Depressed if we have a Tory goverment.

[Jamo]

Thats for a houses current value, not what you paid for it.

There are a lot of people who bought houses in the SE for £30k or less say 30 years ago which are now valued at over £300k. Don't think these are big houses, in London thats the value of one bedroom flat in some places.

You also have to remeber that IHT applies to estates when the beneficiary is not married or in a civil partnership with the person who has died, so for instance a couple living together, one of them dies, they could lose the house if they can't pay the inheritance tax.

There is also the argument that if you've worked hard, paid your taxes etx etc and have saved your money to give as an inhertinace, why shoudl that be taxed again when inherited?

 

Again its only taxed at amounts over that so if that person couldn't afford to pay off the inheritence etc then they could sell the house and move into a flat for twice as much money as I am paying....

 

Why should us Joe averages pay for the mistakes of the RIDICULOUSLY rich. I have never borrowed money recklessly or bet on risky investments and I certainly wouldn't expect people to bail me out when I ruin my career by betting on a flopped investment. So WHY OH WHY am I expected to make more sacrifices than the rich. And I mean the very rich. Why am I expecting to pay more VAT over the next few years. Have my income tax increased. While the very rich don't pay VAT due to their businesses cunningly paying for a large amount of personal possessions which they then claim back and we are then supposed to finance the 3% corp tax reduction which the rich will then revel in. It actually makes me fume thinking of the conservatives priorities. They arent in it for the country. Its for the companies who pay for their tour buses.

[Andrew_C]

For those in the frozen north who don't understand house prices down here; I have an ex council semi with three beds in fairly scummy area of Southampton. Cost me £45k ten years ago. Now worth £130k or so.

 

The same house in Winchester, still on a LA estate, is over £250k. So if you want anything remotely nice in Winchester, or similar towns, £325k isn't all that much.

[tmcd35]

If none of the above wins then it shows that the people have lost faith in the government. At a time like that it is the DUTY of the MONARCH to step in and take control.

 

I really, really don't like the sound of that. It sounds - dangerous.

 

Don't get me wrong I believe we should keep the monarch, but only because they are our best ambassadors to the world and do wonders to our tourist trade. They are worth more to ort economy than any perceived constitutional benefits of getting rid of them.

 

But opening a door to the dictatorship monarchies of old is a very very bad idea.

[Jamo]

For those in the frozen north who don't understand house prices down here; I have an ex council semi with three beds in fairly scummy area of Southampton. Cost me £45k ten years ago. Now worth £130k or so.

 

The same house in Winchester, still on a LA estate, is over £250k. So if you want anything remotely nice in Winchester, or similar towns, £325k isn't all that much.

 

Is this a conversation about the ridiculous cost of housing in this country or inheritance? It stands that noone on a modest wage can afford a 350,000 pound house with a monthly mortgage of 1600 pounds.

 

I would say if I bought a house for 30k 30 years ago and sold it for 400,000 now that the 370,000 pound profit I made would be a good amount of money!!!!! Then the 0.045% equivalent tax you would pay on that investment really isn't that big a deal.

[Guest theeldergeek]

I will be very disappointed if we have a Tory government on Friday. I would like to see electoral reform so that people take other parity more seriously greens and others. The Tory government are going to stop council tax rises this will mean that your council will have less money to fix roads and things like this. I live in Richmond upon Thames which gets very little money form central government most of the money the council spends is raise locally. The people backing David Cameron locally make me even less keen as they are real Tories not the David Cameron type.

 

They should add up how much each person costs the country each year, and then write a personal cheque for that amount to each person. If you spend it all, you don't get any more. If you manage to save some, you get a free holiday in Magaluf. Budget sorted.

 

[torledo]

Is this a conversation about the ridiculous cost of housing in this country or inheritance? It stands that noone on a modest wage can afford a 350,000 pound house with a monthly mortgage of 1600 pounds.

 

I would say if I bought a house for 30k 30 years ago and sold it for 400,000 now that the 370,000 pound profit I made would be a good amount of money!!!!! Then the 0.045% equivalent tax you would pay on that investment really isn't that big a deal.

 

the dead don't pay taxes.

 

it's a cost burden on those who inherit. If it's a family home then there is an argument that to have to sell a modestly sized property [we're not talking mansions here] to meet the tax bill is not what the tax was designed for.

 

if it's a second or third property, or if it is a property unusually large or expensive for the area, then payment of the tax is reasonable imo.

 

the parties are arguing about thresholds. both parties want to exlude ordinary people who own ordinary [but comparatively expensive] properties from the tax......

[duncane]

What would the Conservatives have done differently during the last 13 years from Labour? I suspect that during the good times they'd have paid back government debt, which means that the overall deficit when they needed to borrow would be less. That would mean that we'd not be running such a high deficit as we are doing now, which means the cuts that are necessary wouldn't be any where near as bad. It's simple - just like your own finances, when you find yourself doing well, you put aside something for a rainy day - or at least you do if you're prudent.

[Jamo]

What I would like proved, is how much of the debt currently is the fault of our government and how much is the fault of the collapse of the world economy. It does seem very strange that we aren't the only country who 'suddenly' has a huge national debt...

 

I wonder how much of this mess is caused by the capitalist machine that we have to live in, driven by the uncaring bank personnel who still think that after breaking the entire globes financial situation, they can pay themselves bonuses which average 95,000 pounds for the investment arms of the banks. Its disgusting.

[IanT]

If none of the above wins then it shows that the people have lost faith in the government. At a time like that it is the DUTY of the MONARCH to step in and take control. None of the above was on the voting slips when Queen Victoria was in power, and it was actually removed from the ballot papers when King George V came in as monarch (according to several history teachers in various schools).

 

I agree that its the DUTY of the MONARCH to step in and take control - wont happen though.

[tmcd35]

I agree that its the DUTY of the MONARCH to step in and take control - wont happen though.

 

You're the second person to say that. Are you really willing to give up your freedoms and liberty so easily?

[torledo]

this mess is caused by the capitalist machine

 

you could be right. But we're sort of stuck with this system aren't we ?

 

your right that this is a 'global' problem....and we are by no means the only country with large debts.

 

But the flip side to that is that if it is a global recession....then it was most certainly a global boom.

 

Practically every developed country there was low inflation, low interest rates, booming house prices, so it

wasn't a new labour creation anymore than it was solely their fault.

 

I reckon that makes them expendable. And they know it, that's why they say vote to keep the other lot out.

That's the sum of new labour's political aspiration now that they've been well and truly found out.

[duncane]

What I would like proved, is how much of the debt currently is the fault of our government and how much is the fault of the collapse of the world economy. It does seem very strange that we aren't the only country who 'suddenly' has a huge national debt...

 

It's not the fact that we have debt, but its size that's the problem. The European Commission is predicting that our deficit will be 12% of GDP this year - the highest in the EU. (The austerity measures undertaken by Greece should reduce their debt to 9.3% of GDP this year.)

 

It's also about our past history. If you're a good credit risk (you've always paid back your debt when you've had the money) you're not going to ring alarm bells with your creditors. If you live beyond your means, even when you've been getting bonuses and raking in the money, people are going to be lot more worried about lending to you when you've lost your job. The sames true of countries too.

[localzuk]

It's not the fact that we have debt, but its size that's the problem. The European Commission is predicting that our deficit will be 12% of GDP this year - the highest in the EU. (The austerity measures undertaken by Greece should reduce their debt to 9.3% of GDP this year.)

 

Doesn't the deficit of Greece depend very much on how much of it the Greek people decide to set ablaze? I agree that our deficit is high, but as has been said before - during a recession that is normal. The problem we face is that we are stuck in an odd situation where there isn't a strong industry to help prop us up any more. Our exports are pitiful - with a several billion pound trade deficit every month. Our tourist industry is laughable. Our banking industry is in turmoil, and only starting to recover now. What is going to provide us with any growth?

 

Our budget deficit isn't as shocking as people seem to be making out. Yes, it is bad, but when you combine the various circumstances of what is causing it (labour idiocy, multiple wars, selling all our gold when it was worth hardly anything, and most of all the recession) it isn't hugely higher than the deficits of previous recessions. Also, looking at deficit alone is a poor idea. Sure we have a high deficit, but our overall debt as a percentage of GDP isn't as bad as many other EU states. Look at Italy, Greece and Belgium for example, they all have a debt of either over 100% of their GDP or close to it. Also look at unemployment figures. Ours are a lot lower than other struggling countries.

 

So, yes we are in a mess, but making out its all doom and gloom and that we must slash the budget of everything in the country to a tuppence each to fix it is silly.

[TechMonkey]

You're the second person to say that. Are you really willing to give up your freedoms and liberty so easily?

 

What you mean like detention without trial, search with no cause etc etc etc? Ohhh...

selling all our gold when it was worth hardly anything,

The thing about this that annoys the most is he declared when he was going to sell it & that was why the price was so low! & apparently he is a financial whizz that will get us out of the current problems!

Edited May 6, 2010 by TechMonkey

[kevbaz]

imagine if he waited till now to sell the gold! dale winton would be loving his comission for his part in cash 4 gold!

[torledo]

the gold thing is a complete red herring.....

 

how much would the sale have netted the govt. today ? And how much is that as a % of govt. annual spending ? 3%, 4% ?

 

the govt. has something far more valuable than a hoard of gold.....it has it's own currency that floats on FX markets.

 

as far as slashing of spending.....some areas of spending won't or can't be cut. All that can happen is that the rate of increase in spending will be much smaller than in previous years.....now that is going to be effectively a cut because of the scale at which spending has increased when the sun was supposedly shining. they created that dependance as far as jobs and income on public spending......and then you have people who complain about the pain to come not realising how unsustainable it all was.

[localzuk]

the gold thing is a complete red herring.....

 

how much would the sale have netted the govt. today ? And how much is that as a % of govt. annual spending ? 3%, 4% ?

 

Considering the deficit is discussed on a yearly basis, 3 or 4% would be a quarter or third of this year's deficit! Yes, it wouldn't be a repeating thing but whilst trying to repair our economy, that is a huge chunk of money.

 

the govt. has something far more valuable than a hoard of gold.....it has it's own currency that floats on FX markets.

 

A currency that is currently worth sod all, so our trade deficit still stings us.

 

as far as slashing of spending.....some areas of spending won't or can't be cut. All that can happen is that the rate of increase in spending will be much smaller than in previous years.....now that is going to be effectively a cut because of the scale at which spending has increased when the sun was supposedly shining. they created that dependance as far as jobs and income on public spending......and then you have people who complain about the pain to come not realising how unsustainable it all was.

 

That seems to strike me as 'semantics' - 'some areas of spending won't or can't be cut' 'rate of increase in spending will be much smaller' 'effectively a cut'. A cut is a cut, whether it is a cut in actual budgets or a cut in the usual increases (many areas plan their budgets in advance, so will have planned things with their future budget increase already for example).

[tmcd35]

What you mean like detention without trial, search with no cause etc etc etc? Ohhh...

Point taken - that'd be a 'yes' then!

[Dos_Box]

imagine if he waited till now to sell the gold! dale winton would be loving his comission for his part in cash 4 gold!

 

 

So long as we popped it in an envalope and hoped that they were honest enough to admit they had received it.

[torledo]

That seems to strike me as 'semantics' - 'some areas of spending won't or can't be cut' 'rate of increase in spending will be much smaller' 'effectively a cut'. A cut is a cut, whether it is a cut in actual budgets or a cut in the usual increases (many areas plan their budgets in advance, so will have planned things with their future budget increase already for example).

 

oh for sure. I'm not trying to dress it up as anything other than a cut......just pointing out that you can't gorge yourself on a cake and not expect it to give you indigestion later on.

 

if there wasn't so much malinvestment [and there have been worthwhile improvements aswell] from this spending, then we might have been in a better position to tolerate a readjustment in the rate of increase in spend.

[sidewinder]

the gold thing is a complete red herring.....

 

how much would the sale have netted the govt. today ? And how much is that as a % of govt. annual spending ? 3%, 4% ?

 

the govt. has something far more valuable than a hoard of gold.....it has it's own currency that floats on FX markets.

 

 

Agreed. It certainly wasnt the wisest decision in hindsight but as is always said, hindsight is a wonderful thing. Its only in the last few years that the price has shot up so much, until then it probably didnt seem such a bad decision (since the money was invested in currency which would have gained interest)

Also, money lost from it ranges from £4bn to £6bn. Considering the government collects £10bn a year from tax on tobacco alone, and god knows how much in fuel tax and others, so in the grand scheme of things it isnt an enourmous amount of money

Edited May 6, 2010 by sidewinder

[SpuffMonkey]

Its a waste if it didn't do its job. Its a deterrent, the whole point is that if its effective we never have to use it. Therefore it can be argued that it has been worth every penny.

 

Its not a deterrent, as the US would never let us fire it without their permission...

[Dos_Box]

Actually, it is an independant nuclear deterrant. We don't need American permission for anything to do with it.

[srochford]

Actually, it is an independant nuclear deterrant. We don't need American permission for anything to do with it.

 

Actually, I suspect it's Independent{/] :-)

[srochford]

Actually, it is an independant nuclear deterrant. We don't need American permission for anything to do with it.

 

Actually, I suspect it's Independent :-)