funding Labour manifesto promises

How much tax will we have to pay under Labours plans?

Earning under £80k

No extra tax

Earning £81k

£21 pm extra to pay

Earning £100k

£83pm extra.

Sorry my earlier comment was for GGMk3 - how much do you earn?!

Trisher that is not what the link I included says and quite separately, 2 people whose information I respect have said the same thing.

Though whether maintain(ing) Britain's status in the world and for defence spending was a proper expenditure of the money can also be subject to doubt. The money was given for post-war reconstruction and it was not used for that.

In what way is that relevant or, for that matter, any of your business hunptydumpty?

Marshall Plan

Post war, the U.K. government was intent on maintaining its position with regard to world influence and the funds from the Marshall Aid was used for supporting this effort.

Undoubtedly the Labour Party was guilty of waste of this resource, as was the Tory government guilty of wasting the oil revenue in the 1980s.

monica it was not used to nationalise as you seemed to suggest, but to try to bolster our influence throughout the commonwealth.

M0nica the words in italics in my post are copied and pasted from the BBC article you gave a link to. I suggest you read it again.

The truth is that the post-war Labour Government, advised by its resident economic pundits, freely chose not to make industrial modernisation the central theme in her use of Marshall Aid.

the Labour Cabinet attempted to accommodate the costs of the world role and the expensive new welfare state by severely restricting capital investment at home. This of course served to handicap the much-needed modernisation of Britain's obsolete industrial system, and the country's clapped-out roads, railways and telecommunications.

Two more quotes, but how ever many quotes we swap. The gist of it is that the Labour government misspent the money granted to them for post-war reconstruction on other things, and they seem to be fully set on doing something similar again.

But nothing to do with Nationalisation. It is stated that anyway much of the money from the Marshall plan came too late for British industries. As for the railways, modernisation was difficult as the steam system used local coal whereas a diesel system would require imported oil. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rail_transport_in_Great_Britain_1948–1994
As for the "clapped out roads" the Labour government passed an act to make it possible to build motorways in 1948 and opened the first one in 1953.

monica you rightly point to the way the Marshall Plan was apparently mis-spent if you compared what the U.K. government did with the aid compared to Germany or France, and point to various evidence to support you claim.

However you then go on to suggest that the Labour Party is set to do similar if it gets into government.
However you neither support this assertion nor give consideration to the fact that the Labour proposed spending and economic plan stands up very well when compared to most European countries, in particular the Scandinavian economies.

Whitewave p2, 23.55, this thread. is my reply

I am not sure where lemongrove obtained her so called facts
What Boom?
We have highest number of food lowest pension in 25 EU countries, food banks, homelessness, rough sleeping, child poverty, Care Crisis, Appalling lack of social housing, 1.8 million pensions living below the poverty line. Highest period of deprivation in 26 years. Underfunding for 3 years of the NHS. I wonder what Lemongrove income is compared with the 1.8 pensioners in the poverty trap, living on less than £4,500 per annum. Yet the greed and avarice is increasing whilst other suffer, it sickening the complacency of some Grans.

Where are the quotes from M0nica?

I think I will, from now on, believe all supporters of liar Johnson are also prepared to lie.

The gist of it is that the Labour government misspent the money granted to them for post-war reconstruction on other things

Given our position in the world post WWII and our view of the importance of the Empire it is more than likely that a tory government would have done much the same as the Labour government did; attempt to maintain the UK as a 'world power'. Do we have any evidence that they would have done differently? It was a tory government, after all which presided over the Suez debacle...

MarthaBeck which facts are you unsure about?
I know this much, that pensioners are doing better than ever before thanks to the triple lock.
You can keep on wondering what my income is.

One thing I am very glad to hear is that the Labour Party has promised at least some compensation to the wasps women. I don't know the details though. Does anyone else?

Pensioners might be doing better- but we still have one of the lowest pensions in Europe. That’s nothing to boast about. We also spend much less on health and welfare per capita than equivalent countries. We may be a rich country but the wealth is in the hands of a tiny minority - we have huge inequality. A bit more tax would hardly cripple the top 10% of earners.

Why shouldn’t I be able to leave my children, my home and assets. These have been bought with monies I have earned and paid tax on!!!!

£125,000 inheritance tax threshold is ridiculous, you cannot buy a one bedroom flat for that in the South East.

Go after the multinationals, not the hard working employers and business owners.

Jeremy Corbyn seems to be wandering around in a daze. He needs to get his head out of the clouds and face reality.

Maybe, GG13 because your children haven't worked for what you've earned?

You tory types are full of the virtues of hard work for everyone else, and, indeed, very proud of your own virtuous efforts in that direction, but somehow manage to be extremely tolerant of people who have never had to graft because they've inherited wealth. And scornful, if not downright vicious, about people in the unfortunate position of not having a lucrative occupation or inherited wealth to fall back on. Like it's some sort of moral deficiency in them.

You also seem to have a poor understanding of inheritance tax (especially ironic after your earlier crack about 'gransplaining'). The government doesn't take everything above £125,000 as inheritance tax, which you seem to be implying. The figure is just the tax free allowance. You do understand what a tax free allowance is, don't you?

Some Sunday morning reading:

By several measures–public sector debt, public sector borrowing, macro-economic stability, and the value of wages and salaries–successive Tory governments have not only failed to perform better than their Labour counterparts, they have often performed worse. The simple reason is that they disinvest in the real economy in favour of financial markets and give proportional tax breaks to the richest. Yet, despite the facts, Labour’s critics continue to peddle the line that economic Conservatism is the only viable option. Check the facts before swallowing the dogma.

www.thelondoneconomic.com/business-economics/economics/debunking-the-myth-that-tories-are-better-than-labour-with-the-economy/19/11/

Not all pensioners are doing well. There is one pensioner benefit that has been frozen although I have only seen it mentioned on Money Box and by Money Saving Expert Martin Lewis..

Add to that the fact that the basic pension for older pensioners is lower than the that for newer pensioners although the Tory government obviously believed it was too low to live on as they make it up to the new amount if the pensioner claims a benefit.

One in three pensioners retire with only the state pension to live on. The older pensioners must apply for benefits to give them the same as the newer ones but if a little over the basic they cannot claim so their state pension remains at the lower level. Most of those retiring on only a state pension will have been low-paid workers, people who have suffered life events or carers.

MaizieD yet another patronising post directed at me!!!!

My Children work exceptionally hard, three of them in our family business, one has their own business and one is an officer in the army.

As for not “understanding” inheritance tax I can assure you I understand it extremely well.

Your comments regarding my “Tory virtues” reveal far more about you and your very narrow minded views, and “reeks” of “typical Labour envy”!!!!

Is there anything in the manifesto about seizing homes which have been left empty for more than six months as proposed in September this year?
Or for the 'garden tax' proposed by McDonnell a while ago?

GG13, I don't believe you deliberately misunderstand what is said but I am beginning to wonder.

What Maizie said is that your children did not work for the money or assets you pass to them; you did. I can't believe you would not agree that is true.

Inheritance tax dates back to 1894 when estate duty, a tax on land, was brought in to pay off government deficit. So it was originally a land tax. In the last year we have figures for, only 5% of deaths were subject to inheritance tax, so only a very small percent of the population actually have enough to pay it. The new aristocracy perhaps.

This is a tax on accumulated wealth not on earnings. You should not, in my opinion, be able to gain more by the transference of wealth to you than you can by earning the same amount. This is my purely personal feeling but they should be taxed in exactly the same way.