[Brother Leon]

People want to visit ASAP before it goes down the ****ter.

[JTM45]

Originally Posted by Brother Leon

People want to visit ASAP before it goes down the ****ter.

Spot on!
They want to be able to tell their grand children ''i was there before it was destroyed by Brexit and it wasn't half bad''.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

If it meant keeping the NHS I would pay more tax, I don't mind taxes personally I don't believe in lifting those on low incomes out of paying tax.
I'd like to see everyone pay proportionate to their income, it would save those who pay tax feeling like they are propping up those on low incomes leading to divisions within society.

It's going to cost people alot more otherwise, look at medical costs in the states, crazy

[Oliver_W]

If people earn a lot of money, they shouldn't have to pay a higher percentage of their money. 20% of Ł150k is still a lot of money, and they want to pay more of it, there's plenty of charities they can give to.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

If people earn a lot of money, they shouldn't have to pay a higher percentage of their money. 20% of Ł150k is still a lot of money, and they want to pay more of it, there's plenty of charities they can give to.

They already pay 40% on anything over Ł43K on top of the normal allowances that other people get.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by smudgie

They already pay 40% on anything over Ł43K on top of the normal allowances that other people get.

Yup, and they shouldn't pay more than 20%, like the lesser earners. There should be a flat tax rate.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Yup, and they shouldn't pay more than 20%, like the lesser earners. There should be a flat tax rate.

I totally agree.

[user104658]

I strongly believe that the best thing for the economy is for more disposable income to be in the hands of people who will actually spend it; i.e. working people (and also those in receipt of benefit). So in principle, I'm actually in favour of the highest tax rate being the 40% rate (no 45% or 50% rate), and also, I would raise the thresholds of each band rather than lowering it, including the 0% band (I think 0% under 14k would be reasonable).

I would definitely not support a 20% tax band across the board on all earnings... it would be unworkable. Full time minimum wage is roughly Ł1200 a month which is ALREADY only just about enough to scrape rent, bills and food.... if you take 20% off of that then min wage take home would be closer to Ł950 a month.

There HAS to be a basic threshold of subsistence (shelter, fuel, food) that is allowed for before the government starts taking a slice of the pie.

Also remember that the 0% band doesn't only apply to people on low incomes... the first Ł11.5k of your earnings is tax free no matter HOW much you earn.



Current rates are:

Personal Allowance (0%)
Up to Ł11,500

Basic rate (20%)
Ł11,501 to Ł45,000

Higher rate (40%)
Ł45,001 to Ł150,000

Additional rate (45%)
over Ł150,000


I personally would support:

Personal Allowance (0%)
Up to Ł14,000

Basic rate (20%)
Ł14,001 to Ł55,000

Higher rate (40%)
Ł55,001 and above

Additional rate
none


Though obviously you couldn't do something that drastic over night, it would be a significant restructuring of tax income.



Oh... also I would never have VAT any higher than 12.5%. 20% is a ridiculous VAT rate.

[user104658]

Oh and I also think that a couple's tax free allowance should be fully transferrable. IMO it's somewhat ridiculous that a family with two working parents on Ł25,000 currently has a significantly higher take-home pay than a couple with one earner on Ł50k and the other stay-at-home. In other words, for families, tax rates should apply to the household rather than each individual. Literally everything else that is means-tested is tested against household income so why isn't tax?

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I would definitely not support a 20% tax band across the board on all earnings... it would be unworkable. Full time minimum wage is roughly Ł1200 a month which is ALREADY only just about enough to scrape rent, bills and food.... if you take 20% off of that then min wage take home would be closer to Ł950 a month.

When I say there should be a flat rate, I still believe in the current tax-free allowance, and even that it should be higher - but I also think everyone who does pay tax should pay the same percentage.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Oh and I also think that a couple's tax free allowance should be fully transferrable. IMO it's somewhat ridiculous that a family with two working parents on Ł25,000 currently has a significantly higher take-home pay than a couple with one earner on Ł50k and the other stay-at-home. In other words, for families, tax rates should apply to the household rather than each individual. Literally everything else that is means-tested is tested against household income so why isn't tax?

I don't know but I would imagine it may be related to the higher costs/expenses of a two-parent income i.e. childcare. One would assume that the non-working parent is providing childcare.

[Kizzy]

I would tax everyone I would have a 5% rate for those under 11,500 just so nobody can say that they aren't contributing but like TS I would offset that by reducing VAT.
I would come after tax avoiders.

[DemolitionRed]

Corporation tax is the problem. http://www.progressivepulse.org/econ...tity-of-money/ Its economic incompetence.

[GiRTh]

A flat tax rate is not workable. It puts too much burden on the lower incomes who are simply unable to pay as much as the higher incomes. A progressive taxation system is much fairer regarding a more equal distribution of wealth.

Its a fascinating subject that cannot easily be summed up in a nice 20 - 30 word post. There are many economic theories that all work but the best system is to pull the best ideas from each theory.

The question is how does a country become a rich country? And I dont believe a flat or regressive tax rate can achieve growth at a sufficient rate.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I strongly believe that the best thing for the economy is for more disposable income to be in the hands of people who will actually spend it; i.e. working people (and also those in receipt of benefit). So in principle, I'm actually in favour of the highest tax rate being the 40% rate (no 45% or 50% rate), and also, I would raise the thresholds of each band rather than lowering it, including the 0% band (I think 0% under 14k would be reasonable).

I would definitely not support a 20% tax band across the board on all earnings... it would be unworkable. Full time minimum wage is roughly Ł1200 a month which is ALREADY only just about enough to scrape rent, bills and food.... if you take 20% off of that then min wage take home would be closer to Ł950 a month.

There HAS to be a basic threshold of subsistence (shelter, fuel, food) that is allowed for before the government starts taking a slice of the pie.

Also remember that the 0% band doesn't only apply to people on low incomes... the first Ł11.5k of your earnings is tax free no matter HOW much you earn.



Current rates are:

Personal Allowance (0%)
Up to Ł11,500

Basic rate (20%)
Ł11,501 to Ł45,000

Higher rate (40%)
Ł45,001 to Ł150,000

Additional rate (45%)
over Ł150,000


I personally would support:

Personal Allowance (0%)
Up to Ł14,000

Basic rate (20%)
Ł14,001 to Ł55,000

Higher rate (40%)
Ł55,001 and above

Additional rate
none


Though obviously you couldn't do something that drastic over night, it would be a significant restructuring of tax income.



Oh... also I would never have VAT any higher than 12.5%. 20% is a ridiculous VAT rate.

I would like to see the tax free allowance taken up to Ł15K.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

A flat tax rate is not workable. It puts too much burden on the lower incomes who are simply unable to pay as much as the higher incomes.

They wouldn't be paying as much - 20% of Ł16k is less than 20% of Ł100k.

[GiRTh]

Percentage its the same but proportionally its much more. The logic being that the person on 16k paying 20% would impact their disposable income much more than a person paying 20% on 100k.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Percentage its the same but proportionally its much more. The logic being that the person on 16k paying 20% would impact their disposable income much more than a person paying 20% on 100k.

Someone who earns Ł100k evidently works much harder than someone earning Ł16k, why shouldn't they have more disposable income? What's more, people live to their means. Someone who bought a sic mansion and keep it ticking along with their family inside wouldn't appreciate being told to pay more tax.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Someone who earns Ł100k evidently works much harder than someone earning Ł16k, why shouldn't they have more disposable income? What's more, people live to their means. Someone who bought a sic mansion and keep it ticking along with their family inside wouldn't appreciate being told to pay more tax.

I bring you back to the question I posed - How does a country become rich?

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I bring you back to the question I posed - How does a country become rich?

What do you mean by "a country" ? /if you mean the people within it, they can become rich by working hard, and if they don't work hard they don't deserve to be rich.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

What do you mean by "a country" ? /if you mean the people within it, they can become rich by working hard, and if they don't work hard they don't deserve to be rich.

Oh dear.

What's the difference between microeconomics and macroeconomics?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

What do you mean by "a country" ? /if you mean the people within it, they can become rich by working hard, and if they don't work hard they don't deserve to be rich.

The American Dream? I'm pretty sure even Americans don't believe in that any more .

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

What do you mean by "a country" ? /if you mean the people within it, they can become rich by working hard, and if they don't work hard they don't deserve to be rich.

This is such a neoliberal way of thinking.

My husband earns considerably more money than I do but its a business he inherited some years ago that just earns him money without him doing very much at all. I could work a forty hour week doing a professional job and never earn what he earns working a ten to fifteen hour week. I don't begrudge him his earnings because I benefit from it too but please don't suggest my job has less value than his.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

What do you mean by "a country" ? /if you mean the people within it, they can become rich by working hard, and if they don't work hard they don't deserve to be rich.

This is such a neoliberal way of thinking.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Oh dear.

What's the difference between microeconomics and macroeconomics?

So what's your definition of "a country", and how can it be made rich?

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

This is such a neoliberal way of thinking.

My husband earns considerably more money than I do but its a business he inherited some years ago that just earns him money without him doing very much at all. I could work a forty hour week doing a professional job and never earn what he earns working a ten to fifteen hour week. I don't begrudge him his earnings because I benefit from it too but please don't suggest my job has less value than his.

Someone worked hard to build that business. By running it he's creating and maintaining jobs - that's pretty darn valuable.