Jeremy Corbyn

You can't argue VAT is regressive. In terms of spending its progressive.

So according to where you put your boundaries its either.

Google it.

You can't argue VAT is regressive. In terms of spending its progressive.

Don't be ridiculous. VAT is commonly accepted to be a regressive tax because as a proportion of income, the poor pay more of it.

teamhurtmore - Member

Ah the swerve? Whose talking about VAT? We were on education, different topic altogether.

Shouldn't you be watching the proms with all the other UKIPers?

You haven't really got a degree in economics, have you? 🙂

I am some manual building worker educated to basic CSE level and yet you resort to petty patronising retorts instead of engaging in intelligent debate.

You're a fraud! 🙂

Why do you believe a w transport system should be run for profit?

Because its not really fair for poor people to subsidize people with decent jobs to commute?

Seriously you want to close a couple of hospitals to pay for new rolling stock?

Don't go there OOB - we have pages and hanners before on that topic.

BBC 1 mate

Again with the passive/aggressive nonsense.

OOB, I disagree.
I think the societal benefits of a subsidised and fully integrated transport system outweigh your objection, which is idealogical rather practical.

'Fairness' is subjective.

@Dazh - you can argue it either way:

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/so-is-vat-regressive-day-2-and-the-debate-continues/5455

Because its not really fair for poor people to subsidize people with decent jobs to commute?

You don't think that people with low paid jobs commute?

think the societal benefits of a subsidised and fully integrated transport system outweigh your objection

It's not my objection. You requested objections I offered a couple. I haven't got a dog in this fight.

@Dazh - you argue it either way:

No you can't. It's plainly ridiculous to look at VAT in terms of expenditure as opposed to a proportion of income. Income tax is measured quite rightly as a proportion of income, which is why it's regarded as progressive (as long as the rates are higher for higher earners). If you do the same with VAT it's clearly regressive.

VAT is an expenditure tax not and income tax. So it's exactly the correct place to start. The ridiculous (if you are allowed to say that kind of fhing) thing is to conflate it with taxes on income

No you can't. It's plainly ridiculous to look at VAT in terms of expenditure as opposed to a proportion of income. Income tax is measured quite rightly as a proportion of income, which is why it's regarded as progressive (as long as the rates are higher for higher earners). If you do the same with VAT it's clearly regressive.

The ridiculous (if you are allowed to say that kind of fhing) thing is to conflate it with taxes on income

That would be true if VAT was only imposed on optional luxury goods, but seeing as it's levied on things like sanitary products, child car seats etc which people can't do without or are obliged to use by law.

Without wishing to sidetrack things why hasn't VAT been overhauled and also been made "progressive" like income tax. Surely premium goods priced over £50k should attract a higher VAT rate? There are loads of anomalies-mobility aids for the elderly attract 5% VAT but gambling 0%,aircraft repair and maintenance 0% but car repairs 20%,gold investment coins 0% child car seats 5% for example.Lots of tinkering over the years by various governments to support various bits of the economy but surely it is ripe for reform to make it fairer,more progressive and support the economy?

Considering BR was making a loss by 1955 the end result being the Beechings cuts and even then it was still making a loss years later. Then making a profit or even breaking even would be a novelty.

Actually more seriously the big problem with nationalised anything is they make a profit in good years and treasury nicks it, hence in the bad years there is nowt for investment or to cover the losses. Whole setup is daft.

bencooper - Member

Billy Bragg singing The Red Flag at the Corbyn rally, and the Tories saying he's a threat to national security.

It's a long way from New Labour, isn't it? No matter what, I think politics at Westminster will get a lot more interesting.

Don't try to pretend yoy give a ****.

I have had a few FB posts from nationalists claiming JC as one of their own. This is disgusting. The true sentiment of independence will shine through when "Scots" are appalled that their money may contribute to helping students South of "the border" through their higher education.

Don't try to pretend yoy give a ****.

Well, for a start, I'm not a nationalist. Why so aggressive?

athgray - Member

I have had a few FB posts from nationalists claiming JC as one of their own. This is disgusting. The true sentiment of independence will shine through when "Scots" are appalled that their money may contribute to helping students South of "the border" through their higher education.

I've not seen anyone claiming Corbyn as a scottish nationalist, or pro-independence, that'd be completely idiotic. But [i]most[/i] nationalists are left-leaning and so there's a strong link there. I voted Yes, SNP and Corbyn- I reckon most scottish nationalists and scots in general with a vote in this election voted the same. He's also the only major UK politician who doesn't seem to consider the SNP to be devil worshippers, and who seems to understand that a scottish person's vote is valid.

The rest of your post is just rabid nonsense. Many scottish people and nationalists are horrified by stuff that happens south of the border and would love to see it improved.

Specifically on tuition fees, this is my business- most scottish students are pretty unaware that English, Welsh and NI students are expected to go into lifelong debt to pay for their course, and when they find out, they're appalled. I have this conversation several times a week with students and potential students, it's sad but actually pretty heartwarming in a way. The Scottish NUS is right behind it too.

Ironically, Scottish students are generally more pissed off to find their RUK mates are being charged... You'd think it'd be the other way round and RUK students would be angry to find out the Scots are getting it for free but they hardly ever are.

@nick we had "progressive" VAT way back, there was a basic rate if 15% and a luxury rate of 25%. The luxury rate decimated many UK businesses for example yacht building. So all the tradesmen lost their jobs and we lost the skills. The Brits now buy beats built abroad is that a winner ? We used to have an extra 10% tax on cars as well as VAR but that was abolished too. The rest of Europe has VAT on food (8-10%) and far less lower band/exceptions, the EU tried to get us to drop our lower rate on gas/electric.

@tmh, we need to let Jeremy have a fair roll of the dice, my bet is the SNP will make mince meat of him and he'll fall all over himself with consultations and look ridiculous appearing to stand against everything and for nothing

we need to let Jeremy have a fair roll of the dice, my bet is the SNP will make mince meat of him

😆

jambalaya - Member

.......way back, there was a basic rate if 15% and a luxury rate of 25%.

That's not true. We have never had a basic rate of 15% VAT and a luxury rate of 25% VAT at the same time.

I suspect the rest of your post is similarly inaccurate but I can't be bothered to delve into it.

EDIT : Actually I did decide to delve deeper and the 25% VAT on yachts, which is obviously only 5% more than now, only lasted for about 5 years.

I very much doubt that the entire yacht building industry in the UK collapsed over a period of 5 years because VAT was 5% higher than it is now.

I suspect that wealthy yacht buying punters were able to scrape together the extra 5% VAT for their luxury yachts.

You haven't really got a degree in economics, have you?

I am some manual building worker educated to basic CSE level and yet you resort to petty patronising retorts instead of engaging in intelligent debate.

8)

Genuine question:
As a poor (by STW standards) person, what will Jeremy Corbyn do for me?

I appreciate that it is a selfish question, and the politically minded members of STW will already have me marked down as a selfish tory, but I can't afford to be any more generous than I'm already being and would like an answer.

🙂

Considering BR was making a loss by 1955 the end result being the Beechings cuts and even then it was still making a loss years later.

Years later? You mean every year up to now despite passenger doubling since 1994.

Privitised rail received 5.4Bn subsidy last year.

http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/2015/passenger-numbers/

That's not true.

So what's *your* answer to Nick's question?

There is no evidence that his remark was specifically aimed at *me* and I agree entirely with his point.

There is no evidence that his remark was specifically aimed at *me* and I agree entirely with his point.

You ruled out the only sane answer I can think of to his question.

It would be interesting to hear what you regard as the correct answer.

Genuine question:
As a poor (by STW standards) person, what will Jeremy Corbyn do for me?

Jambas, I doubt anyone will make mince meat of Corbyn in the short term. The power of protest politics is very strong right now as we see in many economies and he is well tapped into it. And because it is based on largely nebulous ideas it proves very hard to counter. Behind the supposed mirth, the Tories will need to think hard about the correct approach. My bet it that they will get it wrong.

The only effective counter to protest politics is reality and the cold shower that is being in power - true of all mirages.. One only has to look at the gaps between rhetoric and reality to see that.

Interesting times ahead especially with Panto Mk 2 - the Europe debate - coming to a stage near you soon.

I wonder who is on Marr this morning? That or a bike ride??

Well if he can't get elected then nothing.

The first thing he has to do is set out some sound policies, reading some of the reactions people want to attack Tories, take the fight to them. If he wants to be the change people think he is then providing a credible alternative is number one. That needs to convince people that he has a sound economic plan to pay for the better life.

And to add the people he needs to convince are not most of the 165 voices in this thread.

You ruled out the only sane answer I can think of to his question.

I ruled out something which wasn't true. We have not at any time had a 25% VAT luxury rate while the basic rate was 15%.

I fully support a higher VAT rate on luxury goods. As a good Thacherite jambalaya obviously doesn't.

ies will need to think hard about the correct approach. My bet it that they will get it wrong.

I think we may see the Tories think the centre is a done deal for them and a lurch right. The Tories have their own Corbyns tucked away and his leftist agenda will make them blow their tops. Cameron will have his work cut out holding them back.

I wonder who is on Marr this morning? That or a bike ride??

Erm....seriously?

Yes, a ride is really quite tempting

@earnie you said that the higher VAT rate was not abolished because it was felt to be damaging British businesses. In which case why was it abolished. It's not a trick question, stop avoiding it.

think we may see the Tories think the think we may see the Tories think the centre is a done deal for them and a lurch right. is a done deal for them and a lurch right.

Maybe, but I doubt it. First thing they did was nab a couple of policies of Labour. The votes are in the centre ground, they won't give that up lightly and I don't see why they'd want to.

They might tear themselves apart over Europe, though.

I've heard this "luxury VAT killed British businesses" line before and the example given is always yachts. Are there any other examples? Were there lots of people employed in luxury yacht building at that time? Were the job losses caused by the 5% difference in VAT? Were the losses significant to the economy is comparison to other sectoral job losses at the time? And was there anything else happening at the time that might have caused the UK industry to employ fewer people?

Atg; I am calling BS,it was all over Facebook that he is just as anti devo/Indy as any previous Labour leader. Stop making things up.

@konabunny Rolls Royce's? I don't know what the reason was but for a politician/civil servant to give up money there must have been a good reason and nobody has offered an alternative reason to the one posted above.

With the rout of the Establishment coming (if Owen has his way) and new found conviction policies it will be interesting to see who is the shadow chancellor to take on Austerity (sic) George. At least, he won't be proposing another cliched PPE Oxford grad, that would be too much. So what background should we be expecting in the new world order?

I used the yacht building example because I'm personally familiar with that. I'm sure there are others, a higher tax like that changes purchase behaviour. British buyers supported British yacht building so she taxes here reduced demand it was the British builders who suffered disproportionately. There comes a point where economically or out of "principal" you buy items abroad to avoid a luxury tax, my BIL imported his new car from Europe back in the day when you had the extra 10% tax

EDit: under Dennis Healy (he of the cap in hand trip to the IMF for a bailout) set luxury vat at 25% vs basic rate of 8%

@ernie I recall the tax rates where 25 and 15 but perhaps I'm wrong, I'll look it up. You will get what you want which is a genuine debate about where Labour should be, I'm personally in the camp that JC will appeal to core Labour demographics, so in short they increase their majority in seats they already hold. Corbyn will not win back seats from Tories nor the SNP. Electorally he will remain an opposition politician being against stuff rather than for anything. He won't even say how many migrants he thinks we should take. As a modest aside it looks like Syriza could be the big loser in the snap Greek election with their early popularity almost totally evaporating as the ballot approaches, I see something similar with Labour under Corbyn.

@thm I wonder why Corbyn cancelled his Andrew Marr appearence, normally leaders are keen for the exposure. Sturgeon has already called him out on Tridnet, I think the May elections in Scotland could be the end of him as leader.

duckman - Member

Atg; I am calling BS,it was all over Facebook that he is just as anti devo/Indy as any previous Labour leader. Stop making things up.

I know he is. So was Charles Kennedy. Still did not stop Alex Salmond and the SNP attempting to coax his good name to their cause when he was unable to respond.

Labour now have a leader who wishes to get rid of the need for foodbanks in the UK and get rid of tuition fees for students. I know this is unpalatable to people who may not wish to see Scottish money spent on causes on the wrong side of the border.

Labour is not lost for a generation in Scotland, because the alternative is a party who officially believe Scots to be uniquely gallus, argumentative and funny, and seem to belive we are a roaring lion. I hope in the next 5-30 years (however long your generation is??) that Scots can be smarter that this.

Corbyn is a nationalists nightmare. They would have liked a Blairite like Liz Kendalk in charge, and I don't doubt many McChe's hope he falls flat on his face.

However, I don't know how a Blarite should have been a bar to progress in Scotland. We had no bother sending 39 labour MP's out of 59 to Westminster in support of Blair AFTER the start of his illegal war in Iraq, when the rest of the UK was starting to see through him. We followed that up with sending an extra MP in 2010 in support of his successor. It seems the rUK electorate were possibly more angry with Blair's illegal war than we in Scotland were.

ROOOAAARRR 😉

Corbyn is a nationalists nightmare.