So Nick Clegg is talking rubbish again.

realBabelfish said:
if we are in such dire need of cash who else should pay more then.....

the poor are already stretched to breaking point. since they have the lowest amount of disposable income they shouldnt be forced to cough up even more, yet they are with rising costs of living like energy and fuel and food.

maybe we should start closing all those tax loopholes that allow the rich to pay less % tax than low earners

or we start being more careful with taxpayer's money. do we really need to give india millions in aid for them to spend it on a space program?

do we really need to be at war in the middle east when the people at home are paying for it and seeing no advantage (at least we could be getting cheaper fuel?!)

at the end of the day the rich benefit from this society more than anyone else. keeping raping the poor and there will be a revolt. and i dont think the toffs will fair too well against the poor if it comes to conflict... didnt work too well in france did it?
Click to expand...

Does not compute..............


How do the Rich benefit more from society than anyone else considering they likely pay for most of the luxuries they have anyhow out of their own pockets?

I can agree with the earlier parts about stopping foreign aid first and taking care of our own citizens before putting india into space, but the highlighted comment above is simply anti rich tosh, unless you care to provide empirical data and examples of where the rich benefit more without actually using their own money.
 
DAIR said:
Fair enough.I agree it doesnt represent everyone's view.

This is just Cleggs way of winning over support
Click to expand...

Preaching to the choir will always win you support you already had. :)

Hatter The Mad said:
HOW ABOUT we just simplify the tax system?

Oh that's right, vested interests and a weak government driven by public reaction ('pasty tax').
Click to expand...

Sadly so. Overly complex tax system requires an army of failed accountants to administer. An army of failed accountants requires an overly complex tax system to pay itself/justify its existence. Circular logic is awesome.
 
wildman said:
Does not compute..............


How do the Rich benefit more from society than anyone else considering they likely pay for most of the luxuries they have anyhow out of their own pockets?

I can agree with the earlier parts about stopping foreign aid first and taking care of our own citizens before putting india into space, but the highlighted comment above is simply anti rich tosh, unless you care to provide empirical data and examples of where the rich benefit more without actually using their own money.
Click to expand...

the rich benefit from having millions in the bank and a much better standard of living. are you saying that rich people have a lower standard of living than the poor?

the rich benefit from the NHS keeping workers working, from roads getting workers to work etc. the poor (im not talking benefits cheats here im talking people under national average wage, which isnt me FYI, but the majority of people out there) pay a much higher proportion of their income just for the essentials. a fuel increase will hit the poor much harder than people with loads of disposable income. the poor will also not be able to offshore half their wealth or use tax loopholes to make themselves more rich.

"considering they likely pay for most of the luxuries they have anyhow out of their own pockets?" - i didnt realise someone else was paying for my luxuries, i was under the impression it was coming from my pockets. is it only the rich who pay for luxuries?
 
Theophany said:
Preaching to the choir will always win you support you already had. :)



Sadly so. Overly complex tax system requires an army of failed accountants to administer. An army of failed accountants requires an overly complex tax system to pay itself/justify its existence. Circular logic is awesome.
Click to expand...


Quangos!
 
Moses said:
If we didn't give aid to Indians, they wouldn't be helped by their government. It's not as though the Indian government would fill the gap with money from their space program, if we withdrew funding.

Also, their investment in a space program is pretty sensible, given it'll make them/save them tonnes of money in the long-term...
Click to expand...

i know... i was just playing devil's advocate...

you have to remember we have the elderly who die every year as they cannot afford to heat their houses. we have our own problems. to me it seems wrong to take money from the poor to give to another nation's poor.

im all for aid to certain places but is it really our fault that india doesnt give a **** about its own people? couldnt our money be spent on our space program to save us tonnes of money?
 
realBabelfish said:
if we are in such dire need of cash who else should pay more then.....

the poor are already stretched to breaking point. since they have the lowest amount of disposable income they shouldnt be forced to cough up even more, yet they are with rising costs of living like energy and fuel and food.

maybe we should start closing all those tax loopholes that allow the rich to pay less % tax than low earners

or we start being more careful with taxpayer's money. do we really need to give india millions in aid for them to spend it on a space program?

do we really need to be at war in the middle east when the people at home are paying for it and seeing no advantage (at least we could be getting cheaper fuel?!)

at the end of the day the rich benefit from this society more than anyone else. keeping raping the poor and there will be a revolt. and i dont think the toffs will fair too well against the poor if it comes to conflict... didnt work too well in france did it?
Click to expand...

On the global scale you are the rich one. When there is a revolt it will be In China, Africa, Middle East (already happening). Then you will see what your lifestyle is like without 3rd world slave labour subsidizing it, and foreign debt subsidizing the government.

Austerity = "fairness" between YOU and the 3rd world slaves making your trainers/iphones/food.

Be careful what you wish for.

BTW I don't know about the UK but even if you taxed all the Americans who make over a million at 100% it would run the federal government for a whopping 4 months. That's not even including the individual state governments, just the federal government.
 
realBabelfish said:
the rich benefit from having millions in the bank and a much better standard of living. are you saying that rich people have a lower standard of living than the poor?

the rich benefit from the NHS keeping workers working, from roads getting workers to work etc. the poor (im not talking benefits cheats here im talking people under national average wage, which isnt me FYI, but the majority of people out there) pay a much higher proportion of their income just for the essentials. a fuel increase will hit the poor much harder than people with loads of disposable income. the poor will also not be able to offshore half their wealth or use tax loopholes to make themselves more rich.

"considering they likely pay for most of the luxuries they have anyhow out of their own pockets?" - i didnt realise someone else was paying for my luxuries, i was under the impression it was coming from my pockets. is it only the rich who pay for luxuries?
Click to expand...


everyone benefits from the things you mention. its not an exclusive right of the rich to use the roads??

it have been proven over and over that if you overtax the rich you end up with less tax take anyway as they go abroad.

/edit as for the op's point. he always has talked rubbish, the fact that he continues to do so should be of no surprise.
 
rDZ4y.gif

I love this diagram...

Especially when you consider that top 10% probably aren't using the state education system, and the top 5% are probably using private healthcare (sweeping statements I know)

[flameshield]
Personally I like the idea of a flat tax rate...
[/flameshield]

kd
 
gjrc said:
everyone benefits from the things you mention. its not an exclusive right of the rich to use the roads??

it have been proven over and over that if you overtax the rich you end up with less tax take anyway as they go abroad.

/edit as for the op's point. he always has talked rubbish, the fact that he continues to do so should be of no surprise.
Click to expand...

hence me saying why not close the loopholes first and make businesses like google and amazon pay their tax. then re-assess the situation. but at present the poor are the ones being squeezed the most, which isnt right.

plenty of people avoid tax etc and we should get them first, or just stop the gov ****ing away all our hard earned cash in the first place.

maybe we need a party that actually cares more about its citizens as all the current flavours seem like self serving *********.
 
King Damager said:
rDZ4y.gif

I love this diagram...

Especially when you consider that top 10% probably aren't using the state education system, and the top 5% are probably using private healthcare (sweeping statements I know)

[flameshield]
Personally I like the idea of a flat tax rate...
[/flameshield]

kd
Click to expand...

IIRC private healthcare only treats certain problems. you cant get everything treated privately so they will be using the NHS somewhere. i might be wrong here though.

you will most likely find the top 10% arent paying their full 40% either as they will be using one of the many loopholes to reduce it. or like cameron will be rich because their parents didnt pay their full taxes.
 
robgmun said:
I think it's a great idea, abolish all TAX and have a 30% flat rate. That would make this country much richer in a single generation. But no one will ever have the balls to do it.
Click to expand...

you would need a basic allowance though as it just hits the poor the hardest. i wouldnt mind say £20k basic before a flat rate. but that flat rate should have zero loopholes and not be avoidable.

tax men out of work would be a bonus :)
 
realBabelfish said:
you will most likely find the top 10% arent paying their full 40% either as they will be using one of the many loopholes to reduce it. or like cameron will be rich because their parents didnt pay their full taxes.
Click to expand...

True, but the quoted graph is based on actual tax take. Hence the % income tax spread is actually supressed by the avoidance you mention. If people did not use such schemes their share of total tax would exceed the 24% stated
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom