[Cherie]

Don't save, don't build a pension, don't buy a home - it's all Rachel Reeves's money now

Your money is no longer your own. It belongs to the Chancellor, and she's after even more of it.

Rachel Reeves has her eyes on your wallet. Just hand it over… (Image: Getty)
Last October, I wrote a half-serious apology to readers. I said I’d been wrong to encourage people to save, invest and put money aside for the future. The reason? PM Sir Keir Starmer had just redefined what it means to be a “working person”, and it was terrifying
He labelled a working person is someone who earns a living but does not have the ability to “write a cheque to get out of difficulties”. The definition was old-fashioned even then. Nobody writes cheques these days, except maybe Labour donors, but the message was clear.

f you had a spot of money in the bank, enough to draw a cheque on, you no longer qualified as “working people”. You were fair game.

Ten months later, the implications are brutally clear. Anyone with even modest assets has been lined up for attack.

In her last Budget, Rachel Reeves hiked capital gains tax (to be fair, Tory predecessor Jeremy Hunt showed her the way) and slapped inheritance tax on unused pensions.

This autumn she’ll be back for more. Labour MPs won’t allow her to cut public spending. Her only option is to squeeze more tax from the middle class. That’s their reward for doing everything I’d been urging them to do for more than three decades as a finance journalist: save, invest, take out a mortgage and buy a home.

How wrong I was

https://www.express.co.uk/finance/pe...vess-money-now
The Express

[Cherie]

If anyone was listening to Lewis Goodall this week as he stood in for Jobbie, he was advocating that people should no longer inherit anything as they didn't work for it and that it should all go to the State to lower taxes, I believe this is not called Kite flying to see how the public react to proposals being discussed by government,

Lewis Goodall has sparked significant debate by proposing a radical 100% inheritance tax, arguing it is necessary to address wealth inequality and promote a meritocratic society.

Overview of Goodall's Proposal
Lewis Goodall, a journalist and presenter for LBC, has called for a 100% inheritance tax, suggesting that the current system perpetuates inequality and allows wealth to be passed down without merit. He argues that this tax should replace the existing 40% rate on estates above £325,000, which he believes is insufficient to address the growing wealth gap in society. Goodall contends that inherited wealth creates an "aristocracy of wealth," where individuals benefit from unearned assets rather than their own efforts.

Wealth Inequality: Goodall highlights the disparity in wealth distribution, noting that the bottom 50% of the UK population owns less than 5% of total wealth, while the top 1% holds nearly a quarter. He argues that a high inheritance tax would help redistribute wealth and fund public services, thereby leveling the playing field.

Meritocracy: He believes that allowing individuals to inherit large sums without taxation undermines the principles of a meritocratic society, where success should be based on individual effort and contribution rather than family wealth.

Provocative Stance: Goodall admits that his suggestion for a 100% inheritance tax is provocative, aimed at sparking a serious conversation about wealth and taxation in the UK. He emphasizes that the focus should shift from taxing earned income to taxing unearned wealth.

Goodall's comments have ignited a fierce backlash on social media, with many critics labeling his proposal as "insane" and arguing that it undermines the right to pass on wealth to one's children. Critics assert that such a tax would discourage hard work and savings, as individuals would have no incentive to accumulate wealth if it cannot be passed on.

Conclusion
Lewis Goodall's call for a 100% inheritance tax has opened up a contentious debate about wealth distribution, meritocracy, and the role of inheritance in society. While he argues that such a tax is necessary to combat inequality and promote fairness, the public response has been largely critical, reflecting deep-seated beliefs about property rights and family legacy. The discussion continues to evolve as more voices weigh in on this provocative topic.

Thoughts?

[arista]

[Oliver_W]

The government has more money now than ever before, maybe consider wasting less before stealing even more?

[Cherie]

He devoted another hour of his programme to it this morning, on top off twice during the week, somethings afoot

[Cherie]

What incentive would there be to do well in life if they just take everything away when you die, you who have worked and paid taxes on it all your life cannot decide where what you have accumulated goes, and apart from leaving to children/grandchildren, many leave gifts to Medical Research and Animal Charities where would they stand in all this if everything went to the government