General Election June 8th

[bluethrunthru]

The manifesto produced by the governing party should be a non event. We should already know their plans. Apart from a bit of long term "vision", which people aren't really interested in, anything else they include tends to fall into the category of "gimmick". And producing a manifesto just encourages them to make daft promises eg to hold a referendum.

The opposition parties spend their time opposing the government. It isn't until the election campaign that there's much focus on what they would actually do. Hence their manifesto's are a very important part of the political process. Much less so for the government.

They include enough in their vision to piss off a lot of their constituency. Changes to free school dinner provision to breakfasts - saves money but does little to help the J.A.M.'s May indentified as those she wants to help. Means testing the winter fuel allowance - even wealthy pensioners ( more likely to vote Tory? ) feel that they have paid enough into the coffers and have the right to expect pay back. And sorting out care for the elderly - you no longer have to sell your home to support care.... as long as you are alive. However if your estate is worth more than £100k ( most house owners will fall into that category ) the state will claw back care costs on your death. Bang goes the Tory voting pensioners legacy to kids and grandkids then if they are unfortunate enough to need care and to live for a long time in a care home.

Still at least she will continue her successful campaign against immigration that she started as home secretary so all their support will be right behind her.

 

[hilts]

Why are some people so against paying taxes? Interested to hear the arguments.

Personally, I'd rather live in a fair society that works and have to pay a bit more to the government every year than one where the sick, elderly, young and inferm are left to rot. And for that you have to pay for it.

I only have a short dinner so can't really reply in as much detail as needed so very briefly

I haven't heard many or anyone say they shouldn't pay tax

In society we should all attempt to contribute so take the following

The unemployed
The low paid workers
The paye worker
The self employed
The rich business owner

Now you can put up taxes but who pays the most? The one group of people that are actually contributing what they should as it is.

Also notice the figure of 80000 mentioned by Labour and then look up an mp's salary. What a coincidence.

For clarity I don't earn enough to be affected so don't fall into the greedy bastard category

 

[SWP's back]

Why are some people so against paying taxes? Interested to hear the arguments.

Personally, I'd rather live in a fair society that works and have to pay a bit more to the government every year than one where the sick, elderly, young and inferm are left to rot. And for that you have to pay for it.

Because it's my money and the welfare on offer is not commensurate with what is paid in. Tax has a place but when it's up over 50% then it stops being fair.

As an example, my father ran a successful business for many years, fell ill and had to sell his business at an inopportune time. He'd always reinvested his profits into his company and if he'd sold it a few years earlier or few years later then he'd have had sufficient to comfortably retire on. As it is, he's 72 and receives just over £1,100 gross per month from his various state pensions yet he paid tax at the highest rate for decades and employed 20 odd people for all that time. My mother receives £64 per month as she was an unofficial secretary/housewife and thus didn't get a large number of qualifying NI years.

That's a crap return for what was actually pod into the system. I urged them to call the DSS or whatever it's called now and find out if they qualify for anything, and they don't apart from a modest council tax reduction. So I send a couple of grand back to the UK each month and have done since I emigrated to supplement their household income and to allow them some sense of freedom. If I was in the U.K., I wouldn't have the disposable income to do that.

If tax monies were well spent then there's a good argument for it, but on the whole, it isn't well spent. There's too much wastage. There's too much spent on defence for pointless wars, £13bn on foreign aid (including some countries with a fucking space programme), £20bn lost through public sector fraud, £1.2bn in CAP payments to foreign farmers. As I say, I understand a country has to provide protection, roads, schools, healthcare and the like to its citizens, but I don't see why grants of £92,000 on a skip covered in flashing lights by the arts council or why the FCA paid £50,000 for a logo change that would have taken anyone on here less than two minutes on Microsoft Publisher.

 

[SWP's back]

However if your estate is worth more than £100k ( most house owners will fall into that category ) the state will claw back care costs on your death. Bang goes the Tory voting pensioners legacy to kids and grandkids then if they are unfortunate enough to need care and to live for a long time in a care home.

Better than having to sell their property no?

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Seems like St Theresa has brought in a massive inheritance tax under the guise of ongoing care costs. Personally, I don't have a problem with it but, if Jezza had suggested it, he would have been lambasted.
Migration down to the 'tens of thousands'. Why is that still in there? Surely, if we are taking back control, and a huge wave of success awaits, we cannot know how many migrants will be coming in? You'd think she'd have said we'd keep it to the number we need, not some useless sound bite that she couldn't deliver whilst being Home Secretary for over six years and has no way to deliver over the next five. Shamefully quiet on the NHS once again.

 

[Gelsons Dad]

No fucker helped you.

Apart from paying for you to go to school, the paying for to work directly for the people while training for 10 years.

That sounds somewhat oblivious.

Sorry but that's a bit lame.
Firstly on the point of the training I received in the RAF. It was more than amortized by the years of productive service including several training positions I held at the time. It did not help me in my civil career as I stated I had to pay for my own pilot training and license.

Secondly, in my time of employment in the U.K. My income tax was around 30% on average and that more than pays for the shit education I received. I went to the doctor twice in all that time. I did however pay for my annual aviation medical whilst flying outside of the military.
I'm completely comfortable that I more than paid my way.
I don't include any personal sacrifices made whilst serving in the military as it was my choice to serve and I left when I no longer had confidence in the governments policy for using the military. This coincided with the Blair government coming to power.

 

[Man_City_Loyal]

After Brexit, and over in America with Trump.

Do people still not realize those who aren't speaking out will vote for the winner?

Silent majority won the vote for both, and I see it again.

 

[bugsyblue]

Because it's my money and the welfare on offer is not commensurate with what is paid in. Tax has a place but when it's up over 50% then it stops being fair.

As an example, my father ran a successful business for many years, fell ill and had to sell his business at an inopportune time. He'd always reinvested his profits into his company and if he'd sold it a few years earlier or few years later then he'd have had sufficient to comfortably retire on. As it is, he's 72 and receives just over £1,100 gross per month from his various state pensions yet he paid tax at the highest rate for decades and employed 20 odd people for all that time. My mother receives £64 per month as she was an unofficial secretary/housewife and thus didn't get a large number of qualifying NI years.

That's a crap return for what was actually pod into the system. I urged them to call the DSS or whatever it's called now and find out if they qualify for anything, and they don't apart from a modest council tax reduction. So I send a couple of grand back to the UK each month and have done since I emigrated to supplement their household income and to allow them some sense of freedom. If I was in the U.K., I wouldn't have the disposable income to do that.

If tax monies were well spent then there's a good argument for it, but on the whole, it isn't well spent. There's too much wastage. There's too much spent on defence for pointless wars, £13bn on foreign aid (including some countries with a fucking space programme), £20bn lost through public sector fraud, £1.2bn in CAP payments to foreign farmers. As I say, I understand a country has to provide protection, roads, schools, healthcare and the like to its citizens, but I don't see why grants of £92,000 on a skip covered in flashing lights by the arts council or why the FCA paid £50,000 for a logo change that would have taken anyone on here less than two minutes on Microsoft Publisher.

So disagreement on what your taxes are spent on is the crux of it? Therefore it's imperative you vote for the right party in terms of taxation i'm guessing, or rather the party you feel most comfortable with in managing the countries taxes?

I completely agree with you we waste money on things that don't benefit society but benefit individuals! Arms trade, foreign policy etc.

Sounds like you'd perhaps favour a taxation system similar to Costa Rica?

There's a socialist deep down inside you. ;)

 

[inbetween]

Because it's my money and the welfare on offer is not commensurate with what is paid in. Tax has a place but when it's up over 50% then it stops being fair.

As an example, my father ran a successful business for many years, fell ill and had to sell his business at an inopportune time. He'd always reinvested his profits into his company and if he'd sold it a few years earlier or few years later then he'd have had sufficient to comfortably retire on. As it is, he's 72 and receives just over £1,100 gross per month from his various state pensions yet he paid tax at the highest rate for decades and employed 20 odd people for all that time. My mother receives £64 per month as she was an unofficial secretary/housewife and thus didn't get a large number of qualifying NI years.

That's a crap return for what was actually pod into the system. I urged them to call the DSS or whatever it's called now and find out if they qualify for anything, and they don't apart from a modest council tax reduction. So I send a couple of grand back to the UK each month and have done since I emigrated to supplement their household income and to allow them some sense of freedom. If I was in the U.K., I wouldn't have the disposable income to do that.

If tax monies were well spent then there's a good argument for it, but on the whole, it isn't well spent. There's too much wastage. There's too much spent on defence for pointless wars, £13bn on foreign aid (including some countries with a fucking space programme), £20bn lost through public sector fraud, £1.2bn in CAP payments to foreign farmers. As I say, I understand a country has to provide protection, roads, schools, healthcare and the like to its citizens, but I don't see why grants of £92,000 on a skip covered in flashing lights by the arts council or why the FCA paid £50,000 for a logo change that would have taken anyone on here less than two minutes on Microsoft Publisher.

And as the tax burden increases the value add from those people will decrease. I have dabbled very close with starting a business myself over the last few years but I will think again if it isn't worth it because a Corbyn government gets in and clobbers me to death before I even get going. A truly visionary Labour would see the benefits of startups and help them, his increase in the minimum wage and zero policies for startups and business would mean in the end I probably wouldn't bother.

So we can increase the tax burden on these people and feel good about ourselves but ultimately will an ever greater tax burden encourage people to create wealth, jobs and invest? I doubt it. Naturally Corbyn does not represent these people anyway so he couldn't give a toss about business or the middle classes.

I am not saying tax should be reduced but there is a point where one group is paying enough and maybe if the deficit is still there then someone is not doing the sums properly. Instead of increasing tax maybe Labour should think if we really need to waste money nationalising things like water. I would be pretty miffed if I started a business and lost all my profits in tax and it was sunk (literally) into buying out bloody United Utilities!

 

[Damocles]

Sorry but that's a bit lame.
Firstly on the point of the training I received in the RAF. It was more than amortized by the years of productive service including several training positions I held at the time. It did not help me in my civil career as I stated I had to pay for my own pilot training and license.

Secondly, in my time of employment in the U.K. My income tax was around 30% on average and that more than pays for the shit education I received. I went to the doctor twice in all that time. I did however pay for my annual aviation medical whilst flying outside of the military.
I'm completely comfortable that I more than paid my way.
I don't include any personal sacrifices made whilst serving in the military as it was my choice to serve and I left when I no longer had confidence in the governments policy for using the military. This coincided with the Blair government coming to power.

Who paid for the roads that allowed you to travel?

 

[SWP's back]

Who paid for the roads that allowed you to travel?

Road fund license.

And you don't think he paid his share at 30%?

 

[Chippy_boy]

More garbage from our PM. I can only imagine she's thinking she's going to win anyway with a huge majority, so it doesn't matter what garbage she comes up with.

What's the point of increasing inheritance tax, if you're going to take back in care costs, more than what you've given in inheritance tax benefit.

Because it's my money and the welfare on offer is not commensurate with what is paid in. Tax has a place but when it's up over 50% then it stops being fair.

As an example, my father ran a successful business for many years, fell ill and had to sell his business at an inopportune time. He'd always reinvested his profits into his company and if he'd sold it a few years earlier or few years later then he'd have had sufficient to comfortably retire on. As it is, he's 72 and receives just over £1,100 gross per month from his various state pensions yet he paid tax at the highest rate for decades and employed 20 odd people for all that time. My mother receives £64 per month as she was an unofficial secretary/housewife and thus didn't get a large number of qualifying NI years.

That's a crap return for what was actually pod into the system. I urged them to call the DSS or whatever it's called now and find out if they qualify for anything, and they don't apart from a modest council tax reduction. So I send a couple of grand back to the UK each month and have done since I emigrated to supplement their household income and to allow them some sense of freedom. If I was in the U.K., I wouldn't have the disposable income to do that.

If tax monies were well spent then there's a good argument for it, but on the whole, it isn't well spent. There's too much wastage. There's too much spent on defence for pointless wars, £13bn on foreign aid (including some countries with a fucking space programme), £20bn lost through public sector fraud, £1.2bn in CAP payments to foreign farmers. As I say, I understand a country has to provide protection, roads, schools, healthcare and the like to its citizens, but I don't see why grants of £92,000 on a skip covered in flashing lights by the arts council or why the FCA paid £50,000 for a logo change that would have taken anyone on here less than two minutes on Microsoft Publisher.

Top post.

I agree and empathise with every single word. The state is such an inefficient and wasteful entity, money given to them (i.e. taken off you) is largely wasted. And i include councils in "the state" by the way - they are just as bad. Therefore, logically, we need the state to do as little as possible and be given as little money as possible. And allow more efficient organisations to do whatever work needs doing. Organisations to whom pissing money down the drain, actually matters.

Anecdotally, we have traffic lights now junction 14. We didn't need them and nobody asked for them. But the council figured it could not think of anything more worthy to waste £600,000 on, so they dicked about with some tarmac and moving a couple of curbs and put the lights in. They've been a disaster, causing chaos and untold congestion. So the council spent another £500,000 on tweaking it to try to make it work. It didn't, it's just as bad.

So now they just turn the lights off, and revert to how it was before they put them in. That's too embarrassing though, having wasted £1.1m of our money, which could have gone on extra nurses, or school facilities, or whatever. So they turn the lights back on during the day time, when there's no cars there. You could not make it up.

I've posted previously about how the local council is spending £200m on a bus lane that no-one wants. Have they not heard that there's austerity going on? They've just put the rates up by the maximum amount and are wasting £200m on a fucking bus lane. It does my head in.

 

[crystal_mais]

I'm up in the air about this election. For me neither Labour or Conservative do it for me. I'd prefer a more centric party for where I am in the world.

Labour has some good points but there are some which are just not right.

I understand about additional taxation of people earning over salary bands. For me I still see anything about 40% as too much. But that's me, and I am no way near that particular salary range.
The 2 I don't agree with
- Additional VAT on Private Education fees - Why would you want to apply this. Parents at Independent schools are not all wealthy. Some are working 2 jobs and making other sacrifices to send their kids to private schools. They are already saving the government money by taking them out of State school education, so this is just an additional taxation.
- Additional Taxation on Private Healthcare - Again people are paying out of their pocket for Private Healthcare - not all rich people too. This is just another money grab. These people are generally relieving the burden on the NHS.
- Increase Corporation Tax to 26% - I'm a small business and this will hit my company and I already pay a good chunk in Corp Tax and Personal Tax
- Inheritance Tax - Why increase taxation on something that tax has already been paid on -

That's just a few things. I understand thinking about all, but for some of us in which I class as the middle we are getting shafted by both parties.

For me both parties need to be going after big Corporations who are taking the piss. Doesn't matter where they are based. If they make money in this country they pay the right level of tax earnt in this country.

 

[Damocles]

Road fund license.

And you don't think he paid his share at 30%?

So the Government. Who ensured he has clean air and water? Who paid for the healthcare of the nation to ensure he didn't get smallpox? Who paid his way for 10 years and have him an out?

As I've pointed out in great detail, this "I did it on my own" stuff is a total myth believed either by people who aren't really thinking it through. This isnt an ideological argument it's a statement of fact unless you happen to be from Liberia or Somalia.

And as I previously mentioned, the idea of a "fair share" doesn't make any sense. This is like asking if when you win at the bookies, them giving you your higher stake back is a "fair share". I can't answer this because the question is malformed. There's no such thing as a fair or unfair share. There's no such thing as a share. Yes, tax rates can theoretically become too high if that's the question.

 

[Gelsons Dad]

Who paid for the roads that allowed you to travel?

Lol!
My taxes contributed my share. As you know full well. They also covered those who didn't pay any tax.

 

[Gelsons Dad]

So the Government. Who ensured he has clean air and water? Who paid for the healthcare of the nation to ensure he didn't get smallpox? Who paid his way for 10 years and have him an out?

As I've pointed out in great detail, this "I did it on my own" stuff is a total myth believed either by people who aren't really thinking it through. This isnt an ideological argument it's a statement of fact unless you happen to be from Liberia or Somalia.

And as I previously mentioned, the idea of a "fair share" doesn't make any sense. This is like asking if when you win at the bookies, them giving you your higher stake back is a "fair share". I can't answer this because the question is malformed. There's no such thing as a fair or unfair share. There's no such thing as a share. Yes, tax rates can theoretically become too high if that's the question.

You've lost the plot mate.
Everyone contributing more than average taxes is funding not only their own way but that of others also.

 

[mat]

I see the Tory serfs are handing out the questions to ask the PM after the manifesto launch.

"We are the true party of the workers. You will work or not get any benefits otherwise creating a strong and stable economy for my already rich friends"

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

Why are some people so against paying taxes? Interested to hear the arguments.

Personally, I'd rather live in a fair society that works and have to pay a bit more to the government every year than one where the sick, elderly, young and inferm are left to rot. And for that you have to pay for it.

Agreed....but thats not happening is it?

1) NHS is a shambles 3 week wait to see the GP and a proposal from the Conservatives that GP's should work in A&E to ease the backlog
2) means testing the elderly to remove their winter fuel allowance (Probably cost more to implement than savings ...next will be taking their free bus passes off them.
3) Social Care reform ...... don't make me fuc£ing laugh. The government still end up taking your house and all your assets.
4) Kids expected to find a job on JSA/ feed themselves etc.


Instead they make the choice of renewing trident (167 billion)/ building a railway line no one wants (70 billion)/ reducing corporation tax / Giving themselves £1049 a year pay rise (1st April) / refurbishing the houses of parliament (5.7 billion) / decorating the house of the richest woman on earth £369 million

One thing the tories will always do is to penalise the elderly / disabled / unemployed for the woes of this country. Please remind me again how many bankers went to prison as a result of the financial crisis of 2008


i could go on ...

 

[Damocles]

I agree and empathise with every single word. The state is such an inefficient and wasteful entity, money given to them (i.e. taken off you) is largely wasted. And i include councils in "the state" by the way - they are just as bad. Therefore, logically, we need the state to do as little as possible and be given as little money as possible. And allow more efficient organisations to do whatever work needs doing. Organisations to whom pissing money down the drain, actually matters.

This Libertarianism after the fact is the stupidest of all political positions.

I'll tell you what, Somalia has no state controlled entities and is essentially the "tiny Government with no spending". Can you explain why it's not currently a capitalist paradise and you aren't living there?

And don't use the term "logically" when you mean "in my opinion".

 

[SWP's back]

means testing the elderly to remove their winter fuel allowance (Probably cost more to implement than savings ...next will be taking their free bus passes off them.

Why shouldn't they be?

Why should a millionaire retiree get the same as someone on the breadline.

And it's expected to save £1bn. Not a small number.