United Kingdom

4107 readers

157 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

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

tom

GreatAlbatross

frankPodmore@slrpnk.net

397

Row as Starmer suggests landlords and shareholders are not ‘working people’ (www.telegraph.co.uk)

submitted 4 weeks ago by blackn1ght to c/unitedkingdom

105 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] nialv7@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I agree with you, but that's not what Keir Starmer said. His spokesperson recanted it, but what he said originally was stupid.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Lol whatever you say.

[–] nialv7@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Read the news please.

When asked by Sky News if someone who works but also gets income from shares or property is a working person, Starmer said “they wouldn’t come within my definition.”

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

But if he said "income from owning shares isn't eligible for PAYE taxation and therefore isn't covered by a pledge to not increase taxes on workers' earnings" he wouldn't have a headline and you would be accusing him of talking like a politician and breaking promises.

But no, he was asked this in the context of some disingenuous question like "bbbut you promised not to raise taxes on working people, and this will hurt working people, aren't people with a hardworking fast food day job and a tiny bit extra from a few shares or renting out their spare bedroom just to make ends meet exactly the working people you promised not to raise taxes on?"

And Starmer says no, and now we have a headline because a bunch of shareholders who are experts at hoarding money because it's all they really care about are as pissed as they ever get because tHe GovErNmunT iS tAkiN aLL MY mUnnY.

It's the daily telegraph, for goodness sake. When did they ever care about ordinary people's finances?!

[–] HumanPenguin 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

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.