poeple on low pay have to pay that, if both parents work, high income earns can afford for the wife not to work.
So people with low incomes dont have to pay for transport costs, they get it free?
the whole system is bottom heavy.
Poll: Darling announces one-off shock tax to 'break bonus culture'
- Thread starter Naffa
- Start date
poeple on low pay have to pay that, if both parents work, high income earns can afford for the wife not to work.
So people with low incomes dont have to pay for transport costs, they get it free?
the whole system is bottom heavy.
Actually living in London, you probably have the cheapest transport costs in the country as a car is totally unnecessary
A car does not cost me 2k+ a year unlike the underground.
are you forgetting all the tax and money aide.
Annual Zone 1-3 travelcard is £1,200
I did say living in London , if you need a Zone 1-6 (£1,900), you don't live in London
Are you forgetting that people with incomes over 20k get less help?
nope.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 17,115
- Location
- Shepley
This is a stupid move.
it should be a fixed amount per person. council costs does not change depending how much you earn. A sevice has to be provide, Bins, fire etc. that is a cost per person.
no it should NOT be, because there is no choice.
dont you understand what iam talking about?
a fix price for something that you have to pay means it hurts a low wage earner more than a high wage earner and it isnt equal.
It could be 20% of a low wage earns income in proprotion to his income, and 5% of a high wage earner income in propertion to his income.
Yes, why is that bad? you earn less you have less to spend. there is nothing wrong with that. Not everyone is equal nor should they be.
They have to spend less because the costs they have to pay is higher.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
So what?
What next, shall we sell cars cheaper to people on low incomes as well?
High earners earn lots of money because generally, they acheive more. If there was no reward for this acheivement - ie, having more money - then where is the incentive to bother?
Everyone uses the public services equally, so should pay equally towards them. Thats what council tax is for.
A low income person doesn't call the police less or have less refuse collections, so why do you advocate they should receive the same service for less?
I kinda agree on the fixed cost council charges. At least then it can be broken down by statement and there's a complete understanding behind it. In other countries (possibly here too? dunno), if you buy an apartment in a complex then you pay a set Municipality Charge which is broken down into Maintenence, Overheads, Staffing etc. That system works fine.
I'm not suggesting it would be easy to suddenly implement or is not flawed, but I just think that on the face of it, I would prefer to live by that system than pay a % that could go on anything. Just peace of mind, i guess.
I voted I dont know on the poll, because i don't, really.
I'm not suggesting it would be easy to suddenly implement or is not flawed, but I just think that on the face of it, I would prefer to live by that system than pay a % that could go on anything. Just peace of mind, i guess.
I voted I dont know on the poll, because i don't, really.
You have the choice to live in an expensive area or a cheap one.
Clearly the concept of ability to pay and proportionate effect is too complex
To take the earlier mooted idea of a £10k reserve and 30% of everything over that, I worked out that it gives pretty much everyone a £2k tax break - now apart from the mythical 'efficiency' savings I struggle to see how that shortfall would be achieved.
To get an equivalent tax-take to now on a £10k personal allowance, I'm pretty sure it's more like 40% of all earnings above that.
\o/
i.e. based on a 40% of everything over £10k
£10k - £10k net (current £8,823)
£15k - £13k net (current £12,273)
£20k - £16k net (current £15,723)
£30k - £22k net (current £22,623)
£40k - £28k net (current £29,500)
£50k - £34k net (current £35,000)
£60k - £40k net (current £41,700)
To take the earlier mooted idea of a £10k reserve and 30% of everything over that, I worked out that it gives pretty much everyone a £2k tax break - now apart from the mythical 'efficiency' savings I struggle to see how that shortfall would be achieved.
To get an equivalent tax-take to now on a £10k personal allowance, I'm pretty sure it's more like 40% of all earnings above that.
\o/
i.e. based on a 40% of everything over £10k
£10k - £10k net (current £8,823)
£15k - £13k net (current £12,273)
£20k - £16k net (current £15,723)
£30k - £22k net (current £22,623)
£40k - £28k net (current £29,500)
£50k - £34k net (current £35,000)
£60k - £40k net (current £41,700)
Last edited:
You have a choice over the size of property you chose to live in and thus the amount of council tax you pay.