Do Wealthy People secretly want Labour?

[TheAnimus]

(alt title: rants of a dyslexic)

Before I start, I'll just remind people the road to hell is paved with good intentions, whilst people may not think they intended any of these consequences, they are damned obvious with no hindsight required.

Also by wealthy, I mean anyone over £100k or so.

So £150k earners, anyone think they will pay the 50p tax rate? Hah, will they hell, this doesn't really worry most, the worst effect would be a lack of skilled people in employment, I know I for one don't need £150k, so I might just take 3 months off next year I'd love to do the silk route. I know that this is a very common view.

I've also seen jobs offering deferred salary (very effective savings tax dodge) people advertising when you go for an interview, "don't worry you won't be effected" payment via options etc.

So this tax in reality its a lot of boll. It will cost more for the HR/Accounting, than it will return to the inland revenue, it will just be like IR35 (which last estimate had given the treasury a 10th of the cost of the tax according to one biased news source).

But what we have seen Labour do is grow the gap between the rich and the poor. The rich can afford more luxury than under the previous tory reign, anyone with assets is much better off thanks to policies of keeping rates artificially low, whilst ignoring house price gains.

So landlords are better off, but its not just that, by having such tax and spend polices, we are going to see more currency loss to the dollar or euro. Not a problem if you happened to be working for a multinational, as often your pay is quanto'd in dollar. Someone has been able to offer a mate a 20% pay rise just on this alone.

So the upshot of that is people on low income are worse off, able to buy less luxury items and even imported food, but people who are highly skilled, well they just got big pay rises.

Then we have things like education, if ever I decide I want kids, I'd want the best for them. Knowing I can effectively buy my way in to uni's others couldn't afford thanks to awful institutes giving cash back, they've a better chance of going somewhere prestigious, but also thanks to the de-valuing of exams like a-levels and introduction of pure bullmonkey degrees, I know that my experience will count for more. Go back 30 years and any degree would have set you in good stead, all someone had to do was get excepted, even to a polly, now you have to have a understanding of the prejudice, the kinda you get by having parents that are higher/middle class echelon. They know that Applied Media Studies and Web Technologies is not a degree thats going to help you at all... Ever.

By introducing things like the minimum wage, some people honestly think they are actually a good thing. However as most economist predicted we've seen a rise in local inflation. That is to say inflation effecting people at the bottom end of the market. If you had benefits you don't truely need a minimum wage, as people simply won't work in enough number for a job that pays significantly below.

By closing a gap between those earning 6 to 12k, they widen it for everyone else. Think of it this way, you've got someone whos the FD for a small firm, they need childcare, they have to be able to pay the same bills at the end of the month, but all of a sudden their childcare costs have just gone up. They are simply going to pay themselves more. That just results in de-valuing the money the minimum wage person earns, to try and manipulate such things with simple measures is somewhat like pissing against the tide.

But by doing so, they fail to actually help people be more productive, more useful, so the economy can afford to pay them more, it is after all a zero-sum game, there is a fixed finite amount of gold or whatever. Someone's allocation is determined by what they can bring to the table, then with adjustments for taxation and local effects. Whilst this classical view does assume we're not in a monopsony, if we are that is better addressed by encouraging mobility by having recognised industry achievements, or just making it easier for employers. Not by increasing the number of tax rules........

This is also quite devastating in many ways as the minimum wage fails to address certain local imperfections. I'm sure people on this forum own computers more expensive than a years rent in certain places around this country. Try being a bottom rung cleaner in London.

By over-riding market forces, the localised poor have been really hurt, meanwhile the rich better off in many ways.

So I wonder how many wealthy people are considering a vote for such self interest evil?

[abaxas]

Have to agree.

Increasing top end tax might even lower the tax take as it becomes more and more financially benifical to avoid that tax.

Being self employed, I attempt to avoid as much tax as is financially viable to me. This year I actaully paid -£1916 in tax. Yes negative.

But on the bright side, at least lots of accountants will be kept in work.

[oolon]

I also do a self assessment tax return, every year they write to me asking me not to do one, but I do it anyway as I normally can get myself 500-1000 pounds tax refund! The number of people out there who must be routinely paying to much tax. Standard losers are people who get given a naff tax code or start a job half way through the year, they think the system will sort itself out well it does not. Its really not in your employers interest to sort it out, just use the code they are given, they you have to hope the HMRC see the over payment and give you a refund... not likely, "those that don't ask don't want".

[G4Z]

Quite agree, Labour has for a long time been the party for the rich in my view. They try and make it look like they do something for those at the bottom end in the form of tax credits however I have to say taking peoples money off them and inventing a massive bureaucracy to administer it seems like a completely bonehead mistake when you could simply alter peoples tax codes in the first place and just not take it off them. Of course that would probably cost more because you wouldn't have those large numbers of people who never bother with it due to its complexity so in reality they are just looking for a way to appear to do something whilst ensuring that it costs the minimum possible. Of course as we know they are totally incompetent and last year I read that welfare payments actually outstripped income tax payments last year...

[oolon]

Of course as we know they are totally incompetent and last year I read that welfare payments actually outstripped income tax payments last year...

Well atleast they can sell off some of our gold its at an all time high now... oh damn they already sold it off for 230 dollars a troy ounce, making a low in the market!

[santa claus]

Rants of a dyslexic

If I didn't know better I'd say you were covering your rear end for all that Tory support you've been spouting for months.

You can at last see that there is no credible opposition to Labour and perhaps you're trying to explain in advance why they will have won the election.

Mr Cameron and his "ever-so-serious-I-have-all-the-answers" interview technique is pure Old Etonion personal belief but no substance and noone knows who Nick Clegg is (is he Vince Cable's batman?).

Labour will win because change for change sake is not a good move at this economically delicate time and it certainly isn't a good time for a bit of political russian roulette.

Nice to see some early backing away though

[TheAnimus]

Oh no, my morals wouldn't let me vote for something as horrific as labour, its very unfair on people.

The problem is personally you don't seam to comprehend the problems of the defecit and QE.

No matter who gets in, massive cuts will be made, and tax hiked.

But lets hope we see something fair, like VAT hike, rather than say extra tax on jobs like NI.... oh wait, they dropped the VAT, the tax on luxory goods, and put a tax on jobs.....

How anyone can vote labour with that going on, without getting something great in return I've no idea. So I assume people are getting something great like £1k off a new car, or improvement in their living conditions, given that this is zero sum game, we know its not coming from the top 10%......

Feel free to actually bring me up on any of the points made thou, enless you agree with me that in many ways labour is the party of the un-caring rich?

[oolon]

Labour will win because change for change sake is not a good move at this economically delicate time and it certainly isn't a good time for a bit of political russian roulette.

Brown is the man who got us in these problems for years he has been borrowing moving the goal posts as to when to pay it back, and he ran out of time go to see him nailed with the lie he had been projecting for so long. Its insane anyone who has studied any economics knows putting up taxes when you have a weak economy is not the thing to do (as this take money out of the economy), yet brown seems to think i we give all our money to the government they will sort it out. I believe people who can best spend money are the people who earnt it.

In summary I believe anyone would do a better job than Brown he has proved he is completely unsuited for the role of PM, and hopefully in a months time we will see the back of him. To be frank I don't care who replaces him, be it liberal or conservative.

[oolon]

The problem is personally you don't seam to comprehend the problems of the defecit and QE.

Sadly I think I know exactly how they will solve both of those. The government will decide that that when the bonds that QE bought get repaid they do not need to "delete" the money from the system, and they can reuse it. If they are not too dumb they should make a killing from the banks they have bought. No country who has debt payable in a currency that they control need fear they cannot replay it. Its the rest of us who need fear as its our money they will be diluting (devaluing).

[santa claus]

The problem is personally you don't seam to comprehend the problems of the defecit and QE.

You're always telling me that I don't understand things. It makes me feel so inadequate .

To be frank I don't care who replaces him, be it liberal or conservative.

Or, if you think about it, you wouldn't mind Labour as long as Mr Brown isn't at the helm .

[oolon]

Or, if you think about it, you wouldn't mind Labour as long as Mr Brown isn't at the helm .

Yes you are probably right, i would not object to labour nearly as much without GB at the helm. The problem is parties don't change while in office, they reform while they are in the wilderness.

[santa claus]

Yes you are probably right, i would not object to labour nearly as much without GB at the helm. The problem is parties don't change while in office, they reform while they are in the wilderness.

Mr Brown replaced Mr Blair as Party Leader without election.

[Saracen]

....

Labour will win because change for change sake is not a good move at this economically delicate time and it certainly isn't a good time for a bit of political russian roulette.
....

If Labour do win and people have actually chosen to put the muppet that caused many of our problems in charge of sorting them out, then this country will thoroughly deserve what happens to it.

Yes you are probably right, i would not object to labour nearly as much without GB at the helm.

That, I agree with ..... in the sense that being hung and drawn is preferable to being hung, drawn and quartered - still not a huge barrel of laughs, but a step in the right direction.

[santa claus]

If Labour do win and people have actually chosen to put the muppet that caused many of our problems in charge of sorting them out, then this country will thoroughly deserve what happens to it.

There's someone better qualified to sort out the problems?

[oolon]

Mr Brown replaced Mr Blair as Party Leader without election.

Yes, and in my book had no mandate to lead us. Brown was part of the Blair administration and this was just a continuation of it like with Maggie and John Major. Its become old and tired and just needs to be replaced, as Boris did with Ken. Ken was acting as if he had the right to rule London, and he needed to go sadly no one better wanted to run against him. Thought i am unhappy with Boris as the one thing he promised he has not done, get rid of those damn bendy busses!

[Saracen]

There's someone better qualified to sort out the problems?

Just about anyone is better qualified.