....it's where you draw the line...

All products are consumer products.

Moby wrote: »

...The banking crisis showed what the consequences can be from a totally laisses- faire system. ...

There was no "totally laissez-faire faire system". There was, however, a p***-p*** system of banking regulation courtesy of a certain G. Brown Esq.

Moby wrote: »

..No-one is arguing for the return of total state control.

Good. So there would be no point in arguing for the return of partial state control.

Moby wrote: »

..What I'm saying is the 'marxist' finger pointing from the right is used to divert from the flaws within capitalism. It becomes pretty childish in this country, especially during an election. Luckily the control of the media by a few right wing magnates is decreasing because many get their info now from social media. ..

The flaws in capitalism are not fixable by Bolshevik nonsense.

Moby wrote: »

...Re. China.......... I would say the state does intervene as and when it wants to through their state owned and state controlled 'enterprises' whatever the world bank says.

I think the World Bank knows more about the Chinese economy than you do.

setmefree2

General Election 2017: Is Tony Blair's old seat about to go blue?

https://betting.betfair.com/politics/general-election-2017/sedgefield-constituency-betting-odds-2017-general-election-190517-136.html

setmefree2

Morning guys!

Humor me this morning.

We've seen a lot of momentum for the LP since the Tory manifesto was published, so imagine we wake up 9th June and there is either a Labour government or a coalition between Labour and the SNP - what will that look like for the economy?

1)Will we (the UK) just spend the next five(ish) years spending money we don't have - taking the deficit back up to say 6% of GDP - the government is spending loads of money - it's party time and everyone feels great - eventually there is a backlash against the overspending?

2) Labour nationalise a load of stuff - this spooks foreign investors and FDI freezes?

3) There are loads of strikes because Trade Unions like to pressure labour governments as they know they will cave?

4) We don't leave the EU - because Labour stay in the SM and CU?

5) JC invites a lot of refugees to the country?

6) Taxes go up - some "anywheres" leave - some companies leave?

Any other scenario????

Fella

The debt & the deficit would skyrocket. Taxes would skyrocket shortly after for everybody, not just the "rich millionaire 5%" Corbyn likes to talk about. Ultimately the people who would suffer most would be the very people he pretends to care about i.e. the "most vulnerable members of society" as jobs & public services went down the toilet. All of this would be blamed on anything but Corbyn, with the majority of the blame being given to "the previous Tory Government". The students rushing to sign up to vote after today's bribe probably wouldn't at any point realise they were turkeys voting for Christmas as they spend a life paying for the debt Corbyn would run up in office.

setmefree2

Bloomberg - John Hardy Saxo Bank calling a Labour win bad for the pound...

....links to other opinions?

setmefree2

Fella wrote: »

The debt & the deficit would skyrocket. Taxes would skyrocket shortly after for everybody, not just the "rich millionaire 5%" Corbyn likes to talk about. Ultimately the people who would suffer most would be the very people he pretends to care about i.e. the "most vulnerable members of society" as jobs & public services went down the toilet. All of this would be blamed on anything but Corbyn, with the majority of the blame being given to "the previous Tory Government". The students rushing to sign up to vote after today's bribe probably wouldn't at any point realise they were turkeys voting for Christmas as they spend a life paying for the debt Corbyn would run up in office.

In the long run? In the short run?

Fella

In the very short term 20-30% off the value of the FTSE & the pound would plummet as people started worrying about UK's ability to service it's debt (something nobody has talked about much lately but which was all rage until Labour got booted out of office in 2010).