Rachel Reeves says higher taxes on wealthy ‘part of the story’ for November budget

[aveatry]

House prices are falling in most areas, a few places are rising, but that is because the shock wave is still moving out. If the LL wants to hurry and he is already saving agent fees, then a better deal might be available.

"Hello LL I've spoken to my [insert blah blah solicitor/mortgage lender] and there will be be an additional fee to accelerate the work - I need you to find [insert amount] can you accommodate this?"

Don't blame him. I'm a LL (no I'm not rich, no I don't drive a Range Rover, no I don't make thousands per month on my properties) and I see down south they're now starting to make it even more arduous to be one, something we're already experiencing up here.

They seem hellbent on driving private LLs out the game (certainly the smaller scale ones). Ah well, if only folk realised it'll mean less places to rent. Not only that, because there are less and less properties, it's driving rents up.

The house sale has been ongoing for a while and its only the last couple of weeks that the LL has had a panic that they may get hit in the budget somehow so all the deal has been done and they were just in discussions as to a completion date so now they realise when the budget is they want it done before Rachel stands up with her whisky .

 

[motorbiking]

This is the thing. They (politicians) love trotting out the phrase 'those with the broadest shoulders ...' and every time it's used I wonder who they're referring to i.e. from what starting point income wise.

It's the same as this "unearned Income" boll@x, it's pure jealousy politics.

Not only do those on the higher/top rate of tax pay most of the taxes, they lose money on a daily basis because they have bothered to save money to look after themselves in old age.

Anyone with a few quid in the bank is losing money daily. Inflation 3.8%, best interest you can get 4.6%

£10k in the bank
£460 interest
£380 lost in inflation
£80 growth
£184 tax
£-104

 

[aveatry]

This is the thing. They (politicians) love trotting out the phrase 'those with the broadest shoulders ...' and every time it's used I wonder who they're referring to i.e. from what starting point income wise.

Another one I keep hearing is -- we are just asking them to pay a "bit more"

 

[morqthana]

That was going to be my point - I too have noticed this - they clearly do not need the hand out. Yes they should be able to have adaptions if needed but the car you buy should be limited in value -- if you are putting this against a BMW x7 at £114k you clearly do not need the handout.

Firstly, do you know (and if so how) what "handouts" if any someone is getting?

Secondly, "wealthy people" might not need a state pension. They might not need NHS dentistry. They might not need an NHS GP. They might not need council bin collections. Would you take these from them too?

There are all sorts of benefits and services paid for out of tax revenues which some recipients may not need, but if people have been paying taxes why should they be denied them?

 

[aveatry]

Firstly, do you know (and if so how) what "handouts" if any someone is getting?

Secondly, "wealthy people" might not need a state pension. They might not need NHS dentistry. They might not need an NHS GP. They might not need council bin collections. Would you take these from them too?

There are all sorts of benefits and services paid for out of tax revenues which some recipients may not need, but if people have been paying taxes why should they be denied them?

Take it up with the government - I suggested it and they agree with me. They are going to stop the motability being put towards expensive cars -- or something similar
Its still there to read yourself
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...ves-to-ban-luxury-cars-for-benefit-claimants/

Reeves to ban luxury cars for benefit claimants​

 

[motorbiking]

We are just asking them to "waste a bit less".

 

[JohnD]

I wonder what a "Global ex-US High Yield Corporate Bond" might be, if only the clue was in the title. Is it a Fund that you can invest in made up of Bonds. I think it is.

here is another Bond fund that pays dividends. There might be a few more...

SPDR FTSE Global Convertible Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | GCVG | IE00BDT6FT30

Key facts and comparisons for SPDR FTSE Global Convertible Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (GCVG | IE00BDT6FT30) ➤ justETF – The ETF Screener

www.justetf.com

ahh yes at least another 50

The Best Bond ETFs 2025

Compare the best Bond ETFs 2025 at a glance. Currently, the best performing index with 21.80% is the FTSE Qualified Global Convertible (GBP Hedged).

www.justetf.com

Poor Johnyboy the clueless cock on a moped... again

Perhaps a simple question might help.
Are these Funds that invest in Bonds? yes or no
Do these Funds invested in bonds pay dividends? yes or no

You are showing us ETFs.

You are not showing us Bonds.

Bonds don't pay dividends.

I can see you are determined to pretend your false claim is true in the hope that somebody will believe you.

Not for the first time.

Your posts are a waste of electrons.

You are a buffoon.

 

[motorbiking]

You are showing us ETFs.

funds

You are not showing us Bonds.

which are made up of bonds, they even use the word bond in the title - handy huh.

Bonds don't pay dividends.

these do, that is the whole point.

I can see you are determined to pretend your false claim is true in the hope that somebody will believe you.

You seem to want to ignore the facts

Not for the first time.

indeed, not for the first time

Your posts are a waste of electrons.

sorry you weren't aware

You are a buffoon.

ad hom noted

 

[JohnD]

sorry you weren't aware

We are all aware that you are a buffoon. We just don't mention it very often.

Some of us also know that Bonds don't pay dividends, and that ETFs aren't bonds.

 

[morqthana]

Perhaps we should start having avatars of a lonely fun sponge sitting at a PC 24/7?

Never heard the term "fun sponge" before. My first thought was is it something made out of sponge, with which to have fun. Then I looked it up.

Prefer my first thought.

 

[pete01]

 

[morqthana]

Lower earners don’t get dividends

Hum. Not sure I agree with you about this.

Let’s have some facts then

People on minimum wage don’t get paid dividends.

That looks a lot more like an unsubstantiated claim than a fact.

Plus you swerved from "lower earners" to "minimum wage". Are you being really picky about "earners"? People on a pension don't "earn" anything, but they can still be on a low(er) income. And get dividends.

 

[aveatry]

View attachment 398313

That's one in the eye for ya

 

[morqthana]

Lower earners rely on the state pension

So now you've gone from "lower earners", through "minimum wage", to state pensioners.

Retired people relying on investments aren’t low earners

Depends on what you mean by "rely on". Someone on a pension could have all their basic needs met by that, i.e. they can afford food, accommodation, fuel, clothing, some sort of transport, and yet find dividends or other investment income a very welcome top-up which allows them to afford holidays, theatre tickets, meals out, etc. They might "rely on" investments to give them a quality of life which exceeds just basic survival.

And why not?

 

[motorbiking]

We are all aware that you are a buffoon. We just don't mention it very often.

You'll always remain clueless, if you wont allow yourself to be educated.

Some of us also know that Bonds don't pay dividends, and that ETFs aren't bonds.

except when they are structured to do so.. maybe in a fund for example, that you can trade stocks in, perhaps on an exchange. maybe they could come up with a catchy name like:

Exchange Traded Fund.

and so that everyone knew they were an investment in bonds they could give them names like
High Yield Bond, Aggregate Bond, Short-Term Corporate Bond or Total International Bond

But Johny the clueless cock on a moped, will still argue they aren't investments in Bonds, paying dividends... poor old sod.