Steven'Apparently Rachel will raise the limit at which mansion tax is imposed to £2 million, ensuring that the homes of Keir Starmer and David Lammy, valued at around £1.7 million, will avoid tax. Did you not say, John, that socialism means advocating tax increases for people richer than yourself?'I certainly stand by my definition of socialism.Another example is the fact that in any country claiming to be 'socialist' those that espouse the philosophy and enforce it always seem to live a richer and better life than those they govern.I wonder what Jeremy's town house is worth in Islington or has he downsized to a Council flat ?!To be honest I don't think the speculative figure of £2M at which the tax would cut in was set to favour Starmer in Islington or Lammy in Tottenham.Who would pay £2M to live in Tottenham !!And of course Angela Raynor only purchased a second home for a reputed £600K.A more serious point is the planned (is it ?) process to ascertain which homes will be liable for the tax.Lot's of valuation work for the one surviving group of suit wearing workers, namely Estate Agents, one assumes.Who will pay them for their labour, the home owner or the general taxpayer who might be living in rented accommodation ?Will all homes have to be valued ?Will there be an appeal system if one's home is said to fall within the requirement to pay the tax ?What if your home is said to just fall inside or outside the limit but then some body like Rightmove says house prices have just risen or fallen ?It's not just that 'socialism means advocating tax increases for people richer than yourself' it also means socialism will always come up with expensive and bureaucratic processes and controls in order to raise taxes and take money from the 'hard working British worker'.I am not absolutely sure she means to introduce this tax, but I am sure their are many readers of this Forum in West Putney who are temporarily turning attention from the dispossed in Gaza to themselves !
John Hawkes ● 7h