Poll: The Budget
- Thread starter No1newts
- Start date
The problem is that most sensible higher rate tax payers (company owners) declared massive dividends in the year before and paid tax at 40% and then are drawing down on loan accounts while the tax rate is at 50% which will last them a few years.
I know 6 directors personally who all declared extra dividends of over £1m and are now paying less tax per year (under £100k taxable earnings) compared to previours years when they might have been paying tax on £300k.
I am actually surprised that the tax revenue didn't drop the first year of the 50% band.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
I have no idea why anyone would entertain going into the teaching profession(9or any public sector role) with the way they are being made scapegoats and attacks on T&C's - and that's not even mentioning the travesty of schools going for academy status!
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
I work in the private sector for a company that employs 350,000 worldwide and it has a national UK pay structure that sets out minimum, median and maximums for job codes. There is flexibility to offer more to a candidate on starting (as long as it doesn't exceed the median) if they are struggling to attract the right people though - but that same option is also available to several public sector organisations (DWP, teaching and NHS).
The key is though that such flexibility doesn't seek to depress the wages in deprived or "cheaper" areas.
I think the point Fox was making was that those people who prefer to live in the north might do so because under the current system they have more disposable income compared to those in the south.
Take away that benefit and the south might start to look more appealing...
I don't think he was having a go at the whole northern half of the country, don't take it so personally.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Quite.
I moved to the North because:-
1: It's a slower pace of life - more relaxing.
2: People seem friendlier.
3: It's cooler.
4: Better scenery (Lakes > South Downs).
5: Much cheaper housing (5 bed detached with double garage for 270k - that'll do).
If wages started to become depressed though I would consider moving further south.
Suspended
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 5,707
- Location
- Buckingamshire
Why? The top 1% pay far too much tax as it is. High earners already pay more tax anyway because they earn more, so it utterly retarded to make them pay a higher percentage as well.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Quite. It baffles me why some people seem to think that the fact somebody on £50k and somebody on £140k pay 40% tax means they pay the same amount of tax
I love this idea, some spending transparency at last...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...-be-told-how-Government-spends-their-tax.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...-be-told-how-Government-spends-their-tax.html
Wow that is good, I don't think people realise how much things cost. It also let's the rest of us know the break down.
Tycoon tax purposal, so much for Tories protected their chums
Last edited:
This is infuriating. Government spending is public information and is widely available from the government itself or online media outlets. All you need is a calculator to work out how much of your tax goes where.
It's ridiculous if it's going to be a one page breakdown (as per the photo). You CANNOT sufficiently analyse government expenditure on one page. The money being spent on personalised printing and distribution could be actually spent on something that's important.
Don't treat this as anything other than the Tories buying votes for the next election.
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 727
The budget has already been signed off as of last wednesday apparently. Not many giveaways this year. Also there was a big contrast at the treasury between the preparation of the 2010 budget (labour, closer to recession) which was still being prepared on the morning it was delivered (my source was working on it) and the 2011 budget, (coalition, still bad finances) which was all prepared long before and signed off long before, due to far better organisation.
Not sure i'd like to know how my money get ****ed up the nearest wall thanks.
Beer duty escalator being scrapped!!
I wish!
Instead, the government is hell bent of stifling a rapidly growing industry by raising the price of a pint at the point of sale as well as raising the price of a pint at supply. All it means is more price for the consumer, and a reduction in innovation within the brewing world.
Sure, it's not quite as important as income tax and all that but it's still a kick in the teeth to drinkers and small brewers.
I wish!
Instead, the government is hell bent of stifling a rapidly growing industry by raising the price of a pint at the point of sale as well as raising the price of a pint at supply. All it means is more price for the consumer, and a reduction in innovation within the brewing world.
Sure, it's not quite as important as income tax and all that but it's still a kick in the teeth to drinkers and small brewers.
Great! I hope there will also be a breakdown of how much of peoples taxes are spent on paying expense claims, funding second homes, long lunches, foreign junkets, back handers and bribes etc but somehow I doubt it...
Tycoon tax purposal, so much for Tories protected their chums
But it's a Lib Dem proposal...
My issue with this being a public sector worker in the North East of England. Is this:
- Why should I be paid less than someone living in the south?
- Fox has made an excellent point towards skilled public workers essentially being forced to move south as it makes complete sense. Why would I live in a deprived area and have the same disposable income as someone in a better off location.
The only way I can see this working is if tax is reduced for those in the North, as essentially we will have poorer public services as a result of this...
If I'm paying tax, I want that money to be spent on services that are to their best ability. For example, I pay the same amount of tax as someone in the south, why should they then have all the best and highly skilled workers just because they live down south? All this is going to do is create an even greater North/South divide, where deprived people from the south are forced to move north as they do not have the required skill sets, and skilled workers from the North are forced to move south due to the same lifestyle but in a much nicer area...
- Why should I be paid less than someone living in the south?
- Fox has made an excellent point towards skilled public workers essentially being forced to move south as it makes complete sense. Why would I live in a deprived area and have the same disposable income as someone in a better off location.
The only way I can see this working is if tax is reduced for those in the North, as essentially we will have poorer public services as a result of this...
If I'm paying tax, I want that money to be spent on services that are to their best ability. For example, I pay the same amount of tax as someone in the south, why should they then have all the best and highly skilled workers just because they live down south? All this is going to do is create an even greater North/South divide, where deprived people from the south are forced to move north as they do not have the required skill sets, and skilled workers from the North are forced to move south due to the same lifestyle but in a much nicer area...
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,020
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Because its not about disposable income its about pay. Fox kind of led people off course a bit with his disposable income comments, it will of course partly affect them but its not the aim to balance disposable income.
The cost of living has a much greater disparity than the % they are talking about affecting the change for. The standard of living for those employed is I would say better up north than down south, but those who think London is the be all and end all don't see what a horrible place to live it is for the majority. (My view of course others will disagree hence my comment disagreeing with those that think its great )
Up north you tend to have cheaper and shorter commutes
You have lower cost housing, very considerably lower cost
Similar cost food etc but even that its a little cheaper typically
So why should you get exactly the same wage as someone who has to work on the edge of London with considerably higher outgoings? The private sector doesn't, it doesn't need to nor would it work if we had the same wages. I.E. if I could earn the same money commuting into London as working 10 miles from home why would I consider working in London? If the private sector worked like the public everyone and most businesses would be deserting London faster than rats up drain pipes, its bonkers expensive to employ and recruit staff in London, it cost a fortune per sq meter for office space for those staff. The staff face more disruption from services such as train breakdowns, the pollution is terrible for those that live and work in London etc
Skilled public sector workers will still be needed in the same numbers outside London, if they are paid 10% less do you think they will be worse off than those living or commuting into London. Hardly. As I pointed out previously the exact places they have had the issue recruiting public sector workers was IN London.
The cost of living has a much greater disparity than the % they are talking about affecting the change for. The standard of living for those employed is I would say better up north than down south, but those who think London is the be all and end all don't see what a horrible place to live it is for the majority. (My view of course others will disagree hence my comment disagreeing with those that think its great
)Up north you tend to have cheaper and shorter commutes
You have lower cost housing, very considerably lower cost
Similar cost food etc but even that its a little cheaper typically
So why should you get exactly the same wage as someone who has to work on the edge of London with considerably higher outgoings? The private sector doesn't, it doesn't need to nor would it work if we had the same wages. I.E. if I could earn the same money commuting into London as working 10 miles from home why would I consider working in London? If the private sector worked like the public everyone and most businesses would be deserting London faster than rats up drain pipes, its bonkers expensive to employ and recruit staff in London, it cost a fortune per sq meter for office space for those staff. The staff face more disruption from services such as train breakdowns, the pollution is terrible for those that live and work in London etc
Skilled public sector workers will still be needed in the same numbers outside London, if they are paid 10% less do you think they will be worse off than those living or commuting into London. Hardly. As I pointed out previously the exact places they have had the issue recruiting public sector workers was IN London.