• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Progressive tax

You decide


  • Total voters
    21

Hotman

reason, honour, integrity
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
5,611
Location
Not here
Moving on from the bonus tax thread, who agrees with progressive tax? IE You earn more, you pay a higher percentage of a larger pot (so increase is compounded) - rather than everyone paying a flat rate.
 
Moving on from the bonus tax thread, who agrees with progressive tax? IE You earn more, you pay a higher percentage of a larger pot (so increase is compounded) - rather than everyone paying a flat rate.

Slightly Marxist in its theory but can wholeheartedly see the benefits
 
My thoughts are as follows:

1) Those paying the higher rates do not receive higher benefit - in fact they are less likely to draw from the public pot, as they will have private healthcare, purchase their own books rather than use libraries, not rely on tax credits etc.

2) It goes against the principles of equality, and those not prepared to make something of themselves are supplemented by those who are.

3) It creates an industry in artificial tax mechanisms which benefits nobody, and results in HMRC having to employ more officers to monitor

Indeed, it could be argued that individuals should pay a "head tax" at a flat rate rather than a percentage, then each can choose to use public services. But that would really make the leftys mardy, and I can afford to pay a bit of tax to stop them whinging.
 
Slightly Marxist in its theory but can wholeheartedly see the benefits
It's what we have at the moment, and Labour appear intent on increasing the spread - especially with their reference to "those with the broadest shoulders".
 
Cricko - what is your justification for a high earner paying for something a dosser would benefit from?
 
Of course..it hardly matters so much if you are earning fortunes.
 
What do you class as fortunes? The higher rate band of £43k is hardly fortunes in anyones book - yet the individual earning that is most likely under a lot of stress, working for a boss and expected to put £43k's worth of effort in - if you are going to tax the truly rich, then surely a wealth tax is more appropriate for your viewpoint?
 
What do you class as fortunes? The higher rate band of £43k is hardly fortunes in anyones book - yet the individual earning that is most likely under a lot of stress, working for a boss and expected to put £43k's worth of effort in - if you are going to tax the truly rich, then surely a wealth tax is more appropriate for your viewpoint?

Right, ex hubby to be earns in excess of 70k pa yet "we" live like bloody paupers - it's all subjective and according to principles and income, unfortunately too many people these days have few if any principles and until someone (preferably unconnected with New Labour) gets to grips with it, we'll continue to be lost and wandering in the wilderness.
 
Eh?? you are going to have to run that buy me again sorry.
Why should a high earner who has private healthcare contribute to the NHS? In fact there's an argument for reduction in tax due to the lack of benefit.

Why should a high earner subsidise the lifestyle of a lower earner and pay part of his rent?
 
Right, ex hubby to be earns in excess of 70k pa yet "we" live like bloody paupers - it's all subjective and according to principles and income, unfortunately too many people these days have few if any principles and until someone (preferably unconnected with New Labour) gets to grips with it, we'll continue to be lost and wandering in the wilderness.
Exactly, 70k only equates to about 4k a month - not a huge amount after tax, national insurance. Take off mortgage of say £1000, shopping of say £700 a month, house bills of similar, council tax, might have a car lease, possibly csa, etc... and there's not much left over. It might seem a high figure but it really isn't
 
What do you class as fortunes? The higher rate band of £43k is hardly fortunes in anyones book - yet the individual earning that is most likely under a lot of stress, working for a boss and expected to put £43k's worth of effort in - if you are going to tax the truly rich, then surely a wealth tax is more appropriate for your viewpoint?

Fortunes was probably a bad word...you live how you want to live....I do think effort is involved ..guys that work for Morrisons probably put the same effort in for their end of weeks wages as a guy in some bank...maybe the risks if you are on the investment arm are not the same ...but hey-ho the government will secure the banks future...I think the more you earn the more you pay and think yourself lucky that your upbringing and education has found you in this fortunate position.
 
Exactly, 70k only equates to about 4k a month - not a huge amount after tax, national insurance. Take off mortgage of say £1000, shopping of say £700 a month, house bills of similar, council tax, might have a car lease, possibly csa, etc... and there's not much left over. It might seem a high figure but it really isn't


You're bloody telling me!!!!:stunned:
 
Fortunes was probably a bad word...you live how you want to live....I do think effort is involved ..guys that work for Morrisons probably put the same effort in for their end of weeks wages as a guy in some bank...maybe the risks if you are on the investment arm are not the same ...but hey-ho the government will secure the banks future...I think the more you earn the more you pay and think yourself lucky that your upbringing and education has found you in this fortunate position.
I agree the more you earn the more you pay - however percentages should be the same.

And upbringing and education make no difference whatsoever, from my own experiences - in fact having lived on council estates up to the age of about 15 (unfortunately some of the worst in southend / shoebury area), and leaving school before my gcse's to get a yts, I've seen the scum who really abuse the system, and resent paying a single penny more than they do towards this country.
 
Exactly, 70k only equates to about 4k a month - not a huge amount after tax, national insurance. Take off mortgage of say £1000, shopping of say £700 a month, house bills of similar, council tax, might have a car lease, possibly csa, etc... and there's not much left over. It might seem a high figure but it really isn't

£70k ! I live on £700 per month, thats only £8400 a year, i work from 7.30 til 5 each day, the only benefit i get is that i get 14 weeks holiday a year. I have to pay rent, rates, gas and leccy, phone, car costs etc etc out of that. £4k would mean living like a king !
 
I agree the more you earn the more you pay - however percentages should be the same.

And upbringing and education make no difference whatsoever, from my own experiences - in fact having lived on council estates up to the age of about 15 (unfortunately some of the worst in southend / shoebury area), and leaving school before my gcse's to get a yts, I've seen the scum who really abuse the system, and resent paying a single penny more than they do towards this country.

Green, green, green, green, GREEN! So ****s me off the way people just completely abuse the system (sorry Paul, I love you dearly!!!)
 
£70k ! I live on £700 per month, thats only £8400 a year, i work from 7.30 til 5 each day, the only benefit i get is that i get 14 weeks holiday a year. I have to pay rent, rates, gas and leccy, phone, car costs etc etc out of that. £4k would mean living like a king !
If you were to earn 70k, you'd say that £100k would mean living like a king.
 
I agree the more you earn the more you pay - however percentages should be the same.

And upbringing and education make no difference whatsoever, from my own experiences - in fact having lived on council estates up to the age of about 15 (unfortunately some of the worst in southend / shoebury area), and leaving school before my gcse's to get a yts, I've seen the scum who really abuse the system, and resent paying a single penny more than they do towards this country.

Of course it does..If you came from a home with two parents in banking rather than from a home with two on crack ..Of course it makes a difference as does your surrounding area.
 
Back
Top