Interview with the economist billionaires fear: this is how we get a wealth tax

What ‘isn’t about preventing wealth’ *Wwmk2’ ?

Why let it all flow upwards before doing anything about the consequent evils it causes?

The video has been taken down for some reason.

Because the wealth of billionaires is held principally in companies the key to a wealth tax is for a government to restrict the investment of foreign companies in the home market.

This is the opposite of the current policy and would certainly attract reciprocal action against the UK. France is very nationalistic in its policies, I don't see it taking serious action against it's wealthy business owners that are already state controlled to a large extent too many jobs are at stake.

Yes but it isn’t just happening in this country. France seems to be leading the way and I have no doubt that other countries - the nordics,? Will follow suit.

That's what gives me hope Whitewave.

love0c

We as a country obviously need to tax to make the country work. However, the government must be careful not to discourage 'money' from leaving the country. Money is leaving at an alarming rate under this government. The next government is going to have the job of getting it back. I just hope Labour voters realise this. Responsible thought and critical thinking is needed when voting.

This as why there was a suggestion that should a British Citizen move abroad they would havd to go on paying tax. The suggestion was for 10 years. The USA already does it for life as long as you retain citizenship.

Wealth tax does not help the economy to grow however which is what is desperately needed. I think the amount of money the top dogs earn is obscene but if it’s taxed it needs to be reinvested in some form and not just used for free handouts. People should be able to have jobs and earn a decent wage.

Whitewavemark2

I don’t really think this is about preventing wealth. It is about ensuring those who profit most from a country’s infrastructure, education, defence etc etc, pay towards it just as everyone else does.

At present they operate outside the law. This is what the 2% is all about.

I would also like to see a way of closing the inequality gap because I don’t think it is good for democracy. That would take 8% according to Kugman and others which given the level of their wealth I don’t think is asking too much.

I would also like to see a way of closing the inequality gap in the way Kugman suggests.

Those individuals driven to achieve and accumulate wealth will always have that drive and ambition. Realistically it would be easier for a state to ensure they pay a fair share of their wealth toward's the state's infrastructure than preventing wealth.

Yes, once the tax is collected from the wealthy, the big argument will be how it is redistributed.

My preference would be health, education, social care

And defence against Putin?

Grantanow

And defence against Putin?

Well, this is about raising tax to close the inequality gap.

Defence and its funding is not really the issue, but I take your point -it serves as an example of how there will be disagreements over how this potential redistribution should work.

Health, education, social care and housing......

LemonJam

Whitewavemark2

I don’t really think this is about preventing wealth. It is about ensuring those who profit most from a country’s infrastructure, education, defence etc etc, pay towards it just as everyone else does.

At present they operate outside the law. This is what the 2% is all about.

I would also like to see a way of closing the inequality gap because I don’t think it is good for democracy. That would take 8% according to Kugman and others which given the level of their wealth I don’t think is asking too much.

I would also like to see a way of closing the inequality gap in the way Kugman suggests.

Those individuals driven to achieve and accumulate wealth will always have that drive and ambition. Realistically it would be easier for a state to ensure they pay a fair share of their wealth toward's the state's infrastructure than preventing wealth.

Yes, no one has come up with anything close to preventing the accumulation of individual wealth, except perhaps China, although they have a lot of billionaires they are closely controlled I believe.

Whitewavemark2 by redistribution do you mean job creation via infrastructure projects?

I hope you do not mean increased welfare payments, as that budget appears to be growing fast enough as it.

(I am all for a safety net, but against benefits as a lifestyle choice. Which does and is happening)

GrannyGravy13

Whitewavemark2 by redistribution do you mean job creation via infrastructure projects?

I hope you do not mean increased welfare payments, as that budget appears to be growing fast enough as it.

(I am all for a safety net, but against benefits as a lifestyle choice. Which does and is happening)

Well, everyone will have different ideas, but I would like to see investment into education - Inc. school infrastructure, investment into our health service, including a proper social care system - which takes the burden off our hospitals, investment into transport including rail and road., and investment into social housing to get the poor out of the disgusting living conditions they are experiencing.

At present a conservative value of £30 billion would be raised pa on just a couple of thousand families in the U.K. at 8%,

Mind you we are a long way off that as yet.

Setting aside a portion of this wealth tax each year for priority spend?

My fantasy current spending wish list (this is off the top of my head could be much more measured and detailed with more reflection) and could change year to year:

Health: major £ infusion ring fenced to clear waiting list backlogs within discrete timescale, plus to achieve 18 week treatment targets thereafter
Education: ( see Carole Vorderman post) £infusion to ensure teachers receive mandatory training in online harm of children PLUS dedicated Support Welfare post/person in each and every state school
*Social Care*: cross party, time limited project, to work up proposals to implement a National Health and Social Care Service with associated funding plan. £infusion to set up
Housing: £infusion to councils ring fenced to reduce waiting list for social housing with permission to build new homes for all ages.

Definitely towards education, and evening out NHS provision countrywide.
From posts on these Threads, there seems to be a postcode lottery, which seems unfair.
Anyway, until it is achieved, it's academic.
But, on the other hand, good to be prepared and have the vision.

😄 we can but dream!

maremia our local hospital is being gradually rebuilt - prior to that one of it’s buildings was built as a workhouse and the other purpose built in something like 1900 - so it is time it was renewed. At present work is just starting on a huge new cancer unit.

Whitewavemark2

😄 we can but dream!

😴 🤞I am on that NHS waiting list and one year later- still waiting 🥱

"Health: major £ infusion ring fenced to clear waiting list backlogs within discrete timescale, plus to achieve 18 week treatment targets thereafter"

Tony Blair did exactly this in the early 2000s after decades of NHS underfunding and the major cash boost was successful. It then set the 18 week consultant led benchmark establishing the legal right for patients to be seen and treated within 18 weeks. 92% of patient had to achieve this treatment target at each and every NHS trust otherwise there were contract penalties £.

We subsequently had 14 years of Conservative Government and the standard woefully slipped and waiting lists increased year. on year. Plus the symptoms of those on the waiting list get worse, their health continues to deteriorate and delayed treatment leads to poorer outcomes and longer hospital stays post operatively on occasion.

UK health and mortality rates have deteriorated as a consequence and the UK slipped down the global comparator list.

This would be a major boost and needs to be repeated at the earliest opportunity.

Those individuals driven to achieve and accumulate wealth will always have that drive and ambition

Yes, it's called greed when it is used only to increase their individual wealth and not reinvested productively. 'Drive and ambition' very often tramples on the poorer in society.

I do not believe that every entrepreneur is motivated by the acquisition of wealth. SMEs are the lifeblood of our economy, they may make their founders comfortable but I doubt if many go on to achieve excessive wealth.

^ Realistically it would be easier for a state to ensure they pay a fair share of their wealth towards the state's infrastructure than preventing wealth^

Why is preventing excessive wealth such a no no?

Why should the money that the state provides be accumulated by a relatively small number of its citizens before the state does anything to retrieve some of it?

Tony Blair today welcomed 11 private healthcare providers into the "NHS family", as he promised them the chance to gain a stronger foothold in the NHS.

Predicting that the private sector would soon provide up to 40% of NHS operations, Mr Blair said the independent providers could help drive up the quality of service to patients which he said was the "most important thing".

This quote from the Guardian

Don't forget that Tony was an advocate for private funding for the NHS

By infrastructure I mean building new hospitals, improving road and rail networks all of which provide jobs.
Supplying materials for these also provides employment and should help our failing industries.

When people are in paid employment they pay taxes and spend in the economy.

All the above will help to grow the economy, which is desperately needed.

Tony Blair didn't get everything right- but clearing the waiting lists by a £ ring fenced infusion was a very good thing.

REKA

*Tony Blair today welcomed 11 private healthcare providers into the "NHS family", as he promised them the chance to gain a stronger foothold in the NHS.*

Predicting that the private sector would soon provide up to 40% of NHS operations, Mr Blair said the independent providers could help drive up the quality of service to patients which he said was the "most important thing".

This quote from the Guardian

Don't forget that Tony was an advocate for private funding for the NHS

Tony Blair has been seduced by wealth. His piece is ridiculous.