All these damn rules controlling every aspect of life!

WOW!

When I ask DIY questions, no one wants to know. Seems the passion fo MT is still strong.

Was just reading today that TB & GB want to tax those who have sceni views from their properties more!

Enough is a f*****g enough!

When is everyone going to wake up and smell the S**T

Bring Back Maggie I say

-- andymason79

Reply to
andymason79
Loading thread data ...

Yes we should, and bring back the ducking stool too. That will teach her.

Reply to
Doctor Drivel

Either put up, or shut up because no one, except you perhaps, believes a word that you said, which was:

Oh, and spending on the NHS *increased* in real terms during the "years of Tory misrule"

I'll be generous, I'll give you three months to come up with conclusive proof from a verifiable source to back up what you said. With a bit of luck the evil twisted bitch might be on her death bed by then and the results will be on topic for this group.

(and I don't support her lot, B liar's lot or pisshead kennedy's lot)

tick tock tick tock tick tock

Reply to
Matt

Lord Hall, do you support the Makita party?

Reply to
Doctor Drivel

It appears that every house will be assigned 'value codes' which will indicate, proximity to bus routes, open spaces, parks, library, patio, balcony, car-parking, garden size, grass-verges, trees ..... and whatever Prescott's official can dream up. So, it's not just the view that you're going to be taxed for. We can look forward to paying fifty quid for living near a bus route hundred quid for being near the kid's swings ... fifty quid for living near a D-I-Y shed ... fifty quid for having a view of the sea - from the front rooms fifty quid for having a view of the mountains - from the back rooms fifty quid for having a view of the trees - from the side rooms

--- you couldn't make it up ... but Tone'n'crones _have_ and Gordon will implement it,

Reply to
Brian Sharrock

I shouldn't worry. How long will it be before HMG's new computer is working properly?

Reply to
Frank Erskine

Well, it's not April 1st...

formatting link
would living in Croydon qualify for a rebate?

Tim

Reply to
Tim S

Living near Dribble would ;-)

Reply to
Matt

I'm not Lord Hall, but for the record, no.

Reply to
Matt

The Mail and Express have helped the Conservatives lose three elections with their rubbishy stories and seem to want to do the same next time round.

If you are going to levy a tax based on the value of a property then it seems pretty obvious that the owner of one with a view (which presumably makes it more valuable) will pay more than an identical one that looks over an abattoir. You'd get the same result taxing on site value. If you are going to scrap Council Tax/Rates type taxes you need to raise £x bn some other way. So is it back to the Poll Tax or some form of tax on income which will mean that the better off pay a lot more and the less well off, less?

And why should an estate agent get more for selling the property with a view when it's probably easier to sell? It's outrageous!

Reply to
Tony Bryer

Possible, although this doesn't address a loss of amenity if an abattoir is built in the plot next door after the owner acquired the property.

Or a combination of the two.

In terms of fairness, perhaps a system as operated in the U.S. would be better.

- a level of local (or state) income tax

- property tax with re-evaluation when properties are sold. To some extent, this protects the long term home owner such as the elderly who may be asset rich but cash poor.

- less involvement by the government in general to reduce the need to raise said funds.

Because people are willing to pay.

Reply to
Andy Hall

And you were doing so well until you got there.

Reply to
Huge

Clearly you're not old enough to remember rateable value. It's a generally reasonable - though approximate - estimation of the notional rentable value of the house. That's what they're talking about. It's not new, it's not revolutionary, it's not unreasonable - and it doesn't do anything like what you claim despite what you may have read in the Sunday Telegraph or wherever.

Reply to
John Cartmell

But you *could* claim a rebate on rates even if you cannot get your purchase price back - hence the rates will be fairer.

[Snip]
Reply to
John Cartmell

And that was abandoned because it became an excessive and unfair tax. Council tax was a reasonable compromise, but as Tone & cronies have spent far more money than current taxation can provide, the race is on to increase taxes again, in any way possible. The Scots and Welsh have already suffered AIUI, so now it's down to taxing the English, who provide the bulk of government income anyway.

Unfortunately the electorate have no party with a reasonable program to vote for, so, I guess it's pay up or leave for the next ten years.

Regards Capitol

Reply to
Capitol

Sounds like a whinge from Ken Clark to me. Newspapers don't lose elections, divided parties without adequate leaders and policies do. The Conservatives are still trying to face both ways at the same time and until they decide that they are Conservatives and not Socialists, they will never be elected on a first past the post system. They only have a presence in Scotland because of PR. The present young Tory leadership contender is IMO a classic image over substance candidate and will, if elected, lose the next election. ( Even with a recession, I don't see how Labour can lose.) His opponent does not seem to be a great deal better in leadership terms. There also appears to be a classic, arrogant, Master/Slave relationship between the Conservative MPs and the grasssroots party/general public, leading to fewer and fewer active supporters of Conservative values.

Regards Capitol

Reply to
Capitol

It became an unfair tax because revaluation was delayed. Owners of new property could be payng twice the rates paid by owners of old property of similar value. A more appropriate - and fairer - tax would be one that used a mix of property values (as currently discussed) + a poll tax + income tax in some agreed balance. Are you willing to agree to that? If not the fairest is the property tax that you appear to be rejecting.

Reply to
John Cartmell

Rateable value was reasonable when most property was rented. The owner occupier was rare and the rate in that case could reasonably be inferred from the actual rents paid for similar neighbouring properties. It became unfair when the absence of a private rental market meant there was no market value but only a notional value. The result was a system that was not transparent to the ratepayer. Although the private landlord has made a comeback, owner occupation is still the norm. As always the criteria for an efficient tax is that it should be cheap to collect, difficult to avoid, and not have side effects.

Reply to
DJC

snip

Clearly(?) .... sadly it's been many a year (actually decades ...) since any check-out operator has queried by eligibilty to purchase alchohol .... :( You _must_ share with us your uncanny ability to intuite whatever facts are going to support your argument while gratuitously insulting whoever doesn't agree with your point-of-view. Is it as a result of your quirky and risky platform .... (quercus, risc ...geddit)

I remember and have paid both Rates; Poll tax - so named by lefties who weren't paying Rates; and whatever 'they' are calling it this week.

One is so glad to see the few remaining true-believers remain 'on-message'!

How much will Tone be paying for Gloucester Square ....? The view is lousy; it's just off Edgware Road; traffic noise is appalling and its environs are full of Arabic-speaking people - Oh! I forget - he's going to have them banged up for ninety days (at a time). Next he'll start on all those Nuns at Tyburn Convent (just down they road from his new pad)- they actually pray for 'martyr's many of whom had committed the crime of not agreeing with the powers of the English Government. Sounds like 'glorifying terrorism' - now all Tone has to do is empanel a jury - Oh! Hang On! Tone's-Crones don't envisage a jury anymore!

Reply to
Brian Sharrock

So what is wrong with them?

My poll tax was much less than my rates - because the rate revaluation had been put off and put off and put off. ;-(

Goodness knows. ;-)

Reply to
John Cartmell

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.