Adopting a policy put forward by the morally bankrupt and principle-free zone that is the Liberal Democrats seems to be something of a gamble for Labour but on the basis that it panders to the politics of envy and would, in effect, be free money for the government, the 'Mansion Tax' looks like being a central plank of Labour policy as we head towards the General Election of 2015.
Indeed, just like the bankers' bonus tax, the Mansion Tax seems to be Labour's Utopian solution - it penalises wealthy people and is therefore likely to be very popular with those who are less well off, and it seems that it can be used to pay for all manner of expensive ticket items including the NHS, the £75billion deficit (cut by the Tories from £157 billion in the last 4 years), and reintroducing the 10p tax rate.
So what exactly is the Mansion Tax? It's (proposed to be) a levy, charged annually to the owners of properties worth over £2 million at a rate of 1%. So if you live in a property worth £2.5 million you would be billed £5,000 annually (1% of £500,000) for having the gall to have worked hard, invested wisely, perhaps been the beneficiary of hereditary largess and to live where you do. £2 million, sounds a lot, but it would affect 55,000 homes in the UK, a figure which would rise to 140,000 in less than 10 years. Some 10% of London properties worth more than £2 million are actually one or two-bedroomed flats and, in order to achieve Labour's target of raising £2 billion in revenue from this 'scheme', the actual property value threshold would have to be lowered to less than £1.5 million.
Spot the mansion:
Yes there will be extremes - overseas property buyers paying £ tens of millions for a residence in London (for example) and paying virtually zero tax, but the vast majority of owners of homes worth over £2 million will (either themselves of their predecessors) have worked hard, paid their taxes, paid into the system, probably created jobs for others and also, probably, have had to stretch themselves in order to be able to live where they do.
And their reward for this ambitious, aspirational, positive, independent, entrepreneurial approach to life, is to be charged for the privilege. Having probably paid more tax than most, created more jobs than most, made more of a contribution to society and the country than most, these people having bought something quite legitimately, will, in this scenario, now be retrospectively taxed - every year - for having done so. And remember that this additional tax would be over and above the higher council tax already paid by owners of higher value homes (whether they use the local library or not).
It's like buying a nice, expensive car and then the government, envious of your 'wheels' turning around and forcing you to pay them an annual 'ownership' tax on it, over and above the road tax, fuel duty etc that you already pay. After you have bought and paid for it, and without knowing that this would be the case.
What next? 'You had a nice piece of fillet steak a few weeks' ago sir, we have decided that that is a luxury, only available to people who work hard, so we have decided to steal some money from your wallet to give to people who can't afford to eat that well'?
Or: 'You seem to have £100 worth of disposable income this month sir, that is not acceptable when some people don't so we're going to take it off you and give it to someone less well off than you'.
It's just a fucking envy-driven communist stance to penalise people who do their best. Ultimately to ensure that there's no point in striving and working towards a good standard of living because these people want everyone - except themselves obviously (they being 'more equal' than the rest of us) to have a uniformly shit life, like everyone else who invariably votes Labour. And, having done so for generations they still don't realise that living the Labour dream ensures perpetual mediocrity and miserable lives based on the lowest non-aspirational, demotivated common denominator and a perpetual anger driven by this state-sponsored envy of others. An outlook which has created a client state, has trapped young people on benefits and has encouraged people to expect - nay demand - to be given the same rewards as savers and strivers for doing fuck all.
It's state-sponsored theft. Plain and simple. Taking yet more money from people who are likely to have contributed most already, to give to people who haven't.
Now I'm not saying that poorer/unemployed people shouldn't have a safety net, that they shouldn't, in our civilised, C21st society expect not to starve, expect to have decent accommodation, heating, lighting, water and waste services and access to good services including health and education, but these things should be paid for, by government as part of our agreed remit, out of lifetime working tax and tax on purchases, not retrospective government theft.
Take Labour's proposed removal of the winter fuel allowance for better off pensioners for example. Why would they want to do that? Have these pensioners not paid in during their lifetimes? I'd suggest they're likely to have paid more in, and just like any other product, if you have paid for it, no matter that you are better off than other people, you should be entitled to get it. If you buy a book, you aren't charged more for it because you happen to be able to afford more; you are charged the price of that book. And they don't take out the last chapter because you're a bit better off. The state pension is exactly the same, if you've paid for it you should get it, including the winter fuel allowance and free bus pass, since you have already, previously paid for it, irrespective of whether you really need it or not.
Or are we now looking at a world in which one cannot buy a bottle of bubbly for a family celebration because 'well you don't really need this do you?' That is fucking madness.
This politics of envy does my head in. It is state-sponsored theft by any reasonable definition. Retrospectively stealing money from people who have legitimately paid for something just because they seem to be a bit better off. Hasn't the basis of our historical success as a nation been aspiration? How does this envy tax - which is being ear-marked to be spent about four times over already - encourage endeavour, hard work or striving for success?
Ed Balls talked about a 'race to the top' yesterday in his credibility and charisma-free Labour Party Conference speech: When has voting in a Labour government ever been anything other than a headlong race to the bottom for every aspect of our nation, from education standards to healthcare cover-ups, economic success to military legitimacy and credibility.
In 1997 Labour inherited a strong, well-balanced, prosperous, thriving economy (not perfect by any means but compared to 1979 when we were the 'sick man of Europe' it was pretty much Utopian): In 2010 when they left office, Labour left the UK and much of the world as a basket case. And now they want to steal money from ordinary people to pay for more profligacy.
The second word you're looking for is 'off'.
Thanks for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment