inkpenspur
Allan Nielsen
You mean the ?ú71 in every ?ú14K of tax take? plenty of bigger fish to fry than the contribution to the European union! ?ú4728 on welfare anyone?
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
The Budget
- Thread starter southstand1882
- Start date
You mean the ?ú71 in every ?ú14K of tax take? plenty of bigger fish to fry than the contribution to the European union! ?ú4728 on welfare anyone?
inkpenspur
Allan Nielsen
If you have ended up with that kind of income over the last financial year then you should really consider sacrificing ?ú10K into a personal pension as this is far the most sensible thing to do... it will then be taxed at a more sensible (40%) effective rate...
The Moonlit Knight
Banned
They didn't go far enough. They need to be handing out more tax breaks to the rich so that they invest more here. People hate it, but it's the rich that fund the majority of this country and yet we still want to punish them for it? Absurd notion really.
The Moonlit Knight
Banned
It's not about that. It SHOULD be about allowing the highest earners to keep as much money as possible so they can spend it (thus benefiting everyone) in this country or even better invest it in start up schemes, their business etc.
When a banker for example gets ?ú1m in bonus, the tax man loves it and gets almost half. What does the banker do with the other half? He'll pop down to his local dealership and buy a flash motor (and that dealership now has more money, the salesman more commision and oh, let us not forget the VAT....). The banker then may decide to buy a new house (stimulating the housing market, and stamp duty to the government please!) or maybe give his present place an overhaul (local builders earning money) or best solution may even build a new place (lots of local business there). Maybe they'll set up their own business and employ a couple of people.
Or we can punish the rich, increase public spending and have the country go down the bricker completely.
It is true.
monkeybarry
Jack Jull
man i'd like to move into your nice little ideal world - sadly i live in this one
so, in your above senario, what happens to everyone else in society? and im talking about the everyday person - not everyone is a lazy scrounger and not everyone can be the banker
how exactly does your view of everyone clambering to the top affect and benefit society as a whole?
The Moonlit Knight
Banned
They prosper. The average day person works for someone else. If there is no one to work for, then they are out of a job. It's not rocket science is it? The private sector flourishes, we ALL flourish.
Leeds Spur
Banned
So passive smoking doesn't harm health?
gonadS.
Links to peer reviewed studies please.
Some people do talk gonads.
Leeds Spur
Banned
In the scenario above the tax man gets ?ú500k in income tax......that's the same tax as 180 people on ?ú25k a year pay, YES 180!!!
Then he goes out and pays 20% VAT on a car, say ?ú100k? Another ?ú20k in tax, that's the same as 7 average workers income tax. Then maybe gets some work done in the house, paying tradesmen, who also buy raw materials in the DIY store, who employ people. He buys new electronic goods in Currys' who employ people, also more VAT there.
The list goes on and on.
Yes - he might save some money as well, but high earners DO spend disposible income.
Last year I paid ?ú35k in PAYE and NI....the same as 13 average workers, when I 'only' earned 4 times the national average.
I pay my fudging way, more than pay.
Dorothy
Willem Korsten
Clambering sounds a little frantic. Better a calmer, more reasoned approach to bettering yourself, providing for a number of children you can afford to look after. Spending wisely, shrewdly and not borrowing what you can't afford to pay back. Working hard and seeking to utilise all that is available to you to better yourself and the lots of those around you.
Why should those who already pay the vast proportion of tax to support this country pay anymore ?
Why do we need Britain's wealthy, her business runners and owners to pay a higher percentage of tax than almost anywhere else in the World ? What effect do you think this has on those who wish, like the rest of us to protect as much of what we earn as possible (by legal means). ?
What would you do beyond just taking more from the above and distributing to everyone in a blanket approach that does not seek to motivate anyone but inadvertently rewards exactly what the majority of the country want to avoid i.e. a further slide towards a something for nothing culture that only harms us as we progress.
Who is the 'model' Britain who is being hurt by this ?
Lest we forget these millionnaires have largely made this money. By having it they are contributing on the whole far more than we average citizens. Britain has to recover from a financial disaster, a growing social malaise and we need to keep the captains of industry, the employers, the wage payers here in Britain. We need them here investing their money, creating jobs and helping to pull us out of this recession. We always had to make tough decisions because a left leaning Government tried to play a faux popularity game and put us in the mire. If the wealthy fudge off then we are only left with the poor. Funny feeling that sort of society is a little flawed.
inkpenspur
Allan Nielsen
The whole point is that you sacrafice enough to take you below the ?ú105K bracket... it is crazy that you end up only taking home 38p in the pound for that specific salary range. I know not everyone is lucky enough to be earning that kind of money. It only is sensible for that small sector of people who earn wages in that specific range.
monkeybarry
Jack Jull
we certainly need a change in culture to ensure philanthropy (even if it is enforced via taxation - actually, can it be philanthropic if its a requirement?!) is seen as something worthwhile rather than just propping up the feckless
whether that is for Govt or Society to manage is a different thing i guess - i've always said we will get the UK that the actions of the UK people dictate....sadly far too many Britons are feckless with an overarching sense of faux-nationalism and sense of entitlement
it about time the country grew up a bit tbh
inkpenspur
Allan Nielsen
I am fortunate to have a good job with a good salary, but too much more tax on top, and I will leave the UK. I have a job with transferable skills, and a company with offices across the globe. If my wife didn't want to stay close to her elderly family in Chichester, then we would have gone already. I could move to Switzerland and pay half the tax I pay now, and probably get a better quality of life. I am sure that I am not alone in thinking that. If even 10% of the higher tax paying public decide to up sticks and move, the knock on effect to the rest of the country will be immense. 50% of the total tax take is paid by 10% of the working population. 10% of this 10% (1% then) decide to move and you could see a 5% drop in overall income tax receipts. That will hurt the 99% of tax payer left behind disproportionately. Bite the hand that feeds too often, and there'll be an exodus, and UK PLC will be truly stuffed. Balls and Co are complete frauds... they know this, but refuse to acknowledge the risks they run with everyones future.
monkeybarry
Jack Jull
if only it were that simple - that is the ideal scenario in the perfect social make up, a nice mixture of socialism and capitalism working together (which IMHO is the best way forward), but sadly the flaw to that is people and people are gready.
that banker will find ways of reducing the tax he pays no matter how much of it "he is allowed to keep"
he will also be looking at his profit margins all the time, so ultimately he will benefit but im not so sure society as a whole will - certainly not to a great extent
IMHO closing the holes at the top (tax avoidance etc) and bottom (people playing the "benefits system") will far more effective in creating a sustainable publci spending mechanism
(and im in favour of everyone being taxed at the same rate, irrespective of earnings btw)
Leeds Spur
Banned
If you bought in a flat tax it would leave a monstrous hole in the public finances
No need to be abusive.
Google Enstrom And Kabat. Their study was sponsored by the American Cancer Society. When they didn't come up with the desired results they were hung out to dry.
You've seen through the Climate Change scam dude, keep an open mind.
Leeds Spur
Banned
Tobacco smoke is a carcinogen....there isn't a debate.
Feel free to smoke around your kids by all means.
The statistical analysis is pretty boring unless you're a bit of a stats geek like me, but the most relevant part is this (from the BMJ):
Actively smoked tobacco smoke is a carcinogen. Do you have any reason to believe (other than being sucked in by a tax-fuelled propaganda war) that exhaled tobacco smoke is?