I do wish Keir Starmer would stop talking about ‘working people’!

Regarding the title of this thread didn’t the Tories talk non stop about hardworking families. It used to get on my nerves a bit because they probably didn’t even know any hard working families. Other than staff perhaps. 🤔

silverlining48

Regarding the title of this thread didn’t the Tories talk non stop about hardworking families. It used to get on my nerves a bit because they probably didn’t even know any hard working families. Other than staff perhaps. 🤔

They probably did and probably got stick for doing so. Does that make Starmer right?

No, I just think he needs to be clearer rather than "right or wrong".

He's trying to find a descriptive term for a group of the population, but it's obviously not adequate.

I find it adequate.

MissAdventure

I find it adequate.

So do I. He means (and Bridget Phillipson reiterated this morning on Kuennsberg) that people will not find their pay packets lighter because of a tax increase. He means people on PAYE.

That is not to say that nobody who has ever worked a day in their life is immune to all taxation - of course not. Pensioners, some of whom have worked very hard, will be treated the same as other groups when it comes to any possible increases tax on interest, on rental income, on inheritance etc, as will those who have a passive income from capital, rents and so on.

The difference, as I interpret it, is that for a change it will not be those going out to work (or working at home, for the hair-splitters ) who will be expected to carry the rest of the population. We all benefit from the NHS, from education, roads, defence (more than ever), welfare, pensions etc etc. Why should it just be those who work who pay for it?

But what about the hybrid workers?
What's to become of them??

hybrid workers?

Excuse my ignorance - what's a hybrid worker please?

Someone who works partly at home, and partly in the office.
Of course, there are countless different places they may work, and they may sometimes work from someone else's home, or summerhouse, or....

I think it's expected that most people don't find the concept too difficult, though.

Oh, ok.

But they probably work for one employer so would be working people

I just thought it was "I'm working from home on Tuesday"! Or whenever.

Trueloveways

The solution is for the media to stop asking for a definition. All the “working people” that I know understands what it means.

Well, no one I know does. Does it include pensioners/

I have avoided criticising this government until now, to allow for them to settle into power and start governing. However when 4 months in they are still making cloth eared and basic blunders like Starmer's latest comments, then, yes, criticism is called for.

This wasn't a policy issue it was basic PR, and if his Communications team are so incompetent that they let him make a remark like this, they should be sacked.

No one we know understands what he means either M0nica.

If you work and get paid for the work you do you're a working person, regardless of what that work entails, how many hours you work, how much you get paid for it, how many rental properties you own and whether you own shares and/or have investments. That doesn't appear to be KS's definition though.

What is his definition?

theworriedwell

eazybee

I think billionaires do work extremely hard because they are so invested in their business they cannot let go, and are always looking for new ways to beat the market. They also provide jobs for hundreds to thousands of people. It is their dependents that tend to do little.

Some current billionaires are more than likely the dependents of yesterday who have inherited the billions. Not all of them are self made.

Cant think of a single one off the top of my head.

I agree with eazybee.

I think probably less than 5% of billionaires inherited their billions. The majority are self made people who did it on their own. They are the entrepreneur types, or those in the right place at the right time.

I wonder how many actually blow the money they inherit too?

It's amazing that old money is somehow constantly being refreshed each generation. Try as he might, I can't see KS bringing a stop to that.

Well, I won't be holding it against him for trying, at least.

Me neither MissAdventure, but like we've discussed before, they'll just up and leave.

Well, they have got to do what suits them, and if it means leaving, well, byebye.

Like others, I hate wealthy people yacking about " Ordinary Working people" as if they actually know any, assuming they don't regard themselves as being in that category. Do they mean their servants or the binman? I've worked all my life, both employed and self-employed (both at the same time for some years) and even 14 years into retirement am still self-employed a little. I don't think either the Tories or the current Labour lot are including me.

Oh, I inherited the residue of my parents' little terrace, after it was depleted by about 70% in carehome fees, and DH inherited his slightly bigger family home which was in very poor repair. We used most of those inheritances to help our DDs onto the property ladder - so in many people's eyes are pretty well off (and I wouldn't disagree - but nothing like as well off as plenty of others are.

I don't think any of the senior politicians know what an "ordinary working person" is.

MissAdventure

Well, they have got to do what suits them, and if it means leaving, well, byebye.

But don't you then say "byebye" to homegrown talent like JK Rowling? An educated, penniless single mum, living on benefits, but who made her huge fortune?
I'm sure if it suits her, like others, she will leave, but what a loss.

JK has said she isn't leaving (just googled, unless I've missed something).
We can't not tax the super rich because some might go.

No, she isn't. I meant sadly the likes of JKR might potentially go.
But I do agree. It has to be fair all round.

Paying tax commensurate to one’s income / wealth is the most patriotic act one can do - note the ‘Patriotic Millionaires’ group.

Those who leave the country in order to avoid paying an appropriate amount of tax are not patriotic … good riddance to them!

I am unable to grasp what's so difficult about this.

I am a working person as I work for an employer (albeit part-time and not all year round), and pay tax on my earnings. If and when I stop working, I will stop being a working person and become a retired one, at which point I will stop paying tax on earnings, as I won't have any, but will continue to pay tax on my pension. .

This would apply whether I lived in a castle and my father was a Duke, and equally if I lived in a dosshouse and he was a convict. It's not about social class, it's about the relationship to the means of production.

What KS has said (as has RR and others in the Cabinet) is that people like me will not pay more tax on my earnings as a result of the budget.

If I had a separate income from a sideline in renting out my diamond tiaras, that may be taxed more than at present.

If I had shares in the diamond mine that provided the diamonds from which the tiaras are made, I may find that the dividends are taxed more, too, just as might the rent on the penthouse in Belgravia which I let to Lord X and Lady Y. We will find that out in the budget on Wednesday.

But the tax on my actual work, which qualifies me as a 'working person' will remain the same.

As regards pensions, there has been no suggestion that they will be taxed at a higher rate than earnings - they are very likely to continue to sit within the same tax bands as do the incomes of the rest of the population.

The French have a good word for working people. You're "actif", as opposed to inactif.

Nothing to do with being physically fit, (or sexually active!)