HumanPenguin

Nor are you a landlord while doing another job. If you are doing your own investment work while being paid a PAYE job. You are also a thief, but I doubt you have that recorded on your payslip.

It may sound silly. But so is the whole claim of this article. Starmer never said or even suggested landlords cannot work. He was asked the question, in relation to the Labour Party manifesto pledge not to raise "working taxes"

His answer was "not under the definition we are using" (for working taxes)

It is an utterly pathetic attempt to so division to claim "Starmer suggests landlords and shareholders are not ‘working people’"

He definitely did not say it and the telegraphs use of the word "suggests" makes it clear they know that.

It is nothing but an outright lie designed to sow division.

This. The whole bias of the article is a lie.

He did not say "landlords and shareholders are not ‘working people" he did not even suggest it.

When asked that question, he said, "they are not included in my definition." That definition being of working taxes.

They are also not included in the Tory definition. This is why they have been paying capital gains tax rather than income tax.

Unless the people complaining are also arguing capital gains tax should end. And all investment income should be taxed under income tax. The whole debate is a lie designed to sow division.

I do not see any house renter looking to pay at income tax rates when selling property. Or pay income tax on all rent paid to the landlords.

And id love to see these right wing jurnalists answer to. "Oh sorry are you aguing rental share and property income should be taxed at PAYE rates?"

Because the right wing media wants it to be. The answer is simple.

Cool if owning property is work. Let's abolish capital gains tax and charge it as income.

Because at the end of it. That is what the telegraph etc is saying. They are trying to argue Starmer agreed to hold all taxes when the manifesto clearly stated working taxes.

Cool call their bluff all capital gains is now charged as income tax.

No he did not.

He said people who own any stock should be excluded from “working taxes"

More accurately, he said they do not fit his definition of working taxes. Because that was the question the telegraph was trying to miss represent.

As does the Tory party and every government since the 1950s. That is why we have capital gains tax as well as income tax.

This whole argument is nothing but absurdly biased reporting from right wing press. Intentionally launched to try and sow division in the electorate. Just like every Tory tactic since the election was announced.

No he did not.

He said that in his definition of working taxes. No, that person is not a worker.

And the Tory party agrees. That is why they call it capital gains tax rather than income.

This whole argument has been stirred by the right wing press since the election. Tories have constantly tried to claim the manifesto promise of no rise in working taxes means no tax rises at all.

It is an out right lie. And Starmer et al make it worse by refusing to address it.

Nothing the Tory party says or believes on taxation matches these claims. It is just a desperate attempt to sow division.

A large part of the British population would like to do something as well.

Issue it, they know anything close to replacing the harm would bankrupt citizens who had nothing to do with the events.

When you think of the cost of paying back slave owners. As evil as the whole idea seems to us in this time. The cost placed our nation into debt until 2015. And that was a debt that basically built our economy. Seriously, few recognise this, but the UK benefited way more from paying off slave owners then from slavery or any other event in UK history. But still left descendents who never participated in slavery and were non-existent during those choices. Paying off debts for 182 years.

Reparations that do not actually leave the UK would be meaningless. So the request translates to people born 200 years after the actions with a debt that will only remove investment from the nation, harming future children who did not exist at the time.

Unfortunately, even those who want to do something find it hard to argue what.

Until the reparations debate can move towards a suggestion that helps all nations. It will be hard, no mater how powerful ex slave nations become. In fact, if your predictions are correct (and I agree they likely are) Move power in the southern nations will result in less ability for the north to make effective payments of any kind.

The conversation is needed. And has been since at east 1833. But without a time machine, that conversation is going to need to be more about building an equal honest future than repairing the past.

So he moved his company out of the UK to avoid tax.

Refusing to cover his share of building the infer structure his and other companies depend on. Also making it harder for non-shitty companies to compete.

And now wonders why the UK is forced to reevaluate how taxing shitty idiots like this needs to work,

No tory is going to believe that.

It's pretty much a key element of conservative politics. That people are positioned as their worth allows.

The whole concept that a personal status is the fault of society rather than the individual is opposed to their whole being. Hence, why they feel fixing such situations is giving advantages to the undeserving rather than creating equality.

In all fairness, what you think does not matter.

You seem to be misunderstanding what I mean by legal etc. '

The actions you claim the party is to naive to prevent.

is impossible for them to prevent. Because the members are not constrained by the party.

Let me put it simply. You are Naive to believe US or UK political parties have such power over their membership. When I say they are not legally able. That means exercising such control over members would be a crime.

But that is not what is happening,

Starmer is talking about taxes, not people. Right-wing newspapers are trying to link the 2, but that is a false link.

We saw all this in the lead up to the election. The tory press tried it then but it was ignored.

If you remember, the Labour manifesto made promises about not raising "Working Taxes" That distinction was clear in the promise. But the Tory party and right wing press constantly interpreted it as not raising any taxes.

Many got pissed of that Starmer refused to address it then. How did not seem to think it mattered. Likely he thought it was not worth this argument.

He is now making exactly the same claim. Working taxes is not money earned from shares or rent. It never has been, that is why it is called capital gains tax etc.

Just because you may also work does not mean your rent income and retirement savings should be taxed as working income.

That is all he is saying. He is not raising working taxes because rent and share profit is not working taxes.

The right wing press are trying to make a fight that dosent exist. Rather then try to aregue why he should not change captal gains tax.

Only on trains not busses. And this is talking about the UK.

And even on trains transportation police have limited power / jurisdiction. Yes, if this was discussing fines for music on trains they would do it, We already have train carriages that require this. The transportation police can kick folks off, but it rarely happens. Due to lack of police.

But this MP was specifically talking about buses. No, we do not have police on buses just a single driver sometimes but very rarely a ticket collector or inspector but again with no legal power past calling the police.