Yup, I get the feeling their samples tend to pick up more disaffected Labour voters. Then again, EU election wise, they might be the likelier type to vote this round.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Alternative headline: 1 in 10 people on the Sunday Times Rich List don't have their assets registered offshore
They don't pay whatever the current rate of tax is, anyhow. They can feck off.
They still pay a big chunk of the overall tax take. Like it or not, it would be a big blow to the Exchequer.
Do they? I would love to see some data on this.
Is this a serious question?
It is. Care to address it?
It's...bold.
Over the weekend Opinium has Labour on 28 and Survation has them on 27 in Westminster VI. Better, but only a little.
What are the voting intentions of the traditional Labour supporting remainers on here for the European elections?
I'll be voting Lib Dems.
I most likely will be too
I didn't think I'd be in this situation after the promises that were never kept in 2010, when I was a student, voting for the first time.
But alas, here we are.
I have posted my vote for the Lib Dems.
I will also be voting Lib Dem for the first time, apparently so is the rest of my family. Find it encouraging that others are doing likewise.
Also Lib Dem. I can't vote Labour in European elections when Corbyn is so blatantly anti-Europe. It's sad.
I'll vote Lib Dems
SNP, however I'm not really in favour of independence if we stay in the EU. If we don't then I'm unsure.
I don't quite know the history here but didn't the lib dems more or less make a complete u-turn on who of labour and the tories they supported in the last general election?
My English flatmate told me something to that effect, and that he was quite pissed with them. Is this just a case of everyone voting anything but labour and tories and hoping for the best or is there reason to believe the lib dems are more trustworthy this time around?
My English flatmate told me something to that effect, and that he was quite pissed with them. Is this just a case of everyone voting anything but labour and tories and hoping for the best or is there reason to believe the lib dems are more trustworthy this time around?
The top 1% pays 28% of the income tax take. Source
Not the last election, but a couple back. They had promoted themselves as a liberal centrist party at a time when Labour had been in power for many years and were deeply unpopular, and the Lib Dems were polling really strongly. Then there was a hung parliament and they went into coalition with the Conservatives. This unsurprisingly really pissed off a lot of their liberal supporters.
Ordinarily I'd vote Labour but for me this Euro election is about a single issue (Brexit). Since I believe we should stay within the union I'm gonna vote for the established party that unequivocally takes that position - the Lib Dems. It's more the message that a vote for the Lib-Dems sends than it is a demonstration of newly found trust in their wider politics.
If we leave by Halloween (as we're earmarked to do) then none of these people will take up their seats for any great length of time anyway.
Are the article and the source you provide really talking about the same thing though? According to the article (which I only skimmed) 1 in 10 of the asked "billionaires and multi-millionaires from the Sunday Times Rich List" are "making plans to protect their wealth." That would be 10% of those in the top 0.00002% of the population (according to this opinion piece in the FT).
Lib Dem here too.
Can't bring myself to vote for the Lib Dems so probably the Green party
Don’t know but I thought it was a striking stat anyway. That 1% looks after a lot of people and services.
Lib Dem to send the clearest signal possible.
It's for that reason that calls to significantly increase the tax rate on the 1% amount to little more than virtue signalling.
Last edited:
I'd be more interested to know what tax % is being paid on the incomes of the elite on their total earnings, I would also like to know how much they're not paying tax on, without knowing this then the 28% into the pot means nowt.
The original article referenced the Superrich, Britain's billionnaires, not the top 1%. Most of the top 1% are just employees with seven figure salaries.
It might also be illustrative of a fairly unequal society. Top 10% of the population has 5x the wealth of the bottom 50% combined or alternatively has more wealth than 80% of the population put together. Given the current state of services in this country it certainly appears that the wealthiest among us don't look after anybody else all that well.
Maybe, but it also shows you how narrow the income tax base really is, and the risk you take by pushing these 1%ers out.
I think it is worth noting also not to conflate the 1% that pay 28% income who are the top 1% earners with the 1% wealthiest. Apparently, according to the national statistics office, in 15/16, you only had to earn a little over 100k to qualify as a top 1% earner.
My guess is the top 1% wealthiest probably pay much less tax than the top 1% earners.
Not to derail the thread further, but I do think the whole Idea of capital flight is overstated. As I have just mentioned in my post above, most of these 1% earners are really not that rich. 1% of the UK workforce is roughly 30, 000 people. Where are they all going to run to? It is only the super rich that can relocate that easily.
Also presumably, someone else will just replace them in that top earning bracket and continue to earn and pay tax.
Proportionally speaking I reckon that's likely very true which, as you say, is why the opinions of 10% of those questioned from the Sunday Times Rich List shouldn't be conflated with the opinions of the top 1% of income tax payers.
I do wonder how steeply the pay curve rises once you've hit that magic 100k lower threshold though. At that wage you pay around 28k income tax. For the sums to add up the top 1% need to be paying an average of 230k tax. For that to happen the mean annual wage among the top 1% of income tax payers would be around £550k (granted I did some fag packet maths so I could be wrong).
Last edited:
Yeah but politicians always conflate higher salaries with wealth. Because it is easy to pretend someone earning 80k is better off than some “poor” pensioner with 800k in their house.
Haven't checked your numbers, but I would agree with the overall idea that there will be some of the top earners paying millions in tax, i.e. contributing the equivalent of thousands of average earners. For this reason, I personally think the income tax burden of top earners in the UK isn't unfair already. It is the really wealthy, but whose annual income is low (and frankly irrelevant), who get off lightly. My preference would be to introduce a wealth tax.
