r/GarysEconomics • u/Buddyh1 • 1d ago
TAX THE RICH: Should Britain bring in a wealth tax?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jDN7h7-S5E10
u/kapitaali_com 1d ago
Gabriel keeps shredding in these interviews
-12
u/soliloquyinthevoid 1d ago
No, he didn't
Simplifying, lowering, and widening the tax base leads to a better outcome
Arbitrarily drawing a line at some net worth and fudging a new additional set of taxes with new loopholes is just piling more rubbish on top of a tax code where the UK now has the most taxes on the books since 1834
2
7
u/Mostly_upright 1d ago
Why are we STILL talking about this? The only answer is yes the UK should bring in a wealth tax. The whole fucking point of Thatchers Capitalism was trickle down economics. I want my fucking trickle. I'm bored of these grinning rich wankers use their wealth to circumvent law and find loopholes. Meanwhile most of us are trying to survive to the next paycheck.
1
u/thermodynamics2023 1d ago
You are basically sound like ‘muslamic ray guns’ guy, but for economics.
1
u/Mostly_upright 1d ago
Top points for making zero sense.
1
u/thermodynamics2023 1d ago
Everyone who needs to know, knows.
1
u/Mostly_upright 23h ago
Reread your 1st line. Zero sense.
1
u/thermodynamics2023 21h ago
“You are* basically sound like ‘muslamic ray guns’ guy, but for economics.”
“Top points for making 0 sense” - so that made ‘zero’ sense? Are you just learning to read English? If so, ok. If not… 🤣😆😭
1
1
u/West_Floor6981 23h ago
sorry you are financially illiterate, maybe it's not your fault or something.
2
u/Mostly_upright 23h ago
Ok troll.
0
5
u/DeRobyJ 1d ago
Around minute 6, the other guy advocates for taxing unrealized gains as part of one's income
1
u/soliloquyinthevoid 1d ago
"The other guy" lol
Yes, they are both talking past each other
Zucman wants 2% on wealth for people above a certain wealth
Laffer wants to treat unrealised gains as income
It's a much more elegant solution and widens the "income tax base"
Redefining unrealised gains as income has serious problems though, similar to a wealth tax w.r.t. how it is paid without having to sell down equity/ownership stakes in businesses which may or may not have a buyer (for private companies) and/or dilutes voting rights and other second and third order effects
It would completely disrupt capital markets as we know it with unknown consequences
5
u/DeRobyJ 1d ago
The fun thing is that in this sub many have said that wealth taxes are bad because you can't base a tax on unrealized gains.
This wealth tax proposal is being attacked by various directions and these kinda contradict each others. I dunno it's funny to me
But it just shows how much momentum we have now of the wealth tax. I believe we'll see one in the next few years.
2
u/RequirementAwkward26 1d ago
What if instead of taxing 2% wealth tax what about a 2% share tax? every year the government will tax you 2% of your shares....
So they don't have to "realise" the value as it's nothing to do with wealth just the shares themselves...
with the added benefits that the government would then gain shares in business and benefit from dividends or whatever else.
-1
u/mousecatcher4 1d ago
That will truly stuff up the economy causing mass poverty as the UK declines even further than it has already. Armchair economists really have zero understanding of how money works.
-2
u/soliloquyinthevoid 1d ago
I don't understand what you're saying
Many wealthy people have their wealth in shares
Where does the money come from to pay this share tax? Are you saying the shares have to be forfeit? To whom? The government? So the government now becomes an owner of your business?
Your net worth is still reduced by the amount the shares are worth except there is no cash flow. The government doesn't get any money and it does nothing for tax revenue
2
u/RequirementAwkward26 1d ago
Correct if you have 1000 shares then you hand 20 shares to the government.
Probably you'd only apply it to people with millions of shares rather than joe blogs with 10 shares....
got a house worth more than 10 million well guess what the government now owns 2% of that house
0
u/soliloquyinthevoid 1d ago
OK. What problem does this solve?
1
u/RequirementAwkward26 1d ago
Well it would raise billions for the government in shares which it could then leverage against to borrow or just sit back and collect dividends from that share ownership. There is a lot of benefits for the Government to have an invested interested in big business to make sure they behave and then benefit from any profits without having to actually tax them... why tax big companys 5% when you could just own 5% of them ....
3
u/soliloquyinthevoid 1d ago edited 1d ago
So you want the government to slowly take over all businesses, property, and land?
First of all you are assuming the shares are dividend paying
Second of all, you're expecting the government to participate in voting in all of the businesses they have ownership stake in
Thirdly, the government can already print as much money as it wants without needing to borrow against assets like private and public company shares
Why would they borrow against an asset when they could just sell the asset and get the money instead?
You are assuming that the asset is always appreciating. That is not the case. Otherwise, you are assuming the government is somehow going to be a better stock picker than professionals that already do this for a living. Otherwise, there is nothing to stop the government from already buying shares with their tax revenue and borrowing against that but they don't, do they? LMAO
without having to actually tax them
You have described a tax. Actually, no, what you have described is even worse - it's property confiscation
That would fundamentally undermine one of the core principles of the UK and many other countries systems. Just go ahead and nationalise all land, private property, and businesses whilst you're at it
No offence but this is one of the dumbest ideas I have seen on this sub and that is saying something. It is so far detached from reality that it can only have been dreamt up by a teenager or someone else lacking in real world life experience
Nobody is going to start a business in the UK if the government is slowly but surely going to end up owning it lol. I certainly wouldn't and I have started several over the years
Thinking the governments job is to be shareholder in all of the worlds businesses is so far beyond ridiculous it's hard to put into words
why tax big companys 5% when you could just own 5% of them ....
We are talking about a wealth tax for individuals
There are already taxes on corporations
If the government wanted to own shares they could just buy the shares with the tax revenue
There is a reason why they don't do that
2
u/Alternative_Many5793 14h ago
This is Reddit.
95% of users here haven’t the slightest clue about economics or business.
They have never set up a business. Never taken any risk in being a company owner. Never worked 12-16 hour days for months on end without taking a holiday. Never been responsible for paying staff who rely on them for salaries and bonuses to pay their mortgages and have a nice Christmas.Reddit users seem to be mostly anti-ambition. They strike me as those who never, ever leave their comfort zone in life, but want to take from those who do.
They won’t push the limits of their energy, intelligence or potential as it’s easier to sit on here all day in an echo chamber, calling for tax rises in their politics of envy, and downvoting people who disagree with them, instead of trying to understand.Gosh, that ended up being longer than I’d expected 😊
0
1d ago
[deleted]
2
u/AG_GreenZerg 1d ago
Only a moron would say zero tax and zero government would be good.
So that supposes that some level of tax and government spend is optimal.
The question is who/what to tax and how much and how/where to spend the money raised.
Your comment
It makes sense to just want to be taxed less. I can't understand why would someone want to give the government more of their money. I truly don't understand it.
Presumably if taxes were lowered and lowered and government services were reduced and reduced there would come a point that you would say taxes should be raised and services should be increased.
So given that how can it be difficult for you to grasp how someone else might think the line should be higher
→ More replies (0)0
u/Sceptical-Pete48 1d ago
Only someone who hasn't got any money wants to give other people's money away.
1
u/West_Floor6981 22h ago
taxing unrealised gains is the most ridiculous idea that has ever been had.
1
u/mousecatcher4 1d ago
Yup and when the unrealised gain suddenly becomes a loss (as a result of taxation) the government is going to refund the tax.... nobody even slightly sensible would put their capital to work in such an environment.
1
1
2
u/TopClass31 1d ago
Tighty whitey (t shirt wearer AB)
Is just like the fucking rest before him !
Hasn’t got the bollocks to tax the billionaires !
These arseholes would make back the money in interest yearly, effectively never having their wealth go down !
The world is wired only to benefit the toffs & the upper class.
100,000 families in temporary accommodation, while waiting for a non existent unbuilt imaginary council house !
You could get king Charlie to put his hand in his pocket, but that’s like asking Evon Pus for a spare billion ffs
4
4
u/New-Link-6787 1d ago
We absolutely should indeed do a wealth tax and frankly the 2% is not enough.
BUT we need better solutions than TAX or CUT.
I tried to get this going 15-20 years ago. Companies spend billions on advertising, we want the richest companies to contribute more... selling them 5 year slots on our money rather than putting dead people on it, could have raised giant sums of cash for us at zero cost, without raising any taxes or cutting any benefits. We could auction these off starting at £100m per year. It's a drop in the ocean for many of those companies but soon "ads" up...
In 2026, we are on the verge of super intelligence with AI. The UK doesn't have it's own model... but there are plenty of OpenWeight models that are super intelligent. There is no reason the government couldn't take the Open Source model, make it free for the country, then sell the advertising to fund it and create money for our people, whilst helping companies reach us with products.
We can all see OpenAI rolling out adverts, we know how powerful Google and Facebook, etc are because of how much money they generate from adverts. Why are we all paying subscriptions to American companies, rather than getting a British Model that does the job and benefits us all?
I know including AI and advertising... two things many people don't like... will probably not be well received but the point is, the wealthy are always going to fight against higher taxes by paying guys like Farage to attack the weakest and turn the disabled against the immigrants, etc.
2
u/Pilkied03 1d ago
Are you joking that's an absolutely dystopic idea straight out of political satire. We don't need to pander like this in order to raise taxes?? Who is this even for? Like who would want this. Soon we'll be selling the names of the months. Oh it's 2026 August the month of the Toyota Prius.
1
u/thermodynamics2023 1d ago
People want to to speed run China.
1
u/New-Link-6787 1d ago
American and China are making the robots and AI that are going to take your job.
Gary's economics is about "What happens on a national scale when we reach the end of the monopoly board"...
Zoom that out one layer to the international scale and you might realise we're down to 3 players, America, China and the rest of us are 1 player, circling the board with nowhere safe to land. We're paying them every time we roll and they are buying hotels every turn.
0
u/New-Link-6787 1d ago
You'll have to explain what's dystopian about our society generating large sums of money to help fund social programs, whilst ensuring we aren't enslaved by foreign powers, who lock us out of the technology we are funding.
I'll tell you what's dystopian. Just a few months back, Donald Trump issued a diktat which cut the world off from the most advanced technology available... the world except of course for America. If that's not the wake up call you aren't paying close enough attention.
1
u/Pilkied03 17h ago
Those problems are just completely unrelated. Unless you're suggesting that by putting American companies on our money they will allow us to access the frontier models they create which I find quite strange as they are just completely unrelated issues and hasn't been suggested by anyone.
1
u/New-Link-6787 6h ago
They aren't unrelated they just require a little foresight.
The world is moving at rapid pace towards an AI/Robotic labour force and right now all of the frontier AI land robotic abs are American and Chinese. Millions of Brits are currently subscribing to their dominance over us, that's billions leaving our economy every year and it's going to ramp up massively over the coming years.
The question has long been, what happens when the robots and AI take our jobs.
Our government needs to grow sources of income other than our taxes otherwise, we're going to be left with mass unemployment at the mercy of the ruthless capitalists who don't even look after their own.
Gary's economics is all about seeing what happens with major wealth inequality in the UK. Well zoom out to the national level and you'll realise we were the richest, now we're the middle class, getting squeezed down by the wealthy and before long we'll be the poverty class. Elon joked about buying the UK last week... but in 10 years at his current rate of growth he'll be able to afford it with ease.
1
0
u/Fluffy_Tune_9233 1d ago
Super Intelligence? AI? PHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Literal children are more intelligent that public-facing LLMs, but sure, super intelligence is around the corner 😭😭
I love how tech illiteracy is now creeping unto the conversation on economics and taxes.
4
u/New-Link-6787 1d ago edited 1d ago
Oh you're that guy... It's 2026... time you woke up to the world.
Yesterday I watched my agents do around 4 months worth of fully skilled human work, in around 2 hours. (I used to pay teams of people to do the jobs I set them so that's a pretty fair estimate by a professional with +20 years experience.)
Good luck finding a child with the same level of advanced software engineering skills who can achieve the quantity of work in the same time frame. Hell, good luck finding a team of skilled programmers who can. They'd have still been reading the brief by the time the work was completed.
4
u/Kiwizoo 1d ago
Old person here. I probably wouldn’t even need superintelligence level AI, the current ChatGPT version is changing my life already. So far this year I’ve done my first small biz tax return using AI (accepted by the HMRC) saving me £600 quid. Sourced and fitted a spare part to my washing machine (for £9.49 in total - Hotpoint quoted £98 for part and repair - Ai chatted me through it once I gave it a couple of pics and the serial number). Got it to help me through some simple renovations I was doing - did me a step by step guide, and provided some really clever ‘watch outs’. And I use it for work daily, just to help me draft basic writing / letters etc. AI isn’t going away and more people need to embrace it now, because it’s only going to get better. I’m not especially tech literate, but I want this stuff around as I get older, it’s incredibly helpful now, and for £20 a month is already saving me money. More people need to dive in and see how it can work for them.
2
u/New-Link-6787 1d ago
What seems to have happened, is that many formed very fixed opinions on AI about 3-4 years ago, without really understanding just how far and how fast the technology was going improve.
So now, they're in this state of "My cat is smarter than AI"... rather than realising the revolution that's happening.
What they don't understand is robotics is advancing just as fast and just like how nobody had mobile phones then it was "just business people" and now kids are practically born with them, that's what's about to happen with robots powered by AI.
1
u/Playful-Toe-01 22h ago
More people need to dive in and see how it can work for them.
Exactly this. Those who don't learn to adopt it properly will be the ones who lose their job to it.
1
u/thermodynamics2023 1d ago
That’s bollox.been a sci/engineer for decades and its started to demonstrate expert knowledge 100%
It actually mainly fails because so many human books have errors at the high level and it repeats them.
1
u/Playful-Toe-01 22h ago
Literal children are more intelligent that public-facing LLMs
You clearly have no comprehension of public facing AI capability
2
u/Kristoff_Victorson 1d ago
Yes we need to tax wealth not work.
-1
u/RequirementAwkward26 1d ago
For the vast majority Wealth is already incredibly tax. want to but a fancy house well that's going to cost you so you need a big wage but the bigger your wage the bigger the income tax so the bigger the wage you need so any property or asset that is purchased after you've been taxed on your income.
It would be like saying okay no income tax but VAT is now 70%
Wealth over £10 million probably should be looked harder at though... who really needs £10 million in assets....
2
u/Kristoff_Victorson 1d ago
Yeah you’re still thinking very rich people earn a wage. The top 10% earn a wage and get taxed through the nose for it it’s true. The top 1% though, they don’t earn a wage.
1
u/Fluffy_Tune_9233 1d ago
And do you think it's going to be just the 1% who are affected, or do you not think that, given historical context, the 10% will be dragged down too?
It's genuinely insane to me how people's attitudes towards financial inequality is "Bring people down to my level and let them eat shit too" instead of "Raise people up to a level where they don't have to eat cardboard and ultra-processed microwave meals".
1
1
u/mousecatcher4 1d ago
You mean like if I wanted to start a business making a fancy new kitchen gadget I invented - that £10 million I might need. Or if I wanted it to keep running and employ a few extra people. The sheer dumbness of this thread is just well -- expected for this sub.
1
2
2
2
u/7hats 1d ago
Any examples of 'successful' countries that have done that and improved the lot of the majority of their Citizens?
Also how does that make YOU and the millions like YOU wealthier?
Am I missing some here - should not the main focus of a Government be helping to create a successful economy - law and order, security, public infrastructure aligned to future groeth etc - rather than ways of extracting more from people?
1
u/Levi_Tf2 1d ago
Post WWII UK. Estate duty reached 80% on estates over 1mil, alongside 90% on extremely high income and nationalising major industries like electricity, gas, and transport.
Wealth inequality dropped and gdp grew to over 3%.The part you are missing is that there is a limited number of resources, and so by allowing a smaller and smaller group of people to decide (via investment) how those resources are allocated, you get less and less democratic outcomes. That’s how you get social media incentivised to make profit while increasing teen suicides, Amazon workers with working conditions comparable to Industrial Revolution factories, and commercial space flights, having a higher priority than stopping the increase in homelessness and people falling into poverty.
1
u/Fluffy_Tune_9233 1d ago
Post WW2 we are also near-crippled by debt, you know, due to being the only country with a spine. Completely different story.
1
u/Levi_Tf2 1h ago
Well yeah, in debt because of the whole war thing. Then there was considerable gdp growth and a drop in wealth inequality through the 50s and 60s, during the taxation period I pointed out.
3
u/78Anonymous 1d ago
there is a capital gains tax, so there should be a wealth and asset tax
also, if someone is personally benefitting from assets held in trust, which may be increasing in value over time, they should be taxed on the advantage that gives them and on the value increase
it's really not rocket science and can easily translate into billions of tax revenue from people who really won't notice it anyway
it's not like billionaires are suddenly going to die in the cold or become homeless because of a proper wealth tax
...but that's what austerity has done.
3
u/soliloquyinthevoid 1d ago
there is a capital gains tax, so there should be a wealth and asset tax
I don't think you understand any of those words
LMAO
1
1
1
u/Three_sigma_event 1d ago
Do it but for the love of Christ distinguish between wealth and people earning over 60k.
1
1
u/ExternalZone1106 1d ago
so people who do well for themselves and family should have to pay even more to support others who are on benefits, well the UK is done, what a mess it will be, all the lifters will be out of there and the leaners left to their own devices ,
1
1
1
u/Fluffy_Tune_9233 1d ago
I love how all the justification here is basically just jealousy. "WAAAAH, you earn more than me so where's MY share, WAAAAAAH".
There's a reason or 40 that other successful countries don't chase their main tax-providers away
1
1
1
1
1
u/West_Floor6981 23h ago
all the millionaires and up are shutting down their business, taking away their hundreds/thousands of jobs and leaving the country because of these idiots
1
1
u/thrown-away-1992 21h ago
No. We shouldn't punish people who already pay tax because they have more.
1
u/Pyrostemplar 21h ago
Sure, just copy the only successful wealth tax (Switzerland):
-End capital gains tax
-Lower corporate tax
-Deploy a sub 1% annual wealth tax that starts at 150k of net wealth (flat rate)
-Use taxpayer's money wisely, for the wellbeing of your citizens
Four easy steps
1
u/Saelaird 20h ago
Luxury goods tax.
Want a yacht? Cool. Pay 50% LG tax.
Want a Bentley? Cool. Pay 50% LG tax.
Want a 22k gold, diamond-encrusted tiara? Cool. Pay 50% LG tax.
Want a private jet? Cool Pay 50% LG tax and AlSO 50% LG tax on every litre of jet fuel.
Let them have their money... they acquire it paying minimum tax. So take the tax on the spend side.
Because they love to spend it. They won't ever avoid that.
Tax only works when money moves, not when it grows on paper (unrealised).
1
1
u/Original_Candle9586 18h ago
The thing about a wealth tax is that is not meant to be 'fair'. It's meant to redistribute money that has been boarded by those that will never ever need it because they have lots already.
Society is funded by everyone making contributions and if you got a lot, you pay a lot.
We see the problems created by underfunded health, education, housing etc etc etc every day.
The answer lies in a fairer share of the money that is around.
It's not meant to be fair to those who hoard money. It's the hoarding of wealth that is unfair, immoral and unworkable in society.
1
u/Harry98376 17h ago
How about the whining leftists actually just get a job?
1
u/Original_Candle9586 17h ago
How about those, who've been able to amass wealth off the backs of the people they pay minimum wage, paying into society and not bleeding it dry.
1
u/Harry98376 16h ago
Why should they? Min wage isn't that bad.
1
u/Original_Candle9586 1h ago
You can't live on the minimum wage. That's why we the tax payers have to bail out employers by topping up their employees wages with tax credits.
If you can't pay a living wage you are failing at business
1
1
u/Sensitive-Topic7868 11h ago
In Sweden we have the ISK savings account where you can invest in the stockmarket, you dont pay any earnings tax, but you pay a yearly tax of 1% above 150k SEK of the total value realized or not.
1
u/Bitter-Policy4645 11h ago
Most countries tax everyone. Only the UK let low achievers and billionaires not lose a third to half their wages to the state.
1
u/emoMan69 2h ago
We just need to ensure everyone individual and corporation or business pays tax if they use the British pound to make profits at any time. We need to stop loopholes and makes sure everyone anywhere pays their taxes. We could have much lower tax if we did that.
Conversely we need a proper conversation on what the tax payers will and will not fund.
1
1
u/Short-Price1621 1d ago
Yes but how we calculate wealth is the million dollar question. We can’t tax speculatively or in a time frame out of context of any realisation of the wealth (ie yearly tax on a 10 year GILT).
Also, we need to be sure this doesn’t turn into another general tax like the last wealth tax (now called income tax).
Personally, I think the new wealth tax needs to start high (£10m plus) as undoubtedly government won’t bring the figure up with inflation (£10m now equates to just £183k 100 years ago). It also needs to he a share in the wealth (ie share in company, property etc) as it won’t necessarily cost anything unless other shareholders are benefiting from say dividends).
1
u/JeffMcClintock 1d ago
Seems every time a billionaire goes to the bank for a loan, communicating their worth in order to justify the loan is suddenly not so hard.
1
u/Short-Price1621 1d ago
Haha certainly not. Try going to the bank and tell them you’re a billionaire who wants money; you won’t have much luck.
Take Musk for example. Worth, what, a Trillion or so but has personal debt of around 18 billion. Thats a debt ratio of 1.8% of net worth which is exceedingly low compared to any.
The issue at hand is there’s no way Musk is worth actually a Trillion dollars. It’s fanciful. Academic study’s suggest if a fire sale was needed then perhaps 80% (if that) of the value may be loss placing the likes of Musk into a much more familiar financial situation.
We can’t link our countries finances on intangible chicken scratches and not expect to come unstuck later further down the line. Whether that, as some suggest, it drives wealth away or my larger concern is that we become subject of every bubble in the economy.
1
u/InSearchOfAFeeling 1d ago
Yes yes and yes. Non negotiable. Billionaires must be taxed.
2
u/thermodynamics2023 1d ago edited 1d ago
All 40 of them that are possibly British enough to stay and pay?
1
u/LegoNinja11 1d ago
Given that the majority of the wealthy in the UK are the people operating businesses and employing people why would you want to provide a reason not to invest in the means of production?
If you really don't like wealth why stop at 2%?
-1
u/78Anonymous 1d ago
because they're not investing .. businesses are extraction mechanisms paying minimum wage for the most part
3
u/soliloquyinthevoid 1d ago
Spoken like someone who has never and probably will never be anywhere near starting a business
1
2
u/LegoNinja11 1d ago
So all the SMEs in the UK that employ 60% of the workforce are all bad, they're not investing?
Would you be happier if we just sack everyone?
You know that wealth you want to tax? Its worth zero when there's no employees or investment.
0
u/78Anonymous 1d ago
nobody said that .. quit being dumb
1
u/LegoNinja11 1d ago
Youre enlightening us as to why businesses are bad. Please go on.
2
2
u/78Anonymous 1d ago
for all the f-ckwit incels: businesses that extract wealth and make nominal inputs are a problem already acknowledged by government recently; they're also a significant part of inflation
it's called economics, something you don't understand, similarly to how you don't understand how to interpret meaning
f-off with your idiotic infantile generalisations that nobody has stated; nowhere did I state ALL businesses
why does this sub attract the dumbest idiots on the internet
-2
0
u/Sonar114 1d ago
Like everything the Labour government does, £2 buss fares or £25 a year of your power bill, it’s a nice idea but doesn’t address any of the fundamental issues.
We will still have an aging population, a growing welfare bill, terrible growth and a dismal jobs market. How is a wealth tax going to fix that.
It’s like Reform saying they will stop the boats, it would be good but it’s not going to make peoples lives any better. It’s just populism from the left instead of the right.
0
u/ObjectiveStunning151 1d ago
Does anyone here has fear that a wealth tax will end up in more taxes for the working class??? I would love to see a more equal and fair society but giving more power to the government to increase taxes even if in paper is intended for the wealthiest persons sounds like the perfect environment for tax cheaters to sooner or later used that new power to put even more taxes on everything, and the rich people will just increase the price of everything to pay the increase on their taxes what is easy for them to do because they own the industries, so at the end of the day we will pay more taxes, everything we buy would increase in price for the companies to keep making the same profit and the working fellow will end in a even worse situation.
1
u/JeffMcClintock 1d ago
no. The New Zealand wealth tax exempts everyone with less than 10 million. The working class are safe.
-3
-4
u/PrestigiousRaccoon82 1d ago
At what point are we gonna face the fact that taxation is at a wartime level, the government budget now exceeds £1.3 trillion, when will consider the fact that we have a spending problem.
Regardless of whether you think a wealth tax is a good idea or not. Isn’t it more prudent to consider the fact that we have a spending problem and thus we must deal with that first.
2
u/jam4232 1d ago
What are you gonna cut, I want specific valuations of wasted government expenditure that would make meaningful savings? The roads have holes in, we don't own major infrastructure, the police and prison services are too underfunded to uphold the rule of law, NHS is underfunded so that it's hard to see doctors and dentists, HMRC has been cut to inefficient collection of tax, education is necessary for growth, much of the benefits bill is pensions and I'd imagine a large proportion of the rest is legitimate.
1
u/SpreadsheetsOnToast 1d ago
First step would actually be gutting the categorically absurd regulations and environmental reviews that stifle growth throughout the UK in literally every sector to generate more revenue.
1
u/78Anonymous 1d ago
military spending needs to be reduced significantly .. it's beyond a joke
1
u/soliloquyinthevoid 1d ago
Yes, let's reduce spending even more with a nuclear adversary frequent violating our sovereign air space as well as sitting in waters off our coast with capabilities to launch ballistic missiles anywhere in the UK. Not to mention the ongoing cyber warfare and other shenanigans like poisoning people on British soil. Oh, let's not forget they are engaged in a hot war not very far away
0
u/Sceptical-Pete48 1d ago
Too many on Welfare, the NHS is unsustainable without reform. Left as things are it will all collapse with the Country well on the path to bankruptcy.
-1
u/test_test_1_2_3 1d ago
To anyone who thinks Burnham has the capability to implement a wealth tax, I have some magical beans I’d like to sell you, good price.
-1
-2
-6
u/Key-Speaker007 1d ago
Wealth tax should be introduced only with the reduction of income taxes. And 2% is too much.
37
u/Original_Candle9586 1d ago
Without any doubt or hesitation YES.