What Martin Amis thinks of Jeremy Corbyn

I really find it difficult to believe that there are many compassionate Conservatives

Probably because most of the compassionate Conservatives who are doing voluntary work, helping other people, working in their spare time for charities etc do not talk about their politics or have time to go on sites like this.

Perhaps it is true that some voters believe the Conservatives will in the long run benefit the country but I wonder how many of them or their families are suffering these terrible cuts. It is easier to go along with the idea that hard decisions have to be made, supposedly in order to create more economic stability, when you do not suffer the effects of those decisions.

It's pretty obvious that most Labour supporters on this site consider anyone who either voted conservative and/or doesn't support what Corbyn is saying must be living an 'I'm all right Jack' kind of life where their only concern is avoiding paying inheritance tax and debating which charity to donate their WFA to.

My daughter and her colleagues will suffer the effects of the budget cuts (I've mentioned this in the past but it was for some reason considered unacceptable for me to use my own family as an example!). Inheritance Tax will never be a concern for me, and the state pension I received I reckon I deserve after nearly 50 years grafting in the private sector.

I resent it being assumed that everyone who isn't a Labour supporter must be unaffected by Tory policies and cares nothing for the unemployed, homeless and disadvantaged. All this virtue signalling by the left is distasteful and quite frankly, insulting.

In fact it would be quite interesting to know how many of the more-to-the-left-wing Labour supporters on here and/or their families are suffering these terrible cuts.

I would not ask but apparently it is a relevant question.

Am diving back into this thread ( briefly] to say that once again, groan, All Conservative voters are being labelled uncaring, and not 'compassionate ' that old chestnut.What a lot of twaddle. Did anyone watch the Daily Politics the other day, with the author of 'Virtue Signalling' saying that it seems to be a left wing thing nowadays to say ' I hate The Daily Mail' or ' I hate Ukip'
To sign hundreds of epetitions, to constantly tweet how caring they are, and by doing nothing actually, put themselves forwards as superior.It's laughable.

That last bit should read 'laughable'.

So will it now end on this forum, or is that too much to hope for?

I think it probably is rose - sadly.

Well, I expect there will be some indignant posts from those who actually do charity/good works (which is in no doubt, although they seem to think it's the preserve of the left), and the sniping will no doubt rumble on and on...

Isn't everyone making assumptions about pretty much everyone on this thread; for a start I'm not a left wing activist but someone who came very close to voting for the Conservatives partly because I was afraid of inflation and partly because they were promising things in their manifesto that I [selfishly] found very appealing. I'm angry because they have gone back on those promises and not a great deal of publicity has been given to that. I'm grateful for links that inform me about what is happening; I would be equally grateful for people to put up links telling me of the good things that are being done by the government. I don't think that everyone who votes Conservative is evil and uncaring but have to question that belief when any information about what is happening to the poorer members of society seems to be greeted with scorn and ridicule by some people on this thread. And also grateful for those of either political persuasion who write constructive and informative comments.

'I don't think that everyone who votes Conservative is evil or uncaring'
Oh tegan what an unbelievable thing to say!
There is no scorn or ridicule on this thread or any other about what's happening to poorer members of society, none at all.
On a personal note I have made it clear that I disagree with the loss of tax credits and am glad it now has to be re-thought.
Ever since I joined this forum , the very left wing (few) have constantly done this virtue sigmalling thing, very holier than thou sort of attitude.It's time it ended.

Time it ended!

I hope you also feel the same distaste towards the scornful and sarcastic put-downs of some of those who profess to be supporters of the caring and compassionate party towards those who don't agree with their views.

One too many 'towards' there and x posts.

It will never end, roses, but at least we can choose to keep out of it.

(Did I hear an echo of 'hounded off'...?)

Yes, I am definitely done here now.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/million-mask-march-anti-establishment-protests-expected-in-over-670-cities-across-the-world-a6722286.html

A good few left wing marches to get annoyed about here.

I bet Martin Amis has never watched PMQs.

www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2015/11/04/another-corbyn-victory-is-cameron-now-the-underdog-at-pmqs

'I don't think that everyone who votes Conservative is evil or uncaring'
Well, actually, I think that is extremely magnanimous.

I don't think that everyone who votes Labour is a rotten egg or tomato throwing rabble-rousing anarchist either.
There are one or two I know in RL who are quite nice and reasonable.

I see several of you have jumped on the "virtue signalling" bandwagon instead of responding to the points I made.

Again, why is it acceptable to increase the threshold for inheritance tax to £1,000,000 per couple and to reduce the top rate of income tax while at the same time introducing policies that will hit the poorest?

There were 13 successive posts before durhamjen's last 2 posts - all up in arms about my comment. Given all those responses, how exactly are people being "hounded off" the thread?

Obviously this is just my personal view Eloethan but I will respond.

I have no particular problem with the inheritence tax level being raised. It is a tax that is only paid by those who have secured wealth /assets throughout their lifetime, it has no effect on those who have not , it does not have an effect on the poorer in society nor the majority of the population who will have no benefit from the increase .

I have no problem owning a home worth £250.000 and little in savings , my family will benefit in full . Equally I take the view that if somebody had a better paid job or had the ability to earn more than me I appreciate they would have taken out a higher mortgage and purchased a home of a higher value. That's the way of it. On our death all most of us want is for our children to have our legacy handed on to them, no matter how little or how much we have financially.

I am not advocating getting shot of Inheritance Tax but actually I have never agreed that our death should be taxed in the first place, other than it is an easy 'cash cow' for the Treasury and is a way of making the wealthy 'pay back' for their ' sin ' of accruing wealth. That's not my right wing view by the way it is one I have have always had even when I was Labour voter.

We will have a difference of opinion , I am sure, at least I have given you my opinion.

Inheritance tax is an odd one, isn't it. Most of us will not pay it, the rich have ways around it by setting up trusts, eg
www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11189430/Tony-Benns-inheritance-tax-dodge-how-it-works-and-how-you-can-use-it-too.html
So in the majority it is those in the middle bracket who will pay it, the families of old people whose homes they inherit, which have risen in value just because of when they were purchased and where they happen to be situated.

The majority of these houses will probably have been purchased by people with money earned from income on which income tax has been paid, tax paid in stamp duty, vat on any improvements which may enhance the value, vat on fees paid to solicitors etc etc.
So tax is paid over and over again.
Many countries do not have inheritance tax at all and some do not have such a punitive rate - or at least on a sliding scale.

POGS An article in the Guardian in January this year referred to new research which tracked 634 rare surnames, such as Pepys, Bigge and Nottidge and in so doing showed how wealth has been handed down since 1850. The research concluded that money and assets obtained by way of inheritance rather than by way of earnings was the main contributor to wealth. So, to a fairly significant extent, the idea of the "self made man" is a bit of a myth.

After examining the records of 18,869 people, and dividing them into three categories, the rich, the prosperous and the poor, Professor Clark and Dr Cummins, the two economists behind the study, suggest that there is a “significant correlation between the wealth of families five generations apart”. Put simply, the descendants of the wealthy of 1858 are still much wealthier than the average person in 2012.

You may feel quite happy that the current situation re inheritance tax does not affect you because your estate won't be liable for it. But if fewer people are liable for tax, less money goes into the exchequer and this has an impact on government spending on things like schools and hospitals - so in a very real sense it does affect you. Just as important though is the fact that less well off families are facing cuts in tax credits while far wealthier families are benefiting from tax cuts.

I feel that, if anything, the Inheritance Tax threshold should have been lowered (and I say that knowing that our children/grandchildren are likely at some stage to become liable). To my mind, being able to inherit even two or three hundred thousand pounds without paying tax seems pretty fair to me and the remaining liability for Inheritance Tax will go into the pot to help everybody - not just one family.



.

The Telegraph article you quoted, roseq, said that Benn's arrangements were not tax dodging, but sensible. The last two paragraphs say that.

It would be a brilliant strategy, durhamjen but unfortunately I don't have enough to warrant paying IHT!

I'm just saying that the very wealthy can find ways around paying IHT and those poorer mortals don't come into the IHT bracket - it's those in the middle who don't have whizzy accountants to help them find ways to avoid the tax whose families get clobbered.

To my mind, being able to inherit even two or three hundred thousand pounds without paying tax seems pretty fair to me and the remaining liability for Inheritance Tax will go into the pot to help everybody - not just one family.

I think it would be fairer to pay 1p or 2p more on income tax and to stop tax-dodging schemes - imo that would be a better way to bring more money into the Exchequer.
It seems more honest to me to take it off the living rather than the dead.

I realise the way that the Benn family organised their affairs was perfectly legitimate and probably acceptable to most people. The headline in the Telegraph referring to it as a "dodge" was I think inflammator.

However, I have to say I felt rather disappointed that things were done in that way. Of course, he - like most people - wanted to leave something to his family. However, I think all of them are relatively comfortable and did not need to inherit the full amount - I may be wrong but I imagine they would still have obtained a more than reasonable share of the estate even if 50% tax had been paid on the proportion liable for tax.

On the other hand, I don't know what the position was with regard to the other property. Perhaps the full amount of IT was paid on that.