Life is hard living on £120k a year.

Well they are – that’s why I called it wealth redistribution. But jambalaya seems to think the term means cash handouts, cos he said it doens’t work. Where as social security clearly does work – just not perfectly.

You cannot just give people money and not expect them to just “kick back” and become dependent upon it, where is their incentive ? There really does become a culture of dependency and entitlement. Also the redistribution has a major flaw, the money comes from “the rich” and goes into Government, what do you think happens to it there, do you think every penny flows out for redistribution, how much gets diverted into other projects or initiatives.

I think he is describing the same system but completely disagrees with its efficacy.

Not really, maybe i am missing something but you are lumping that anyone who earns more money than average as being greedy?

No, he’s not. People who earn more but don’t mind paying tax aren’t greedy, and they’re the ones who are staying in the country.

Do you think a 75% tax rate is fair?

Mate of mine earns around 100k PAYE – he’s a ‘lefty’ and I’ve never once heard him whining about how much tax he pays or considering moving abroad. Because he’s not greedy.

Explain why people who earn more money are greedy?

Explain why you keep posting stupid straw man arguments first.

Do you think a 75% tax rate is fair?

why don’t you just tell us what you think is fair?

Over what earning threshold?

Do you think a 75% tax rate is fair?

The figure shouldn’t be seen in isolation. In exchange for paying higher tax you get to live in a better off, fairer, nicer society….

Well I wonder how many people, rich or poor, would pay less tax if they could work out how. Methinks if that’s the definition most people are greedy.

Any threshold. Would you want 75% of your earnings being taken away from you?

In exchange for paying higher tax you get to live in a better off, fairer, nicer society….

Do you? How do you judge that? Is Zimbabwe nicer than Finland? Is Cuba nicer than the UK?

Well that doens’t add up. In a progressive scheme like ours, even if we had a 75% tax band you’d never end up with 75% of your income taken away.

But even so, if you paid me £1m a year and taxed me 75% I’d still be pretty chuffed.

The figure shouldn’t be seen in isolation. In exchange for paying higher tax you get to live in a better off, fairer, nicer society….

Indeed footflaps:

In society where there is more income inequality the poor are worse off than in a society with less income inequality
In a society where there is more income inequality the average person is worse off than in a society with less income inequality
In a society where there is more income inequality the rich are worse off than in a society with less income inequality

Any threshold. Would you want 75% of your earnings being taken away from you?

Personally, I wouldn’t have a problem with it, if it was redistributed properly.

There is a lot of published evidence (google is you want) showing that people are happier the less inequality there is, or basically inequality breeds unhappiness…

Personally, I’d rather be happy than rich.

@aa – understood, we definitely agree on that, we can afford it.

@molgrips – understood also. Our social security budget is huge though, is it all spent wisely ? How much of the Disability budget actually goes into the care of those most of us would recognise as really needing assistance ? It’s easier to ask for more money (especially from that group the rich who can afford it and who are all tax cheaters anyway) than to look at whether the current money is being spent wisely. We cannot afford what we are spending, we run a big budget deficit. If we don’t address it we will have a far inferior social security net and a much worse health and education service. That’s the danger I see.

I wouldn’t have a problem with it, if it was redistributed properly

So redistributed properly includes fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, building HS2, funding MP’s second homes and renewing a Nuclear fleet of submarines?

But even so, if you paid me £1m a year and taxed me 75% I’d still be pretty chuffed.

Why would you ever work harder though? There becomes a point where the returns don’t equal the work put in. It breeds mediocrity.

Well it would be hard if a 75% tax was introduced rather than always being there as suddenly there’d be a bigger dent in income than before. People tend to resent that sort of thing however rich they are.

jambalaya – didn’t we do the stuff about benefits before?

You had to admit that actually the vast majority of the benefits bill goes to pensioners and the working poor (thereby effectively subsidising the profits of many large companies), and that benefit fraud is a tiny percentage of the total.

It’s easier to ask for more money

The issue isn’t asking for more money – it’s making sure people actually pay the money we are already asking for.

Do you think a 75% tax rate is fair?

Incorrect argument – do I think anyone needs more than 150K to live comfortably? So if the 75% tax rate was set for incomes above 200K (including bonuses) then I think it’s more than fair. They’re profiting from our society and so their contribution should reflect their profit.

Incorrect argument – do I think anyone needs more than 150K to live comfortably? So if the 75% tax rate was set for incomes above 200K (including bonuses) then I think it’s more than fair. They’re profiting from our society and so their contribution should reflect their profit.

And we’re almost at communism.

So the idealistic view is that we tell people how much they can earn and make an assessment of their level of happieness and then restrict them from doing anything which doesn’t fall in line with this idealistic view point.

So redistributed properly includes fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, building HS2, funding MP’s second homes and renewing a Nuclear fleet of submarines?

That’s quite an impressive conclusion you’ve drawn there…..

Redistributed properly, to me, means that tax rates are raised on higher earners with the intention of evening out the wealth across the population. Rather than say upping the tax rate on those earning £100k, so they can offer tax cuts to billionaires, which would be the traditional Tory / Neocon strategy.

As for the list in your ‘leap of faith’ conclusion I don’t really have a problem with any of them, except perhaps the war. MPs expenses are in the noise, so don’t care. Nuclear subs and HS2 are massive infrastructure projects in the UK, so the money gets re-circulated within UK industry, which is fine by me.

There is a lot of published evidence (google is you want) showing that people are happier the less inequality there is, or basically inequality breeds unhappiness…

That’s what the guy who used to be chief inspector of schools in Finland puts their education performance down to – an equal society.

footflaps – Member

The figure shouldn’t be seen in isolation. In exchange for paying higher tax you get to live in a better off, fairer, nicer society….

Incredibly complicated feedback loops too- more money spent on schools, infrastructure, health etc means more effective workforces and conditions in which to do business, which trickles up.

That’s what the guy who used to be chief inspector of schools in Finland puts their education performance down to – an equal society.

Sounds like communism to me.

Rather than say upping the tax rate on those earning £100k

Remember for equality this should be for household income. It would be unfair to penalise a single income family of £100k over a double income family when both parents are earning £50k. So the 75% tax band should be for those earning £50k too.

Do Dave and chums look as if they give a flying **** whether the majority of the population are living happy, fulfilling and rewarding lives? Or even make a living wage?

As long as their rich friends are… job done! Its been interesting watching question time last night, and news night this week. While the Pfizer takeover of Astra Zenecca was being discussed, plenty of people (and not just pinko commies) are now readily using the word ‘Tax Haven’ when referring to the UK

Maybe concentrating on personal taxation is a bit of a red herring. What we should be looking at is how little business contributes , as a percentage of its profits. Far far less than the bastion of capitalism, the US.

Are they really that deluded that they think a race to the bottom on corporate taxation will benefit the countries economy in the long term? Do they even care?

are now readily using the word ‘Tax Haven’ when referring to the UK

So what? That’s been evident for years. Ireland have been playing that game even more. At the end of the day with highly mobile companies and workforces, it’s hard to see how corporation tax will even exist in 50 years.

And we’re almost at communism.

Marxism/communism relates to the control of capital within an economy- in one it is in private ownership in the other collectively owned. Therefore altering tax rates does not make you more or less communist it makes you more or less fair / redistributive.

So the idealistic view is that we tell people how much they can earn and make an assessment of their level of happieness and then restrict them from doing anything which doesn’t fall in line with this idealistic view point.

What they meant was what they said

They’re profiting from our society and so their contribution should reflect their profit.

🙄

The People’s Republic of United Kingdom according to the great wisdom of STW.

Hail the great Leaders!

Are they really that deluded that they think a race to the bottom on corporate taxation will benefit the countries economy in the long term? Do they even care?

Alex salmond believes so – he is committing Scotland to lower rates of corp tax than rUK. Funny old world.

Lesser of two evils. A nation full of jobs and investment but no corporation tax, or a nation without both.

The People’s Republic of United Kingdom according to the great wisdom of STW.

It’s not that radical, most Scandinavian countries have a much more redistributive tax system…

Perhaps we can all become Harrison Bergeron? There’s a thought for lunch,

The People’s Republic of United Kingdom according to the great wisdom of STW.
Hail the great Leaders!

Great argument. Well made.

It’s not that radical, most Scandinavian countries have a much more redistributive tax system…

They’re also healthy, prosperous and well-educated. It’ll never catch on…

They’re also healthy, prosperous and well-educated. It’ll never catch on…

Yep, goes against everything we Brits stand for, with our heads held high surrounded by poverty and ignorance.

Are they really that deluded that they think a race to the bottom on corporate taxation will benefit the countries economy in the long term? Do they even care?

Alex salmond believes so – he is committing Scotland to lower rates of corp tax than rUK. Funny old world.

Alex Salmond? The legendary economic sage? That half-wit, pre-crash, in his ‘Arc of Prosperity’ speech (which he inexplicably now tries to deny the existence of) said he wanted the tax regime of Ireland, coupled with the regulatory framework of Iceland. Given the banks based in Edinburgh, if he’s achieved this, then an independent Scotland would presently be making Greece look like Monaco.

Our social security budget is huge though, is it all spent wisely ?

Of cousre not – there is wastage, but is eliminating all wastage possible? Is it possible to catch everyone who’s taking the piss without penalising those who are in genuine need? I suspect not.

But even so, if you paid me £1m a year and taxed me 75% I’d still be pretty chuffed.
Why would you ever work harder though?

What you earn doesn’t have much relation to how hard you work, does it? I do quite well but I don’t work hard at all. It’s pure luck that I was born with an aptitude that pays well.

As for not working hard – at that end of the pay scale, there are other rewards. I suspect most people up there are more motivated by ambition, power and responsibility than money. It’s certainly the case in my job. Many of us our working hard to get promoted, even though it rarely results in higher pay; it simply gives us more senority and makes our job more interesting. We can do things our way instead of having to take crap from someone else.

A nation full of jobs and investment but no corporation tax, or a nation without both.

Or perhaps somewhere in between..?

teamhurtmore – Member

Perhaps we can all become Harrison Bergeron? There’s a thought for lunch

Oh ffs

Alex salmond believes so – he is committing Scotland to lower rates of corp tax than rUK. Funny old world

MUST RESIST 😉

What you earn doesn’t have much relation to how hard you work, does it? I do quite well but I don’t work hard at all. It’s pure luck that I was born with an aptitude that pays well.

Wise words molly wise words

IME the hardest jobs I have ever done paid the least

IME the hardest jobs I have ever done paid the least

It’s just how do you define ‘hard’?

Hard physically? Mentally? Most responsibility? Biggest cost if you cock up?