Forum menu
Seems like a great time to have an election from the oppositipns point of view, the other side in the media for potentially illegal activities in a previous election, all front and centre in media at a time people are slightly more politically aware than usual.
Or it would be if the opposition had a cat in hells chance of winning which Thursday clearly showed they don't.
holding another election while the current government is still being investigated by the police for election fraud."
Well, in some of those cases, like in North Wilts, the accusation involving the 'Battle Bus' and funds used is baseless, because it never even came here.
There was a LibDem one around, IIRC.
Will not want back into the chubb club thanks. I asked to be deleted based on your accusation here. The honest advice I gave on your other thread was my sincere advice. I sent you an email as the EU stuff on the last few pages is a rehash of the 30,000 post thread, its been done to death.
You didn't answer what you thought I had made up. I have zero interest in the other trolls input. I specifically want to know what [b]you[/b] think I [b]made up[/b]
Re: photo I could not post earlier. Momentum arranged Machester rally. Nothing to do with official Labour. Militant Tendancy all over again with lashings of blame "The Media"
[img]
So, it looks like 'the one percent' is now 'the five percent'
[url=
tax rises for everyone on £80k and above[/url]
ninfan - MemberSo, it looks like 'the one percent' is now 'the five percent'
Income tax rises for everyone on £80k and above
Ninfan, if you're trying to persuade me to vote Labour, you're wasting your time.
EDIT: reading that article, it's all a bit depressing.
I wonder why none of the other parties are going after the conservatives on the election spending issue.
Makes you think......
Wow, jambalaya's gone full-on weirdo. 😯
Makes you think......
Does it hurt? Hawhawhaw. Yaw.
CountZero - MemberWell, in some of those cases, like in North Wilts, the accusation involving the 'Battle Bus' and funds used is baseless, because it never even came here.
I don't see North Wilts in the list of identified MPs? Michelle Donelan for Chippenham was rumoured to be at one point but bizarrely, it turned out that the photoshoot she did with David Cameron on the bus, didn't take place in her constituency and it never actually visited there- she went and met him somewhere else to give the impression he'd visited. Not election fraud, just normal fraud.
@jamba
I will backtrack on the accusation of 'making stuff up' (others may not, that's their call). I'll go for your explanation of having opinions that I disagree with but you have in my opinion, presented certain of those opinions as fact that simply aren't true. Whether that is deliberate or not, only you know (politicians of all colours have been known to lie after all) and the purpose of that has at times verged on trolling. IMHO.
If that offends, I'm sorry, but it's how I see it. I'm not going to list them out one by one, I don't see the point because you haven't yet shown anywhere where you won't just reaffirm what you already said.
You have your opinion, me mine, and I don't see why that should affect co-existing in other non-political threads, but if you don't want to then it's your call. I've had far worse rows recently with my MiL without getting close to cutting off relationships. I had no problem accepting your membership to ChubClub despite differences, to do otherwise would make me guilty of discrimination. If you feel you can't remain member for the same reason, feels a bit petty to me tbh. But again - your call.
The £80k tax bracket sounds reasonable but no doubt loads of people who will never come close to earning that will still moan about it as they have aspirations
So, it looks like 'the one percent' is now 'the five percent'
Yes, and it should be. Those lucky enough to be in the 5% need to contribute more so there can be a fairer spread of money and resources for the less lucky 95%.
Why wouldn't they want to do that?
Do you really even think people earning over £80K would even notice if they paid a bit more tax?
So googling for numbers 5pc of the working population is 1.6 million, the extra tax Labour need is 45 billion. (That's a number the BBC quote from the Torys, anyone find a better number?)
So about thirty grand each by whatever mechanism is used over whatever period that 45 billion covers.
I guess voters have to decide if the Laffer curve says yes or no...
Looks like Corbyns back to demonising sections of society again, but it's OK because 80k is loads, people earning it are just lucky and they don't contribute enough already. If you look at tax rates historically the percentages were higher for everyone, if you want to return to 70s taxation everyone should be paying more.
It might start off with the top 5% but it'll soon increase. Then again we're back to the stupid situation where a single earning household of 81k will be paying the new rate whilst next door with two 45k earners bringing in 90k still pay 20%. Welcome to Corbyn''s fairer society. Simple polices for simple people, shame the problems aren't as simple.
Any way not going to happen, Corbyn and the Labour party are a total joke completely out of touch with the average voter. Not everyone is as selfish, simple and self obsessed as his Momentum supporters.
^^^
Earns more than 80k 😆
Then again we're back to the stupid situation where a single earning household of 81k will be paying the new rate whilst next door with two 45k earners bringing in 90k still pay 20%. Welcome to Corbyn''s fairer society. Simple polices for simple people, shame the problems aren't as simple.
You mean like osbournes policy on child benefit?
I think it's a perfectly reasonable, and sensible thing to do. We need higher taxes, that much is obvious.
Not everyone is as selfish, simple and self obsessed as his Momentum supporters.
Interesting definition of selfish you've got there. I would suggest it's not them that come across as selfish.
This is interesting:
One investment banker complained that earning a few hundred thousand a year “just doesn’t feel particularly wealthy” when others in the City have millions of pounds in bonuses and assets.
BIGISSUE.COM yes because taxing the top 5% is very much like "demonising" anyone and it sure puts the Tory campaign of attacking disabled people and labelling the unemployed as scroungers into perspectiveLooks like Corbyns back to demonising sections of society again
they want the rich to pay more tax that is all the colourful language is not helpful but it would be better if you care about bedroom taxes, austerity ion the poor rather than waited only to get outraged when the top 5% in society were targeted
interesting insight into where your moral compass lies
That's a number the BBC quote from the Torys, anyone find a better number?)
You could use Labour's number. Or any random number you want. The Tory number is demonstrably a lie as had been pointed out many times
However, stuff costs money. Anyone thinking that the Tories will deliver Swedish level services with low taxes is seriously deluded. Unfortunately there are actually enough such people to make it a vote winning claim.
but it's OK because 80k is loads, people earning it are just lucky and they don't contribute enough already.
Yep, totally agree - although I realise you don't really think it is okay....
Can you explain why you think someone who is earning £80K per year is not lucky?
Can you explain why you think it is right for one person to earn £80K and another £12K?
Can you explain how taking another few % from someone earning £80K is going to cause them hardship?
Can you explain why you think it is right for one person to earn £80K and another £12K?
Damned straight! Why should a heart surgeon earn more than someone working in the pub? It's a national disgrace. To the barricades, comrades!
He did not ask if you could mock the question they asked if you could explain
Can you?
I don't think anyone is arguing that everyone should earn the same, but the current differentials are obscene.
Why should a heart surgeon earn more than someone working in the pub?
When the job in the pub doesn't pay enough to live on then we have a problem don't we.
Not all jobs are the same, therefore they have different salaries.
Hardly worth explaining, really.
He did not ask if you could mock the question they asked if you could explainCan you?
But the question isn't even "should anybody earn £80k", it's "should those people who earn more, pay more tax?".
I think Kerley is accidentally creating a strawman against his own argument there. Don't even go down that route as it's a stupid argument, a neurosurgeon is clearly more skilled and more important to society than me (spreadsheet wrangler).
As for the selfish accusation. That's bizarre. Wanting higher rates of tax to find a sustainable NHS, effective police, safe social services, quality education is selfish. But throwing a strop because you might have to pay a bit more tax (when you earn more then 95% of people in the country) isn't?
Yes, the couple/household income vs individual income thing is an issue, but how do you fix it? If I share a flat with a mate then what's to stop us claiming we're a couple and getting the associated tax benefits?
Edit: Why bring up surgeons? That's one of the most 'useful' jobs imaginable and pays relatively little compared to a CEO or city trader.
The Cpt's wine cellar will remain well stocked in this event and why should he care about poor people eh ..why did they not work harder etc its HIS MONEY and the rest can well use food banks as that is why we have charity
Any chance of an actual debate?
the real issue is do we think the rich should pay more tax so that spending can increase on some services- NHS for example
i would imagine its a broadly popular tax given we all love the NHS and we dont all earn 80k.
Interesting both labour and lib dems saying tax increases and the Tories refusing to say they wont do it so it seems its coming whatever happens
Tories will probably raise VAT or something that hits the poor disproportionately mind as that is there way - I suspect there is a lot less support for that than an increase on the top 5%
🙄 Perhaps it best you stick to the notsowise cracks capitan.
a neurosurgeon is clearly more skilled and more important to society than me (spreadsheet wrangler).
and a refuse collector more improtant than PR person or an other job that pays vastlt more
we do not set pay rates based on "importance to the country"
IMHO the question is a moral one - if i work 40 hours and you do why should i earn less ? the answer given is an economic one hence we get this "debate"
You either want a fair society or you want a society with wildly diverse incomes
I suspect the answer is a mixture of your own moral code and where you sit on that disparity - very few of the top 5% seem to be among humanities more altruistic - its almost as if they are rich because they value money really highly.
"should those people who earn more, pay more tax?".
Isn't that how percentages work anyway?
only if you ignore the % part of the % calculation
Yes, people earning £80k can afford to pay more, and at a higher percentage rate too, greedy ****ers...
Oh wait, they already do.
Based on the Salary Calculator website with 3% pension contribution:
£20k basic
Tax = £1,580
NI = 1,420
£40k basic
Tax = £5,460
NI = £3,820
£80k basic
Tax = £19,740
NI = £5,120
Seems to me that the top 5% are already puting in at least 8x what below average earners put in. Isn't that how it's supposed to work, why does it need further changes?
well of course they pay more already. The point is more money is required for public services and it has to come from somewhere. One of those places is from tax from earnings and the best place to take from is the top 5%.
Again, if you earn £80K you are lucky (for all sorts of reasons) and paying more tax than someone who is unlucky seems fair enough to me. Someone earning £80k doesn't work 7 times harder than someone earning £12K do they. They are lucky to be getting overpaid in that regard.
When you look at taxation and inputs you also have to remember that the more you earn the more you can benefit from things like tax free pension contributions, share schemes etc. you can manage your tax better.
As a simple question if we need to raise more taxes should it come from those with the most or the least?
If you earn 81k you may be slightly worse off than a couple earning 40k but your partner could easily work to match that couldn't they - up to £11,500 in fact so that argument seems to be a weak one.
I think it's a perfectly reasonable, and sensible thing to do. We need higher taxes, that much is obvious.
+1
Someone earning £80k doesn't work 7 times harder than someone earning £12K do they. They are lucky to be getting overpaid in that regard.
A very good point. I earn over £80k and probably average 35 hours a week and have a very cushy work life balance (the higher you go, the easier it gets as you have much more autonomy and can manage your own time)...
I earn over £80k and probably average 35 hours a week and have a very cushy work life balance (the higher you go, the easier it gets as you have much more autonomy and can manage your own time).
Wtf are you doing? You must never admit this and are supposed to say you work hard and deserve all you get and the low earners should just work harder.
This is where the younger generation find out why Tony Blair was so successful at getting elected, while Michael Foot was not.
Conservative landslide.
Can you explain why you think it is right for one person to earn £80K and another £12K?
Hmmm i'll have a go at this one.
-Some jobs have much more training and skills required?
-Because some jobs have far more responsibility and pressure
-Because some jobs create far more wealth than others
-Because some jobs are absolutely critical to scociety and only certain individuals are capable of doing them
i could go on..
Someone earning £80k doesn't work 7 times harder than someone earning £12K do they. They are lucky to be getting overpaid in that regard.
no they dont work 7 times harder but noones going to suggest thats why they get paid 7 times as much....
FYI, 12k p/a is less than the minimum wage for a full time employee...
Corbyn probably knows the best they can hope for is merely disastrous, so is making sure he can't be accused afterwards by his momentum chums of not being having been radical enough.
As a Care Worker, albeit one with a posh title:
tpbiker - MemberHmmm i'll have a go at this one.
-Some jobs have much more training and skills required?
-Because some jobs have far more responsibility and pressure
-Because some jobs create far more wealth than others
-Because some jobs are absolutely critical to scociety and only certain individuals are capable of doing them
I think the job I do fits these criteria.
Lots of training, far more than people realise.
The 'wealth' created is pocketed by the directors.
They tend to buy Porsches and big houses in Cheshire with it.
I'm legally responsible for people's lives.
There are hundreds of situations every day where a simple mistake can hurt or kill someone.
Moving and handling, administration of meds, incorrect record keeping etc.
My job is 'critical to society'.
If we don't look after your relatives, who will?
Only certain people CAN do it.
Try it if you don't believe me.
Educational attainment is irrelevant - lots of care workers with degrees, lots with minimum qualifications.
Most people won't entertain the idea of looking after their own flesh and blood.
I think guilt about this is one reason why we are largely ignored.
Now you tell me I'm worth no more than £8.00 an hour.
Can you explain why you think it is right for one person to earn £80K and another £12K?
As others have said, there are loads of reasons.
I spend a significant time away from home, sometimes in conditions most people would consider completely unacceptable. I do a job that few people are qualified for or have have the relevant experience. Not saying the qualification is particular difficult, just not many people go that way. The experience is more critical and even fewer people with my quals go that route. I eanr more than £80k. So basically supply and demand.
Although saying all that, I thought I was getting the chop a few weeks ago. 😳
FWIW I would happily pay 45-50% on my higher tax band. We need more money to pay for more expensive and high tech society we live in. It's not free and the money has come from somewhere, so tax the "rich" not the "poor".
I have no problem with people earning as much as they want, or can, but those people who do earn the higher salaries should accept their social responsibility to help, financially, a little more than those worse off than them.
No one it talking about equalisation of wealth, just higher contributions, which seems fair.
Social responsibility?
Doesn't exist anymore.
We need to blame someone, it's a lot easier and much, much more fun.
As a Care Worker, albeit one with a posh title
Well, people like you can access food banks for fee supplies so you shouldn't complain. Really - how is it that the PM can make such comments and not be strung up from a lamp post, but Corbyn is pilloried for suggesting that the rich pay a bit more?
I think you'll find that the top 5% of earnings are already contributing disproportionately. but of course they don't vote labour, and it's an unpalatable fact that nobody wants to hear.
From that table, the top 10% of earners contribute 1/3 of all revenue, the top 5% contribute a quarter.