Labour leadership hopeful Owen Smith says he would introduce a wealth tax on the richest 1% in society to fund the NHS and tackle inequality in Britain.
Mr Smith – who is challenging leader Jeremy Corbyn – said the “equality-busting” move would raise £3bn a year.
He also vowed to reinstate the 50p tax rate, strengthen workers’ rights and end the public sector pay freeze, as he promised a workplace “revolution”.
Call it what you will, it’s stealing, plain and simple. Redistribution is merely a euphemism to disguise the naked greed and spite lurking in the politics of envy this nasty little man espouses. Might as well stick with Corbyn, he is an obvious unreconstructed Stalinist without the veneer of respectability.
The sooner that people realise that this party is nothing more than a bunch of criminal gangsters with an eye on your wallet, the better. But some people are still so stupid they vote for them.
“I shall tax the rich until the pips squeak” – Dennis Healey
Labour never change. The politics of envy and total hypocrisy when their top men are all millionaires with off shore tax arrangements…
Just look at Blair and Prescott for starters.
There was a lot of talk after the referendum about how some people’s votes should be worth more than other people’s. On hearing what this pillock was proposing, it did occur to me that maybe you should have to have been a net contributor for the previous five years in order to vote in elections. That way, those potential recipients of other people’s money wouldn’t be able to vote. I also thought about Einstein’s definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
….it did occur to me that maybe you should have to have been a net contributor for the previous five years in order to vote in elections
Now that makes a lot of sense, and would certainly have the effect of changing the political landscape. It would also probably mean that politicians wouldn’t be eligible to vote, which would be interesting.
‘Could’ raise 3bn? No, because the 1%’s smart money will always be gone, leaving a McCavity like grin in its passing. Better to reform and simplify the tax code than keep trying the same, tired old answers and failing the same, tired old way.
Being able to sell your vote to the highest bidder would sort things out.
Ordinary ‘democracy’ is jaded.
No it wouldn’t. It has been demonstrated that election promises (e.g. I promise to pay the bearer of this vote) are not binding on the newly elected government.
In any case, with whose money are they paying?
That’s precisely what Labour do, though.
It’s hardly the epitome of reasoned discourse, but all I can think of to say is “Bollocks to the lot of ’em”.
They’d only up foreign aid by £6Bn in aid of virtue signalling if they managed to take £3Bn off the richest before they boarded their Lear jets and fucked off permanently.
Could we compile a list of politicians who can’t don’t have a fetish for pissing other people’s money up the wall quickly enough, a postage stamp will provide ample room for the name.
In his novel In the Wet, Nevil Shute imagined a voting system where everybody got a basic vote but you were granted extra votes for various things. Can’t remember what they all were, but going to further education, holding down a job, being married, having travelled and so on (I think) were some of them.