yes but not everyone of working age actually works or pays PAYE.

Indeed which is why I say at least.

Well my figures say 4 million pay higher rate tax and there are 36 million people of a working age so that’s at least 10% but given that the average income is in the mid-20ks then yes not middle earners.

I gave up fencing when I was 12 due to the time commitment needed; regretted it when I realised later in life that it was the only sport I was ever really good at.

Graduate tax seems fairest to me as shouldn’t put people off. I don’t suppose we’d want to return to the days when only the cleverest people went do we?! At least the country could afford to pay for higher education then….

Well, for a start we could afford to support her more if the money wasn’t being pissed up the wall on Tarquin’s drama course. same goes for the pensioner getting under £100 per week.

But that’s not the same thing at all! You want the richer to pay more than they do now which may or may not be appropriate depending on what you think different people should pay towards the running of the country. The idea of what is fair taxation is opinion, that is all.

well, this page agrees with the 10% figure

That’s my opinion too it’s just that TJ has tried to make it sound like at most it’s 5%.

Zulu-Eleven – I don’t see the point in those arguments really. I mean a single Mum earning £8k gets a lot of benefits right? More than she pays in tax? So she ain’t really contributing to anybody else now is she?

Its 10% of all full time PAYE payers earn enough to get into the higher tax braket. . so around 5% or less of all workforce. (including part time and unemployed as well as self employed)

Is that your opinion or do you have a reference?

Middle earners are not earning £44000 pa. They are the top few %

How many is a few?

http://www.turbotraining.co.uk/turbo_trainer_sessions.php

I’ve ended up living 5 miles from my old prep school and am wondering if I should send my son there when he’s old enough. The local decent secondary school is over subscribed and the alternative isn’t so great so not sure what we’ll do. If I carry on in my current employment I’ll be able to afford it but the schools are expensive here – Cobham/Leatherhead. Definitely don’t want to move house – moving costs would be far too much.

My 1.7 puma does 40mpg or so except when it slow moving traffic when it drops to about 25mpg. Planning to get a c-max and think a diesel might be sensible; like the look of the new one that’s coming out but suspect I’ll get a 2nd hand outgoing version.

I suspect that, like I said in my first post, what they mean is that had those fees not been levied you would have an extra £xxxx worth of growth.

I don’t think that at all as the article is quite explicit. The thing is that there are up front costs and ongoing costs so after 40 years there’s a lot of money (hopefully!) attracting a %age cost.

How old is the laptop? Pretty old I guess so not worth spending much on it as you’ll probably need to get a new (faster) one soon anyway.

Maybe get something 2nd hand if can’t afford a new one. Or look for someone selling one cheap on the high street but double check you’re getting what you think you’re getting.

Hope they’re not fainting goats
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fainting_goat

I’m an Oracle consultant; having great problems with a client who ignored our advice regarding hardware and is now complaining about performance. Not a lot we can do other than get them to add CPUs which they can’t do at the moment.

So when he gets out of jail in 16 weeks can they ask him for the password again and send him back if he refuses? This could go on for a while….

Even if they did get the laptop it would have to be pretty special to be worth that much – even if bought from a retailer with warranty, etc. Pretty stupid really.

I suggest he be held in custody until the password is cracked.

Treat ’em mean to keep ’em keen….

Nah I’m a softy – get those ‘ribbed for her pleasure’ thingies.

“My” credit card – that she uses, “my” money – that you put into an Isa for

Stop being a ****t! I pay for everything and she keeps her cash. I didn’t expect her to give some of it away to her Mum without asking.

tiger 0 yes – calling joint money your money!

Well my money’s joint and and what she has isn’t it seems. Anyway, if she ever passes her driving test she can buy her own car…oh flip I pay for her lessons too!

You know what that’s called?….

And that’s not all…I put money into an ISA for her which she promptly took out and lent to her Mum without telling me. I am doing something wrong aren’t I?!

My wife keeps her maternity payments in her account and won’t tell me how much she has, meanwhile everything she buys goes on my credit card – humph.

tiger – smoker dies younger so get less pensions – far less. Thats a big saving

Ooh so more pension for non-smokers? OK, I’m convinced smoke away all ye smokers.

Mogrim – Well I suppose then there’s also people dying in their prime who could be contributing tax for more decades to come? I’d like to see proper figures on this but do they exist?

It’s tolerated only in the sense that it can’t be banned.

You don’t agree with the contents of this I suppose?:

http://money.uk.msn.com/news/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=152625392

What does that even mean?

Now I’ll explain for you. Smoking costs the country money – through increased healthcare and lost revenue from days off ill OK? Right then they pay money to the Government as they pay tax on cigarettes OK? So as the latter isn’t enough to pay for the former non-smokers have to make up the rest. OK now?

So, smokers help fund the NHs for non-smokers….

Yeah help fund it – but they don’t pay in enough so smokers cost more to the country than they contribute.

But it’s not that poorer people are losing out it’s just that non-kid having people are paying a bit to those with kids. Those with kids still have bigger costs than those without, the payments just negate that a bit. Better off people pay more tax than the poorer but the amount they should pay is opinion.

No I know, but the fact is that he has paid into the system, and therefore is entitled to it when he needs it.

But it doesn’t work like that now does it? I mean plenty get more out of the system than they pay in and plenty get less out – that’s what most of us want right?

I’m not. I say tax the bastards more heavily.

Yeah bloomin’ rich people what have they ever done for us?

NHS should be free to only those that can’t pay too. Or not.

Nothing changes for you then – indeed have some more kids…!

It’s not just the child benefit payment that people with kids get – they also benefit from free education so when are we going to see that changed? Free education should only be for those kids from lower income tax families right?

If one of you pays higher rate tax then neither of you get it.

yes as one has a full time carer at home that the other does not
quality of life [better off] may not be just down to pounds and pence.

of course but why give more money to the one with the most take home pay?

Why do you think that? They’ll take home more as both using their lower income tax bands – some is tax free.

That’s a different point though FuzzyWuzzy wasn’t explicitly making his comment to higher rate tax payers. Anyway, not all higher rate tax payers feel rich I’m sure – lots of other outgoings to consider and their mortgage/rent might be an issue if they’re in the SE and want to live somewhere they consider to be OK.

Why are people interested in brands? Because they’ll fit better or last longer? The only time I’m even vaguely interested in brands is when it comes to outdoor and cycling gear.

Haven’t defragged a disk in years; used to do it on my PC back in the early 90s but then that was 40mb!