I dont often agree with this Tory in disguise, but in this case he's right.
this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)
United Kingdom
4076 readers
33 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Are you a landlord if you let a room to help you pay bills at the end of a month? Are you a shareholder if you have a pension?
Judging by the answers here, the answer is no. But then we’re talking about millions of people who work everyday factory jobs, retail jobs, or low level office jobs.
Yes if you own rather then sublet and yes now final salary etc pensions are close to non existant.
Dose not mean it is wrong. But just like the others doing it it is not worked for income but investment income.
Judging from the answers here everyone has a pretty clear idea of the difference between investment and work.
Right, but I hope we’re able to see the difference between a working person who has investments and someone who earns the bulk of their income from investments. Similarly for real estate.
Because calling someone who works and has investment savings for retirement (such as a pension) “not a working person” is not just plain wrong, it’s extremely offensive, especially coming from a career politician like Starmer.
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.
You make valid points in a logical sense but issue of class is the issue of class, not descriptor of economic activity.
Sure, class is the big issue on everyone’s minds. But the remedies people often throw around are here indiscriminate enough to target the room-letter and the building ownership company alike. The tycoon and the pensioner alike.
Coupling owner class with grandma is a nice touch.
Bigger point is that grandma siding with owner class is 🤡
I don’t know why they seem to think they are. Yes some landlords do labor, but that labor is to maintain and improve value of their income from owning things.
That landlord aint much of a lord
Yeah he’s a relative who started as a handyman and kept investing in rental property.
Good fucking luck to any landlord looking to be named in a manifesto.
You might get mentioned. You won't like how.
Well I remember when I used to rent I don't remember my landlord ever doing anything. He owns the property but he certainly didn't maintain it.
Comrade Starmer lmao
He's right though. I'd very much like a PM to take a hard line on these chuckle fucks.
Nothing "comrade" about it. It's just sense.
He definitely is. It's refreshing to finally even hear this sentiment from our government. However it's just words, hopefully we start seeing some positive changes in the rental and housing market.
Very small scale landlords are often working people, and lots of working people own shares. That said, the bigger landowners and stock holders are much less likely to be working people. Those fuckers contribute nothing of value to society.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I'm super dubious because Starmer has done very little to earn my trust, but I would be very keen to be surprised, or even proven wrong
They do no labor, they create no good, they accomplish no service. Literal rent-seeking.
Rare Starmer W
Broken clock moment.
Context for this statement?
Is he pandering to beat down brits?
He's a self serving neoliberal who doesn't give two fucks about the working class.
He has made it clear all along that he is nothing but a corporate and establishment shill, and while making this one accidentally accurate statement about landlords, his party is planning to, for example, go ahead with pretty much the exact same cuts and abuses (E: like the government having unlimited access to the bank accounts of all benefits claimants) that the Tories had planned for the poorest in society, along with trying to force as many sick and disabled people in to work as they can (without providing any more support or income to help this happen of course, just more punishment for those who ~~can't~~ "refuse"). Landlords will not be getting any of the same treatment.
His statement doesn't reflect any moral leanings, nor a will or intent to change anything for the better.
load more comments
(1 replies)
And, as everyone here says. He is correct. It is an investment. Not work. Yes you are taking a risk, that is the point. If you work, you should not be taking a risk. But instead paid for your labour.
Unfortunately, saying it here doesn't matter. Papers like the telegraph and other Tory press are not going to care about the facts. They only care about creating division.
More importantly, Starmer et al. Are also not going to make the effort to argue this case. No effort is going to be made to push forward the true difference between working class income and actual investment income.
Anyone watching saw this argument starting during the election. It was clear then when labour started talking about working taxes. The Tories instantly started arguing that the Tories were talking about not raising taxers at all. Anyone watching saw this discussion forming.
And Starmer et al. intentionally ignored it rather than draw attention to the difference. They will not bother to fight the terminology now either.
Yer, I totally trust the Telegraph on what Starmer says on the lines in a class war. Completely trustable source on the subject. Not at all trying to put that line with as many people on its side not Starmers.....
Based from Starmer there.
Landlords and shareholders aren't working people.
Okay, so (hypothetically) I can be working for 50 hours a week to make ends meet. If I put any little savings I have from time to time into stock, I am not working people anymore? Just because I want to be financially responsible?
you’ll put those savings into a stocks and shares ISA where any gains from stocks are tax free guaranteed.
If you have more than £20k a year to put away into stocks and shares then yeah you need to pay some tax bruv.
That's not what Keir said originally, he said people who own any stock should be excluded from "working people". Then people got (rightfully) mad and his spokesperson had to recant for him.
🤡
load more comments
(3 replies)
By your definition I should be called a footballer because I play football once a week casually. Ignore the 50 plus hour weeks of my actual job. I got $50 from football as season champions (it's a gift card, for the bar, at the place I play). I better go update my linkedin!
You're funny, good one.
What are you talking about? This is exactly what Keir Starmer is saying and is what I am calling stupid.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
This might be my favourite thing he's said yet
In a country like UK... He just pissed off a lot of parasites.
And thats a good thing! They got to comfortable over last 40 yeara.
UK is fucking gutted from within, and peasants accept it lol
Yeah, Starmer is right though...
By definition if you make all the money you need to live from investments like stocks, bonds, or leasing out homes then you aren't working class. If you work a regular job, but have some additional income from investment savings you are working class, but the Labour government isn't having to focus on those investments going up as much as making your working life more comfortable.
I’m sure he’ll acknowledge his mistake, apologise profusely and make amends with a round of capital-gains tax cuts.
Of course they're not working people. They are leveraging capital to give them an income. That is not the same as chopping wood and carrying water.
Truth hurts I guess.
I mean, he's right. The whole point of my mother leveraging her home to become a landlord back then was because she had a stroke and literally could-not-work. Landlords aren't working class. They're just investors.
Because he is correct
That is correct. They might work, but in context they are not “working people”
Here “working people” is synonymous with “working class”. Thus, not landlords and shareholders obviously
I’m curious about your definition of shareholder; what if I owe £80 worth of fractional shares in an app-based investment service? Does that make me a shareholder?
It certainly doesn't make you a worker.
It’s not my definition. It is the definition that is being used in context in the article. Read it before commenting
The definition being used is proper and common in modern usage.
load more comments
(2 replies)