That has been tried already and failed dismally. See communism.







And what, might I ask, happens when the rich move out? 3 Californian cities have filed for bankruptcy and more are expected to follow. This is what happens when there are huge public spending commitments and those who actually make a net contribution to the public purse leave town in their droves.



The rich are ultimately wealth creators. They employ people, they spend money, they keep the economy moving.



The politics of envy once again surfaces on The Sin Bin. Another opportunity to unite against the nasty rich, and be part of the 'us' in the never ending battle with 'them'.

That's was why you were proved so resoundingly correct about the attitude toward Jerry Chicken after he 'fessed up to being successful, is it?

Seeing as the world has never had a true communist state, we'll probably never know.



One of the main reasons for introducing LVT is that unlike people and wealth, you cannot offshore land.



But please don't quote the IFS any longer. Not too far back, they advocated abolishing corporation tax and tax paid on dividends. To make up the obvious shortfall to the exchequer, their proposed solution was to raise VAT to 28.5% and levy it on everything, including food etc.

If that's the case then why are you whining about a small percentage of people paying the most tax proportion? You can't move the tax burden without moving the wealth. It's simple.

Which communist state should I look to see this wealth redistribution in effect then?





Oh dear. I assume you think the rich shouldn't be taxed then? Otherwise you must surely agree with statement.



The only people displaying envy on this thread are the ones suggesting that people on below the average wage should pay more in tax because they have children and so receive something from the state, so as to reduce the tax on the rich.



And you've still never answered the question - is it just their income tax contribution in certain years that you're deciding this on?

One doesn't have to be Communist to want some redistribution of wealth.





Depends which of the rich people you are talking about.

Many employ but a few and invest their money overseas.

Beyond a certain level of income many will invest any tax reduction abroad rather than spending it in Britain.





I am not envious of the rich.

But I do think that I, and those more wealthy than I, should be looking after the worse-off a bit better than we are doing ... and certainly not reneging on our responsibilities.

Amen to that.

I'm usually the one who Standee and Video Ref point towards, in their "politics of envy" rants.



In 2010 my aunt & uncle died within weeks of each other and as such, their estate was combined for IHT purposes. A cousin of mine was one of the executors and complained bitterly about the 40% IHT that was due on the balance above £650k. He also moaned about some of the beneficiaries, including my ex-wife. He seemed shocked when I told him that I couldn't give a flying fook who got what. It wasn't ever our money to start with, it had been earned by someone else. Basically this was simply money that had fallen out of the sky and as such, I didn't begrudge the exchequer taking their cut.



Is that the politics of envy?

I've been rather fortunate in recent years to have seen my income and concomitant standard of living increase. And I'm very grateful for that. I won't lie – a little bit more would change my life completely. It would enable me to work at exactly what I want to work at.



Not sit around and do nothing, but work at what I want to work at.



But there you go.



But the fact that I am doing very nicely, thank you, is not an excuse, for me, to forget what OI have experienced, or o forget what other people are still experiencing.



I find it aggravating that some seem to assume that, if you are doing okay yourself, you have to become a selfish git who doesn't care about anyone else. I hate to think that I could become like that. Why would I?

Quite apart from possessing a moral compass, it may just have something to do with actually experiencing life (as in real-world living, as opposed to Sal's "Real World" life) under Thatcher and even she didn't go as far as this lot in decimating the NHS and welfare

What about the wishes of the deceased? Many parents work hard their entire lives to provide for their children, and that includes once they have passed. They take out savings funds and even amend the legalities regarding ownership of property to ensure the maximum sum possible is passed on to their loved ones.



100% tax on inheritance? Idealistic bllsht if you ask me. Why should the exchequer get a massive chunk of what parents have worked their fingers to the bone to pass on to their children? It's already been taxed - why does dying suddenly release that cash and those assets as some sort of tax bounty?



My parents are elderly and my mum has been in poor health for many years, though you wouldn't know it to meet her. One of their biggest concerns is that what they have worked all their lives for is passed on to myself and my sister, and they've taken financial advice several times to that effect. They're not hugely wealthy but they both had decent jobs, saved and invested well and my dad fell on his feet as far as voluntary retirement was concerned.



That inheritance will help provide a better life for my family. And in the same manner, I'll do my absolute damndest to ensure my kids get as much as possible once I've gone and frankly the exchequer can go whistle. I'm not a materialistic person at all - never been bothered about a fast car or the biggest TV or latest gadgets - but I do care about the security of my family's future.

What about the wishes of the deceased?



They're dead, they are no longer sentient, presumably they died knowing the situation regarding IHT, so basically their wishes no longer count for anything.



Legacies are unearned income and are taxed as such. I really can't see the problem with IHT, especially when applied to increased property values. Just how hard does someone work to watch over an increase in house prices?



Oh and it wasn't me who suggested a 100% IHT rate BTW

I admit that I've been there and I've seen it in others who have, through graft, acheived a level of income where the household bills can be paid without thinking "oooh thats a bit higher this quarter", there is an inate feeling that you've done well, you've done it yourself and you're self sufficient now.



Whereas of course you aren't, with a few years and some bad times on your back you learn that actually most of your success was just good luck and the bad times are all part of the parcel, and its in the bad times that you need to fall back on society for support.



I'm the first to admit that for 18 months during 2009/10 we relied on the tax credits that we applied for to pay the mortgage, if it hadn't been for those credits then we'd have been stuffed, just like the family were who bought our last house from us in 2007 and over-stretched themselves just before the recession hit - that house is now for sale by the mortgagee for £60k less than we sold it for and the family has had to move out - I'm under no illusion that that could easily have been us.



Independence from the state is an illusion created in young minds, its only after you properly mature that you realise how much you need a properly functioning public sector.