Poll: The official I voted/election results thread

Who did you vote for?

  • Alliance Party of Northern Ireland

    Votes: 4 0.3%
  • Conservative

    Votes: 518 39.5%
  • Democratic Unionist Party

    Votes: 6 0.5%
  • Green Party

    Votes: 65 5.0%
  • Labour

    Votes: 241 18.4%
  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 99 7.5%
  • Didn't vote / spoiled ballot

    Votes: 136 10.4%
  • Other party

    Votes: 6 0.5%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 6 0.5%
  • Respect Party

    Votes: 1 0.1%
  • SNP

    Votes: 67 5.1%
  • Social Democratic and Labour Party

    Votes: 2 0.2%
  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 4 0.3%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 158 12.0%

  • Total voters
    1,313
Soldato
Joined
21 Jul 2008
Posts
4,932
I'm probably not even talking about you! That article linked earlier said 3,000 people earn over £2.7 million a year, paying 4.2% of all income tax. I was just arguing that at the very least we should tax the crap out of these people, far more than the 45% rate (although the disgusting truth is many of them probably pay FAR less with tax avoidance).

So 0.004% of the population paying 4.2% of the total income tax isn't enough? Sounds like they already pay plenty.

As it is, they (those who earn over £2.7 million per year) probably pay a minimum £1.25 million in tax and NI (well, they probably have some clever, legal, schemes to offset some of that).

My tax bill of £15k last year was enough hurt for me. I can imagine it hurting a fair bit more looking at over £1 million in tax on your P60.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
32,623
So 0.004% of the population paying 4.2% of the total income tax isn't enough? Sounds like they already pay plenty.

As it is, they (those who earn over £2.7 million per year) probably pay a minimum £1.25 million in tax and NI (well, they probably have some clever, legal, schemes to offset some of that).

My tax bill of £15k last year was enough hurt for me. I can imagine it hurting a fair bit more looking at over £1 million in tax on your P60.

Why would it hurt you if you paid a million in tax, that still means you will have millions in net income.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
10,938
Did I say that?

I never said you did, I was asking you a question because additional rates work well as a brake on the gap between the richest and the poorest.

I don't see any merit in taxing people so heavily they can't be bothered being more productive. That's how it got with labour in the 70s.

You always take more home the more you're paid, regardless of what tax bracket you're in so I don't see how there isn't a motivation to earn a higher wage.
 
Permabanned
Joined
31 Dec 2007
Posts
10,034
Wow. 120 second places for UKIP. Thats impressive I must say.

You finished crying over farage?

Tbh UKIP did badly as I predicted, I don't care about share of vote as that's not how our system works. Yes we need voting reform, but crying about it now from UKIPs perspective is lame, as you campaigned viciously against it in the referendum.

Anyone who thought UKIP would be in with 5+ seats was blinded by loyalty
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Jun 2004
Posts
26,684
Location
Deep England
So 0.004% of the population paying 4.2% of the total income tax isn't enough? Sounds like they already pay plenty.

As it is, they (those who earn over £2.7 million per year) probably pay a minimum £1.25 million in tax and NI (well, they probably have some clever, legal, schemes to offset some of that).

My tax bill of £15k last year was enough hurt for me. I can imagine it hurting a fair bit more looking at over £1 million in tax on your P60.

That is shocking, I'd much prefer it if 1% of the population were paying 4.2% of the total income tax wouldn't you?
 
Soldato
Joined
2 Dec 2005
Posts
5,514
Location
Herts
I disagree. Those who earn more do pay more. They would pay more under the current system or a flat rate system. I've explained this several times now, it's not rocket science.
They already pay more from the fact they earn more, why should they then pay EVEN MORE on top?

Because wealth generates wealth. The richer you are, the richer you get. So the taxman needs to take a bigger proportion to "keep up".

I literally can't simplify the idea any more.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
3,121
Everyone has their reasons for voting for who they did, a lot just voted to prevent a labour government which was caused by a large amount of Tory scaremongering.

Or maybe they just didn't like the Labour party's policies? Why does every keep thinking it was down to scaremongering or Rupert Murdoch media companies that has scared people off? Labour's economic polices were a joke, a complete non starter for me. If someone like David Miliband had been elected leader I think his policies wouldn't have been as

Also a lot of nonsense on social media, people making it out like voting for the Tories means you are endorsing food banks or savage cuts on benefits. Completely untrue, they've messed up on some points but on the whole done a good job in their time. They were handed a complete and utter mess and are doing a decent job at sorting problems out. Miliband or Balls offered no better solution until the last 6 months and just criticised everything the government did. When the economy grew they would twist it other things. Those two simply had no credibility and showed during their time as opposition no real understanding or offered any reason solution to anything. That is why Ed Balls lost his seat and why Miliband is gone imo. Those two veered firstly far too much on the left, creating policies that would harm business and the economy and were part of the team that created a lot of the mess. The financial crash wasn't just their fault but the huge deficit the country is running at was.

The reason why a lot of people fell into poverty was because the recession and financial system crash. That happened during the Labour government and the Tories inherited that. The solution is not to keep just handing out more benefits. It is important that jobs are created to bring those people out of poverty but that takes time. I would say though the Tories haven't covered themselves in glory over this or the NHS and somewhere where they need to get hold of the situation sooner rather than later.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
18,647
No, you are misrepresenting what I posted.

What I said was that if that was the decision they made then I would expect to see a reduction for everyone in NI contributions to reflect the fact that people would need to fund care themselves. I did say that we already pay for private healthcare and that the idea of paying for the NHS wouldn't cause any difficulties, but at no point did I state they should do it, or that it was a good idea.

No you siad that just now. What you said before was you would be fine with selling of the NHS as long as you pay less IN. To which I say LOL.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Aug 2010
Posts
3,114
You finished crying over farage?

Tbh UKIP did badly as I predicted, I don't care about share of vote as that's not how our system works. Yes we need voting reform, but crying about it now from UKIPs perspective is lame, as you campaigned viciously against it in the referendum.

Anyone who thought UKIP would be in with 5+ seats was blinded by loyalty

We all predicted that outcome

Don't worry Farage is on a summer break
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jun 2007
Posts
68,785
Location
Wales
No, you are misrepresenting what I posted.

What I said was that if that was the decision they made then I would expect to see a reduction for everyone in NI contributions to reflect the fact that people would need to fund care themselves. I did say that we already pay for private healthcare and that the idea of paying for the NHS wouldn't cause any difficulties, but at no point did I state they should do it, or that it was a good idea.

iirc Ni doesn't even cover the pension budget so don't be expecting it to drop.
 
Joined
27 Jul 2005
Posts
13,083
Location
The Orion Spur
People are so disillusioned when it comes to welfare, do people actually realize in the grand scheme of things how little the welfare bill is for the total amount of long term unemployed?, people are always talking about these "scroungers" but do you honestly think if we wiped that bill out things would be any different right now? The media (and government to a certain extent) seem to have done a good job at making us believe the poorest and most vulnerable in society are to blame for most of our problems, if your paying £20,000 tax a year how much of that do you actually believe is going to a scrounger?
 
Soldato
Joined
2 Dec 2005
Posts
5,514
Location
Herts
You always take more home the more you're paid, regardless of what tax bracket you're in so I don't see how there isn't a motivation to earn a higher wage.

Thank you.

Why would it hurt you if you paid a million in tax, that still means you will have millions in net income.

And even better, if you're actually a morally aware person you might think "Wow I paid £1 million pounds this year on public services, doctors, and teachers, how amazing am I?".

One example and he was going to an appeal but decided he was going to kill himself before the appeal, why?

I know it's anecdotal, I just thought it was a sad story and a good counterexample to the quoted post.
 
Back
Top Bottom