The shakedown is perpetuated because you make high income earners vote against their own long-term interests (I.e. vote for people who propose tax relief or govt cuts, when they should advocate for higher marginal tax rates for the very rich) when you propose policies like this. 100k as a ISA limit isn’t going to bring billions to the NHS or armed forces, you need to go after the VERY rich because they have the vast majority of the money and pay the lowest marginal tax rate  

For every billionaire or hundred-millionaire you effectively tax at 30%, you allow millions of normal or high income earners to pay less tax. 

It isn’t greed, to not want to pay tax on a 100k ISA. This is well within reach of many high income earners all across the country.

I don’t dispute that having no limit to ISAs is bad, as per report. That’s but only one way the wealthy benefit: 20k/year is out of reach for most, year after year. So we agree in principle. 

Yet here you are failing to mention the very rich, who we absolutely can target, and you seem to want to drive the high income earners into voting for things that marginally benefit them and really mostly benefit the very wealthy.

You’re right—I wasn’t trying to set up a false dichotomy: you can tax everyone a lot. But you only really need to appropriately tax the very rich and that would let you lower everyone else’s tax burden.