Josh L

So the most arogant non-driver in the country has frozen fuel duty for 2 years. Big fat hairy deal! If they apreciate the concerns of the motorist, as they claim, why don't they do something!

They want to reduce 'direct taxation' which only means further increases in stealth taxes which are already crippling individuals and business alike.

Why can't they have the guts to increase the rate of tax, so that the people who earn it, pay it. Doing that would have little or no effect on most of us.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm sick and tired of being told how low my direct taxation is, only to see taxes raised, or implemented, on fuel, insurance, pensions etc etc etc.



Sorry, rant over

banshi

Sorry Josh, whilst I agree there has been a ludicrous hike in fuel taxation. But I prefer to have cash in my wallet, then I make the decision to buy: Beer, Petrol, Cigs,its my choice.

I don't see how increasing the tax burden on business will put more money in my pocket, and I wouldn't wish to return to a sliding income tax scale which peaked at 99%. BTW petrol duty still increased annually under that system.

There is a stong argument that direct taxation is most benificial to those on the lowest incomes, hence no VAT on food. Not many people in that catagory run Scoobs (at least not their OWN)

B

Tim W

iTrader: (1)

Can you imagine what would happen if common sense prevailed in a politcal party?

Thought not...

A simplistic way of looking at taxation would be to say wtf don't they just make:-

All transport taxes spent on Transport

All NI payments spent on Health

All Income tax spent on Education, Law & Order and Pensions

All council tax spent on Local Government

VAT and duty on topping up the short falls and alike...

Lottery money on the Good Causes

This of course would never happen it's probably far too sensible

Incidentaly I feel Politicians shouldn't be paid...maybe that would weed them out a bit...

Josh L

Banshi,

Who mentioned increasing the tax burden on business? They've already done that!

With respect, what real difference would it make to you if you had slightly less in your pay packet or paid slightly more PAYE, if the cost of living was generally lower as a result of a reduction in indirect taxation?

I agree with your comment concerning the argument for direct taxation, that's why I made it myself. If that's the case why are Labour intent on reducing direct taxation? You don't have to resort to ludicrous sliding scales. Just make sure that the people who pay the tax, are the people who earn the money.

Having spent the best part of twenty years in opposition, you'd think that they would have worked out where the Tories were going wrong, but no.

The more I look at this government, and the damage they have caused to the business of everyone I know, the more I am reminded of the old addage..'Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely'. The biggest majority since Noah, and look what they've done with it.

What Tim noted was absolutely correct. But does the fact that we know that's the way of the politician make it right?

Josh

tizard99

HI Kelvin an' all I have just been discusing this on 'another scooby drivers political opinion post' and heres my 20 cents worth (inflation U know):-

People need to get to work to earn money to Live, hay no one asks to be born. Some people use public transport, some of us have NO public transport that goes past where they work, no trains, no bus service and a taxi defeat the object. So some of us need to drive, not choose to drive, to make a living.
OK, you can car share, I'm all for that, but what if your a shift worker? or required to do overtime? also in the summer some people bike to work (forget it in the winter) but what if you live 20 miles away and work 10-12 hour days? get a caravan near to work for the week? I think not.

So yes some people don't need to drive, but some of us do, and yes I am being a bit hypocritical in the fact I drive a bloody thirsty car, but I realise that and use the wife's car when I can (your only young once and this will be the last time I will be able to afford such a car!)

No one needs to smoke or drink (I don't), but hay I don't work cause I like to, I need to.


The main problem the present government have is that they are victims of the Thatcher years of selling off all the countries regular income businesses and although ( myself included) we all cashed in and made a quick buck, we are all having to stump up the lost revenue.


Trev.

JayDee

Treasury will never invest properly in Public Transport. It would be like turkeys voting for christmas in that if people actually used their cars less there would be less revenue from motor related taxes (fuel tax, road tax, speeding fines)

Josh you're right. As soon as political parties come into power they start to get arrogant, and after a few years...well.

Trouble is , I am not sure the Tories have learnt their lesson yet.

So who dya vote for?

I predict low turnouts at next general election

JD

Darren Thompson

What about tax relief on mortgages and the married mans allowance and the high taxes on fuel and cigs, the increase in road tax, the increase in the insurance taxes which has put your policy up yes the other parties would have done it so I don’t single out labour on them all but I do know that I am £300 a month worse off since we have had them in power and all I am interested in is what is in my back pocket.

A poorer Darren. Up The Revolution!!!!

RB170

Hold on !!!

Why should I pay more tax just because I earn more ??? I use public facilities the same as someone on the dole, less even so why should I pay more. If I go to Tesco's and buy a loaf of bread are you saying that I should be means tested so that I pay more for that loaf than the next guy?
I work just as hard for my money as everyone else and just because the field I work in tends to pay more should not mean that I'm penalized for it.
Call me facist capitalist B*****D if you want but I expect to keep what I put the effort in to get.

Geezer

Why should higher earners pay more tax? They pay more anyway as x% of their higher salary is more than x% of a lower one. When I go into Tescos, they don't means test me before I buy a loaf of bread, so why should I pay more for the services the gov provide because I earn a higher than average salary?

As for cigs, they should be taxed out of existence. I cannot believe people moan about the increase of somethng which is done purely out of choice and kills you anyway! I can understand to a point the disquiet over fuel, because evrybody needs to travel to a certain extent, but you do not have to smoke!!!

Geezer

Geezer

RB170,
Weird, very similar posts typed at the same time

Geezer

RB170

Geezer

SPOOKY!!!!

Are we related in anyway???


[This message has been edited by RB170 (edited 09 November 2000).]

Neil Micklethwaite

RB170 - Are you a contractor ?

Geezer - Travel is up to the individual ( to a point ), as are beer , cigs , eating out , etc etc. I do all of 'em and it's my choice.

How much do the government make out of cigs ?

How would they make the same amount of money ?

RB170

Neil

I'm not but if you want someone rubbed out.....(nudge nudge wink wink)


[This message has been edited by RB170 (edited 09 November 2000).]

Geezer

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Neil Micklethwaite:
<B>Geezer - Travel is up to the individual ( to a point ), as are beer , cigs , eating out , etc etc. I do all of 'em and it's my choice.

How much do the government make out of cigs ?

How would they make the same amount of money ?[/quote]

Exactly, it's your choice, so you shouldn't complain about the tax on those things (if you are, that is, which isn't clear, so excuse me if you are not!!)

How would they make up that money? A vast proportion of the money from cigs is ploughed into treating people with smoking related diseases, so the revenue requirement would be reduced somewhat. Or, just tax the hell out of something else like alcohol, which is another luxury that is bad for you.

Geezer

P.S. I am not some puritanical monster who doesn't believe that people should enjoy themselves, I like a drink and I was a smoker for 17 years, but they are non essential at the end of the day

kelvin

Sorry - double post - read below

[This message has been edited by kelvin (edited 09 November 2000).]

kelvin

Geezer,

I entirely agree with you - smoking, drinking alcohol etc. are all pretty much down to personal choice whereas for most people these days, travel is a necessity. In my opinion, the government should be doing more to discourage "de-merit goods" such as these by increasing the tax levy on them, while at the same time reducing the tax burden on products which have become a necessity, and ultimately part of everyday life.

I expressed similar thoughts to these only a few days ago and seemed to cause a bit of controversay (

Neil Micklethwaite

Geezer

Just trying to say that you should not differentiate between Petrol and cigs ( etc ) whilst you appeared to be saying that we should. Aplogies if I misinterpreted you.

I think the government is creaming too much out of these taxes.

Petrol for instance the Tax stayed the same whilst the cost dropped from $30 to $10.

RB170 - Initials GB by any chance ?

Josh L

RB170 and Geezer,

I'm not professing some sort ridiculous scale of taxation, I haven't even implied it. It's just simple maths! Regardless of the basic rate of tax, the more you earn the more you pay. Simple!

And as far as Darren being £300 a month worse off...I should be so lucky! Just taking into account taxation changes implemented under Labour it's costing us three times that each month(including IR35). I wouldn't mind, but I don't ever recall having that sort of money left over at the end of the year!

BARSTEWARDS

logiclee

RB170,

If you ignore the dole scroungers/slackers etc who we all agree should be sorted out you are left with those who genuinely cannot work such as the disabled. I have a family member who like myself was a high earner and now has to live off the state, this could happen to you or I at anytime of our lifes. I hope you never have to see the other side but I would swap my Scoob and all other toys for the above persons health. You suddenly realise whats realy important in life.

Those of us who have higher incomes have a duty as humanbeings to look after those less fortunate than ourselves, but the whole tax system is far from fair.

Transport/road costs only should be passed onto the motorist.
Additional NHS cost should be passed onto the smokers, read an article that said doing this would price **** at £10 a packet.
Why should the petrol tax fund the NHS and Schools this should be on National Insurance / Income Tax

Etc Etc.

Calmed down now rant over
Lee

RB170

Logiclee

Don't assume that because I'm a capitalist that I'm not aware of my social responsibilities. I do have experience of "other side" and like you would not wish it on anyone but I do object at being targeted by the government or anyone as somebody that should pay more tax purely because my monthly income is over a certain amount. I've worked damn hard to be in the position that I am at the moment. (Sorry nearly went into one there)

logiclee

RB170,

Don't want to get into any sort of slanging match, not that sort of person.

I consider myself very fortunate to have the skills and ability to hold a well paid job. I admit when people question my earnings I always fire back that I studied for a further six years after leaving school while they were living it up. I also however acknowledge that some friends with manual jobs work harder and longer hours than I for far less pay.
I don't see why I should have more money to spend on luxuries while they are working seven days a week to pay the mortgage and feed the kids.
As long as I'm paying 40% tax I'll consider myself in a fortunate position.

Lee

RB170

Lee

I'm in no way suggesting that I deserve to get paid more than anyone else but on the flip side, neither do I deserve to get penalised more than anyone else.....HMMMmmmmm does this make me a socialist

Geezer

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by logiclee:
<B>I don't see why I should have more money to spend on luxuries while they are working seven days a week to pay the mortgage and feed the kids.
Lee[/quote]

Because you are paid for what you know, not how hard you work, otherwise people who work in sweatshops would be the highest earners in the land.

It is not my responsibilty to look after those who cannot look after themselves, it is the governments. I already pay more tax than a low income earner, why should I pay 40% as well?

Geezer

Trout

iTrader: (1)

Someone could point out at this time that anyone who can afford to drive a £10-32k car, that costs £1,000 a year to insure, that does on average 14-26mpg can probably afford the petrol to go in it.

They could point that out, but it probably won't be me.

R

Geezer

Rannoch,
LOL

Geezer

Josh L

Rannoch,

I would have agreed with you entirely, if you had made that point, which of course you didn't.

However, the price is the same for all, which goes back to original point. If we are taxed directly, those less well off would benefit from the removal of the indirect or 'stealth' taxes that are imposed on everyone, regardless of income, yet would have little effect on most others.

When I read what I written on this thread, I appear almost socialst, ranting on about an arogant, out of touch Tory government. Whereas quite the opposite is true.

My, how things change!

Josh

ca

It seems to me that low-earners moan about indirect taxation and high-earners moan about direct taxation. How does one strike a balance?

I'd be interested to know what % of Treasury revenue is direct and in-direct.

I'd like to see a tax system like this:

Allowance of about 6K
6k-12k about 10%
12k-25k about 20%
25k-50k about 40%
50k-150k about 43%
150k and above about 45%

C


[This message has been edited by ca (edited 09 November 2000).]

Josh L

I'm sorry Gezer, John is right.

Yes, there are a great many dissatisfied people in other countries, but that doesn't mean we are all better off in the UK.

My Wife and I have considered looking elswhere for a while, but we have been thinking about it far more seriously in recent times.

Someone I was talking to likened this country to a piece of accounting software, which shall remain nameless, in that we have a very old core which worked well originally. However, over the years we have just patched the system, to cover loopholes and changes, instead of looking to rewrite the system entirely. This applies equally to our system of government and taxation.

If you look around the world there are many places where they have reviewed the system entirely. Singapore is a good example. Whilst there are some silly laws. Their infrastructure and system of government/taxation are superb.

I love the UK, but we could do a hell of a lot better.

Well said John

GaryC

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by tizard99:
<B>

The main problem the present government have is that they are victims of the Thatcher years of selling off all the countries regular income businesses

Trev.[/quote]


What regular income business?? Do you remember the 1980's? - most now-privatised businesses were costing the country money to prop them up, hence why they were sold for a song. It is only post-privatisation and post-introduction of real world efficiencies and accountability that the BTs/BGs of the world have turn profits

Its about time New Labia a.k.a The Mad Reds realised the concepts of real world efficiencies and accountability. £800million wasted on Millenium Dome - don't even get me started on that one.

GaryC

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by logiclee:
<B>

Those of us who have higher incomes have a duty as humanbeings to look after those less fortunate than ourselves
[/quote]

BULLSH1T - I have worked god-damned hard to get where I am, both in studying and in business, I already pay more than 60% of my wage to the government in direct and indirect taxes, WTF should I further support the doleys??

Perfectly agree about help GENUINE less-fortunates, but having spent 6 years in post-scholastic education, and the past 7 years working 10-16 hours a day to build my career and income, why should I pay even more than the guy down the road who sits on his **** and does sod all except collect his giro/income support, family credit, housing benefit.........


how do you do a very red-faced annoyed smiley??

[This message has been edited by GaryC (edited 10 November 2000).]