Precautions in case of a Labour win

Anonymous101

SonOf wrote: »

Tax free cash helps the economy. Not hinder it. And it is also one of the smaller costs to the treasury in respect of pensions. Tax relief and salary sacrifice being two major ones. Indeed, salary sacrifice has boomed since auto-enrolment and has become one of fastest-growing costs to the treasury in terms of lost revenue on pensions.

IMO when it comes to pensions any government is in a catch 22 position. Scrapping salary sacrifice or tax relief all together goes against the larger target of having an aging population save efficiently for retirement. I know governments aren't usually afraid of kicking the can down the road but it would directly contradict the recent political consensus.


I think whoever is in power the days of higher rate tax relief are numbered. Its one of the reasons why I'm contributing a large part of my salary to my pension as early as I can. From a personal point of view I'm hoping the timeframe for change isn't within the next few years but I wouldn't be surprised if it was. It would be a popular choice and to be honest I think its possibly quite fair.

lisyloo

Haven’t recent events shown that we need notice of major changes or gradual implementation?

Continually moving the goalposts is why many people got into BTL and at best makes it hard for sensible people to plan.

Those near retirement don’t have a long time to adapt to major changes, neither do they in their 50s or 60s always have the best opportunities to be flexible in what type of work they do (physical work may be out of the question for some).

Turpinr

@Thrugelmir Suggest you refrain from viewing social media.


Hahaha and what's this site other than social media for savers.

Suggest you stop reading theTorygraph

Thrugelmir

Turpinr wrote: »

Suggest you stop reading theTorygraph

Actually I don't.

As far as the NHS goes. I think the Trump administration have far bigger issues to to concern themselves with rather than acquiring the NHS at the current time.

SonOf

Turpinr wrote: »

@Thrugelmir Suggest you refrain from viewing social media.


Hahaha and what's this site other than social media for savers.

Suggest you stop reading theTorygraph

That is unfair on Thrugelmir. Your comments were clearly from the Labour member handbook. i.e. the silly comments about the NHS. That does not make anyone disagreeing with your comments an automatic tory.

Turpinr

Ok @sonof you're saying the NHS is completely safe under Johnson's goverment.and they definitely haven't met with any of Trump's staff??

Tories outnumber Labour voters on this site, probably about 100/1, give the Corbyn bashing a rest.

Triumph13

There is a difference between 'bashing' a political party based on what their opponents say they will do and 'bashing' one based on what the party themselves have said they want to do.

[Deleted User]

The NHS scaremongering is silly.

A reasonable concern would be that following Brexit UK would be forced into an unbalanced trade deal with the US to replace diminished trade with Europe. That wouldn’t be good but the effects of negotiated Brexit are surely already priced into the stocks and the value of the pound.

A Corbyn government would be different. It’s an event the stockmarket is betting against and we’ve seen that surprises can happen. And I do think the consequences would be dramatic. While we can’t predict the future, there are 3 plausible scenarios:

1. Greece where Syriza and Tsipras did not change all that much once in government.
2. Venezuela, where a socialist government implemented nationalization and turned a wealthy country into a disaster
3. Sweden in 1960s where the more radical changes like nationalization and worker share ownership didn’t get implemented but taxes were pushed very high and growth stopped.

There are other examples, but they are similar.

Greek scenario could materialise if Brexit does not happen or is delayed further. EU rules would prevent implementation of confiscatory policies.

The Swedish scenario is unlikely, Corbyn and McDonnell demonstrated that they are far more radical over the last 5 decades or so. Silly to doubt their sincerity when they promise nationalization and share transfers. And they made very specific promises to their base.

The Chavez scenario seems like the most likely one IF Labour get into power.

Albermarle

Tories outnumber Labour voters on this site, probably about 100/1

Bit of an exaggeration I think . If for no other reason than quite a lot of public servants or ex public servants are using the site..
Actual Corbynistas are probably a bit thin on the ground though.

Thrugelmir

Anonymous101 wrote: »

IMO when it comes to pensions any government is in a catch 22 position. Scrapping salary sacrifice or tax relief all together goes against the larger target of having an aging population save efficiently for retirement. I know governments aren't usually afraid of kicking the can down the road but it would directly contradict the recent political consensus.

An increasingly large aging population is going to put greater and greater strain on the NHS and other community based services. There has to be a balance between providing for retirement and contributing to the potential cost of ones healthcare. The middle ground needs to reestablished.