Bolitics The New Condem Government

[blandy]

 

Most "Rich" people avoid paying any tax at all. Is that fair do you think?

That's another post to which the correct response is "Bollex".

I get the gist - that plenty rich folk employ crafty accountants and so on to reduce the tax the y pay as much as they can - but to say they don't pay "any tax at all" sounds like something of a tall tale. Sorry.

[VillaForever1970]

I dont pretend to know anything about politics but can someone explain this please.

Everyone moans the blue lot cut taxes for the rich, surely this means more rich people will live here, contributing?

i.e rich in this country get taxed 100quid for example, but they get taxed 150quid in Germany. They are going to live here and still pay tax, its not like they don’t pay any tax, thus thats more people in the country paying tax isn’t it?

Most "Rich" people avoid paying any tax at all. Is that fair do you think?

But are you not ignoring the point, not all rich people don’t pay tax thats ridiculous they’ll have to pay some tax and if more rich people live here because of lower tax we’ll get more at the end of the day if they don’t live here surely?

[bickster]

Most "Rich" people avoid paying any tax at all. Is that fair do you think?

That's another post to which the correct response is "Bollex".

I get the gist - that plenty rich folk employ crafty accountants and so on to reduce the tax the y pay as much as they can - but to say they don't pay "any tax at all" sounds like something of a tall tale. Sorry.

Agreed, my lazy writing there I think.

[villaajax]

Other European countries don't seem to have quite the culture of greed that we have in this country. In Holland I think the highest rate of tax is around 70% and it works.

[Awol]

....if more rich people live here because of lower tax we’ll get more at the end of the day if they don’t live here surely?

Which is why when the government abolished the 50p tax rate, the tax revenues actually went up.

If you fancy a laugh then try explaining that to a Labour voter.

[Awol]

Other European countries don't seem to have quite the culture of greed that we have in this country. In Holland I think the highest rate of tax is around 70% and it works.

Sounds great, may as well abolish wages and everyone can just work for the government.

[bickster]

....if more rich people live here because of lower tax we’ll get more at the end of the day if they don’t live here surely?

Which is why when the government abolished the 50p tax rate, the tax revenues actually went up.

Any idea where one could find the figures to substantiate that claim. I've heard it said many a time by Cameron and Gideon but you'll excuse me if on current form I don't believe a word they say

[Awol]

....if more rich people live here because of lower tax we’ll get more at the end of the day if they don’t live here surely?

Which is why when the government abolished the 50p tax rate, the tax revenues actually went up.

Any idea where one could find the figures to substantiate that claim. I've heard it said many a time by Cameron and Gideon but you'll excuse me if on current form I don't believe a word they say

Not off hand, like you (probably) I read it a good while ago, but it wasn't disputed by the economic genius that is Ed Balls.

[villaajax]

 

Other European countries don't seem to have quite the culture of greed that we have in this country. In Holland I think the highest rate of tax is around 70% and it works.

Sounds great, may as well abolish wages and everyone can just work for the government.

 

 

Or we could all live in tax havens

[Rodders]

May have encouraged some rich rocket polishers to play-ball more frequently, but I highly doubt they pay the full 40% anyway. It still **** me off no end. I know it's extreme and ill-thought threw but personally I'd be willing just to strip the tossers of their citizenship and tell them to **** off to panama if that's where they want to go. If we do have all these amazing "entrepreneurs" they'd take the opportunity to fill the holes left.

 

Pay up or **** off, or try dancing with a bayonet in yer throat.

 

Vive le **** revolution. There is no moral justification for tax avoidance. Incentives my **** arse. It's just greed, you overpaid **** rocket polishers. You still have more than enough money to live a **** stress free life. Just pay the share required of you, help get money back in to the government to prevent cuts - less cuts = more services = more jobs = less poverty (=less need for benefit ) = happier citizens = more competition. The only words removed who profit from the 50% thing going are the rich.

 

Trickle down does not happen. trickle-down piss maybe, but not economic prosperity from those maniacally greedy tosspots. **** THEM ALL.

 

The idea that these utter scum need "incentives" not to pay tax they can easily afford is so depressing I want my hand on a red button to blow all the bastards to pieces.

 

 

 

Damn, why do I do into the politics thread? It always makes me angry.

[snowychap]

Which is why when the government abolished the 50p tax rate, the tax revenues actually went up.

I can't remember the figures over the years (i.e. when it was 45% then 50% and then back down to 45%) but the 'experiment' (and its outcomes) is/are not really something to hang a hat on because, as the 50% window was so short and the changes were all signposted (as they should be), incomes were both brought forward and postponed thus giving a pretty distorted picture of the tax raising effectiveness of the different rates. Edited November 14, 2014 by snowychap

[blandy]

...when the government abolished the 50p tax rate, the tax revenues actually went up.

If you fancy a laugh then try explaining that to a Labour voter.

Because as a one off all those bankers and money men had their bonuses delayed to the month the lower rate came in, in anticipation of paying at 45% instead of 50. So in the first year, the revenues went up, but it was a one off, solely due to bonus delays.

[snowychap]

For whom is Paterson the stalking horse?

Edited November 24, 2014 by snowychap

[chrisp65]

For whom is Paterson the stalking horse?

 

visited 50 constituencies recently

 

he's clearly a man with a plan - even if that plan fell over on it's arse at the first question asked of it

[snowychap]

He's no Geoffrey!

[choffer]

This story is nearly a week old but haven't seen this posted yet.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/to-help-fuel-their-propaganda-machine-against-the-poor-our-government-has-now-decided-to-redefine-the-word-welfare-9873127.html

 

 

Across the country this month millions of us will be receiving tax returns from the government with colourful, sexy-looking pie charts on them, helpfully outlining where all our tax is being spent. This is, according to George Osborne, a revolution in transparency over how people’s money is being used by the government.

 

My own tax return, its shiny little pie chart practically glowing with a sense of its own transparency, arrived through the door yesterday. The first thing that struck me and shocked me about it was that the largest part – a whole quarter – was taken up by the term "welfare". Could it really be true that welfare receives more money than any other part of the public sector? More than health? More than education? Something seemed untransparent here.

 

Like everyone else's, my pie chart shows the largest segment of tax going on welfare (24.5 per cent) followed by health (18.9 per cent), education (13.2 per cent) and state pensions (12.1 per cent). But what is the definition of welfare here? Is it consistent with previous Government definitions of the word? Does it contain spending that the average person would normally associate with the word welfare? Does it include spending that should, more logically, be grouped into other categories?

 

In fact the document makes all of the above misrepresentations. Firstly, according to the independent fact checking organisation,fullfact.org, the definition of the term "welfare" as a spending category was created especially for this statement. The government previously defined the term "welfare" when it introduced the welfare cap.

 

However the new definition is different, containing more spending categories than before. These new inclusions comprise things like "personal social services" (like home care and child protection), and, perhaps most glaring of all, a category called "other pensions" which includes teachers’ and other state employees’ pensions. How does that make sense, especially when there is already a separate category for pensions? I don’t know about you, but teachers’ pensions are not something that I have ever associated with the term "welfare".

 

Another misrepresentation is lumping fire services in with "criminal justice", handily bulking up the amount of money that seems to be spent on crime. Then there’s the category called "environment" which, although not big, is at least reassuringly visible, until you find out that 73 per cent of this is "waste management" or rubbish collection. I must remember to hail my bin man as an environmental worker when he comes tomorrow.

 

These statements are being delivered through the doors of 24m tax payers at a cost of £5m of our own money (will future pie charts have a segment labelled "cost of these pie charts"?) That’s 24m people across the UK who will be opening these letters and thinking, “That’s a lot of money to spend on the unemployed. Maybe the Tories are right; maybe we do need to make more cuts to welfare spending.” What a nice coincidence then that this comes after George Osborne signalled that he wants to make a further £12bn worth of cuts to welfare spending.

 

Who knows, it might even get people thinking, “Maybe I should vote Conservative after all, rather than Labour or Green who’d only increase spending on welfare.” Again, a coincidence that these pie charts come winging through our doors in the run up to the general election? Don’t be silly, this is all about transparency, right?

 

The word "transparency" in the mouth of the Tory government is like the words “won’t feel a thing” in the mouth of a dentist. These "transparent" tax returns are nothing more than targeted pamphleteering for government propaganda, designed to make us believe their hype that cutting money to the poor and needy and giving it to the rich is good for the country.

 

 

TL:DR: We're still being lied to.

[chrisp65]

what struck me was the disproportionately tiny amount that was designated 'EU'

 

I'd presumed from media coverage and right wing outrage it was hovering around the 75% mark, turns out all that talk time and worry and campaigning concerns 0.75%

[bickster]

Will they tell us that out of all the tax the average person pays in a year, that just £34 of it goes to the EU?

[peterms]

 

@rachaelmongan @MonganRachael

Mitchell loses libel case against News Group Newspapers & Judge satisfied the word 'Pleb' used. #plebgate #mitchell

[peterms]

Tina McLeod @TinaMcLeod2

Judge effectively calls the PC a pleb in ruling that he didn't have the wit or imagination to concoct his story #plebgate