|
|
Post by dodgydave on May 31, 2023 13:10:46 GMT
So you think JK Rowling should stop writing books because she is already excessively rich? Elon Musk should stop creating new companies because he is already excessively rich? You seem to think that billionaires have billions in the bank lol. Why don't you so some research for once and look at the reasons why they move. Norway's richest man moved because the wealth tax forces him to raise income to pay it... because shock horror it is a paper wealth, and he doesn't have 175m lying around lol. He has to increase dividend payments to the shareholders in his company so he can pay it, and that harms his business. There are many things we could do to change our tax system. For a starters we should treat gambling as income, scrap dividends tax and treat it under normal income, and most importantly treat inherited assets as income. I would also scrap VAT and corporation tax and just make a transaction tax ie you buy something off Amazon, and both sides are charged a 5% transaction tax. I think JK Rowling writes because she enjoys it, not to make more money. Elon musk does vanity projects because he enjoys playing with his fortune. Norways richest man left because he couldn't bare to see some of his immense wealth taken from him, he did not have to move to survive. Billionaires, even millionaires don't keep their money in the bank, as a rule they ring fence amounts to 1, invest in things they are interested in 2, to invest in medium risk higher growth. 3, In those hard to find safe places such as land banking or gold. Much of their wealth does nothing but sit there. Q: How would a transaction tax differ from VAT? Elon Musk does "vanity projects"... lol. He transformed online payment with Paypal. He led the EV revolution with Tesla. Now he is leading the way in affordable and reusable space travel. He has also paid more tax than anybody else in history! Like I said previously, billionaires / millionaires are asset rich, and when they "realise" those assets to provide income then it is taxed. All you do with a wealth tax is make them take more income from the business(es) they own and then company pays less taxes... and less money for investment / recruitment / wages. You are focusing on the politics of envy, rather than the actually problem, which is that people at EVERY LEVEL do all they can to avoid taxes, rather than being responsible. A transaction stops this. You scrap physical money and every electric transactions occurs a 5% charge... even when you give your kids some pocket money. Likewise, I would scrap all inheritance tax allowances. Giving an asset to somebody else should be straight forwardly classed as income. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2023 15:10:20 GMT
It is in fact far from inevitable, and the very notion you spout is just the typical right wing failure to understand us. Whilst I would love to win the lottery and be wealthy myself - who wouldn't? - I do not envy the wealthy at all. Nor do any left wing comrades I have ever known. We are not motivated by envy at all, but by a sense of social justice and a desire for a more equitable distribution of wealth that derives from that. The notion that all can earn what they are really worth, and everyone can earn enough to live decently. We tend to believe that most people left to their own devices would seek to maximise their incomes and that those in positions where they can get away with it will end up commanding far higher incomes than they can possibly be worth whilst millions are underpaid. The inherent imbalance of economic power involved, the overt exploitation of the poor that is often involved, the prioritising of greed over need that is often involved is distasteful to our sense of social justice. And it is something that works against the economic interests of the working millions whose cause we seek to champion. In short, we believe that some people simply have too much at the expense of millions who have too little. And envy has nothing to do with it but social justice and a desire to see an economy that works for the many rather than the few, and the obvious fact observable throughout Europe that less unequal societies are far happier ones, is what motivates us. One of my best friends is a wealthy millionairess and I am not the least bit envious of her. But right wingers prefer not to even try to understand our motivations and prefer, falsely and dishonestly, to interpret them as envy because it suits them to do so and requires less intelligent thought. well maybe tony blair wasn’t a proper socialist, for his attitude to my quarter of a million turnover was to destroy my company’s ability to make it in hope I would sign up with the software house his new found donors ran, do they could charge half a million and pay me forty grand and pocket the rest. Its a funny thing but as a freelancer on about four times the amount the average employee collected, you always got the envy stuff. My basic answer was to hand them my agent’s card and say ‘come join me’. I’d be more than happy to help anyone follow my example but many, when told the reality, quickly revised their eagerness and with it the envy. Fact is i’ve funded god knows how many idle wasters and when shit hits the fan like when i went blind because the wankers in the welsh nhs management couldn’t organise my treatment and no private faciluty had the equipment to do the op the stste hung ne out to fucking starve so you can take your ideals of what should be and shove them not because they are wring but because tbe badtards running the show are grinning ear to fucking ear while they take snd gont give back when they should.
So i’m all in favour of tax evasion in its illegal form because tbe bastards running the shitshow don’t even play fair when you are entitled to claim. So you are all in favour of illegally avoiding paying your dues - And Jokesy of course rocks up to like what you have just said - yet the pair of you would be screaming blue murder about someone claiming welfare they are not entitled to. Hypocrisy writ large. And the blatant selfishness which is screaming out at me here cannot understand idealism and a belief in something better and can apparently only understand such motives in terms of their own selfishness. Thus it must be envy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2023 15:21:51 GMT
I disagree. I don't think tax has reached some potential ceiling. And while you keep emphasising its the highest since ww2 you constantly ignore its comparison to today in other countries (Which I consider far more relevant.) Whenever I ask you which of the hundreds of services government provide today that they didn't in 1945 you shy away. The NHS represents a huge amount of that difference and as I point out again and again we can treat a million things that would have killed yo in 1945. Which of those things would you be happy to die of? Would you be happy to see the average life expectancy to fall back to 73 years? Or do you actually want to have your cake and keep your happenny? Well I'll give you a personal example - last year my income rose by circa £20k. On that I paid a marginal tax rate of 70%. If you think that I am just going to sit around and accept higher taxes without changing my behavior to reduce that burden you are very mistaken. But good luck if you want to give it a bash.  The fact that your income as a retiree increased by so much in one year - a sum much larger than many pensioners have to live on in total - marks you as a particularly well heeled individual and hardly in the same ballpark as most of us when it comes to financial struggles. Or course you will try and find ways to avoid paying your dues on such relative wealth because your sort always do. Little wonder that most of your sympathies are for the well off. Because such sympathies are also for yourself. The poor are clearly a loathsome bunch who need a good kick up the arse because of their claim on your taxes. You'd rather cut all support to them to the absolute minimum so you can pay a bit less tax. Unless it is something you get yourself like winter fuel payments when suddenly it becomes - conveniently - more costly to stop giving it to you than to carry on giving it. You are thus coming across as disappointingly selfish, so by all means correct me if I am wrong. Jokesy will no doubt be along soon to like your comments anyway so all is well with the world, lol |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 31, 2023 16:01:49 GMT
well maybe tony blair wasn’t a proper socialist, for his attitude to my quarter of a million turnover was to destroy my company’s ability to make it in hope I would sign up with the software house his new found donors ran, do they could charge half a million and pay me forty grand and pocket the rest. Its a funny thing but as a freelancer on about four times the amount the average employee collected, you always got the envy stuff. My basic answer was to hand them my agent’s card and say ‘come join me’. I’d be more than happy to help anyone follow my example but many, when told the reality, quickly revised their eagerness and with it the envy. Fact is i’ve funded god knows how many idle wasters and when shit hits the fan like when i went blind because the wankers in the welsh nhs management couldn’t organise my treatment and no private faciluty had the equipment to do the op the stste hung ne out to fucking starve so you can take your ideals of what should be and shove them not because they are wring but because tbe badtards running the show are grinning ear to fucking ear while they take snd gont give back when they should.
So i’m all in favour of tax evasion in its illegal form because tbe bastards running the shitshow don’t even play fair when you are entitled to claim. So you are all in favour of illegally avoiding paying your dues - And Jokesy of course rocks up to like what you have just said - yet the pair of you would be screaming blue murder about someone claiming welfare they are not entitled to. Hypocrisy writ large. I would put it like this - If you are ambivalent about welfare fraud and galloping public sector corruption, incompetence and misconduct, why shouldn't taxpayers be ambivalent about tax evasion? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 31, 2023 17:23:56 GMT
It's more like you give Government departments money they will find ways to spend it whether those are needed or not. A good example is in the news today - the Covid Enquiry. It's already cost £100 million and is not expected to report back until 2026!. Meanwhile Sweden have completed their enquiry and moved on. There are far too many people (Civil Servents and Welfare recipients) sucking at the teat of the taxpayer - these need to weaned off and start doing some productive work. This is a well know phenomena in large organisations, where detail can be obscured significantly. It can become in a department's interest to knowingly waste resources. The added problem with government is that the payer simply isn't there at all and has no control, so not only can it become in a government department's interest to waste resources, it can become in the interests of those in control of those resources to allow it happen and effectively form an interest block against the payer (the taxpayer). It's simpler (and less risky) to scam the public with passivity than actively deal with the civil service corruption. The last UK politician to make a proper stab at the issue was M. Thatcher, but she didn't finish the job. My local council has just spent several hundred thousand re-jigging a junction on the main road. There was actually nothing much wrong with the layout to begin with and the 'new improved' layout is actually worse with poor sightlines and cars blocking the road. I suspect it was one of those deals where the department has to spend the money in this years budget otherwise their budget for next year will be cut. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on May 31, 2023 17:27:06 GMT
well maybe tony blair wasn’t a proper socialist, for his attitude to my quarter of a million turnover was to destroy my company’s ability to make it in hope I would sign up with the software house his new found donors ran, do they could charge half a million and pay me forty grand and pocket the rest. Its a funny thing but as a freelancer on about four times the amount the average employee collected, you always got the envy stuff. My basic answer was to hand them my agent’s card and say ‘come join me’. I’d be more than happy to help anyone follow my example but many, when told the reality, quickly revised their eagerness and with it the envy. Fact is i’ve funded god knows how many idle wasters and when shit hits the fan like when i went blind because the wankers in the welsh nhs management couldn’t organise my treatment and no private faciluty had the equipment to do the op the stste hung ne out to fucking starve so you can take your ideals of what should be and shove them not because they are wring but because tbe badtards running the show are grinning ear to fucking ear while they take snd gont give back when they should.
So i’m all in favour of tax evasion in its illegal form because tbe bastards running the shitshow don’t even play fair when you are entitled to claim. So you are all in favour of illegally avoiding paying your dues - And Jokesy of course rocks up to like what you have just said - yet the pair of you would be screaming blue murder about someone claiming welfare they are not entitled to. Hypocrisy writ large. And the blatant selfishness which is screaming out at me here cannot understand idealism and a belief in something better and can apparently only understand such motives in terms of their own selfishness. Thus it must be envy. i never used to feel that way. The day i walked out of my defence company employment thanks to their illegal imposition of new terms of employment i left a job that paid me £20k pa in 1990 So called tax advisers told me to set myself up with a salary that met the absolute minimum salary to incur the absolute minimum of national insurance and take the rest in dividends. I chose to suggest they fuck off and i paid myself a salary of £20,000 because my mortgage affordability criteria depended on my salary. I paid my wife to keep the books and paid her to do so At that time the tax man, the dept of social security and hm customs were three separate organisations, and fuel bought on a company credit card intended at the time of purchase for business mileage but subsequently used for private mileage was not liable for NI so naturally i opened a company credit card. My attitude changed markedly after Tony Blair came into number 10 Gordon Brown made paying your wife subjected to settlement investigation by Nirth West 5 Trusts And Settlements. While ensuring MPs could still pay their wives and fuck tbeir secretaries. And then Dawn Primarolo stated categorically in her regulatory impact assessment that Millionaire footballers would be able to afford lawyers capable of fighting IR35, Gig Economy workers would give up and go back on the dole and tbe main target, people like me, would be trapped and unable to escape. I proved her useless twats broke two of the clauses they said applied, and the Special Boat Squadron assisted me in explaining the third at gunpoint to a taxman who tried to enter Faslane without pre approval. Christ that was fun to hear about. And then Sarah Walker said IR35 applied to married couples and men and women cohabiting as man and wife. Gays and Lesbians were exempt. That was tbe point i decided i wished i’d taken one of tbe many, many measures to fuck the tax man illegally. I celebrate the achievements of any who have because as Elaine wossername said in a written reply to my complaint that their actions breached the taxpayers charter tbat the charter’s commutment to fairness did not mean two people in tbe same circumstances woukd pay tve same amount of tax. I’ve still got tbe letter saying that. Fucking unbelieveable. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 31, 2023 17:31:52 GMT
It's more like you give Government departments money they will find ways to spend it whether those are needed or not. A good example is in the news today - the Covid Enquiry. It's already cost £100 million and is not expected to report back until 2026!. Meanwhile Sweden have completed their enquiry and moved on. There are far too many people (Civil Servents and Welfare recipients) sucking at the teat of the taxpayer - these need to weaned off and start doing some productive work. By far the largest group sucking at the teat of taxpayers are pensioners. And I am not simply referring to state pensions which were a lifelong promise linked to their NI contributions and thus would be wrong to take away. I am referring to all the other freebies like winter fuel payments, free bus travel and various random benefits like attendance allowance which is paid to those with gammy legs or other mobility issues. I agree with you Well we can tackle housing costs by restricting the growth in population and thuse reducing demand - and energy costs could be reduced by scrapping the Net Zero nonsense and stopping all the green subsidies. But no politician is willing to do either of those so we are stuck with crippling costs. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 31, 2023 17:35:56 GMT
Well I'll give you a personal example - last year my income rose by circa £20k. On that I paid a marginal tax rate of 70%. If you think that I am just going to sit around and accept higher taxes without changing my behavior to reduce that burden you are very mistaken. But good luck if you want to give it a bash. The fact that your income as a retiree increased by so much in one year - a sum much larger than many pensioners have to live on in total - marks you as a particularly well heeled individual and hardly in the same ballpark as most of us when it comes to financial struggles. Or course you will try and find ways to avoid paying your dues on such relative wealth because your sort always do. Little wonder that most of your sympathies are for the well off. Because such sympathies are also for yourself. The poor are clearly a loathsome bunch who need a good kick up the arse because of their claim on your taxes. You'd rather cut all support to them to the absolute minimum so you can pay a bit less tax. Unless it is something you get yourself like winter fuel payments when suddenly it becomes - conveniently - more costly to stop giving it to you than to carry on giving it. You are thus coming across as disappointingly selfish, so by all means correct me if I am wrong. Jokesy will no doubt be along soon to like your comments anyway so all is well with the world, lol You miss the same point as zany - believing that you can increase taxes with no change in behavior. Currently I'm willing to go along with the levels of taxation - increase it significantly and I will either change behavior to reduce my tax bill or fuck off completely and HMRC will get zero tax off me. That is what always happens. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on May 31, 2023 18:15:09 GMT
By far the largest group sucking at the teat of taxpayers are pensioners. And I am not simply referring to state pensions which were a lifelong promise linked to their NI contributions and thus would be wrong to take away. I am referring to all the other freebies like winter fuel payments, free bus travel and various random benefits like attendance allowance which is paid to those with gammy legs or other mobility issues. I agree with you Well we can tackle housing costs by restricting the growth in population and thuse reducing demand - and energy costs could be reduced by scrapping the Net Zero nonsense and stopping all the green subsidies. But no politician is willing to do either of those so we are stuck with crippling costs. Tackle housing costs by releasing more building land at lower prices. Offer planning permission with cost conditions. See how many farmers are happy to give up a sugar beat field for half the going rate. Housing costs are by far the biggest cost facing the poor. Of course the Tories wont because they know their backers don't want land prices falling. How much are you paying a month towards net zero? Do you know? |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on May 31, 2023 18:20:14 GMT
The fact that your income as a retiree increased by so much in one year - a sum much larger than many pensioners have to live on in total - marks you as a particularly well heeled individual and hardly in the same ballpark as most of us when it comes to financial struggles. Or course you will try and find ways to avoid paying your dues on such relative wealth because your sort always do. Little wonder that most of your sympathies are for the well off. Because such sympathies are also for yourself. The poor are clearly a loathsome bunch who need a good kick up the arse because of their claim on your taxes. You'd rather cut all support to them to the absolute minimum so you can pay a bit less tax. Unless it is something you get yourself like winter fuel payments when suddenly it becomes - conveniently - more costly to stop giving it to you than to carry on giving it. You are thus coming across as disappointingly selfish, so by all means correct me if I am wrong. Jokesy will no doubt be along soon to like your comments anyway so all is well with the world, lol You miss the same point as zany - believing that you can increase taxes with no change in behavior. Currently I'm willing to go along with the levels of taxation - increase it significantly and I will either change behavior to reduce my tax bill or fuck off completely and HMRC will get zero tax off me. That is what always happens. You're not even close to the sort of money Zany wants to tax. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2023 18:52:18 GMT
So you are all in favour of illegally avoiding paying your dues - And Jokesy of course rocks up to like what you have just said - yet the pair of you would be screaming blue murder about someone claiming welfare they are not entitled to. Hypocrisy writ large. I would put it like this - If you are ambivalent about welfare fraud and galloping public sector corruption, incompetence and misconduct, why shouldn't taxpayers be ambivalent about tax evasion? What makes you think I am ambivalent about any of those things? You just decided to assume that about me, simply because I pointed out that all those others who don't like welfare fraud, public sector corruption, incompetence and misconduct, seem to think that tax evasion is ok, which to me is a self interested double standard. For the record, I do not support welfare fraud nor public sector corruption, incompetence and misconduct, and neither do I support tax evasion. All are wrongs. It is not me trying to justify double standards. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on May 31, 2023 19:15:03 GMT
I would put it like this - If you are ambivalent about welfare fraud and galloping public sector corruption, incompetence and misconduct, why shouldn't taxpayers be ambivalent about tax evasion? What makes you think I am ambivalent about any of those things? You just decided to assume that about me, simply because I pointed out that all those others who don't like welfare fraud, public sector corruption, incompetence and misconduct, seem to think that tax evasion is ok, which to me is a self interested double standard. For the record, I do not support welfare fraud nor public sector corruption, incompetence and misconduct, and neither do I support tax evasion. All are wrongs. It is not me trying to justify double standards. That's really unfair SRB, if Mags wants to replace you with a strawman who's easier to argue against, you shouldn't deny her that. She struggles with the complexity of the middle ground. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on May 31, 2023 19:35:08 GMT
What makes you think I am ambivalent about any of those things? You just decided to assume that about me, simply because I pointed out that all those others who don't like welfare fraud, public sector corruption, incompetence and misconduct, seem to think that tax evasion is ok, which to me is a self interested double standard. For the record, I do not support welfare fraud nor public sector corruption, incompetence and misconduct, and neither do I support tax evasion. All are wrongs. It is not me trying to justify double standards. That's really unfair SRB, if Mags wants to replace you with a strawman who's easier to argue against, you shouldn't deny her that. She struggles with the complexity of the middle ground. Hahaha, and who might occupy the middle ground? |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 31, 2023 19:38:22 GMT
Clearly, that wasn't the most diplomatic way to phrase that point. SRB, I didn't mean it personally and obviously I have little idea how ambivalent you are to the various issues in the public sector. However, I think your solution of just handing over yet more money is rather suggestive.
Btw the best question you asked in the thread is - "Where is all the fucking money going?" Nobody answered
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on May 31, 2023 19:38:27 GMT
That's really unfair SRB, if Mags wants to replace you with a strawman who's easier to argue against, you shouldn't deny her that. She struggles with the complexity of the middle ground. Hahaha, and who might occupy the middle ground? Their easy to spot. The ones who's opinions are varied. |
|
