DarkFruitsRam7 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 1 minute ago, Paul71 said: I don't earn anywhere near that sort of money, but don't see why we should burden successful people with even higher taxation rates. It’s all relative though, isn’t it. Tax rates were as high as 90% for some in the 1960s. They make today’s rates look an absolute steal. Yet if Labour propose to raise the tax rate at the £80,000 bracket to 45%, people are up in arms about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 25 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said: I wouldn't have torn it from her arms, as I would have brought the mother back with her. If the mother has to serve prison time or something, the baby should then have gone to the family. I wouldn't want her anywhere near a UK prison. Do you know what happens in prisons? Not a lot of people do. But believe me, you do not want her locked up along side other vulnerable criminals. It's a feeding ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkFruitsRam7 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 Just now, Norman said: I wouldn't want her anywhere near a UK prison. Do you know what happens in prisons? Not a lot of people do. But believe me, you do not want her locked up along side other vulnerable criminals. It's a feeding ground. Fair point. But that’s another issue for our government to resolve isn’t it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1of4 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 9 minutes ago, AdamRam said: No, but if you want to address that situation why should it be the rich that have to pay ? Unless that’s not what you were saying in which apologies ? How much as the last nine years of austerity affected the rich? So yes they should be asked to contribute more. But everyone else as we come down the rich list, also needs to contribute an appropriate amount. Until those at the bottom of our society are no longer in a vulnerable position, then those that can afford to pay more should do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Ram for All Seasons Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 2 hours ago, FindernRam said: The younger generation haven't seen anything, have no experience of life and should not have a vote until at least 25 Well, we can't have the young 'uns outnumbering the gammons now, can we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 59 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said: Someone earning 100k pays nowhere near 40k a year. Of course, if I was looking at somewhere to increase tax, I'd increase the rate on those who earn, and therefore pay, more. That's how a progressive taxation system works. No, I don't use foodbanks. Why do you ask? £27500 tax, £6000 NI... £33500 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1of4 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 44 minutes ago, Van Gritters said: I know a single mother with 4 kids getting more in benefits tax free then hard working people who need tax credits. She has no intention of working and just has casual relationships so no one moves in with her to affect her benefits. If people need food banks something needs looking at how the benefits system works first before you go after more money off us. I know a few contractors who pay less in tax than the people who work for them. There'll always be a few who will abuse the system. As for the benefit system, yes it needs looking at. As universal credit is failing to many people who have to rely on it to survive. Which raises another question should benefit payments be enough to allow someone to live their lives and not just survive? But it's not just the benefit system that is failing the vulnerable in our society. The education system is in desperate need of more money. How can we as a country expect to prosper in the future, if we can't or won't allow our children to get a good level of education, due to lack of investment in our schools. Our social care system needs a major overhaul, how should that be financed, so the old are taken better care of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkFruitsRam7 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 19 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said: £27500 tax, £6000 NI... £33500 So a fair way off 40k! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsnip Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Van Wolfie said: You’re right of course. Planting 10 trees a second for 20 years on land we haven’t got is perfectly reasonable and achievable. Again, your just referring to the information that you've read in that thing you've copied and pasted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Paul71 said: Simple mathematics. People who earn more pay more. Only those who look at the % get confused by that. I don't earn anywhere near that sort of money, but don't see why we should burden successful people with even higher taxation rates. Because they have more money to spare? Progressive taxation systems are a must for any sort of fair society. At low and moderate income, what is earned is crucial for a taxpayer and their family's health, education and all the essentials for a decent life. As their income increases the money they earn becomes less valuable to them in real terms and they can spend it on luxuries. So it makes sense to tax higher incomes at higher rates, that money is far less essential for people's general well being. Flat tax rates (or anything close to it) are for plutocracies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 2 hours ago, AdamRam said: No, but if you want to address that situation why should it be the rich that have to pay ? Unless that’s not what you were saying in which apologies ? Because the poor can't afford to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i-Ram Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 40 minutes ago, Highgate said: Progressive taxation systems are a must for any sort of fair society. At low and moderate income, what is earned is crucial for a taxpayer and their family's health, education and all the essentials for a decent life. As their income increases the money they earn becomes less valuable to them in real terms and they can spend it on luxuries. So it makes sense to tax higher incomes at higher rates, that money is far less essential for people's general well being. No Labour Government is going to tax me out of having Imperial Leather soap in the bathroom or Ferrero Rocher chocolates on the coffee table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gee SCREAMER !! Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 17 minutes ago, i-Ram said: No Labour Government is going to tax me out of having Imperial Leather soap in the bathroom or Ferrero Rocher chocolates on the coffee table. It looks nice at the start, but the little red emblem isn't robust enough. I've taken to using a bar just the once then changing it. Can't have ugly looking soap sitting against me gold taps. Anyway I'm voting for this fella . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 2 hours ago, AdamRam said: No I’m asking you where it stops, someone earning 100k pays 40k a year, you want to increase that and not anyone else’s tax code ? Do you use food banks ? Someone who earns £100k pays £27.5k in tax. NICs account almost a further £6k. A net income of over £66,500 then. Where are you getting this £40k figure from? Some data from the Trussell Trust for your perusal... Between 1 April 2018 and 31 March 2019, the Trussell Trust’s food bank network distributed 1.6 million three-day emergency food supplies to people in crisis, a 19% increase on the previous year. More than half a million of these went to children Over 33% of those referred to the Trussell Trust are working Since the government has made it clear that they care not a jot for those who are struggling to feed or house themselves, the burden is quite obviously going to be passed on to those who earn the most, except of course, under a Tory government who rather than aid the poor, seek to reduce the meagre benefits paid to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 30 minutes ago, i-Ram said: No Labour Government is going to tax me out of having Imperial Leather soap in the bathroom or Ferrero Rocher chocolates on the coffee table. Many a true word... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gee SCREAMER !! Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 2 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said: So a fair way off 40k! To be fair a tax code is never that clear cut . Someone earning 100 k could quite conceivably pay 40 k in tax as there code may include restriction for expenses such as car benefit, work expenses such as train fare etc, at there highest rate of tax . Basically there tax code could be nothing with enough restriction they could even have a negative code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andicis Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 6 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said: Interesting that you say there's a more even split in political allegiances that most might think. Without trying to come across as a Bamford in the slightest, I wonder whether there's a difference in that regard between former polytechnics and, for example, Russell Group unis? At the Uni of Manchester, everything seems to be massively left-oriented. I know that might be because people are scared to say anything at all to the contrary in fears of being castigated (including me), but I genuinely haven't met someone at Uni who's voting anything further right than Lib Dem. Contrast that with my cousin at De Montfort, who says that 'no one gives a duck'. I'm sure he's exaggerating, but it does pose a question as to whether it's accurate to lump all students together. You wouldn't have thought polytechnic would make a huge difference, same people drinking the absolute same tonight. The people I know from Uni of are matching Hallam for voting. I don't think it makes a huge difference one way or another. Do you feel massively left wing at Mani or you feel like it's better if you vote that way anyway? You've not met many at uni, then? Like i get you're doing a left wing course but all my lot are going tory... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 10 hours ago, FindernRam said: The younger generation haven't seen anything, have no experience of life and should not have a vote until at least 25. This reducing the age to 16 is pure nonsense. Would you let a teenage child tell you how to do your job? Which car to buy etc. Kids make the poorest drivers, highest divorce rates, all because they have no experience to draw on. That's why they tend to vote Labour. I've highlighted the stuff I consider to be utter bilge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkFruitsRam7 Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 3 hours ago, Andicis said: You wouldn't have thought polytechnic would make a huge difference, same people drinking the absolute same tonight. The people I know from Uni of are matching Hallam for voting. I don't think it makes a huge difference one way or another. Do you feel massively left wing at Mani or you feel like it's better if you vote that way anyway? You've not met many at uni, then? Like i get you're doing a left wing course but all my lot are going tory... I’m probably closer to the centre than most of the people I know at uni. The impression I get from the internal social media pages is that nearly everyone is left wing. I know social media isn’t an accurate reflection, but it seems to bear out from the people I meet too. Who knows, anyway. I just don’t like the intolerance shown sometimes. I’d never fall out with anyone purely because they’re voting Tory, but a lot up here would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Ram Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 15 hours ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said: Well, since you're an economist I'll try posting this once again.The Labour party received a boost on Tuesday when 163 economists signed a public letter offering broad support for its proposals for higher public investment to kick start growth and raise productivity. The letter published in the Financial Times lamented Britain’s poor economic performance of the past decade, called for “a serious injection of public investment” and said Britain would benefit from greater state involvement in national economic management. Full article here - https://www.ft.com/content/d29b4cbe-0fa4-11ea-a225-db2f231cfeae Should we assume they are all wrong? Would depend on their political views would it not.. I am sure the Tories could get a similar number who could pull it apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.