| Article which riled me this morning 09:19 - Jun 18 with 13271 views | Guthrum |
'Why does it take a tragedy like this for ministers to put lives above money?'
Real answer: Because it's only after something like this that the mass of the electorate change their own priority - low taxation at all costs. If people (other than those immediately affected) wanted safety to be a priority, they would have demanded and voted for policies which reflect that. Rather than kicking up a storm at even a slight adjustment of NI.
As a nation we have to make a choice between raising contributions* and lowering expectations.
* And not just "other people" (the rich, companies), all of us. |  |
| |  |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:28 - Jun 18 with 8843 views | Herbivore |
I'd be happy to pay more tax for better public services. I do feel tho that taxation on corporations and the wealthy should be more progressive than is currently the case too. Those who benefit most from a society predicated on gross inequality ought to contribute the most to its upkeep. |  |
| |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:37 - Jun 18 with 8799 views | TractorWood |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:28 - Jun 18 by Herbivore |
I'd be happy to pay more tax for better public services. I do feel tho that taxation on corporations and the wealthy should be more progressive than is currently the case too. Those who benefit most from a society predicated on gross inequality ought to contribute the most to its upkeep. |
I agree but the election seemed to focus on trying to coerce the comfortable middle class into voting labour for the greater societal good. This is wrong in my opinion, we need a party that 'gets' your most apt of sentences 'Those who benefit most from a society predicated on gross inequality ought to contribute the most to its upkeep'.
Ie those making hundreds of thousands every year with lavish cars and multiple homes. |  |
| |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:41 - Jun 18 with 8786 views | FrowsyArmLarry |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:28 - Jun 18 by Herbivore |
I'd be happy to pay more tax for better public services. I do feel tho that taxation on corporations and the wealthy should be more progressive than is currently the case too. Those who benefit most from a society predicated on gross inequality ought to contribute the most to its upkeep. |
Unfortunately people payed in dividends pay the least tax. The only way to get around that is to massively increase corporation tax.... maybe to around 60% of profits?
Could mean a lot of jobs lost though |  | | |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:46 - Jun 18 with 8763 views | BlueNomad |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:28 - Jun 18 by Herbivore |
I'd be happy to pay more tax for better public services. I do feel tho that taxation on corporations and the wealthy should be more progressive than is currently the case too. Those who benefit most from a society predicated on gross inequality ought to contribute the most to its upkeep. |
Effective collection of taxes under the current regime would be a start!! |  | | |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:53 - Jun 18 with 8742 views | Herbivore |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:46 - Jun 18 by BlueNomad |
Effective collection of taxes under the current regime would be a start!! |
Agreed, proper enforcement would raise billions to begin with. I do think a corporate tax rate below 20% is a bit of a piss take though. | |
| |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:57 - Jun 18 with 8729 views | Pendejo |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:53 - Jun 18 by Herbivore |
Agreed, proper enforcement would raise billions to begin with. I do think a corporate tax rate below 20% is a bit of a piss take though. |
and once collected... prudently spent for the benefit of the majority and / or those in most need |  |
| |
| Article which riled me this morning on 10:21 - Jun 18 with 8703 views | Bluesquid |
Why of course! It's the electorates fault!!
lol, I mean who else could it have been? 
If the proles want to be safe in their home's then they need to pay more, more, more!!!
Why don't you mosey on down to Kensington and Chelsea and tell the survivor's and the friends and relative's of those who died in that tower that this tragedy could of been avoided if they - as part of the electorate, were only willing to pay more in taxes.
Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria - they all cost a pretty penny didn't they?
Always money for war. |  | | |
| Article which riled me this morning on 10:23 - Jun 18 with 8690 views | blue_oyster |
Low taxation, sure, but 'at all costs' is your bit of spin because you desire a utopian society instead of a workable solution. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Article which riled me this morning on 10:25 - Jun 18 with 8688 views | No9 |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:41 - Jun 18 by FrowsyArmLarry |
Unfortunately people payed in dividends pay the least tax. The only way to get around that is to massively increase corporation tax.... maybe to around 60% of profits?
Could mean a lot of jobs lost though |
Because of the way in which employment / unemployment is counted no one knows for sure how many people are 'active' in the economy.
The tax system needs to be overhauled by any measure the HMRC spend a lot of time working to get tax from the people at the lower end, understandabley because it is easier, & less from the top end, even the HoP Select Committee has stated this but, until we have a political party willing to put this on the eganda nothing will happen.
BTW, large foreign corporations have cosy agreements with HMRC via the 4 big accountancy firms | | | |
| Article which riled me this morning on 12:04 - Jun 18 with 8554 views | tractorboy1978 |
| Article which riled me this morning on 09:37 - Jun 18 by TractorWood |
I agree but the election seemed to focus on trying to coerce the comfortable middle class into voting labour for the greater societal good. This is wrong in my opinion, we need a party that 'gets' your most apt of sentences 'Those who benefit most from a society predicated on gross inequality ought to contribute the most to its upkeep'.
Ie those making hundreds of thousands every year with lavish cars and multiple homes. |
A lot of the population have delusions of grandeur and think that they are the 'rich' people that the Labour party think should be paying more. The real truth is that for your everyday person doing moderately well on £30-£40k odd a year, the whole tax up/down outcome has very little impact either way. Certainly not enough to swing your vote in a self interested way. | | | |
| Article which riled me this morning on 12:29 - Jun 18 with 8500 views | GlasgowBlue |
Completely agree and said this when May had to do her u-turn over the self employed NI proposals. Same with the social care policy.
Everyone says they would be happy to pay more tax to improve services but we saw a big increase in the vote for the party who said only the super rich would be paying more and a 20 point lead disappear for the party who said we all have to start contributing a bit more. |  |
| |
| Article which riled me this morning on 12:49 - Jun 18 with 8464 views | JeanManuelThetis |
As a nation we also have to make a decision whether we want a government-led safety net or not. As at the moment it is being gradually eroded with nothing to replace it. |  | | |
| Article which riled me this morning on 12:52 - Jun 18 with 8461 views | Pinewoodblue |
Reading this thread in spinal injuries unit in Sheffield where wife has been for past five weeks. Sadly we are.both underwhelmed by the experience it isn't just a money issue chucking more cash at it will not solve all the problems of the NHS. It needs a massive shake up . |  |
| |
| Article which riled me this morning on 12:54 - Jun 18 with 8448 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Article which riled me this morning on 12:52 - Jun 18 by Pinewoodblue |
Reading this thread in spinal injuries unit in Sheffield where wife has been for past five weeks. Sadly we are.both underwhelmed by the experience it isn't just a money issue chucking more cash at it will not solve all the problems of the NHS. It needs a massive shake up . |
Sorry to hear that mate. I hope Mrs Pinewood is ok? | |
| |
| Article which riled me this morning on 13:02 - Jun 18 with 8428 views | unbelievablue |
| Article which riled me this morning on 12:29 - Jun 18 by GlasgowBlue |
Completely agree and said this when May had to do her u-turn over the self employed NI proposals. Same with the social care policy.
Everyone says they would be happy to pay more tax to improve services but we saw a big increase in the vote for the party who said only the super rich would be paying more and a 20 point lead disappear for the party who said we all have to start contributing a bit more. |
Are you super rich if you earn over £80k? |  |
| |
| Article which riled me this morning on 13:20 - Jun 18 with 8377 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Article which riled me this morning on 13:02 - Jun 18 by unbelievablue |
Are you super rich if you earn over £80k? |
The way some in here reacted to a post by Chico on the subject you would think so.
Let me rephrase that. The top 5%. | |
| |
| Article which riled me this morning on 13:42 - Jun 18 with 8333 views | TractorWood |
| Article which riled me this morning on 12:52 - Jun 18 by Pinewoodblue |
Reading this thread in spinal injuries unit in Sheffield where wife has been for past five weeks. Sadly we are.both underwhelmed by the experience it isn't just a money issue chucking more cash at it will not solve all the problems of the NHS. It needs a massive shake up . |
Sorry to hear that. Agree though, NHS has the annual budget similar to that of the GDP of some reasonably sized countries and is one of the biggest employers in the world. To think it can be solved by chucking more money at it is classic escapism. | |
| |
| Article which riled me this morning on 15:08 - Jun 18 with 8263 views | Dubtractor |
| Article which riled me this morning on 12:29 - Jun 18 by GlasgowBlue |
Completely agree and said this when May had to do her u-turn over the self employed NI proposals. Same with the social care policy.
Everyone says they would be happy to pay more tax to improve services but we saw a big increase in the vote for the party who said only the super rich would be paying more and a 20 point lead disappear for the party who said we all have to start contributing a bit more. |
Bit simplistic that argument though, as Labour proposed protecting and improving public services, whereas the conservatives have spent the last 7 years consistently degrading them.
Not just about how the tax is raised, but about how you spend it. |  |
| |
| on 15:11 - Jun 18 with 8256 views | _ |
| Article which riled me this morning on 13:02 - Jun 18 by unbelievablue |
Are you super rich if you earn over £80k? |
| | | |
| Article which riled me this morning on 15:56 - Jun 18 with 8205 views | Lazymidfielder |
People on that sort of salary are already paying far more tax, of course. They certainly arent taking home 3 times what an average man does. Someone on 25k takes home over 20k per year. Someone on 75k (3 times the other) takes home 50k...
Then theres the marginal tax rate on people earning over 100k. There is already an effective tax rate of 60% on earnings between 100k and 120k ish. This, along with removal of child benefit for high earners, was brought in under a conservative government.
Also, Im amazed in the election that not many people took any note of that fact that hiking 5% on income tax for people on 80k brings in a few billion only. Its not a solution, because there arent that many of them. | | | |
| on 16:01 - Jun 18 with 8202 views | _ |
| Article which riled me this morning on 15:56 - Jun 18 by Lazymidfielder |
People on that sort of salary are already paying far more tax, of course. They certainly arent taking home 3 times what an average man does. Someone on 25k takes home over 20k per year. Someone on 75k (3 times the other) takes home 50k...
Then theres the marginal tax rate on people earning over 100k. There is already an effective tax rate of 60% on earnings between 100k and 120k ish. This, along with removal of child benefit for high earners, was brought in under a conservative government.
Also, Im amazed in the election that not many people took any note of that fact that hiking 5% on income tax for people on 80k brings in a few billion only. Its not a solution, because there arent that many of them. |
| | | |
| Article which riled me this morning on 16:30 - Jun 18 with 8159 views | Lazymidfielder |
How do those things fit with the idea that the current government simply tax the rich less and hurt the poor out of some sort of ideological malice? | | | |
| on 16:36 - Jun 18 with 8146 views | _ |
| Article which riled me this morning on 16:30 - Jun 18 by Lazymidfielder |
How do those things fit with the idea that the current government simply tax the rich less and hurt the poor out of some sort of ideological malice? |
| | | |
| Article which riled me this morning on 16:48 - Jun 18 with 8124 views | WD19 |
The property wealth divide has widened In the past decade. Conversely income inequality is less.
The situation is not good...in fact it is cr@p....but 'all time high' it is not. |  | | |
| on 16:55 - Jun 18 with 8105 views | _ |
| Article which riled me this morning on 16:48 - Jun 18 by WD19 |
The property wealth divide has widened In the past decade. Conversely income inequality is less.
The situation is not good...in fact it is cr@p....but 'all time high' it is not. |
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
