The Wish They Were All Dead Tory Cunt Thread

[The Wengerbabies]

They're not even hiding it anymore

[Letters]

So in response to the first part about being mortgage free, this is pretty much certain not to be the case. Farms will have many loans to fund buying equipment or building new grain barns etc. to keep up with modern standards and improve the farm running. The land is unlikely to be completely mortgage free so that option is not as easy as it sounds. While 50k sounds a lot, that does depend on the farm being able to grow the crops etc and no other variables coming into play. Take the Ukraine war, the price of fertizler shot up massively meaning that 50k would have been massively reduced as costs eat into income. Weather also plays a massive part, a real example here is about 3 weeks before harvest, there was a significant hail storm that caused us to lose around 40% of our rape seed that harvest.40% of the crop lost but all the cost of growing it had been spent at that point.

The point about 3 million being tax free, it sounds a lot but it isn’t. I reckon most farms will probably have around 500k-1m in machinery (combines, tractors, ploughs etc.) that’s before the big assets such as the land, house & barns. A lot more farms will be caught in this tax then treasury are forecasting.

This policy affects my family but that’s not why I’m against it, I’m against it because it’s a load of bollocks. I’ve no idea how my family afforded the boarding school fees but you have seen photos on facebook and made an assumption that we are loaded which isn’t the case. I’m not going to pretend we are poor, we aren’t. You say its just rich people moaning about tax but farmers generally are not cash rich, they’ll only be cash rich when they sell the land but given these farms have been passed down for generations, isn’t likely unless forced.

Being loaded is subjective of course but come on dude, anyone who can afford school fees that high is doing OK. That isn't an assumption, it's just obviously true. There's no way I could afford it and I earn a decent salary. I take the point about being cash rich vs assets rich and noted about the mortgages. I accept that you know a lot more about all this than me. I also accept that some people who have been making plans based on how the rules were are now going to be shafted because the rules changed. But I doubt it's as many people as certain people are claiming. A load of younger people can take advantage of the 7 year thing to mitigate this. You say £3m isn't a lot - I mean, it objectively is. That's a shit-ton of assets to have. It would put you in the top few percent in the country. People might not want to sell some of their land or sell up completely, but they do have that option and it would make them extremely rich if they do. So overall there are a lot of people in much worse situations.
I have some sympathy for older people who were making plans along the lines of the old rules and their children are now left with a problem, but any change in the rules is going to affect some people and therefore seem unfair to them.

This made me chuckle although you may be too young to get the reference.

[Ollie the Optimist]

Being loaded is subjective of course but come on dude, anyone who can afford school fees that high is doing OK. That isn't an assumption, it's just obviously true. There's no way I could afford it and I earn a decent salary. I take the point about being cash rich vs assets rich and noted about the mortgages. I accept that you know a lot more about all this than me. I also accept that some people who have been making plans based on how the rules were are now going to be shafted because the rules changed. But I doubt it's as many people as certain people are claiming. A load of younger people can take advantage of the 7 year thing to mitigate this. You say £3m isn't a lot - I mean, it objectively is. That's a shit-ton of assets to have. It would put you in the top few percent in the country. People might not want to sell some of their land or sell up completely, but they do have that option and it would make them extremely rich if they do. So overall there are a lot of people in much worse situations.
I have some sympathy for older people who were making plans along the lines of the old rules and their children are now left with a problem, but any change in the rules is going to affect some people and therefore seem unfair to them.

This made me chuckle although you may be too young to get the reference.

Yes it’s true that when you take into account the assets, these people are “rich” but that’s only on paper. They don’t realise the wealth until they sell. Now you might think it’s a good thing that farmers are forced to sell land to pay inheritance tax but I would argue the opposite. Theyll need all the land they have to make a profit, if they sell to pay tax, the profitability of the farm becomes worse meaning that they might decide to sell up completely.

Now who has the money to buy a farm worth several million? Only the wealthiest landowners & big city hedge funds etc. do you want all the farm land being owned by them? I suspect not. Or of course, the other issue is they sell to developers meaning we end up with no farm land and being entirely reliant on food security from overseas, which again probably not a good idea either.

To be honest, farmers would be better off becoming public sector workers. They seem to be exempt from IHT for some unknown reason - https://www.gbnews.com/money/rachel-...-public-sector

[Letters]

Yes it’s true that when you take into account the assets, these people are “rich” but that’s only on paper. They don’t realise the wealth until they sell. Now you might think it’s a good thing that farmers are forced to sell land to pay inheritance tax but I would argue the opposite.

I don't think it's a good thing, but I do think the impact of this has been overstated and it won't affect anywhere as many people as some are claiming. I also think there are people more deserving of sympathy than anyone who owns land worth over £3m. I'm sure there are some family farms which will discontinue as a result of this and sure, that is a shame. But it won't decimate the UK farming industry.

Now who has the money to buy a farm worth several million? Only the wealthiest landowners & big city hedge funds etc. do you want all the farm land being owned by them? I suspect not.

But it's not going to be all the farmland, is it? It doesn't affect most farms, those it does affect there are ways around this like the 7 year thing. Not an option for some older farmers, sure, but for many people it will be. Some people will just be able to afford to pay of course without selling up - don't farmers still have much longer to pay this than other people? Some farms may get sold to developers and I agree that would be a shame, but it won't be that many. And those that do sell will have millions in the bank, they're not going to be on the streets.

To be honest, farmers would be better off becoming public sector workers. They seem to be exempt from IHT for some unknown reason - https://www.gbnews.com/money/rachel-...-public-sector

Well that's a policy I think we can all get behind
I didn't even know IHT could be applied to pensions and I'm not sure how that would work for defined benefits pensions. My pension statement just tells me how much my pension will be, there is no pot of money assigned to me individually to pay that so I don't know what IHT would be based on. When I was in the private sector I did get statements with how much was in the pot and how much my pension could be but of course that was just a projection. But I paid that amount in to the Public Sector scheme when I started this job.

[Niall_Quinn]

Mark 12:13-17.

Yes, so we agree, give back to evil what is evil and keep the rest which must be, logically, not evil. You need to look behind the outcome to see the cause. The cause is the evil, not the outcome. Which is why I say get rid of government, not get rid of tax, because tax cannot exist without government or some other criminal gang extorting the weak.

[Niall_Quinn]

I don't think it's a good thing, but I do think the impact of this has been overstated and it won't affect anywhere as many people as some are claiming. I also think there are people more deserving of sympathy than anyone who owns land worth over £3m. I'm sure there are some family farms which will discontinue as a result of this and sure, that is a shame. But it won't decimate the UK farming industry.


But it's not going to be all the farmland, is it? It doesn't affect most farms, those it does affect there are ways around this like the 7 year thing. Not an option for some older farmers, sure, but for many people it will be. Some people will just be able to afford to pay of course without selling up - don't farmers still have much longer to pay this than other people? Some farms may get sold to developers and I agree that would be a shame, but it won't be that many. And those that do sell will have millions in the bank, they're not going to be on the streets.


Well that's a policy I think we can all get behind
I didn't even know IHT could be applied to pensions and I'm not sure how that would work for defined benefits pensions. My pension statement just tells me how much my pension will be, there is no pot of money assigned to me individually to pay that so I don't know what IHT would be based on. When I was in the private sector I did get statements with how much was in the pot and how much my pension could be but of course that was just a projection. But I paid that amount in to the Public Sector scheme when I started this job.

Well let's make rape legal. If women lock themselves indoors they'll probably be okay. Mind you, the ones who wear nice clothes probably deserve it. Just tell me why the state is allowed to steal money and then, after the theft, come back at steal again from what remained. Inheritance tax? You mean a tax on the balance after tax has been levied. Is this a case of two wrongs making it right?

[Niall_Quinn]

So in response to the first part about being mortgage free, this is pretty much certain not to be the case. Farms will have many loans to fund buying equipment or building new grain barns etc. to keep up with modern standards and improve the farm running. The land is unlikely to be completely mortgage free so that option is not as easy as it sounds. While 50k sounds a lot, that does depend on the farm being able to grow the crops etc and no other variables coming into play. Take the Ukraine war, the price of fertizler shot up massively meaning that 50k would have been massively reduced as costs eat into income. Weather also plays a massive part, a real example here is about 3 weeks before harvest, there was a significant hail storm that caused us to lose around 40% of our rape seed that harvest.40% of the crop lost but all the cost of growing it had been spent at that point.

The point about 3 million being tax free, it sounds a lot but it isn’t. I reckon most farms will probably have around 500k-1m in machinery (combines, tractors, ploughs etc.) that’s before the big assets such as the land, house & barns. A lot more farms will be caught in this tax then treasury are forecasting.

This policy affects my family but that’s not why I’m against it, I’m against it because it’s a load of bollocks. I’ve no idea how my family afforded the boarding school fees but you have seen photos on facebook and made an assumption that we are loaded which isn’t the case. I’m not going to pretend we are poor, we aren’t. You say its just rich people moaning about tax but farmers generally are not cash rich, they’ll only be cash rich when they sell the land but given these farms have been passed down for generations, isn’t likely unless forced.

Which is the whole ballgame - forcing small to medium sized farms out of business. Then the pretend corporate farmers have control over the food supply. You can see it happening all over Europe and in the west in general. This is why something as fundamentally insane as cow farts can make the news. Anything to cripple self sustenance and drag us towards the utopia of reliance for life itself on the criminal state.

[Letters]

Just tell me why the state is allowed to steal money

Tax is part of the societal contract. You pay tax, you get roads and hospitals and schools and infrastructure.
Obviously the details of that are complicated - it's certainly true that governments waste a lot of money, spend it on the wrong things, don't invest enough in the right things and so on. But the principle of tax in the context of a society is sound. And when we have elections the parties lay out their plans for tax and spending, the one that gets elected has a mandate, that's why they're allowed to do it.

and then, after the theft, come back at steal again from what remained. Inheritance tax? You mean a tax on the balance after tax has been levied. Is this a case of two wrongs making it right?

I have mixed feelings about inheritance tax. I vaguely agree that the principle of being taxed again on estates which your parents have already bought with money which has already been taxed feels wrong. But you could say the same thing about VAT, you pay tax on your earnings and then pay it again when you buy stuff.
But inheritance tax only actually applies to something like 4% of estates - that may go up now house prices are so high, but right now only the richest few percent of people actually pay anything. If my maths is right then if you are left 600k then you'll pay 100k in tax. That feels like a lot, but you're still left with half a million.

TL;DR, inheritance tax only affects the richest in society, so while I have some misgivings about it, as with farmers sitting on millions of pounds worth of estate, there are people more deserving of sympathy.

[Niall_Quinn]

Tax is part of the societal contract. You pay tax, you get roads and hospitals and schools and infrastructure.
Obviously the details of that are complicated - it's certainly true that governments waste a lot of money, spend it on the wrong things, don't invest enough in the right things and so on. But the principle of tax in the context of a society is sound. And when we have elections the parties lay out their plans for tax and spending, the one that gets elected has a mandate, that's why they're allowed to do it.


I have mixed feelings about inheritance tax. I vaguely agree that the principle of being taxed again on estates which your parents have already bought with money which has already been taxed feels wrong. But you could say the same thing about VAT, you pay tax on your earnings and then pay it again when you buy stuff.
But inheritance tax only actually applies to something like 4% of estates - that may go up now house prices are so high, but right now only the richest few percent of people actually pay anything. If my maths is right then if you are left 600k then you'll pay 100k in tax. That feels like a lot, but you're still left with half a million.

TL;DR, inheritance tax only affects the richest in society, so while I have some misgivings about it, as with farmers sitting on millions of pounds worth of estate, there are people more deserving of sympathy.

I DO say the same thing about the criminal activity labelled as value added tax. It's one of the most egregious crimes committed by the state. Not only does it pass another whole basic rate income tax onto the consumer, but it also robs business at each stage of the production process. It's one of the most vile extortion rackets running today, exactly what you would expect from the worst of us who "serve".

[Letters]

I DO say the same thing about the criminal activity labelled as value added tax. It's one of the most egregious crimes committed by the state. Not only does it pass another whole basic rate income tax onto the consumer, but it also robs business at each stage of the production process. It's one of the most vile extortion rackets running today, exactly what you would expect from the worst of us who "serve".

Well fair enough, that's logically consistent. Personally I've always thought that they should maybe just take as much as they need from my earnings and then leave me the hell alone after that. But I'd be the first to admit I don't really know what I'm talking about and that's probably too simplistic. Although the tax system in this country is definitely too complex and full of loopholes.