Calls for single 30% income tax rate - Page 3

danielf · 28-05-2012, 13:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

I realize I make very simplistic claims.... I would just like to challenge the common denominator a little bit and see a system where hard work is rewarded and people get to keep the fruit of their labour....

I don't think anyone would disagree with that. I would argue that high earners paying more enables more rewards for the labour of low earners. I also think there should be a decent safety net for those unable to work, and those who find themselves out of a job. My enjoyment of life isn't just determined by the size of my bank account. It's also determined by the plight of those around me. I really don't think the society you seem to envisage would be a nice place to live in.

Will21st · 28-05-2012, 13:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

I don't think anyone would disagree with that. I would argue that high earners paying more enables more rewards for the labour of low earners. I also think there should be a decent safety net for those unable to work, and those who find themselves out of a job. My enjoyment of life isn't just determined by the size of my bank account. It's also determined by the plight of those around me. I really don't think the society you seem to envisage would be a nice place to live in.

Hmmm,
so you think I have no compassion for others?

Of course money isn't everything,and no one likes to see others suffer.

However sometimes I believe people are very quick to let others foot the bill whilst not helping themselves all too much.THAT is what I am against...

danielf · 28-05-2012, 13:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

Hmmm,
so you think I have no compassion for others?

Of course money isn't everything,and no one likes to see others suffer.

However sometimes I believe people are very quick to let others foot the bill whilst not helping themselves all too much.THAT is what I am against...

I don't think anyone is in favour of that. So I guess the question then becomes how hard you want to clamp down on it. Seeing that clamping down will inevitably affect innocents as well, I tend to favour a relatively relaxed approach. But that's just laid-back old me

Will21st · 28-05-2012, 13:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

I don't think anyone is in favour of that. So I guess the question then becomes how hard you want to clamp down on it. Seeing that clamping down will inevitably affect innocents as well, I tend to favour a relatively relaxed approach. But that's just laid-back old me

what's the word again? gedoogen?

danielf · 28-05-2012, 13:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

what's the word again? gedoogen?

I suppose you could use that word, but you'd need to drop one 'o' or look like you learnt to spell in the medieval times

Will21st · 28-05-2012, 13:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

I suppose you could use that word, but you'd need to drop one 'o' or look like you learnt to spell in the medieval times

gedogen...

I shall try some of that more frequently.Other wise my points stand as they are!

martyh · 28-05-2012, 16:00

We aren't forgetting that the separate NI payments will be merged into the 30% flat rate along with at least a 5% cut in fuel duty are we?,and if that is coupled with a Â£10,000 threshold then i think a large majority of lower paid workers will be much better off.

ntluser · 28-05-2012, 16:02

Paying higher taxes is something that people would not mind if goverments did not waste the funds collected on unwise and imprudent spending.Many times the National Audit Office has commented unfavourably about wasteful government spending.

Given too that the government is cutting ordinary people's incomes it would be nice if they set a good example like Francois Hollande, the new French PM has done by cutting cabinet salaries by 30% not the measly 5% in Cameron's cabinet.

It would also help if any transition from 20% to 30% was phased so that it did not impact negatively on the poor.Sudden reductions of income are not good as they do not give people sufficient time to adjust their lifestyle to their new reduced means.

As a pensioner I would pay the extra 10% but in return I would expect to receive the new inflation - linked Â£140 per week pension coming in around 2015 as I retired after 2010 and have input the necessary 30 years of National Insurance contributions. As things stand I will only receive the current pension of just over Â£107 per week.

Like a lot of things we will have to wait and see the proposals in detail.

martyh · 28-05-2012, 16:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by ntluser

Paying higher taxes is something that people would not mind

Strictly speaking it's not higher taxes that are being proposed ,it's more of a merge of income tax and NI contributions

**Hugh** · 28-05-2012, 16:20

Re the French cutting the salaries of the President, Prime Minister, and the rest of the Cabinet - it's important to compare like with like.

The President's salary is 221,000 Euros (Â£177k) per year (plus expenses) and the Prime Minister earns approx 267,000 Euros (Â£214k) per year (plus expenses) - reducing this by 30% brings them down to Â£124k and Â£150k per year, versus the UK Prime Minister's salary of Â£142k; so the new French Prime Minister will still earn more than ours.

martyh · 28-05-2012, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

Re the French cutting the salaries of the President, Prime Minister, and the rest of the Cabinet - it's important to compare like with like.

The President's salary is 221,000 Euros (Â£177k) per year (plus expenses) and the Prime Minister earns approx 267,000 Euros (Â£214k) per year (plus expenses) - reducing this by 30% brings them down to Â£124k and Â£150k per year, versus the UK Prime Minister's salary of Â£142k; so the new French Prime Minister will still earn more than ours.

How does a president earn less than a prime minister ?

**Hugh** · 28-05-2012, 19:34

More 'expenses'....

ntluser · 29-05-2012, 05:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

Strictly speaking it's not higher taxes that are being proposed ,it's more of a merge of income tax and NI contributions

Thanks for the correction.

Given that non-working pensioners do not pay National Insurance does that mean all pensioners will now be required to pay it under the new arrangement?

If so then the merger of the two will be an increase in tax for me.

---------- Post added at 06:38 ---------- Previous post was at 06:21 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

Re the French cutting the salaries of the President, Prime Minister, and the rest of the Cabinet - it's important to compare like with like.

The President's salary is 221,000 Euros (Â£177k) per year (plus expenses) and the Prime Minister earns approx 267,000 Euros (Â£214k) per year (plus expenses) - reducing this by 30% brings them down to Â£124k and Â£150k per year, versus the UK Prime Minister's salary of Â£142k; so the new French Prime Minister will still earn more than ours.

Perhaps so, but at least a substantial cut has been made not a minor one and just as shareholders are getting fed up with failing,overpaid company bosses, voters are getting fed up with our failing, overpaid and not so honourable MPs.

Instead of reforming everybody else's pay, pensions and conditions, they should start with their own which has been an embarrassment for years.

Chrysalis · 30-05-2012, 16:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

Taxes should be as low as possible to encourage people to work hard for a nice,juicy paycheck...

by the way,here is what I would like to see as a measure to get this country going...

flat 20% tax on ALL income

flat 15% corporation tax

10% corporation tax for 10 years for companies who move to Britain ,then regular rate.

infrastructure projects to be greenlit within 6 months,and to be rejected only when absolutely necessary.

planning laws to be simplified so millions of new homes can be built on green-belt land.

on the issue of benefits:

limit unemployment benefits to 5 years in a lifetime,max!

social housing will only be granted for the time of the emergency situation...
once circumstances change,tenants will be evicted to make room for others in need.

every child lowers a couples tax rate by 2% p.a. until the child is 21. (3 kids means 6% lowered tax bill.

single parents will not receive the tax rebates.

you one of the mislead who thinks welfare is money down the drain.

tax and welfare fuels economies as it is money circulation.

Cutting taxes allows bank balances to swell (bad for economy) and means public services cuts (also bad for economy). Not to mention both policies are pro rich policies.

Yes living standards are poor here compared to countries with higher taxation and welfare levels. Those countires also have better employment laws as well meaning workers are generally better off. Of course they not so pro capitalist as us and the richest may suffer a bit, is that the problem?

Your ideas would give a huge deficit given that unemplyoment benefits are a tiny tiny part of the budget, they nowhere near give the savings you would expect for those kind of tax cuts.

To achieve those tax rates we could maybe scrap the ministry of defense and pensions?

MartJ · 02-06-2012, 16:13

Don't think this would be picked up by any of the mainstream political parties, as merging Tax & NI and creating a rate of 30%, would mean a 10% increase in tax for all those who have retired and no longer pay NI.

Given that the over 60's make up a significant proportion of the electorate a guaranteed vote loser if picked up.