punishing the poor for being poor

The political right, I think, believe that anyone can be rich and successful if they work hard and apply themselves. However the logical inverse of this is that if you aren’t rich and successful, it’s your own fault….

Yes and it’s been pointed out to binners before but that doesn’t stop him blaming IDS and the Tories

It was when the tories decided to reassess incapacity benefit to the people already on it rather than to new WCA claimants in 2011 that the problems really started, so both outlooks have merit-Labour introduced it, IDS made it a lot, lot worse for people.

well that’s a relief, why would you want them to ruin the country?

Look ma, a typo flame!

There are various figures bandied around to quantify the loss to the exchequer from tax avoidance. The Guardian reckon £35bn a year

they should know all about offshoring profits after they did it for Autotrader sale proceeds

It was when the tories decided to reassess incapacity benefit to the people already on it rather than to new WCA claimants in 2011 that the problems really started, so both outlooks have merit-Labour introduced it, IDS made it a lot, lot worse for people.

if ATOS is so toxic why is Alan Johnson briefing them about Labours policies?

Labour Give ‘Hated’ Atos Special Access to Plans For Government

When labour introduced different testing for the disabled , it was a revised test for new claims, that effected a small number of people. It was IDS and the Tories that decided to force every claiment, no matter how ill, to be reapraised. Putting them on a random conveyor belt of spurious tests, on an industrial scale.

Mrs Binners was working with a disabled charity at the time, and it was ridiculous. They were telling people with severe disabilities, who struggle to cope in their own homes unaided, to show up for random assessments in towns miles away, then stopping their benefits when they failed to show up. And we’re not talking about the odd case either.

IDS is a cold-hearted, callous and uncaring ****!!!

A typical Tory really

Yeah, I take everything Paul Staines says at face value. Oh, just remembered, his blog is hosted offshore isn’t it?

Michael Portillo went to South Wales on one of his Railway Journeys. He was talking to an ex-miner about the strike, and said something like ‘Gosh, I didn’t realise it meant that much to you’.

FFS.

aracer – Member

Well there are 50 times as many people in the bottom 50% as in the top 1%

I was working with average individual incomes so I’m not sure what your point is?

My point’s fairly simple; the richest people in society do pay more than average earnings, but nothing like in proportion to the disparity in wealth. They’re not paying more income tax today because we’re putting “more weight on the broadest shoulders”- they’re paying more income tax because we’re putting more money in the biggest pockets.

jimw – Member

Yeah, I take everything Paul Staines says at face value. Oh, just remembered, his blog is hosted offshore isn’t it?

I think he is internet troll and can be OTT, as I understand it his blog is hosted overseas to keep it out of the reach of UK litigation

howvever on some issues he is more than happy to go to court, just ask property multimillionaire Emily Thornberry

http://www.cityam.com/212117/labour-mp-emily-thornberry-threatens-guido-fawkes-legal-action-after-buy-let-bust

so are you saying that Alan Johnson isn’t meeting ATOS?

I can’t forgive the tories for making me feel sorry for Ed Miliband. It would appear the tories are going to fight this election by telling bare-faced lies and launching ever more vicious personal attacks against Miliband. They should be careful, as it could force a lot of ex-labour voters back in to the fold.

so are you saying that Alan Johnson isn’t meeting ATOS?

No, I don’t know either way, but from what I have read Guido is not as independent of the establishment as he would like you to think.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100289720/revealed-the-guest-list-that-proves-that-guido-fawkes-is-a-certified-member-of-the-tory-establishment/

If, of course you believe all that is written in the established media

When labour introduced different testing for the disabled , it was a revised test for new claims, that effected a small number of people. It was IDS and the Tories that decided to force every claiment, no matter how ill, to be reapraised. Putting them on a random conveyor belt of spurious tests, on an industrial scale.

Mrs Binners was working with a disabled charity at the time, and it was ridiculous. They were telling people with severe disabilities, who struggle to cope in their own homes unaided, to show up for random assessments in towns miles away, then stopping their benefits when they failed to show up. And we’re not talking about the odd case either.
Read this binners ,hardly a sympathetic study but shows again that your assertion is incorrect,bit like your Islington rants 😉 It was a Labour programme,hence the reason why you didn’t hear Labour trying to score political points by berating the Tories in the various headline grabbing stories on the subject.ATOS are no longer the provider btw.

I like Ruth Davidson – she seems a generally decent person. God knows what she’s doing in the Tory party.

And that’s the fundamental problem – no matter what the Tories do to reinvent themselves, they’re still the Tories, they can’t be forgiven for what they’ve done. Labour are very, very close to going down the same road.

There’s a saying that every political career ends in failure. I wonder if political parties have the same story arc, founded on idealism and for the needs of the common man, but over time taken over by a party machinery that slowly forgets where it came from, until the heart dies and all you have left is a shell of spin and soundbites.

no matter what the Tories do to reinvent themselves, they’re still the Tories, they can’t be forgiven for what they’ve done.

Not even that. It’s not about holding grudges, it’s that they are Tories, and I am not. They believe things that I don’t think are very nice. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t be Tories by definition.

Yes, which is kind-of my thing with Ruth Davidson – she joined the party so must agree with most of it’s views.

Though there is the cuckoo-in-the-nest thing, the perfect example of which was Tony Blair.

Based on the plethora of “red princes” in line for cushy seats this general election it looks like Labour are planning an alternative labour version of the house of lords before they disappear into their shell of spin and soundbites

surroundedbyhills – Member
I’m Scottish too, what’s a Tory?

Plenty of them in scotland.
[/quote]

What, Scots?

bencooper – Member
…….no matter what the Tories do to reinvent themselves, they’re still the Tories, they can’t be forgiven for what they’ve done. Labour are very, very close to going down the same road.

So if the tories came back and tried to deliver things you agreed with you would still never vote for them? At times we need to remember that past performance is no guarantee of future performance.

If you go too far down that route then you might run out of people to vote for.

Not for the “So the top 1% pays proportionally 3 times more income tax on average” bit you weren’t. All of them put together pay 3 times more than all of the bottom 50% put together. You can’t do one bit on their combined contribution and one bit on their average income and expect to make a useful comparison.

If you want to do it that way, then on average the top 1% pay 150 times as much income tax as the bottom 50%. Whilst earning 14.5 times as much on average. So on average they pay 10 times as high a proportion of their income in income tax.

My point’s fairly simple; the richest people in society do pay more than average earnings, but nothing like in proportion to the disparity in wealth.

Well yes they do, far more so, as I just showed. The only reason I can see for your assertion is that you’re doing earnings as an average and income tax contribution as cumulative, which makes no sense at all. Whether 10 times as high a proportion of income in tax is a high enough proportion is another question, but your assertion is basically incorrect.

The argument here seems to be “look at all this money rich people pay. It’s A LOT.” Yes, it is.

But they can afford it. Poor people can’t.

My argument? It’s that Northwind is comparing apples with oranges. I’m not saying anything about whether the amount high earners pay is enough.

So if the tories came back and tried to deliver things you agreed with you would still never vote for them? At times we need to remember that past performance is no guarantee of future performance.

No, because they’re Tories – can’t trust them farther than you can throw them.

And I know this means might run out of parties to vote for – that’s no reason to vote for a party you don’t believe in or trust.

The gobshite was just on the today program, if I hear the sound bite hard working families much more I’m likely to spontaneously combust.

Yes, that’s seriously annoying too – I aim to avoid hard work as much as possible, who’s going to represent me?

I had to switch it off when he was asked about his welfare cuts [ IFS have asked them to explain where 12 billion of cuts are coming from and they have declined] and he just talked about labours plans instead

Its a special talent to talk without either saying anything or answering the question. I am not sure whey we dont just shout at them ANSWER THE **** QUESTION WILL YOU

All politicians do it is was just Daves turn today.

Yep, I work the bare minimum to pay the bills/living expenses then spend the rest of the time doing stuff that makes me happy.

I’m a work shy singleton, who’s representing me? 😀

bencooper – Member
…And that’s the fundamental problem – no matter what the Tories do to reinvent themselves, they’re still the Tories, they can’t be forgiven for what they’ve done. Labour are very, very close to going down the same road…

I don’t dislike the real Tories, they do what they say on the tin and basically stick to party principles.

I do dislike the Red Tories and the Yellow Tories though. Their ingredients aren’t what they say they are and they have long forgotten what a principle is.

As for taxing the rich, they are like grass and benefit from a mowing every now and then. Just spread a bit of fertiliser and a new crop pops up. 🙂

Yes, there’s that – you know what you’re getting with the Tories.

Not true – lot of examples of Tories being quite the opposite of how they are painted – check out their history of government spending etc.

But this is why IMO the whole party labels are unhelpful and I refer back to comments on Rachel Reeves and Ed Balls – very bright capable people who are constrained by the nonsense of party politics.

While Wallace continues to misdiagnose the reasons why we had a crisis and why we have a cost-of-living issue, some of the Labour team gets it but are constrained from addressing the issues by party dogma. Great article in FT today on this very point.

The cost-of-living issue as an example is solved by addressing the underlying cause – our terrible productivity record. Wallace’s instinct is to address this through intervention and artificial wages. In contrast, Balls recognises that we need genuine supply side reforms which is why business can work with him. Of course, this gets labelled red tory etc which is tosh.

Interestingly, the main supply-side reform proponent in Europe right now is Hollande, not that it is getting him far.

But if it takes red tories to address the real issues then so be it. I am agnostic to the parties, its the policies that matter. And at the end of day, the requirements to address UK challenges transcend politics anyway

Tax and stuff …

As tmh, myself and others have pointed out numerous times higher rates of tax frequently result in reduced tax collections as people change their behaviour (ie how they work, how they are paid, where they are based). There is a significant tipping point around 50% as its phycologically very significant if you receive half or less of the amount you earn. Again as I have posted before the rise in UK taxes to 50% was a big part of me relocating abroad for 2 years.

The argument, “they can afford it”, is not the correct way to think about it. The high earners are generally the most able to change the way they are paid (eg the ones who run their own businesses) or where they are located (they have the financial rescources and flexibility to move abroad)

As for the 1% vs 50% stuff above think about it like this

Someone on 250k (bottom of 1%) will pay around £150k in employee and employer taxes plus (guestimate) 15k in VAT = total tax take about 165k or 66%

Someone on 17k (Northwind’s figure) will pay around 2.5k in employee and employer taxes plus 1k in VAT = total tax take around 3.5k or 21%

Also someone on 17k probably has access to welfare payments and in any case benefits from NHS services which are paid for by others, lots of significant side benefits.

So in my example the higher earner pays 47 times more tax and a rate of treble that of the lower earner

Tax Avoidance – the problem with this its legal and actively encouraged by Ireland and Luxembourg etc etc. Under Junker Luxembourg has become one of the wealthiest countries in the EU by actively encouraging abuse of EU tax legislation by encouraging businesses to be based there and cutting special deals on corporate taxes. Anyway my point is if this mythical £35bn was realistically collectable one of the prior governments would have done something about it.

JY – The Tories have given far more detail about where their cuts will come from than have Labour (who will also make cuts just not as large). The fact is in an election the parties are very vague about spending details.

I am agnostic to the parties

The SNP breathes a huge sigh of relief at this breaking news 😉

As tmh, myself and others have pointed out numerous times higher rates of tax frequently result in reduced tax collections

So it not always then…so we can tax more and get more..Its good to know that lets hope we get it right eh. Its also fair to say you are amongst the more right wing business Tory orientated posters on here [ lets take it as a given you and THM will dispute this]

As for cuts take that up with the impartial IFS rather than me as they are the ones asking. FWIW your answer was the same as Daves – deflect to Labour and say they are worse. Whether this is true or false is irrelevant as it does not answer the question of where a Tory govt will make the cuts. Given I did it in caps lock I am not sure why you missed this point that this does not answer the question 😕

The tax cuts one is an interesting point as there is some truth that raising tax leads to avoidance [ needs to be massively high IMHO] However if we say increased speeding to 85 on the Mway and 40 in towns we would get less folk speeding. I cannot think of another policy area where we do policy based on avoidance rather than what is correct.Perhaps there is one?

I also think you overstate how flexible folk are in relocating. IMHO not everyone is like you.

The trick is knowing when 😉

Thankfully we have economist to let us know these truth eh 😉
This thread needs TJ and the laffer curve IMHO

This thread needs TJ and the laffer curve IMHO

Only after THM has claimed to be a left winger.

molgrips – Member

But they can afford it.

Since experiencing a mild sense of amusement after reading that statement. I do find myself questioning the moral integrity of those who think they are entitled to judge what others can “afford”.
While also remarking upon the slight whiff of hypocrisy regarding that statement, on this occasion.

Something that still surprizes me is the obsession of the left to continue to strive to make rich folk poorer in order to hand out fresh fish to the poor.
It’s the answer of the myopic simpleton.

Forgive the Conservatives? On the basis of what makes a Conservative, possibly. On the basis that regardless of the colour of the tie they wear, they are all politicians. Certainly not!
There are good people working in Government and there are bad people working in Government.

I prefer the terms “slightly less rich” and “enough to survive” (and I’m not a lefty).

according to that 4×4 matrix I am a LW libertarian!!

the last thing we need is a false debate on a laffer curve

Also someone on 17k probably has access to welfare payments and in any case benefits from NHS services which are paid for by others, lots of significant side benefits.

Wow! Lucky them. Your attempt to paint a picture of the downtrodden, persecuted high achiever is worthy of Cameron himself. You do realise NHS ‘benefits’ are available to the rich as well as poor?

the obsession of the left to continue to strive to make rich folk poorer in order to hand out fresh fish to the poor.

Even the myopic simpletons in the bleeding heart left that is the republican party [ or UKIP] agree with redistributive taxes or taxing the rich at a higher rate than the poor.
I assume its something we all basically agree on [ bar a tiny minority] and all we are really doing is discussing at what % and where rich starts