Tories

[Happy Face 29]

Lower income tax will increase disposable income. People in debt can therefore choose to pay off their debt.

 

 

Tax on the goods and services they pay for will rise exponentially because of the amount of tax income lost from the wealthiest people, so the poor will be FAR worse off.

 

Only the wealthy benefit from that proposal.

 

 

Lower income earners would be worse off if there was a flat rate rise in taxes. But as I've already said, if VAT was implemented properly it would be a much better system.

 

What do you mean 'properly'? VAT can only be added at a flat rate Shirley.

 

JD Rockerfeller would pay the same amount to the government as Joey Boswell if that were the case.

[Guest alex]

Phil, what exactly are you proposing re: VAT here?

[Phil 6]

Lower income tax will increase disposable income. People in debt can therefore choose to pay off their debt.

 

 

Tax on the goods and services they pay for will rise exponentially because of the amount of tax income lost from the wealthiest people, so the poor will be FAR worse off.

 

Only the wealthy benefit from that proposal.

 

 

Lower income earners would be worse off if there was a flat rate rise in taxes. But as I've already said, if VAT was implemented properly it would be a much better system.

 

What do you mean 'properly'? VAT can only be added at a flat rate Shirley.

 

JD Rockerfeller would pay the same amount to the government as Joey Boswell if that were the case.

 

I mean gear it more as it was originally intended. i.e. for luxury items, 5% on gas and electricity is just plain wrong.

 

 

Having said that this whole debate is moot as the Tories dont want to scrap income tax and the recent income tax band rise was a Lib-dem policy.

[LeazesMag 0]

Lower income tax will increase disposable income. People in debt can therefore choose to pay off their debt.

 

 

Tax on the goods and services they pay for will rise exponentially because of the amount of tax income lost from the wealthiest people, so the poor will be FAR worse off.

 

Only the wealthy benefit from that proposal.

 

 

Lower income earners would be worse off if there was a flat rate rise in taxes. But as I've already said, if VAT was implemented properly it would be a much better system.

 

What do you mean 'properly'? VAT can only be added at a flat rate Shirley.

 

JD Rockerfeller would pay the same amount to the government as Joey Boswell if that were the case.

 

I mean gear it more as it was originally intended. i.e. for luxury items, 5% on gas and electricity is just plain wrong.

 

 

Having said that this whole debate is moot as the Tories dont want to scrap income tax and the recent income tax band rise was a Lib-dem policy.

 

I would strongly disagree with this. They would like it as low as they possibly can, hence the question.

[NJS 4044]

I would strongly disagree with this. They would like it as low as they possibly can, hence the question.

 

People have to ask themselves what will happen if for the sake of argument their 5 year plan works perfectly and the deficit is wiped out. By then (especially if they win another term) public services will a fraction of their present status - there could also be a pullout of Afghanistan by then.

 

In that scenario they would have scope for absolutely huge tax cuts - probably the abolition of the higher bands at the very least.

 

Of course handing people that much money would lead to a massive housing boom and large inflation which would take us back to square one but they'd still do it imo.

[peasepud 59]

They'll be hoping to get the deficit down heftily in 4 years, give tax cuts and watch the votes roll in just in time for the election

[Happy Face 29]

Lower income tax will increase disposable income. People in debt can therefore choose to pay off their debt.

 

 

Tax on the goods and services they pay for will rise exponentially because of the amount of tax income lost from the wealthiest people, so the poor will be FAR worse off.

 

Only the wealthy benefit from that proposal.

 

 

Lower income earners would be worse off if there was a flat rate rise in taxes. But as I've already said, if VAT was implemented properly it would be a much better system.

 

What do you mean 'properly'? VAT can only be added at a flat rate Shirley.

 

JD Rockerfeller would pay the same amount to the government as Joey Boswell if that were the case.

 

I mean gear it more as it was originally intended. i.e. for luxury items, 5% on gas and electricity is just plain wrong.

 

 

Having said that this whole debate is moot as the Tories dont want to scrap income tax and the recent income tax band rise was a Lib-dem policy.

 

 

So your plan is-

 

Cut all income tax: Cost - £20bn

Cut VAT as it stands: Cost - £10bn

Apply higher rate of VAT on luxury items: profit - £30bn

 

That's some VAT to be paid on Fois Gras and Ferraris.

[LeazesMag 0]

They'll be hoping to get the deficit down heftily in 4 years, give tax cuts and watch the votes roll in just in time for the election

 

 

and there is no point giving tax cuts to a massively unemployed population, all of whom is their own fault of course.

[The Fish 9340]

But the choice should really be their's to make.

 

Happy for people to make informed decisions but, "people" won't, "people" will react to what ever Simon Cowell tells them to. I would trust "people" to spend their taxable income as much as I'd trust a child to spend their pocket money. They're not going to do anything but buy sweets and Football stickers... if we're lucky.

 

I would love to have faith in the populous, but they're morons who need to be taken care of.

Edited August 12, 2010 by The Fish

[Phil 6]

Lower income tax will increase disposable income. People in debt can therefore choose to pay off their debt.

 

 

Tax on the goods and services they pay for will rise exponentially because of the amount of tax income lost from the wealthiest people, so the poor will be FAR worse off.

 

Only the wealthy benefit from that proposal.

 

 

Lower income earners would be worse off if there was a flat rate rise in taxes. But as I've already said, if VAT was implemented properly it would be a much better system.

 

What do you mean 'properly'? VAT can only be added at a flat rate Shirley.

 

JD Rockerfeller would pay the same amount to the government as Joey Boswell if that were the case.

 

I mean gear it more as it was originally intended. i.e. for luxury items, 5% on gas and electricity is just plain wrong.

 

 

Having said that this whole debate is moot as the Tories dont want to scrap income tax and the recent income tax band rise was a Lib-dem policy.

 

 

So your plan is-

 

Cut all income tax: Cost - £20bn

Cut VAT as it stands: Cost - £10bn

Apply higher rate of VAT on luxury items: profit - £30bn

 

That's some VAT to be paid on Fois Gras and Ferraris.

 

 

My plan? I think you'll find this is LM's conspiracy theory. It's absurd to think income tax will be scrapped.

 

 

If I had my way on income tax I'd raise the threshold to 25k, offsetting it against the savings made by making no interest payments.

 

 

Like I said this isn't something I would do, but when you take into account the budget cuts being maintained the maths isn't that far out.

[LeazesMag 0]

Lower income tax will increase disposable income. People in debt can therefore choose to pay off their debt.

 

 

Tax on the goods and services they pay for will rise exponentially because of the amount of tax income lost from the wealthiest people, so the poor will be FAR worse off.

 

Only the wealthy benefit from that proposal.

 

 

Lower income earners would be worse off if there was a flat rate rise in taxes. But as I've already said, if VAT was implemented properly it would be a much better system.

 

What do you mean 'properly'? VAT can only be added at a flat rate Shirley.

 

JD Rockerfeller would pay the same amount to the government as Joey Boswell if that were the case.

 

I mean gear it more as it was originally intended. i.e. for luxury items, 5% on gas and electricity is just plain wrong.

 

 

Having said that this whole debate is moot as the Tories dont want to scrap income tax and the recent income tax band rise was a Lib-dem policy.

 

 

So your plan is-

 

Cut all income tax: Cost - £20bn

Cut VAT as it stands: Cost - £10bn

Apply higher rate of VAT on luxury items: profit - £30bn

 

That's some VAT to be paid on Fois Gras and Ferraris.

 

 

My plan? I think you'll find this is LM's conspiracy theory. It's absurd to think income tax will be scrapped.

 

 

 

 

why ?

[Kitman 2188]

I assume what Phil is trying to say is you need to divorce the effect on people's net income from the effect on the Treasury. It's government's responsibility to figure out whether the sums work, and whether there's enough money in the kitty to pay for public services, such as they are.

 

As far as cutting income tax and increasing VAT, the theory is that you put the choice of incurring taxation in the hands of consumers ie if they don't spend, they won't be taxed. If all that poor people spend their money on is VAT exempt, such as fresh food - children's clothing and books - by definition they should have more disposable income. However spending is not really optional, and net disposable income is the real issue, so you would still need a system of targetted benefits to ensure poor people have enough to cover essential costs of living. I'm not convinced by that argument tbh but there is a good deal of (right wing) economic theory behind it as a concept.

 

It's worth reflecting that income tax is a highly political issue. Successive govts have shied away from increasing personal tax rates for fear of the voter backlash, although effective tax rates overall rose steadily under Labour. Employees are increasingly highly mobile these days (I took myself off to NZ after all!) and you risk losing a chunk of your taxbase altogether if income taxes are high, particularly with taxpayers whose skills are transferrable or who have the wealth to move around. Income tax is also a relatively expensive and difficult tax to administer and enforce. VAT by contrast is less emotive, less politically sensitive and much easier to administer and police. And optional to a limited degree as Phil says.

 

Not that I'm in favour of low income tax rates and high VAT rates by the way. I think a sensible balance between the two is needed. Anybody who thinks that high income tax rates are the answer like old Labour are smoking dope though, the rich will always manage down their tax bills through legal avoidance and/or emigration and it has been shown time and again that tax revenues actually increase when punitive tax rates are reduced. High VAT rates are more difficult to avoid, but again if the cost of living gets too high the rich will just go somewhere else, whereas the poor don't have that option by and large.

 

There's no doubt in my mind that the British tax system needs root and branch reform, it's a complete bugger's muddle. However the answer to poverty is not to tinker back and forth with the tax system but to raise standards of living in real terms for the poorest in a sustainable way. Then it doesn't matter how you take taxes off them. Unfortunately that's proved impossible for Labour and Tory governments alike, it's all wind and piss and no results imo. Maybe the UK is in terminal economic decline, and the politicians are just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic as it sinks......

 

Given the parlous state of UK govt finances, I think the best solution might be for the mega rich in the UK to show some decency and humanity, get off their silkwrapped arses and out from behind their locked gates, and organise themselves to do something about British poverty like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have in the US. I won't hold my breath on that one but I look forward to the next lecture from the likes of Sting and Bono about what we should all be doing to make the world a better place. Perhaps they could do something together for charidee for us to buy.

Edited August 13, 2010 by Kitman

[Happy Face 29]

It's absurd to think income tax will be scrapped.

 

It's what the tories do....

 

 

In 1974 the top-rate of income tax increased to its highest rate since the war, 83%. This applied to incomes over £20,000, and combined with a 15% surcharge on 'un-earned' income (investments and dividends) could add to a 98% marginal rate of personal income tax. In 1974, as many as 750,000 people were liable to pay the top-rate of income tax.

 

Margaret Thatcher, who favoured indirect taxation, reduced personal income tax rates during the 1980s. In the first budget after her election victory in 1979, the top rate was reduced from 83% to 60% and the basic rate from 33% to 30%. The basic rate was also cut for three successive budgets - to 29% in the 1986 budget, 27% in 1987 and to 25% in 1988. The top rate of income tax was cut to 40% in the 1988 budget.

 

In a few terms they halved the income tax rate of the wealthiest from 83% to 40%. But only dropped the basic rate for the less well off by less than a quarter (33% to 25%).

 

How can you say the less well off benefit most from that?

[kockhead 0]

Its called income tax what a fucking sham. Its fucking tax to China you silly twats. People call me thick yet people in this thread thick as pig shit. At least I know the score. Englands fucked and Chinas taking over the world. I'm learning Chinese while people in this forum roting in a shit hole. Tory or Labour its still the same. To much debt to many lazy twats to much speant on war. We act like the police of the world yet we fucking tiny country. Were fucked.

Edited August 13, 2010 by kockhead

[Happy Face 29]

To much debt to many lazy twats to much speant on war.

 

Is that a toast?

[SloopJohn 0]

 

you finished The Century Of The Self yet Happy?

Edited August 13, 2010 by SloopJohn

[Happy Face 29]

 

you finished The Century Of The Self yet Happy?

 

Halfway through episode 2. It is excellent

 

The stuff on my V+ box just takes priority at the moment though. It keeps telling me the space situation is critical.

[Guest alex]

To much debt to many lazy twats to much speant on war.

 

Is that a toast?