Britain’s real-terms millionaire population has fallen to its lowest estimated level since 2008, when the financial crisis struck under the last Labour government.
There is astonishing ignorance about this in the Labour party. I watched an interview with a woman labour MP and the discussion was about wealthy people leaving the country. "Good riddance to them" she says, "they don't pay any tax anyway". Well actually they do, quite a lot in fact.
You’ve hit the nail on the head, Steve. It’s a classic myth! The top 1% actually fund nearly 30% of all Income Tax revenue. Losing them means a massive hole in the Treasury's pocket—and guess who gets asked to fill it? Cheers for reading and sharing your thoughts!
No Jamie, the top 1% is funded by the SPENDING of the remaining 99%. Us. All of us. We pass our earned money onto them and their business pays the tax you talk about. Not them. We pay it by our SPENDING and their business funds tax by our ability to SPEND. It survives or dies in our collective ability to SPEND. To have sufficient money to SPEND sufficient amounts to trigger sufficient tax take.
Valid point on the circular nature of the economy, Brian! Though whether it’s spending or direct tax, losing the folks who host the party usually means someone else gets stuck with the venue bill.
Yes, we need to reinstate exchange control regulations first removed by Thatcher.
They keep money in the uk. If money is allowed to flow freely by enforced spending than all money remains in house and can reach everyone. Spending has to be the choice. Not withholding that money. That choice should not be allowed. We need funding from government not banks and those holding our money we desperately need. That’s a depression a recession. A lack of sufficient money in our hands freely. If money is just a token of swap then we have to swap that money paid in full whether we earn £100 or £1,000,000. You can earn it but have to spend it back that’s the need.
How can preventing flue be good for the majority? It can’t.
It forgetting when you spend you get full and free exchange of goods services and assets! You still get value that is the wealth not the money that gif you that swap of work effort.
Just like any engine Jamie, it will only fully work one way! Otherwise it won’t fire on all cylinders.
We might not like the thought of spending money but most of us do spend it each month. The poor do. Most family’s do and must trying to better themselves do. The only ones who don’t spend are those who gave too much of it! But holding it withholds it from us. That’s not democratic. Whether we like the thought or not it will only work one way to its optimum.
And it’s now, for the first time in history we can enforce spending. Using digital banking. We can put a spend by date on money and enforce it by direct debits that clear that amount to government if unspent. Thus enforced spending will bring us all towards the centre of the scales of balanced economy.
If your Elon musk the thought of spending a trillion is mind blowing. So I’d suggest it will prevent that overfunded position by him only spending what he needs! The remainder goes to government to do its best with. Then he gets his trillions quicker next time! And the sane happens.
As for import export. Trump is a great example. He wants parity. Even exports for imports. I agree. We need to keep money in house. Buyers abroad can sell goods here to raise money to spend in the same way as we do. Sell goods to us. We buy. They can spend that money with us or lose it. It’s harsh. But unless we get full and fair wages change we can’t assure fully paid incomes in time to spend for our needs.
We are underfunded underpaid and underinvested by the actual free flow if our money. That’s the bit we can change and produce the best economy overnight. Just by SPENDING instead of not spending!
How strange though. According to the Adam Smith Institute, my husband is a millionaire. Not because he has a million quid stashed away but because our house is worth over £700k and he has a good pension. It's not our fault the house is so expensive and I wonder who will be able to afford to buy it after us. Surely the ASI needs to be looking at multi-millionaires because of the distorting effect of the housing market.
One of Thatcher’s first actions was to remove the then ‘exchange control regulations’. You may not be old enough to remember this Jamie but, prior to that we couldn’t take more than a hundred or two pounds abroad.
These regulations should be reintroduced.
You’re right, we can’t sustain the flow of money out the nation. We need money to be passed like a baton to each other rotating and revolving our daily economic pot via the nominated exchange of work…… Money!
You’re guilty of conflating money and being rich with money to that of wealth. There is an obsession about wealth that refuses to concentrate on money and rather concentrate on wealth instead.
They are in my mind two very different things!
Money is the conduit to exchange work for work, in the same time frame. You work and expect payment of money from us who work and want to SPEND it with you.
Wealth should be the goods assets and services received from the SPENDING of that earned money.
It’s crucial to grasp this nettle Jamie.
Again, in my mind all our nations sovereign currency must remain in house within the nation. To be able to heavy lift money from our nation just makes us underfunded. You are correct on that, but wealth is a completely different scenario.
You can’t lift property, real estate and take it abroad. Only the money that is paid for it or rental income from it. Thats why we need to, we must, reinstate those exchange controls. To prevent our money leaving our shores.
People ask “where’s the money coming from?”. We hear it a lot from politicians who really should know better. The correct answer is “where it’s always come from!”.
It’s a simple process. Government produce money not wealth. Wealth can only be created by the SPENDING of that money. And tax can only be gained by the SPENDING of money.
It’s a little known fact that despite income tax and Nic being assumed it’s paid for by employees it isn’t! The true fact is it’s paid solely by the employer who has to account for it together with wage payment as a cost to the business. Not the employee. It’s a falsehood. It’s a Bernie Madoff style of statement production. He used to make up his statements given to his investors. And wage slips are similar.
Employees are told they have paid it but clearly that’s not the case. It may be calculated on their wages. It may have ‘income’ in the heading and employees may be liable for their taxes but, clearly thus is incorrect. The bill is paid by that business from the need it had to SPEND on the employment of that employee from the income it has into its business from the SPENDING of others.
So Jamie, just like vat and Duty on fuel cigarettes and alcohol etc ALL taxation is ‘triggered’ by SPENDING or money having to move like windfall taxes and Council tax.
Taxes are paid by money as all wages, earnings, income, are too.
It’s counterintuitive to accept. But it’s true. We all have to SPEND our money to ensure money is revolved and rotated to give FULL flow to our economy. From which it lines our pockets to be SPENT on and on and on giving the flow we need and giving the maximum triggers for tax take from the constant SPENDING of our currency.
Jamie wealth is a red herring. We work for it. We get out of bed for it. We buy more and more from earning more and more. And pay more tax as we do.
But the opposite is happening. Your correct our money is haemorrhaging out of our pot! That’s not good. It’s terrible.
We are forced to borrow to fill the gap. And as we know our government has borrowed £3 trillion pounds. USA are looking at an out of control $40 trillion dollars.
This type of debt is unsustainable for us and them. More and more conjuring up of money by instruments is a bewildering landscape of smoke and mirrors. It’s a clusterf*ck of biblical proportions.
Wealth is not the way out. Wealth is a Mercury type of fluidity that you can’t pin down to tax fairly. Much better is to tackle money itself when it has to made to be SPENT. Vat is clear precise and easy to collect when SPENDING takes place. So do that! Make money be SPENT all the time so the most vat gets the surplus we need our government to have.
We have to have sufficient money in our pot to start with! I have to say MMT had this bit right. Money is created by government. But if it’s insufficient for the population and its needs then they have to create more. But once at that optimum amount it has to revolve and pay our wages as we go.
MMT gives a false picture of restraint. It says that our economy is limited by and is withheld by our supply of workforce or limited by materials and production. This isn’t correct.
If more money swamps our economy by increased SPENDING then it can be shared in higher earnings! It doesent have to be limited by production. We can produce the same and earn more and the more money out on offer the more work can fill that increased availability.
Work doesent have to be with our planet’s resources! Road sweepers don’t use unsustainable commodities. It involves wood! Which is sustainable.
Work isn’t limited to resources. It’s limited by available amounts of money!
Money cures all financial ills. So look at money for the answers. Not wealth.
There is astonishing ignorance about this in the Labour party. I watched an interview with a woman labour MP and the discussion was about wealthy people leaving the country. "Good riddance to them" she says, "they don't pay any tax anyway". Well actually they do, quite a lot in fact.
You’ve hit the nail on the head, Steve. It’s a classic myth! The top 1% actually fund nearly 30% of all Income Tax revenue. Losing them means a massive hole in the Treasury's pocket—and guess who gets asked to fill it? Cheers for reading and sharing your thoughts!
No Jamie, the top 1% is funded by the SPENDING of the remaining 99%. Us. All of us. We pass our earned money onto them and their business pays the tax you talk about. Not them. We pay it by our SPENDING and their business funds tax by our ability to SPEND. It survives or dies in our collective ability to SPEND. To have sufficient money to SPEND sufficient amounts to trigger sufficient tax take.
Valid point on the circular nature of the economy, Brian! Though whether it’s spending or direct tax, losing the folks who host the party usually means someone else gets stuck with the venue bill.
Yes, we need to reinstate exchange control regulations first removed by Thatcher.
They keep money in the uk. If money is allowed to flow freely by enforced spending than all money remains in house and can reach everyone. Spending has to be the choice. Not withholding that money. That choice should not be allowed. We need funding from government not banks and those holding our money we desperately need. That’s a depression a recession. A lack of sufficient money in our hands freely. If money is just a token of swap then we have to swap that money paid in full whether we earn £100 or £1,000,000. You can earn it but have to spend it back that’s the need.
How can preventing flue be good for the majority? It can’t.
It forgetting when you spend you get full and free exchange of goods services and assets! You still get value that is the wealth not the money that gif you that swap of work effort.
Just like any engine Jamie, it will only fully work one way! Otherwise it won’t fire on all cylinders.
We might not like the thought of spending money but most of us do spend it each month. The poor do. Most family’s do and must trying to better themselves do. The only ones who don’t spend are those who gave too much of it! But holding it withholds it from us. That’s not democratic. Whether we like the thought or not it will only work one way to its optimum.
And it’s now, for the first time in history we can enforce spending. Using digital banking. We can put a spend by date on money and enforce it by direct debits that clear that amount to government if unspent. Thus enforced spending will bring us all towards the centre of the scales of balanced economy.
If your Elon musk the thought of spending a trillion is mind blowing. So I’d suggest it will prevent that overfunded position by him only spending what he needs! The remainder goes to government to do its best with. Then he gets his trillions quicker next time! And the sane happens.
As for import export. Trump is a great example. He wants parity. Even exports for imports. I agree. We need to keep money in house. Buyers abroad can sell goods here to raise money to spend in the same way as we do. Sell goods to us. We buy. They can spend that money with us or lose it. It’s harsh. But unless we get full and fair wages change we can’t assure fully paid incomes in time to spend for our needs.
We are underfunded underpaid and underinvested by the actual free flow if our money. That’s the bit we can change and produce the best economy overnight. Just by SPENDING instead of not spending!
You only have to look at the Sunday Times tax list to see how wrong she is.
How strange though. According to the Adam Smith Institute, my husband is a millionaire. Not because he has a million quid stashed away but because our house is worth over £700k and he has a good pension. It's not our fault the house is so expensive and I wonder who will be able to afford to buy it after us. Surely the ASI needs to be looking at multi-millionaires because of the distorting effect of the housing market.
Another thought provoking piece Jamie.
One of Thatcher’s first actions was to remove the then ‘exchange control regulations’. You may not be old enough to remember this Jamie but, prior to that we couldn’t take more than a hundred or two pounds abroad.
These regulations should be reintroduced.
You’re right, we can’t sustain the flow of money out the nation. We need money to be passed like a baton to each other rotating and revolving our daily economic pot via the nominated exchange of work…… Money!
You’re guilty of conflating money and being rich with money to that of wealth. There is an obsession about wealth that refuses to concentrate on money and rather concentrate on wealth instead.
They are in my mind two very different things!
Money is the conduit to exchange work for work, in the same time frame. You work and expect payment of money from us who work and want to SPEND it with you.
Wealth should be the goods assets and services received from the SPENDING of that earned money.
It’s crucial to grasp this nettle Jamie.
Again, in my mind all our nations sovereign currency must remain in house within the nation. To be able to heavy lift money from our nation just makes us underfunded. You are correct on that, but wealth is a completely different scenario.
You can’t lift property, real estate and take it abroad. Only the money that is paid for it or rental income from it. Thats why we need to, we must, reinstate those exchange controls. To prevent our money leaving our shores.
People ask “where’s the money coming from?”. We hear it a lot from politicians who really should know better. The correct answer is “where it’s always come from!”.
It’s a simple process. Government produce money not wealth. Wealth can only be created by the SPENDING of that money. And tax can only be gained by the SPENDING of money.
It’s a little known fact that despite income tax and Nic being assumed it’s paid for by employees it isn’t! The true fact is it’s paid solely by the employer who has to account for it together with wage payment as a cost to the business. Not the employee. It’s a falsehood. It’s a Bernie Madoff style of statement production. He used to make up his statements given to his investors. And wage slips are similar.
Employees are told they have paid it but clearly that’s not the case. It may be calculated on their wages. It may have ‘income’ in the heading and employees may be liable for their taxes but, clearly thus is incorrect. The bill is paid by that business from the need it had to SPEND on the employment of that employee from the income it has into its business from the SPENDING of others.
So Jamie, just like vat and Duty on fuel cigarettes and alcohol etc ALL taxation is ‘triggered’ by SPENDING or money having to move like windfall taxes and Council tax.
Taxes are paid by money as all wages, earnings, income, are too.
It’s counterintuitive to accept. But it’s true. We all have to SPEND our money to ensure money is revolved and rotated to give FULL flow to our economy. From which it lines our pockets to be SPENT on and on and on giving the flow we need and giving the maximum triggers for tax take from the constant SPENDING of our currency.
Jamie wealth is a red herring. We work for it. We get out of bed for it. We buy more and more from earning more and more. And pay more tax as we do.
But the opposite is happening. Your correct our money is haemorrhaging out of our pot! That’s not good. It’s terrible.
We are forced to borrow to fill the gap. And as we know our government has borrowed £3 trillion pounds. USA are looking at an out of control $40 trillion dollars.
This type of debt is unsustainable for us and them. More and more conjuring up of money by instruments is a bewildering landscape of smoke and mirrors. It’s a clusterf*ck of biblical proportions.
Wealth is not the way out. Wealth is a Mercury type of fluidity that you can’t pin down to tax fairly. Much better is to tackle money itself when it has to made to be SPENT. Vat is clear precise and easy to collect when SPENDING takes place. So do that! Make money be SPENT all the time so the most vat gets the surplus we need our government to have.
We have to have sufficient money in our pot to start with! I have to say MMT had this bit right. Money is created by government. But if it’s insufficient for the population and its needs then they have to create more. But once at that optimum amount it has to revolve and pay our wages as we go.
MMT gives a false picture of restraint. It says that our economy is limited by and is withheld by our supply of workforce or limited by materials and production. This isn’t correct.
If more money swamps our economy by increased SPENDING then it can be shared in higher earnings! It doesent have to be limited by production. We can produce the same and earn more and the more money out on offer the more work can fill that increased availability.
Work doesent have to be with our planet’s resources! Road sweepers don’t use unsustainable commodities. It involves wood! Which is sustainable.
Work isn’t limited to resources. It’s limited by available amounts of money!
Money cures all financial ills. So look at money for the answers. Not wealth.
A bold plan indeed! Though if the goal was to make us all poorer together, it certainly seems to be right on schedule.