Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
It wont come as a surprise to anyone that the Daily Mail would be backing a slash in the 50p rate. There is already rumblings that its on the way out, under some cock n bull reasoning that the guys over the 50p level are hit unfairly, as its they who generate all the wealth. Let them generate the wealth by all means, but still pay the level of tax required.
As we saw under the recent revelations re Murdoch, there is too much cronyism and too much back door lobbying in government. The guys around here on low pay dont get much chance to do any Whitehall lobbying, but the corridors of power are packed with the well off shuffling around and leaning and cajoling the likes of Osborne and politicians generally.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
LOL oh really..............................
Please do get into the real world, put your prejudices to one side and try to address the way people actually behave and think and not how you wish they think and behave.
You are demonstrating here the huge flaws in socialist thinking.
Why on earth should anyone take a risk, work harder, employ someone extra if at the end of the day 52% of the extra they earn is taken from them by government? Far better for them that they take a few extra days a month off work and relax.
If you want to see growth and prosperity and as a result higher tax revenues then you must ensure that people are incentivised to invest, work harder and take risks. It is either that and encourage growth or bigger cuts to public spending.
This is not theory - this is fact, I see this in my job.
Keith and Paul - you do not exactly wish the government well so by wanting them to retain some of most economically destructive policies of the last government is no surprise and runs true to form.
BUT it is a balance, isn't it. Indeed, higher taxes for the well off can be counter productive, but the scene PaulB paints of mutual benefit in Whitehall is only too true. It is not Socialist Propaganda to recognise the relationship management involved in politics!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
bern. What is more important here is the impact on the real economy and the current and future tax revenues. When we are so deep in the economic do-do anything else is an unaffordable luxury and right now we are struggling to get out of the deepest economic do-do we have ever been dumped in.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
We should look at taking some of the lowest paid out of the tax bracket in order to stimulate the economy and take them out of the benefits system and make going back to work an attractive option.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
What they need are more and better paid jobs. They won't provide that for themselves unless they go self-employed.
Those who will take the risks and create the jobs need encouraging to do so and the subject of this thread, the 50p tax rate, discourages that.
That said - I believe in lower taxes for everyone anyway and the nil rate band has been increased by a lot and will be getting another big rise next year, so what you are suggesting is being addressed. The wrong priority in my view, but nevertheless something I can still support.
Guest 688- Registered: 16 Jul 2009
- Posts: 268
I did find it maddening when I was told that Wayne Rooney et al only pay 2 % of what they should be paying tax wise due to the judicious use of a good accountant.
We know were the tax loopholes exist.How angry do we have to be before we get of our collective backsides to fight this legalised corruption that has become endemic in our society.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i have hijacked a piece from the link that tom posted in number 11, well worth a read i think, many might have missed it.
This FT article is not what is seems. The scroungers in question are the overpaid executives in the boardrooms of British companies. According to the article, which refers to an another published last week called The Trickle-up Effect, "the chief executives of FTSE 100 companies saw their pay rise last year by a median 32 per cent. That compares with 2 per cent for most workers. This was not a blip. In 1998, the average pay of these business leaders was 47 times higher than that of employees. By 2010 the multiple had soared to 120. Yet the real value of their companies hardly changed. So much for claims that pay matches performance.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
enough said howard
funny its always a lefty idea when you look to fairness
as to this govt, i hope they get it right, to many people are hurting already
and much more to come
marek
you make a valid point
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Yes, it is a strange kind of 'fairness' that you can assign to 'lefties' whereby in order to be 'fair' you damage economic growth and job creation and reduce tax revenues, in so doing damage the less well off. All in the name of 'fairness'.
John Heron - do not be too impressed by that kind of thing. Overpaid prima-donnas like Rooney indeed will have accountants who can minimise the tax they pay. This is the problem that is created by complex tax systems and high levels of tax. Lower, simpler, flat taxes are harder to avoid and there is less incentive to do so, this is much fairer in the true sense of fair, not the 'lefties' strange idea of fairness that punishes the less well off as well as those they envy.
Mitigating and reducing tax is not something for the rich only. Everyone can take advantage of the various legal tax breaks available. There is nothing wrong with it.
Howard - we should celebrate their success, we need more successful people earning lots of money, the more the merrier.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
I have just found an article in the Speccie that covers this issue.
It reminds us that Gordon Brown, the man who introduced the 50p rate did so as no more than a trap for the Conservatives using some massaged figures. It also makes clear that, his trap aside, Brown actually agrees with the points I made about the impact of his 50p rate and indeed even a 45p rate.
This sums up Brown - all he cared about was stuffing the Conservatives even if his policies, as they have, cause massive economic problems and job losses.
Here is the link to the Speccie article:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/7145773/brown-still-hovers-over-the-50p-tax-debate.thtml
An extract here:
"""""""""""""A number of papers report today that George Osborne is minded to replace the 50p tax with Gordon Brown's original proposal: a 45p tax. How the ex-PM will be laughing. As he knows, even the 45p tax will lose money — that's why Labour didn't raise the top rate until the final four weeks of its 13 years. But the Tories haven't worked that out yet, and the Treasury is still working on the false assumptions he programmed into it.
In short, the amount of money that either tax rate will raise depends on what's called the "taxable income elasticity," or TIE — a figure suggesting how responsive various taxpayers are to rate changes. It varies for income groups. The lower-paid are less able to move their labour or money around than the rich. As various countries across the world realised this, they worked out that the best way to squeeze the rich was by lowering their tax rate.""""""""""""""""
There is a graph that shows how countries have reduced top rates of tax to increase their tax revenues.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
barry
you have clearly not read the article in post 29, business leaders are coining it in at the expense of their employees while their companies are worth no more.
in other words they are giving themselves massive salaries that they clearly haven't earned.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,706
Again cutting through the yah boo sucks political tennis going on here the reality is that punitive tax levels serve no-one well other than accountants and perhaps lawyers. All the evidence available is that tax levels much beyond 40% tend to be counter-productive and see significant rises in the use of legitimate tax avoidance schemes by those able to access them.
As someone who unfortunately has a reasonable proportion of their salary taxed at 40% I would certainly feel very uncomfortable being asked to pay more, particularly as I use little or no public services (I am a single bloke, who puts out one rubbish bag every 2-3 weeks, does not use the library etc. last visited the doctors over 2 years ago etc etc)
To be fair I do believe that as a productive member of society I should pay tax to cover such things as the NHS, the police, the military, education etc. but frankly there are limits.
The fairest tax solution and by far and away the simplest is a flat rate tax (say 20%) on all income (including investment income etc) with a sensibly set personal tax free allowance of say £15k and absolutely no other allowances, exemptions etc. The rate of tax should also be the same for business so there is no advantage for sole traders in manipulating the income and dividends they take from their business. This approach protects low earners (effectively redistributing some wealth), but does not penalise the well off
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
I have to add that regardless of leanings the Old Man and I are every month more annoyed at how much is taken off us! We use and support a significant amount of public services - kids have been through the grammar schools, we use the NHS (mostly), and as a large-ish family we use services. But we also pay that back in terms of our contribution in taxes but also in terms of contribution to society, working in charities, public services, social and health services, encouraging the kids to do voluntary work and pursue careers that will make a difference - and we still get robbed of almost 50% of what we earn!!
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
more to come deeper to
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,706
do you know something we dont Keith
are you saying that the government will be introducing large cuts in tax?
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Yes indeed Howard I think we spoke about the widening gap in pay rates between workers and the executive floor a few months ago when the latest figures were released. The pay on the shop floor remains roughly on par, whereas the executive pay has soared...so the gap continues to widen and with very little justification, as very often the talent at the top is very moderate indeed.
Its not strictly true what BarryW says there. The rich dont create wealth for the rest of us, some do. Perhaps the entrepreneurial Alan Sugar and the few like him. but generally super-rich executives are very well paid and are often very bad indeed. They create nothing.
And speaking of the very bad..one need gaze no further than the bankers..Fred Goodwin perhaps, massive salary, massive bonus, massive payout when forcefully retired...someone tell me he shouldnt pay a 50p rate in tax.
But lets not overfocus on the bankers, as maybe an argument could be made that they were hit by this crushing banking collapse and werent entirely to blame. But since Ive been following business, since I came here to London all those years ago.. Ive seen countless rubbish company executives ruin businesses and still walk away with their pockets stuffed with bonuses and pay-offs, even though they were talentless. I had several investments in city institutions over those years, and there's nothing quite like that for focusing the mind. And my gawd Ive seen some turkeys.
There was far too much pay for far too little talent in a lot of cases. The shop floor made the money but lost their jobs. The executives lost the company, but walked off into comfortable very fat cat rich retirement. They created nothing.
Let them pay top rate tax.
The streets of London may indeed be paved with gold but they are also paved with the bones of broken executives who were rubbish at what they did but still ended up as rich as Cresus..
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
ROSS;
Think reading the many posters including the recent one by paulb says all.
then of course theres no getting away from the usua conservative philosophy of looking after there rich friends.
this is not a dig at this particular outlook, just an observation that at least you know what they always want to do.
then we get the WE ARE ALL IN TOGETHER SPEECHES
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Osbourne and Cameron have the`` disadvantage``of having been in a wealthy environment all their lives.We are a product of our environment.They talk the talk on the elderly,low earning families and the medium earning having to put more cardigans on in the winter and adjusting their diets to have a comfortable life but they have never had to experience it!!!
They cannot comprehend the daily to day lives of ordinary folk.They live in a bubble of wealth which restricts them from understanding the reality of our normal lives.
My business life for many years consisted of weeks at a time Concorde,First class travel,Luxury hotels being pampered mixing with wealthy people.Returning home was a quick reality check washing up changing nappies ( in the early days )The point I am making is the wealthy have no fear,concept of hardship,running out of resources,making ends meet for weeks some times always.They have no idea that the public are angry on hearing that the wealthy will receive a reduction of five percent when just the five percent would keep some families and the elderly for a year.!!!!.
The cabinet is made up of millionaires do we think they know whats going on?
Foot note.Business makes money.Banks,Finance institutions,investment advisors,bean counters use the money and frequently get it wrong.Macro and Minor.eg.Barings,Global market plunge.Businesses are run from the top.The boss man/women have hands on responsibility on all matters.Governments should be exactly the same.
As its Sunday................Apologies..............`.Here endeth the lesson`
