• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Two-thirds of millionaires left Britain to avoid 50p tax rate

PeteEU said:
Wrong...
Click to expand...

No, whats wrong is extremists who want to have children removed from the homes of families whose choice of political party they disagree with & would lie to advocate such.

You know the rules.
 
JRog said:
I think that a healthy wealth distribution is one that includes some wealth inequality. I do, however, think that there needs to be a system through which people are prevented from becoming "too big to fail" so to speak, especially across generations of wealthy families. Extreme wealth inequality is damaging to an economy, but some inequality (along with upward mobility) promotes productivity and ambition.
Click to expand...

Does wealth inequality mean that there are some people have more than you? What of it?
 
Paschendale said:
So then the problem isn't taxes. It's too much money given to non-essential special interests. That's absolutely an issue that merits discussion, and serious reactions. But throwing a temper tantrum over taxes is just childish.
Click to expand...

No one is throwing a tantrum. Britain is simply providing a massive incentive for them to leave, and so people are responding to the incentives.


Aesop was right - You can't, actually get gold out of the goose by cutting on it.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
You sure do use the term "tea party" a lot. Do you assume everyone that disagrees with you is a member of the tea party? Or do you recognize that there are more political and moral views than two?
Click to expand...

But there are only two: heads and everyone else who is wrong.
 
Dragonfly said:
So where did all the now ex-British millionaires go?
Click to expand...
There's no indication that they "went" anywhere.

There's no evidence offered of any one moving. The only evidence offered is how much income people listed on their tax returns. Taxes went up and fewer people let themselves be subject to the tax.
They could have claimed money ahead of the tax increase so that the money wouldn't be subject to the higher rate. They could have moved their money into different vehicle which are subject to different taxes. They could have done quite a number of things with their money to reduce their tax burden.

It's supremely silly imho to take the data offered as evidence that people emigrated and became ex-pats.

But, then again, I have no vested interest in believing such tripe, so I am not likely to get pulled in by that one.

Find some articles talking about how cool I am and what a great dad I am, and I'll be unlikely to see how flawed the articles are. ; )
It's just human nature that we have trouble thinking clearly about data which conform to our prejudices.
:shrug:
 
Simon is onto something.

What the right wing ranters forget is fewer people filing in a certain bracket is a myriad of reasons besides the one that fits their rant.

One big reason fewer filed in the higher tax bracket is their income fell due to weak economic conditions. If you make less money you don't qualify for the higher rates. If your stock income takes a drastic hit, your business is in a slump due to lower consumer spending, you start a trust fund, make a sizable charitable donation because you were just a few grand over the 1 million mark....

No the only 'reason' right wing ranters see is an increase in tax rate and the only 'result' was the millionaires MUST be fleeing. :roll:

Now on using Nazi Germany, Hitler, and the Jewish exodus from pre WWII Germany...

It is beyond reasoned discourse to drag all of that into this.

Now if England made every millionaire wear a distinctive badge, highly restricted their businesses, took their vote away, ban marriage outside their group, highly restricted their travel...

well you might could use Nazis, Hitler, and Jews in this...
 
Simon W. Moon said:
There's no indication that they "went" anywhere.
Click to expand...
You're correct. It's called moving your money while you sit still. ;)

The Myth of the Millionaires' Exodus

A gaping hole in this argument is that by the HMRC's own admission, a great deal of this drop was accounted for by (the non-PAYE paying) super-rich bringing bringing forward their income ('forestalling') and declaring it in 2009/2010 tax year instead, ahead of the pre-announced 50p tax rise. The key point is, by its nature forestalling can only happen once - those who did so could not have kept doing it in the years after; they would have had to have paid up. The 2010/2011 yield was thus artificially deflated; totally anomalous, and unreliable as a baseline. There may have been other more permanent forms of evasion in the mix, but the only way of knowing this - and the true effectiveness of the 50p tax - for sure would have been to wait for 2011/2012 returns. Which is presumably by Osborne avoided doing just that (given there was good evidence it raised a significant sum of money).
Click to expand...
 
cpwill said:
No one is throwing a tantrum. Britain is simply providing a massive incentive for them to leave, and so people are responding to the incentives.

Aesop was right - You can't, actually get gold out of the goose by cutting on it.
Click to expand...

And the idea that rich people are the source of prosperity for a people is insane. The golden goose, as you put it, is the hardworking citizens who build things, make things work, and invent new things. None of that is contingent on wealth, nor disproportionately concentrated into the upper class. Quite the opposite, in fact. There's nothing "golden goose" about the upper classes.
 
Paschendale said:
And the idea that rich people are the source of prosperity for a people is insane. The golden goose, as you put it, is the hardworking citizens who build things, make things work, and invent new things. None of that is contingent on wealth, nor disproportionately concentrated into the upper class. Quite the opposite, in fact. There's nothing "golden goose" about the upper classes.
Click to expand...

What are these hard working people going to build next? I might want to invest in it.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
The question is will obama and the Democrats learn anything from this.


"Almost two-thirds of the country’s million-pound earners disappeared from Britain after the introduction of the 50p top rate of tax, figures have disclosed."


"In the 2009-10 tax year, more than 16,000 people declared an annual income of more than £1 million to HM Revenue and Customs.

This number fell to just 6,000 after Gordon Brown introduced the new 50p top rate of income"

: “Labour’s ideological tax hike led to a tax cull of millionaires.
Far from raising funds, it actually cost the UK £7 billions in lost tax revenue.


Two-thirds of millionaires left Britain to avoid 50p tax rate - Telegraph
Click to expand...

Both you and the Telegraph are placing your own ideological spin on this story. The article contradicts its own headline in fact...
It is believed that rich Britons moved abroad or took steps to avoid paying the new levy by reducing their taxable incomes.
Click to expand...
I'm more inclined to believe that that second possibility, of paying their big city accountants to avoid declaring their entire income, hence seeing their income fall...on paper only. Typically, neither you nor the Daily Torygraph post any evidence to back up your claim. It's nothing more than supposition on behalf of the class warriors of the right.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
The question is will obama and the Democrats learn anything from this.


"Almost two-thirds of the country’s million-pound earners disappeared from Britain after the introduction of the 50p top rate of tax, figures have disclosed."


"In the 2009-10 tax year, more than 16,000 people declared an annual income of more than £1 million to HM Revenue and Customs.

This number fell to just 6,000 after Gordon Brown introduced the new 50p top rate of income"

: “Labour’s ideological tax hike led to a tax cull of millionaires.
Far from raising funds, it actually cost the UK £7 billions in lost tax revenue.


Two-thirds of millionaires left Britain to avoid 50p tax rate - Telegraph
Click to expand...

Letting the temporary tax relief of 2001 and 2003 expire; thus returning our tax structure to what is was in the 1990's is not going to lead to a massive wealth drain.

Thank you, however, for one of the more humorous points of argumentation this board has seen since the election.
 
AliHajiSheik said:
Does wealth inequality mean that there are some people have more than you? What of it?
Click to expand...

Wealth inequality is when the amount of wealth is not evenly distributed. It's healthy to have inequality. EXTREME wealth inequality is when a significant amount of an economy's value rests with very few people. That is unhealthy because those who have the money, have so much of it that they can't possibly spend it (nor do they want to), which takes that money out of circulation. Sure they invest it where it will earn money, but investing does not generate demand, and therefore does not stimulate growth.

This is a good chart to reference
http://chewychunks.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/dan-ariely-wealth-inequality.png?w=630&h=263
 
head of joaquin said:
To summarize, the silly meme of the OP reduces to an admission that rich people have no love of any country and thus only care about making more and more money for themselves, no matter who that hurts (even though they are already fabulously rich and don't have to work another day of their lifes).

And somehow tea partiers think this is an argument for taxing the rich less!

You have to love rightwing memes. So out of touch.
Click to expand...

so you think that having more of one's wealth taken by a wasteful government is a measure of one's love of one's country?

the fact is-many people use more than they pay. the wealthy do not
 
upsideguy said:
Letting the temporary tax relief of 2001 and 2003 expire; thus returning our tax structure to what is was in the 1990's is not going to lead to a massive wealth drain.

Thank you, however, for one of the more humorous points of argumentation this board has seen since the election.
Click to expand...

I love the love the left has for the clinton tax rates.
 
TurtleDude said:
I love the love the left has for the clinton tax rates.
Click to expand...

Tax the whiners more and put hefty fines for hiding money off shore and HUGE fees every quarter they supply the chinese with a job...then raise their tax rates back where they belong 70% no loopholes
 
lpast said:
Tax the whiners more and put hefty fines for hiding money off shore and HUGE fees every quarter they supply the chinese with a job...then raise their tax rates back where they belong 70% no loopholes
Click to expand...

are you posting this out of a well thought of belief that the such idiotic actions would actually help things or is it rather the product of some sort of envy of those who are more successful than you are?
 
TurtleDude said:
are you posting this out of a well thought of belief that the such idiotic actions would actually help things or is it rather the product of some sort of envy of those who are more successful than you are?
Click to expand...

I just want to see you cry until your entire body is just a little puddle
 
lpast said:
I just want to see you cry until your entire body is just a little puddle
Click to expand...

you will die a disappointed man then
 
So if a thousand millionaires hoard / don't spend a million each it's a billion not in the economy right? What of the million people, like me, that hoard a thousand dollars each? What are you going to do to them or do you only want to impact the smaller voting block?


JRog said:
Wealth inequality is when the amount of wealth is not evenly distributed. It's healthy to have . EXTREME wealth inequality is when a significant amount of an economy's value rests with very few people. That is unhealthy because those who have the money, have so much of it that they can't possibly spend it (nor do they want to), which takes that money out of circulation. Sure they invest it where it will earn money, but investing does not generate demand, and therefore does not stimulate growth.

This is a good chart to reference
http://chewychunks.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/dan-ariely-wealth-inequality.png?w=630&h=263
Click to expand...
 
lpast said:
You kiddin your mostly puddle already from all those croc tears...loolol
Click to expand...

you're I think is the word you are looking for

I am not the one complaining that others are wealthier than I am (yes there are some who are)
 
TurtleDude said:
you're I think is the word you are looking for

I am not the one complaining that others are wealthier than I am (yes there are some who are)
Click to expand...

I just keep getting more and more impressed every time I talk to you...I did hear some sniffling though :)
 
CalGun said:
So if a thousand millionaires hoard / don't spend a million each it's a billion not in the economy right? What of the million people, like me, that hoard a thousand dollars each? What are you going to do to them or do you only want to impact the smaller voting block?
Click to expand...

Having a million people with a thousand dollars is not wealth inequality, so I don't see your point. Granted, the economy would benefit from everyone spending all of their money, but I think we'd best focus on correcting the most extreme cases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom