General election
- Thread starter Chippy_Tea
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
Yes, but I didn’t get the joke you made. Still not sure to be honest.
But I guess humour is not universal. Apologies if I took it the wrong way.
Bit of caution around polls in general.
According to poll daddy Sir John Curtice, this election is harder to nail down on a constituency basis because of the massive swing happening.
From what I’ve read elsewhere the smaller polling companies also rely very heavily on online polling, which will also skew things.
I honestly don’t get what all the fuss is about. As far as I understand (and I may be very, very wrong) you don’t pay tax on pension contributions, so when you come to draw your pension the money is coming from an untaxed pot? If this sum exceeds the income tax threshold then it should be subject to tax, same as any other income. What’s wrong with that?
Nothing, except the issue here is fiscal drag.
The state pension has gone up numerically, but not in real terms. You can’t buy any more with it than you previously could.
But the threshold for income tax has not moved at the same rate, meaning that in a couple of years anyone on a full state pension will be over the threshold for income tax.
I would not call the state pension ‘generous’, and moreover it’s dumb to have the state give on one side and then immediately take away on the other.
Agentgonzo
Landlord.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2021
- Messages
- 3,695
- Reaction score
- 4,045
Nothing. You have it spot on
Except fiscal drag affects everyone equally, not only pensioners.
Saying that "pensioners can be exempt from the fiscal drag but other working age people can't" is unfair, ageist and discriminatory, and TBH I can't see how it can be legal in any way when set against anti-discriminatory laws
Gax
Well-Known Member
Reform is typical modern populist nonsense. It's a lie on 2 fronts. It's a party that gets to promise the world because they know they won't have to back it up, and they are taking advantage of the average layman convincing them that what's good for the upper class is good for the lower class when that's just a bold faced lie.
Don't fall for populism.
Don't fall for populism.
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2013
- Messages
- 6,503
- Reaction score
- 6,354
I agree, but the tax system needs to apply to everyone, pensions shouldn’t be a special case. The tax free allowance should be raised across the board.
Last edited by a moderator:
Simple solution - state pension rises by the triple lock and whatever the state pension is becomes the new tax free allowance for everyone.
MickDundee
Landlord.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2016
- Messages
- 5,438
- Reaction score
- 3,994
Last edited by a moderator:
I have no doubt the results will be closer than the polls predict but i would be very surprised if the Tories got back in
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2012
- Messages
- 510
- Reaction score
- 298
So are they not being truthful about their aims?
Bosch
Landlord.
In fairness they are quite open about their aims.
Using immigrants as target practice is one, isn't it.
'
I guess you didn't read the recent Diane Abbot thread here or had you conveniently forgot that one.
An Ankoù
Landlord.
Do you mean they want to perfect their aim by practising on immigrants?
Now, with the formal re-entrance into the election spotlight of the UK’s leading exponent of the rhetoric of supply side immigration management, Nigel Farage, with his promise of zero net legal immigration to the UK, the Conservatives have felt the need to take their own supply side immigration management playbook to the next level, announcing that if re-elected they would bring in a reducing annual cap on work and family migration, to be advised upon by the independent Migration Advisory Committee (MAC), and voted on in parliament.
And, as, as Farage himself has said, based on recent figures a net zero figure would still “leave room for 600,000 people coming to the UK, which is “plenty” for the labour market”, depending how the Conservatives’ newly announced cap mechanism were to work in practice, this might even ultimately turn out to be tougher on the supply side of immigration than Reform UK’s approach. For the first time, Labour seemed a little unsure how to respond. However the cap mechanism would work, and all the practical difficulties it would inevitably give rise to, it is hard to agree with the shadow Home Secretary’s assertion that it is simply “rehashing failed announcements”.
Labour’s rhetoric has also been that legal immigration to the UK is too high and needs to come down. And in order to go on to the offensive against the Conservatives’ over their record on immigration numbers, Labour have had to adopt the posture of supply side constrainers, confirming that there are some of the Conservatives’ supply cutting measures that Labour will accept.
Even in areas where Labour might be thought more sympathetic to a more open approach, such as the potential for expanding the UK’s youth mobility scheme – which allows young people to come to the UK to work for a few years – to be open to the youth of the EU, Labour have held the line with a firm ‘no’. Seemingly motivated in this particular case by a fear of being misrepresented as allowing the re-introduction of freedom of movement from the EU through the side door.
FULL ARTICLE - https://www.smf.co.uk/commentary_podcasts/conservatives-labour-immigration-policy/
And, as, as Farage himself has said, based on recent figures a net zero figure would still “leave room for 600,000 people coming to the UK, which is “plenty” for the labour market”, depending how the Conservatives’ newly announced cap mechanism were to work in practice, this might even ultimately turn out to be tougher on the supply side of immigration than Reform UK’s approach. For the first time, Labour seemed a little unsure how to respond. However the cap mechanism would work, and all the practical difficulties it would inevitably give rise to, it is hard to agree with the shadow Home Secretary’s assertion that it is simply “rehashing failed announcements”.
Labour’s rhetoric has also been that legal immigration to the UK is too high and needs to come down. And in order to go on to the offensive against the Conservatives’ over their record on immigration numbers, Labour have had to adopt the posture of supply side constrainers, confirming that there are some of the Conservatives’ supply cutting measures that Labour will accept.
Even in areas where Labour might be thought more sympathetic to a more open approach, such as the potential for expanding the UK’s youth mobility scheme – which allows young people to come to the UK to work for a few years – to be open to the youth of the EU, Labour have held the line with a firm ‘no’. Seemingly motivated in this particular case by a fear of being misrepresented as allowing the re-introduction of freedom of movement from the EU through the side door.
FULL ARTICLE - https://www.smf.co.uk/commentary_podcasts/conservatives-labour-immigration-policy/
Last edited:
To all those going on about pensions and tax, I used to think like you, so good luck when you get yours, it’s a pittance
Your lucky it's a pittance rod, I won't be getting any!
