Were you to be listening outside a Starmer Cabinet meeting, you would only ever hear three words when discussing the money the middle classes still possess; Grab! Grab! Grab!
Rather than cutting the benefits for those secretly working cash in hand or the sick who should be receiving Oscars for their performance to deceive assessors, Labour takes from those who have worked damned hard and created a little wealth.
Having taken every penny from the living, Labour now wants to steal from the dead. As reported in their own bible, The Guardian, Labour intends to put a lifetime cap on the value of gifts that someone can pass on before they die to reduce their eventual inheritance tax bill.
Further, and even more worrying, is the suggestion that Reeves wants to change both the number of years before your kids’ inheritance becomes tax-free and the amount of tax that can be paid on the way.
At the moment, under a tapered tax rate, if you gift your children, and you survive seven years, they pay nothing. If you died after three years, they would pay 40 per cent and a descending 32 per cent to eight per cent over the next three years.
Under the scheme being bandied about by Socialist politicians, the seven years could be extended to eight years, and the tax rates for the last three years increased marginally. I should point out that Corbyn wanted to extend gifting to 15 years.
Having stolen every penny from the living, Rachel Reeves she wants to steal from the dead - Kelvin MacKenzie
|Getty Images
Were any of this to happen, it would absolutely guarantee that at the next general election Labour would be out of office with the biggest defeat in history – even larger than the Tories of ‘24 - as Nigel Farage has promised to scrap inheritance tax if he comes to power.
The clue to Labour’s hatred of the middle classes comes in this statement to The Guardian from what must have come from a middle-ranking minister: ‘’With so much wealth stored in assets like houses that have shot up in value, we have to find ways to better tap into the inheritance of those who can afford to contribute more.’’
Speaking for myself, and I think I speak for you, I don’t want to ‘’contribute’’ more. I want to ‘’contribute’’ a darn sight less. I am sick to the back teeth of funding the SKIDS (Skint Idle Dim Socialists).
Even a dim Starmer recognised the welfare bill was a racket and tried in a small way to reduce it by £5billion. His collection of Labour MPs, who all come through the union, charity or councillor route, voted it down.
That means, for the duration of this Parliament, there will be no cuts in payments to the SKIDs, and that money can only come from the middle classes, as the rich have fled.
I particularly object to any change in IHT. This is money we have earned and paid tax on. Currently it brings in £7.5billion but will double to £14billion by 2030. You can see Reeves' political game.
Were Farage to get in and scrap inheritance tax, he would have to explain to the market where that money was coming from. Not to mention the £17.5billion that he plans to restore law in our country.
Come closer to election day, he would face scrutiny. Having seen a capital project round my way – a £350million road project at junction 10 on the M25 - it’s clear they have spent at least £30 million on nice-to-haves that were not needed. Cut those on every project, and those billions would easily be saved. By a Reform government.
Children and grandchildren will be reading Reeves' inheritance plans with much foreboding. The baby boomers will be handing down lumps of money never seen by previous generations, and many will have factored in the gifts in their own retirement plans.
The baby boomers believed in working hard and worrying about the future. The following generation, some of whom held a different political view from their parents, haven’t always had the same view.
Wouldn't it be ironic if it were the Labour and Liberal children who were robbed of their future by a Socialist government?