Tories lost the 2019 election among working age adults

Soldato
Joined
7 Nov 2009
Posts
19,799
Location
Glasgow
Why not? Do we not all use the same services? :)

Income tax often doesn’t cover services used, more often this is council tax which covers this (or at least tries to). Council tax is inherently unfair and needs fundamental reform. However, it also hits the poor harder .
Adding a few percent onto the higher and additional rate means those that can afford it can offset the costs for those who can’t.
We should absolutely also be ensuring we are collecting the taxes from corporations as well, but the changes in income tax is an easy option, with direct good consequences and few downsides.

Scotland’s income tax rates are higher than England by 1%, and I’ve not heard of any major issues with this.
 
Last edited:

fez

fez

Caporegime
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Posts
25,334
Location
Tunbridge Wells
The best idea is a wealth tax IMO. Much simpler and takes into account people who just play the system to not only pay the square root of FA tax but active suck money from the poor into their own pockets.
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jun 2007
Posts
68,785
Location
Wales
You literally quoted me saying "you may have to swallow your distaste at a few layabouts getting a free meal to ensure a viable workforce in the future", and just responded talking about a few layabouts.

At least try to argue in good faith.

Well no youre saying that you need them to breed a viable workforce.

Absolutely not true though given outcomes for them.

You'd have a more viable workforce through getting rid of them and importing adult immigrants.


But same problem getting rid, or stopping them breeding are the worst outcome morally
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
7 Dec 2012
Posts
17,513
Location
Gloucestershire
New Statesman article on the plummeting fertility rate :

https://www.newstatesman.com/commen...ate-is-falling-its-why-anyone-has-kids-at-all

Relevant to the thread:

If the government is genuinely concerned about the birth rate there are things it could do: make renting more secure, or invest massively in childcare or, hell, even reform planning rules to build enough new family homes. But it has so far chosen not to do those things — chosen, indeed, to raise taxes on the young to protect the interests of the old. This is not an irrational way for a government elected by the grey vote to behave. By the same token, waiting much, much later to have kids is not an irrational way for the under-40s to behave either.
 
Associate
Joined
11 Aug 2011
Posts
682
I've actually been enraged by this green energy proposal. Not often that this happens.

The young and working age people have just spent an inordinate amount of money protecting old frail people from COVID, and this is what is being proposed?

I'm really starting to hate this ******** of a country.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Jul 2010
Posts
23,805
Location
Lincs
Indeed. There's a not-insignificant chance the next move will be to extend the 30 year write-off to 40, too.

Hasn't that already been announced?

https://www.politics.co.uk/news/202...s-instead-of-30-in-higher-education-shake-up/

The student loan repayment term will also be extended to 40 years for new borrowers from September 2023, to ensure more students repay their loan in full, taking into account the fact that people are now working and earning for longer.
 
Caporegime
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posts
32,940
Location
Northern England
It about time the old subsidised something really...increase in tuition fees paid by the young, massive increase in student loan interest charges, increase in national insurance contributions.
 
Back
Top Bottom