[Closed] Would you mind paying more tax?

The public sector is no worse for bureaucracy and waste than the private sector

Hahahahahahahahahah 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆

El-bent - Member

Well I'm sure that all those services you will require in the future will suck up any "savings" you make.

If I was in the position to have savings, I wouldn't need more money.

They don't need public services, apart from when they do, which is pretty much all the time. Public services are provided to us all the time, it is just the greedy and ignorant who want to pretend they don't benefit from them and don't want to pay for them.

Molly I dont think you troll but I dont wish to play along when you do that.

In the UK you get:

Taxed
Double taxed
Stealth taxed
Other taxed ...

Very simple we need a small public sector and we don't really need all the services. I don't want to pay jobworth in the public sector to create an environment that encourages parasitic living.

I blame all the tax and parasitic living on your ancestor Henry VIII ...

🙄

[i] and we don't really need all the services.[/i]
Ah, but someone does... Funny thing is, I pay CT and get my bins emptied, occasionally !

City hall is full to the brim of lefties on 30 hours a week, taking a wedge and using CT to punish the public.

Ooo, inflation is <3 percent. What do City hall do ? raise CT by 5 percent. Wage rise ? did you get one ?, <2 percent you say ?
Doesn't matter, City hall don't care, CT is going up by more than wage rises or inflation.
[b]Tough ![/b]

I wouldnt mind if

1. All the tax loopholes were closed so big corporates and wealthy individuals pay the same proportion of their income in tax as those on PAYE do

2. That I actually believed the government wouldnt waste it on its latest vanity project

3. That as a citizen I got more of a say in how it is spent than voting for a single MP every few years.

Oh and I like the other punitive tax ideas. Its great to read. Yeah, lets tax the successful and hard working. How dare they make money and profit ! How very dare they ! Instead, we should take their money from them to teach them a lesson, to make life easier for us and to ensure they never make the mistake of working hard, making profit or a success of themselves, ever again ! Yes, lets use taxes to prohibit people making money. Damn those who get into debt to attend Uni and go on to earn higher wages (possibly), tax them I say.

Yay for tax, tax and more tax !

I think most people would mind especially if they don't see the tax money being spent in a good way.

For example, why does the UK send $500m to India every year. A Nuclear country which ranks in the top 12 of most millionaires and has its own space programme?

Wars in Iraq / Afghanistan.....

Yes, lets use taxes to prohibit people making money.

Don't be ridiculous.

Increased taxation would not remove ALL the benefits of hard work and success. Just share some of it around.

I've not read past the first three pages but find it slightly annoying that most people said they wouldnt pay more tax, yet there's recently been SO many threads, and so much press and publicity, berating the assumed rich for 'avoiding' paying more tax.

I detect a slight whiff of Hypocrisy.

We are mostly armchair rich imagining we wouldnt do the same if we actually earned that kind of money, the truth is different and you kid yourself if you disagree.

I think its the same with amrchair Everest climbers... oooh I'd help somebody down even it was certain death. Pah.

/devils advocate grenade thrown

more tax is essential unfortunately.. not 500m here or there but hundreds of billions have to be found to pay for pensions, education and the black hole of the nhs where 100 bn pounds a year isnt enough to provide enough nursing staff and gps who can see you the same day..

so small bits here and there make very little difference our leaders need to be brave and lead and use the N word more.. not that one this one.. NO.

If I was in the position to have savings, I wouldn't need more money.

The savings would be in not paying for public services, which in turn will be sucked up plus more by the alternatives which you will require. Are you really that hard of thinking?

Yeah, lets tax the successful and hard working

How about the successful and lazy, can we tax them?

I've not read past the first three pages but find it slightly annoying that most people said they wouldnt pay more tax, yet there's recently been SO many threads, and so much press and publicity, berating the assumed rich for 'avoiding' paying more tax

I detect a slight whiff of Hypocrisy.

It's quite easy to detect hypocrisy when you compare the opinions of loads of different people as if they are one homogenous entity.

And it's not hypocrisy or jealousy to want the rich to pay the same percentage of tax we do, rather than often much, much less.

Yay for tax, tax and more tax !

So that's a yes, Solo? 😉

[i]Don't be ridiculous.[/i]
Try that yourself ! Obviously you haven't met the shop floor staff who decline O/T answering "theres little point in working O/T as it goes in taxes".
🙄

El-bent - Member

The savings would be in not paying for public services, which in turn will be sucked up plus more by the alternatives which you will require. Are you really that hard of thinking?

Ah, calling me stupid because you are incapable of comprehending the simplest of posts. I'll try not to reply in kind.

Which tax that I am not currently paying will see me saving money by not paying it? ❓
You've already asserted your intellectual superiority, this shouldn't be too difficult for you to answer.

1. All the tax loopholes were closed so big corporates and wealthy individuals pay the same proportion of their income in tax as those on PAYE do

Solo - Member

Obviously you haven't met the shop floor staff who decline O/T answering "theres little point in working O/T as it goes in taxes".

When I worked in a bank, I once tried to get a chap with a terrible savings account to switch to a better one- he was getting 0.02% and he'd get something like 3%, all he had to do was sign a form, really that easy. He refused because he didn't want the taxman getting any more money 😕

[i]When I worked in a bank[/i]
😯

Who'd of thunk it ? That one of [i]them[/i] would have owned up to doing such a thing.

Dude !, run, run now, before the STW pitch fork brigade get here.

And it's not hypocrisy or jealousy to want the rich to pay the same percentage of tax we do, rather than often much, much less.

its hypocrisy to say a person would do one thing but then not when places are swapped.

you think the rich pay less tax than you? perhaps less than you think they should but not less than the average resident.

Never understood this lefty hatred of the rich, it's because of the really rich who pay loads of tax that I don't have to.
Cheers rich people! 😀

Whilst some only hate those rich that seem not to pay as much tax as they should (legally/illegally) it is true that some just hate the rich for being rich. I quite like that they exist as they can fund interesting/fun/useful things be it for selfish or altruistic reasons.

I thought the school holidays were next week

Solo - Member

Who'd of thunk it ? That one of them would have owned up to doing such a thing.

Dude !, run, run now, before the STW pitch fork brigade get here.

It's cool, there's a difference between "working for a bank" and "being a BANKER" 😆 I got paid less as an evil banker than I do now for being a lovely educator.

Obviously you haven't met the shop floor staff who decline O/T answering "theres little point in working O/T as it goes in taxes".

Are they correct though?

Can you explain to me what situation means that earning more gross doesn't mean more net? I can't think of one, but I'm happy to be corrected. Perhaps something to do with tax credits?

No I wouldn't mind.... WHEN...

1. They close the corporate tax loopholes.
2. They close the tax avoidance loopholes (I'm sure there are more companies like "Icebreaker" to invest in)
3. They stop giving out millions to 3rd world, and not to 3rd world (India) countries.

Are they correct though?

Can you explain to me what situation means that earning more gross doesn't mean more net? I can't think of one, but I'm happy to be corrected. Perhaps something to do with tax credits?

They don't understand how income tax works, which is often the most common reason I hear.

"if I earn more, and get bumped up into the 40% bracket, I'll get taxed 40% on EVERYTHING" (Not just 40% on the amount above the threshold)

I had a recruitment consultant try to tell me that I'd take home more on a lower wage than on a wage just over the 40% threshold 🙄 Idiot!

I had a recruitment consultant try to tell me that I'd take home more on a lower wage than on a wage just over the 40% threshold Idiot!

😆

[i]Are they correct though?

Can you explain to me what situation means that earning more gross doesn't mean more net? I can't think of one, but I'm happy to be corrected. Perhaps something to do with tax credits?[/i]

Grips, I think Junky might be correct. The real grips has been kidnapped by the Rylan Star League to defend the galaxy against the Ko-Dan Empire and a Troll has been left here, in Grips place.

Anyway, if you think I'm now going to enter into a 5 day BS-athon with you. Think again ! Its not even subtle, what you posted there. [i]Tax credits[/i]. Jeez !
🙄

Interesting mix of positives and negatives.

What's also interesting is nearly everyone's looking very much at their own personal bubble, and not at the bigger picture (please excuse the marketing metaphor). Nothing wrong with that - we all need to eat at the end of the day - but interesting that a lot of the public spending we are paying out for with our taxes were set-up after WW2 when there was an understandable greater sense of 'us'.

Also interesting that the tax-dodgers are being bought up a lot. Realistically, how much do you think they have 'taken' from the big tax pot? Is it enough that it's justifiable to close the loopholes and potentially lose the multi-national's business, or would we be better off tackling something else, such as benefit fraud or cutting overseas aid?

Anyway, if you think I'm now going to enter into a 5 day BS-athon with you. Think again ! Its not even subtle, what you posted there. Tax credits. Jeez !

It's a fair question though. If you're (not specifically you, Solo) on an hourly wage that takes you into the 40% tax bracket for doing a bit of overtime, then, fag packet (or in my case, back of a piece of parquet) maths tells me you're on approaching £20/hour. How does doing a bit of overtime make it [i]"all go on taxes"[/i]?

Anyway, if you think I'm now going to enter into a 5 day BS-athon with you

Honestly, I'm not. I'm not trolling - I'm asking questions because I don't know. I've never dealt with the tax credit system so I've no idea how it works.

Is there a situation where working overtime doesn't actually result in more net income?

[i]Also interesting that the tax-dodgers are being bought up a lot. Realistically, how much do you think they have 'taken' from the big tax pot?[/i]
Shirley they can't take, what they haven't paid in ?

However, the more visceral issue for some is the obsession with [i]public services[/i]. Some folk appear to believe that to fund these services should be beyond question and that we will all just have to dig a little deeper into our pockets to continue to provide increasingly costly services. Again, I ask the pro tax bunch whether there might ever be a limit on how much money should be spent on services.
Alas, no answer yet... So one can only assume that the answer is "no" and that the sky will be the limit when is comes to funding and the taxes required to pay for it.
Furthermore, I wonder how many of the pro-tax bunch, work in the public sector.
😕

bold comments Solo.

Is there a situation where working overtime doesn't actually result in more net income?

It was said in the past that this could happen but I don't think so now - this seems to help explain quite well

http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2014/02/fair-pay-matters-but-so-do-tax-credits/

Again, I ask the pro tax bunch whether there might ever be a limit on how much money should be spent on services.

That appears to be a rhetorical question.

Do go on. 🙂

[i]How does doing a bit of overtime make it "all go on taxes"?[/i]
I'm quoting the folk I've dealt with.
This translates into "[i]Throwing away a Saturday, on flat rate, which is still subject to tax, doesn't give me any incentive to work O/T[/i]"
So, obviously, if they do work O/T, they get a little extra, but in my view, these are line workers, shop floor staff. They ain't on massive incomes as it is. Now making them go claim back some WTC is almost a slap in the face.

[i]bold comments Solo.[/i]
Whatever, I'm just asking if there is or should be a limit to funding how big the state becomes and what it provides.

We all have to weigh up our free time vs being paid overtime, this is fine. But it's not true that working overtime doens't get you any extra money, does it?

You don't seem to have a valid grievance in this case. Working overtime does in fact get you more money. It may or may not be worth it to you, but that's a different issue.

I'm quoting the folk I've dealt with.
This translates into "Throwing away a Saturday, on flat rate, which is still subject to tax, doesn't give me any incentive to work O/T[/i]"
So, obviously, if they do work O/T, they get a little extra, but in my view, these are line workers, shop floor staff. They ain't on massive incomes as it is. Now making them go claim back some WTC is almost a slap in the face.

Sounds like your business needs to increase its flexibility and ability to respond to big orders or clear backlog by incentivising its/your staff with a proper overtime rate.

Overtime, on a weekend at flat rate? That's the problem not the tax. I'd be thinking a third on top for saturday and another third for it being overtime might make your shop floor workers less inclined to worry about still paying the same rate of income tax on it.

[edit] qute a few years since I worked in overalls on a factory floor but even the agency scum got proper overtime rates ( at least 50% on top) when they went over 40 hours and that really was a hard offer to turn down!

[i]You don't seem to have a valid grievance in this case[/i]
Wrong, its not me, its the people I've spoken to. Go lecture them.
However, I'm still not sold on the idea of a [b]limitless[/b] tax take, in the name of, well, anything.

[i]Sounds like your business needs[/i]
Wrong also, not me gov, its not my company.

However, I am amused that someone might suggest business might be to blame for why the tax take could be higher, if a business was run better, for that purpose. Wow !
😯

Wrong, its not me, its the people I've spoken to. Go lecture them.

I think someone's getting a bit mixed up.

[i]I think someone's getting a bit mixed up.[/i]
Grips, this is what I mean with you these days.

If you CBA to read the entire thread, then ok. However, to tax folk, to increase taxation without limit or question is not for me. Some folk think they would like to pay more tax. I ain't one of them, to continue to hit-up the tax payer to fund increasingly costly [i]public services[/i] is some shit that's really getting old.
This seemingly unwritten rule that we should never say no to or question the increased costs of Public Services is something that needs to stop. Likewise, increasing taxation for those who educate for longer or who could work more hours, seems to me to be in danger of turning people away from doing O/T or getting that degree. If you work hard for it, then you should receive some kind of reward and not just the knowledge that you've funded a pay rise for someone in the public sector. I need to live too and I need my wages to do this.

Shall we have an alternative thread ?
Do Members of Parliament work in the public sector ? do they work for us ? who'd fund a tax increase for the MPs then ?

Bye.
🙂

Solo, I am not suggesting higher taxes. I am responding to your posts about overtime ( i even quoted those bits in case you forgot what it was you said) then i was suggesting that it is unwise of you to expect staff to do overtime at flat rate, and foolish to think that the employees' poor understanding of tax is the only barrier to them agreeing to do overtime. I also pointed a business that had no problem getting overtime by paying extra for it (and presumably passing those costs on to the customer in some way eg "priority order" rate or in my case it would have been cost to the wholesaler and customer of each individual unit) . I don't really have an opinion on raising the tax take by paying staff more in the first place, sorry if it sounded if i did.

Tbf your posts made it sound like if it was not your business then you at least held a position that led you to ask (unsuccessfully) the shop floor workers to do overtime. What was it you were doing job-wise whilst asking them this?

[i] I am responding to your posts about overtime[/i]
I posted other people's thoughts on the matter, people I have spoken with and listened to. Their words indicate to me that they feel they pay enough tax, they feel no need to work to pay more tax, especially in a trade off against family time, cycling, whatever. At least until Xmas comes around...

So, cheers, but I've got to go now.