The Politics Thread

[Hoboh]

The number of hours worked a week is an erroneous statistic. The point is that those on 150K a year can comfortably afford to be taxed a bit more, especially in times of hardship.

It's much easier for someone who is earning 150K a year to protect themselves in a recession than for a minimum wage earner.

And let's not pretend that all the folk earning in the top tax bracket are working flat out, that will include footballers for example. If you earn vast sums then you should have a moral duty and you should be happy to give back as much as asked to society, especially when it's having hard times.

Everyone should want to improve society top to bottom. And they should be prepared to do something about it.

"If you earn vast sums then you should have a moral duty and you should be happy to give back as much as asked to society, especially when it's having hard times".

WTF are you on about?? I have no "moral duty" to pay for everyone else and why should I or anyone else be happy to give as much as asked to folk in society who DON'T GIVE A SHIT about going to school 'cause it's boring so leave being unable to fill in even the most basic forms, loot, riot, do drugs because they have the IQ of a pea or 'cause their mates think it's cool. These same people who care not a jot about beating up and robbing OAP's and cannot be arsed getting work because they have to get up, get told what to do and put something into society BEFORE they start taking out.
Man the only tax you know is a jealousy tax, now't else! Moral my ass!

[The Axman]

Moral my ass!

There ought to be a tax on that, plus VAT at 25%.

[BWFC_Insane]

The number of hours worked a week is an erroneous statistic. The point is that those on 150K a year can comfortably afford to be taxed a bit more, especially in times of hardship.

It's much easier for someone who is earning 150K a year to protect themselves in a recession than for a minimum wage earner.

And let's not pretend that all the folk earning in the top tax bracket are working flat out, that will include footballers for example. If you earn vast sums then you should have a moral duty and you should be happy to give back as much as asked to society, especially when it's having hard times.

Everyone should want to improve society top to bottom. And they should be prepared to do something about it.

"If you earn vast sums then you should have a moral duty and you should be happy to give back as much as asked to society, especially when it's having hard times".

WTF are you on about?? I have no "moral duty" to pay for everyone else and why should I or anyone else be happy to give as much as asked to folk in society who DON'T GIVE A SHIT about going to school 'cause it's boring so leave being unable to fill in even the most basic forms, loot, riot, do drugs because they have the IQ of a pea or 'cause their mates think it's cool. These same people who care not a jot about beating up and robbing OAP's and cannot be arsed getting work because they have to get up, get told what to do and put something into society BEFORE they start taking out.
Man the only tax you know is a jealousy tax, now't else! Moral my ass!

Think you will find plenty in the top tax bracket guilty of that.

And the point is, from top to bottom we should all work and be prepared to do our bit for a better society.

Everyone should have a moral duty for that. And you're not "paying for everyone else" you're paying tax proportionate to what you earn that allows society to be improved for the benefit of all.

All the social issues you describe will only get worse as the wealth gap widens and kids at the bottom feel that they have no chance in life and are de-motivated from the start, especially as this passes from generation to generation.

Kids who have parents who've never worked for example. I'm all for making life very uncomfortable indeed for people who choose not to work and live off benefits. However, first you need viable jobs for these people to do. Its no good stopping their benefits when actually given they've got no qualifications or experience they can't get a job anyway. That sort of thing needs government investment. To create the jobs either through private sector incentives or public sector job creation. Either way if you want to fix society then you're going to have to do sommat about it.

Either that or drift further and further towards a society where the poor get poorer in their trailer parks and the top 10% bleed the system dry for their own wealth.

Its not where I want to be.

If thats what you want then fine. I get the "I'm alright Jack" mentality. Hell we're all guilty of it. But don't moan next time there is a story about a footballer on 50K a week playing on his PS3 for half the day counting his pennies and buying his way out of speeding tickets......

[Hoboh]

The number of hours worked a week is an erroneous statistic. The point is that those on 150K a year can comfortably afford to be taxed a bit more, especially in times of hardship.

It's much easier for someone who is earning 150K a year to protect themselves in a recession than for a minimum wage earner.

And let's not pretend that all the folk earning in the top tax bracket are working flat out, that will include footballers for example. If you earn vast sums then you should have a moral duty and you should be happy to give back as much as asked to society, especially when it's having hard times.

Everyone should want to improve society top to bottom. And they should be prepared to do something about it.

"If you earn vast sums then you should have a moral duty and you should be happy to give back as much as asked to society, especially when it's having hard times".

WTF are you on about?? I have no "moral duty" to pay for everyone else and why should I or anyone else be happy to give as much as asked to folk in society who DON'T GIVE A SHIT about going to school 'cause it's boring so leave being unable to fill in even the most basic forms, loot, riot, do drugs because they have the IQ of a pea or 'cause their mates think it's cool. These same people who care not a jot about beating up and robbing OAP's and cannot be arsed getting work because they have to get up, get told what to do and put something into society BEFORE they start taking out.
Man the only tax you know is a jealousy tax, now't else! Moral my ass!

Think you will find plenty in the top tax bracket guilty of that.

And the point is, from top to bottom we should all work and be prepared to do our bit for a better society.

Everyone should have a moral duty for that. And you're not "paying for everyone else" you're paying tax proportionate to what you earn that allows society to be improved for the benefit of all.

All the social issues you describe will only get worse as the wealth gap widens and kids at the bottom feel that they have no chance in life and are de-motivated from the start, especially as this passes from generation to generation.

Kids who have parents who've never worked for example. I'm all for making life very uncomfortable indeed for people who choose not to work and live off benefits. However, first you need viable jobs for these people to do. Its no good stopping their benefits when actually given they've got no qualifications or experience they can't get a job anyway. That sort of thing needs government investment. To create the jobs either through private sector incentives or public sector job creation. Either way if you want to fix society then you're going to have to do sommat about it.

Either that or drift further and further towards a society where the poor get poorer in their trailer parks and the top 10% bleed the system dry for their own wealth.

Its not where I want to be.

If thats what you want then fine. I get the "I'm alright Jack" mentality. Hell we're all guilty of it. But don't moan next time there is a story about a footballer on 50K a week playing on his PS3 for half the day counting his pennies and buying his way out of speeding tickets......

Errr I think you'll find that most of the jobs done by importing forigners might start to be looked at for starters and who pray tell me is the biggest meddlers in education and hold most of the responsibilty for the mess its in!

[BWFC_Insane]

The number of hours worked a week is an erroneous statistic. The point is that those on 150K a year can comfortably afford to be taxed a bit more, especially in times of hardship.

It's much easier for someone who is earning 150K a year to protect themselves in a recession than for a minimum wage earner.

And let's not pretend that all the folk earning in the top tax bracket are working flat out, that will include footballers for example. If you earn vast sums then you should have a moral duty and you should be happy to give back as much as asked to society, especially when it's having hard times.

Everyone should want to improve society top to bottom. And they should be prepared to do something about it.

"If you earn vast sums then you should have a moral duty and you should be happy to give back as much as asked to society, especially when it's having hard times".

WTF are you on about?? I have no "moral duty" to pay for everyone else and why should I or anyone else be happy to give as much as asked to folk in society who DON'T GIVE A SHIT about going to school 'cause it's boring so leave being unable to fill in even the most basic forms, loot, riot, do drugs because they have the IQ of a pea or 'cause their mates think it's cool. These same people who care not a jot about beating up and robbing OAP's and cannot be arsed getting work because they have to get up, get told what to do and put something into society BEFORE they start taking out.
Man the only tax you know is a jealousy tax, now't else! Moral my ass!

Think you will find plenty in the top tax bracket guilty of that.

And the point is, from top to bottom we should all work and be prepared to do our bit for a better society.

Everyone should have a moral duty for that. And you're not "paying for everyone else" you're paying tax proportionate to what you earn that allows society to be improved for the benefit of all.

All the social issues you describe will only get worse as the wealth gap widens and kids at the bottom feel that they have no chance in life and are de-motivated from the start, especially as this passes from generation to generation.

Kids who have parents who've never worked for example. I'm all for making life very uncomfortable indeed for people who choose not to work and live off benefits. However, first you need viable jobs for these people to do. Its no good stopping their benefits when actually given they've got no qualifications or experience they can't get a job anyway. That sort of thing needs government investment. To create the jobs either through private sector incentives or public sector job creation. Either way if you want to fix society then you're going to have to do sommat about it.

Either that or drift further and further towards a society where the poor get poorer in their trailer parks and the top 10% bleed the system dry for their own wealth.

Its not where I want to be.

If thats what you want then fine. I get the "I'm alright Jack" mentality. Hell we're all guilty of it. But don't moan next time there is a story about a footballer on 50K a week playing on his PS3 for half the day counting his pennies and buying his way out of speeding tickets......

Errr I think you'll find that most of the jobs done by importing forigners might start to be looked at for starters and who pray tell me is the biggest meddlers in education and hold most of the responsibilty for the mess its in!

Which jobs are you talking about there? Lots of foreign nurses for example. Don't fancy someone with 2 GCSE's suddenly being asked to take over from a properly qualified foreign nurse.

If you're talking about low skilled jobs, then you're problem is bridging the cost gap for those companies that employ them. They won't do it themselves. Are those "foreign workers" even official tax paying jobs. If not you're going to have to pay Mr Private Company owner a lot of money to persuade him to take on a much more expensive workforce.

As for education, the fact folk don't have qualifications is nowt to do with the standards of our education system. And quite what you mean by "meddlers" I have no idea at all. The issue is a society wide one. Its that kids are taught from their parents. There are a generation of parents who see no value in education and therefore their kids have no chance. We need a combination of carrot and stick to "influence" these parents/kids into getting jobs and educations.

[Hoboh]

Put me in charge of the stick and I think consumption of carrots would multiply hugely, in fact theres some jobs, planting them!

Private company's who use the "cheap" overseas labour force by your usual reckoning are the mill owner cotton plantation "types" please don't change your view on their behalf, Croc tears at bed time?

[BWFC_Insane]

Put me in charge of the stick and I think consumption of carrots would multiply hugely, in fact theres some jobs, planting them!

Private company's who use the "cheap" overseas labour force by your usual reckoning are the mill owner cotton plantation "types" please don't change your view on their behalf, Croc tears at bed time?

I really don't know what that means.

And who is going to pay people to plant carrots?

[Worthy4England]

The number of hours worked a week is an erroneous statistic. The point is that those on 150K a year can comfortably afford to be taxed a bit more, especially in times of hardship.

It's much easier for someone who is earning 150K a year to protect themselves in a recession than for a minimum wage earner.

And let's not pretend that all the folk earning in the top tax bracket are working flat out, that will include footballers for example. If you earn vast sums then you should have a moral duty and you should be happy to give back as much as asked to society, especially when it's having hard times.

Everyone should want to improve society top to bottom. And they should be prepared to do something about it.

"If you earn vast sums then you should have a moral duty and you should be happy to give back as much as asked to society, especially when it's having hard times".

WTF are you on about?? I have no "moral duty" to pay for everyone else and why should I or anyone else be happy to give as much as asked to folk in society who DON'T GIVE A SHIT about going to school 'cause it's boring so leave being unable to fill in even the most basic forms, loot, riot, do drugs because they have the IQ of a pea or 'cause their mates think it's cool. These same people who care not a jot about beating up and robbing OAP's and cannot be arsed getting work because they have to get up, get told what to do and put something into society BEFORE they start taking out.
Man the only tax you know is a jealousy tax, now't else! Moral my ass!

Think you will find plenty in the top tax bracket guilty of that.

Round our way, there's plenty more in the bottom/zero tax bracket robbing OAP's...

Question for you.

If those on higher tax "should give more", when they do, should they stop paying their parent's utility bills etc., because they're too expensive, or do you reckon the cash to cover these will then come to their parents direct from the Government? (I'll give you a clue, a fiver on the heating allowance won't cover it). Stop paying into Charities, because the extra will take care of that too?

You have no notion what any individual gives, or whether their "I'm alright Jack" attitutdes actually encompass more people than just Jack. All your rhetoric is focussed on take, rather than what people already give, under the auspices that people on higher tax rates only ever take and they can afford it.

Flawed logic and a suggestion that time and time again has proven not to increase tax take, yet you know better.

[Hoboh]

Put me in charge of the stick and I think consumption of carrots would multiply hugely, in fact theres some jobs, planting them!

Private company's who use the "cheap" overseas labour force by your usual reckoning are the mill owner cotton plantation "types" please don't change your view on their behalf, Croc tears at bed time?

I really don't know what that means.

And who is going to pay people to plant carrots?

The same people who pay to have their strawberries/Veg picked!!

BWFCI while we continue to hand out benefits like we do to the young, the not so bright ones will never seek work at the bottom level which lets face is were most of us did. The youth of the country are making themselves unemployable just as they are making theirselves uninsurable by their stupid antics and the fact they get away mostly with it.
I feel sorry for those young who are sensible and are genuine but feck me the "gotta do everything before I'm 20" attitude has got to go. One episode of Sun, Sex and Parents will show you why no one trusts the young, in particular older managers who are responible for employment.

[Bruce Rioja]

BWFCI while we continue to hand out benefits like we do to the young, the not so bright ones will never seek work at the bottom level

Unemployment benefit is no longer paid to 16 & 17 year-olds.

[BWFC_Insane]

Put me in charge of the stick and I think consumption of carrots would multiply hugely, in fact theres some jobs, planting them!

Private company's who use the "cheap" overseas labour force by your usual reckoning are the mill owner cotton plantation "types" please don't change your view on their behalf, Croc tears at bed time?

I really don't know what that means.

And who is going to pay people to plant carrots?

The same people who pay to have their strawberries/Veg picked!!

BWFCI while we continue to hand out benefits like we do to the young, the not so bright ones will never seek work at the bottom level which lets face is were most of us did. The youth of the country are making themselves unemployable just as they are making theirselves uninsurable by their stupid antics and the fact they get away mostly with it.
I feel sorry for those young who are sensible and are genuine but feck me the "gotta do everything before I'm 20" attitude has got to go. One episode of Sun, Sex and Parents will show you why no one trusts the young, in particular older managers who are responible for employment.

I just don't have the words. We're in TD levels of generalisation here.

If we're allowed to throw around random TV shows then I chuck back at you the new Mary Portas knicker making show. Young people in Rochdale who have never worked, learning to be machinists and with one exception, loving it and embracing work even though its not something they or their parents have experienced before.

Just shows that if you can create the right opportunities in the right places you can get people re-employed.

I fully agree that a job, even on minimum wage, should be financially beneficial to benefits. You've got to get the balance right there. But no point if the right jobs aren't there in the right places.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Thing I don't understand with the 50% tax band is, we are always being told it doesn't actually raise that much money, and so is purely symbolic, and so should be got rid of. But, if it doesn't actually raise that much money, it still doesn't seem to be affecting people too much, and so any move to get rid of it is surely only symbolic. Somebody earning £160k per year pays an extra 1k. One. Somebody earning £200k pays an extra 5k*. I can't for the life of me see anybody 'going abroad' doing a 'brain drain' for five grand a year.

So, if having it is symbolic, and getting rid of it is symbolic, then, its symbolism isn't an argument either way. Which signal do we want to send? That while Cornish folk are paying 20% extra for pasties (one bloke reckoned that was going to cost him £200 per year, which by my maths -see *- means he is currently[/], pre-rise, spending twenty pounds PER WEEK on pasties) and tramps can't have special brew any more that the rich are suffering some of the burden too (even if it is largely symbolic) or, that f*ck y'all, all o' y'all, if you don't like it, trytoblowmebutyou'llnevergetthroughthegatesandtheguardsmanwillhaveyoushot?


*All figures subject to the condition my maths isn't utterly shite

Your logic is confused, if I may say so...

You can't say "it doesn't raise much, therefore it has little effect on people, therefore it's just symbolic, oh and by the way I don't actually reckon it changes people's behaviour much too...". I'm sorry, but that isn't coherent.

Now, a decent chunk of the unrealised revenue associated with this tax may well be people deliberately (and perfectly legally and even reasonably, actually) bringing forward or delaying their remuneration to avoid what was always billed as a 'temporary' tax. Lots of rich people can afford to do this to ride out a 'temporary' measure and have the control necessary to do it.

But I also do think that people underestimate how much rich people think about these things. I do believe that some individuals decide to locate themselves (or at least their money) elsewhere, work less because they are incentivised less, or come to realise that the aggressive tax avoidance that they didn't bother with before is worth it after all.

Maybe your man on £200k won't flee the country, but I do believe he'll have a good think about whether getting to £210k is worth is effort, or whether splashing out on that expensive accountant his mates on £400k use looks more like a good idea.

And above that level, people making big money in competitive worlds, often where money is way of keeping score, do not like to be ripped off or to be seen to be ripped off in any way at all - especially given that lots of these people will move in international circles and the Joneses they are keeping up with are the super rich in other countries and other tax regimes.

Football sometimes provides us with examples of the sort that aren't publicised in other industries: http://fourfourtwo.com/news/england/40191/default.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; http://www.worldsoccer.com/news/arshavi ... -cover-tax" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I once criticised Michael Portillo for intellectual laziness when he said that it was 'immoral' for a goverment to take away half of everything a citizen earned... as if morality can be determined a % cut-off point. However, I do think the 50% mark is psychologically significant and people will always resist and resent paying half or more to the state in the form of income tax, and this is why most western countries have settled on an idea that something in the 35-45% bracket is what is 'fair' or at least tolerable.

[thebish]

panic buying at the pumps and Fire Brigade warns of "massive explosion risks" with gerry cans full of petrol in everyone's garage..

nice one Mr Maude...

[Bruce Rioja]

panic buying at the pumps and Fire Brigade warns of "massive explosion risks" with gerry cans full of petrol in everyone's garage..

nice one Mr Maude...

I've got my Tupperware at the ready. I'm havin' loads of it

[thebish]

panic buying at the pumps and Fire Brigade warns of "massive explosion risks" with gerry cans full of petrol in everyone's garage..

nice one Mr Maude...

I've got my Tupperware at the ready. I'm havin' loads of it

pumps are already dry where bobo lives...

[Bruce Rioja]

panic buying at the pumps and Fire Brigade warns of "massive explosion risks" with gerry cans full of petrol in everyone's garage..

nice one Mr Maude...

I've got my Tupperware at the ready. I'm havin' loads of it

pumps are already dry where bobo lives...

Oh, Worthy must've filled up down there then!

[thebish]

panic buying at the pumps and Fire Brigade warns of "massive explosion risks" with gerry cans full of petrol in everyone's garage..

nice one Mr Maude...

I've got my Tupperware at the ready. I'm havin' loads of it

pumps are already dry where bobo lives...

Oh, Worthy must've filled up down there then!

we'll be OK - I've filled my bath with petrol...

[William the White]

I once panic bought a houseplant.

It was during the 1978-79 'Winter of Discontent' when public service strikes, and threats of them, led to a wave of mass panic buying.

By the time I got to the big Tesco in Rochdale, where I was then working, it was stripped almost bare. No food whatsoever.

So I had to panic buy a selection of what was left - which in my case was a houseplant and a bottle of Teachers whisky.

[The Axman]

What's happening with the diesel? They still going to deliver that?
This news story is one-sided Hydrocarbonist propaganda.

[Bruce Rioja]

What year was it when the bakers went on strike? I wish they'd hurry up and do it again.