Some dissembly required
So, right-wingers want to let one section of the population (people inheriting assets worth up to one million pounds) keep their unearned income while letting it be known that another section of the population receiving unearned income (people on welfare) are parasites. We’re stroking Ike for inheriting his mother’s house while kicking Mike for needing help to get by.
Can someone square this circle for me?
Posted on October 1st, 2007 at 6:38 pm
| See also • Probably just a coincidence • Chuckie Bum Tax Bombshell Go Boom? • I CAN HAS FREED SPEECH? KTHNXBYE |
Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe By Email • Print This Post • • • |
|
Filed under UK politics |
Sorry. I can’t help on that one.
Well, a house has been earned, maybe not by Mike but certainly by his parents and its not stroking him while kicking Ike. Why should you get taxed for inheriting what has been earned by your parents? It has been worked for, not by the chancellor, so why should he have it?
If Ike is on welfare thats a shame for him, labeling him a parasite is harsh but it isn’t going to kill him.
Ike could consider getting a job afterall, or is that going to far for this lefty blog?
welfare…………. was the peace dividend…. does that mean tories are going to war ???
It has been worked for, not by the chancellor, so why should he have it?
“He” doesn’t get it. Society does.
The fact that one has to explain basic points about tax and the need for it, in this year of our Lord 2007, is one of the most depressing things about this deeply depressing political age. The fact that one is usually explaining them to the wilfully and selfishly deaf does not detract from the depressing nature of the experience.
Incidentally, the basic point, that we have two welfare systems, one for the wealthy and one for the poor, and that the first is considered good and healthy and legitimate while the latter is considered none of these things, is one well made and well worth making.
Simple. Mike doesn’t read the Daily Mail and will never vote Tory. Ike does.
Q: How much ‘work’ does house price inflation actually involve?
Ike’s mother is disposing of her property as she wishes. Mike is receiving money forcibly taken from others. That is the difference, for more rightish ranting on this please go here:
http://dsftyj.blogspot.com/2007/10/tax.html
It’s a difference. It is not however the only difference, despite the efforts of one-dimensional rightists to elevate the rights of property to some sort of absolute principle.
None of these rightists ever use public services of any kind, of course. Because that would be stealing.
I tell you, I weep for this generation.
ejh “rightists”, (it’s just the day for great names), do use public services. Why shouldn’t they, on average they probably pay more per head towards them than the “leftists”.
Other than the need for taxation to fund those things that absolutely have to be done at a governmental level, property rights should be absolute. Please let me know why you disagree with this.
P.S. Weep away but which generation?
That’s the trouble with a ‘meritocratic’ society: within a generation it’s an aristocracy. A whining aristocracy with a mock persecution complex at that. They want a free lunch and money for doing nothing. Whatever happened to getting on in life under your own steam? I thought that was the mantra of the welfare state-hating right?
And then they look down on another group of people getting something for nothing (except they’re not always getting something for nothing if they’re on contributions-based benefits).
Fine, have your absolute property rights. Let Ike’s mother do what she wants with her house; leave it to Ike. However, the second he decides to cash in the beloved family home, it’s income. Make him pay income tax in it.
Justin, a few points:
“they look down on another group of people getting something for nothing (except they’re not always getting something for nothing if they’re on contributions-based benefits).”
Contribution based benefits are simply the government taking away your money and then grudgingly giving a little of it back. Why not just let people keep more of the money they earn?
As for your “whining aristocracy”, just ensure that gifts are made outright rather than held in trust. You would find the money returning to the system rather rapidly.
Finally, there’s not much difference in taxing Ike now or later on. The gift is still taxed.
It’s still money he got by sitting on his arse and doing nothing. So much for the work ethic. Under George Osborne’s new threshold, swathes of people with well off parents can kick back and wait for them to die. The next Tory to mouth off about dole scroungers in my earshot will regret it.
What’s the moral difference between taking money earned by the sweat of your mother and taking money earned by the sweat of anonymous tax payers? Other than the fact that welfare is a humanitarian gesture to help those in need?
Aghhh. I’ll go through this one more time.
Ike is getting money that his mother has earned, paid taxes on already and has CHOSEN to pass on for the benefit of her children.
Mike is getting money that has been forciably extracted from the taxpayer. The taxpayer having NO CHOICE in the matter.
As for the dole in general; having a safety net is a sensible idea and something you would expect from a modern society. However, it should be for a limited time and the tax system needs to change in order to prevent the insanely high marginal tax rate that discourages people from getting back to work.
Perhaps this will make it clearer:
IM has 10X and choses to give it to I. There is no justification for HMG taking 4X of that.
Tax of YX forcibly taken by HMG and ZX given by them to M. This is not a persons choice, it is something imposed on them and they have every right to expect this situation to occur for the minimum period possible.
Falco,
What argument against IHT couldn’t also be made against any form of taxation? Personally, I’d rather be taxed when I’m dead that when I’m alive.
Quinn,
You will be taxed when alive. IHT taxes money that you have already paid tax on.
IHT taxes money that you have already paid tax on.
Just like VAT and numerous other taxes then?