To be confused by 'high earners' complaining about taxes?

I'm not sure thats fair. You could say that about a lot of jobs. Where would we be without care workers, teachers, police officers. Your contribution to society isnt worth more just because it comes from your wallet.

Which

does this go to show that high earning and being competent at managing money are not at all correlated?

Most of the money that the company I work for makes comes from third party insurers and government healthcare programs…money really just goes round and round tbh.

Economics is not taught in schools in England. It is an A level you can opt to take.

I'm in the second highest income tax band and haven't had a holiday since 2016 and live in a flat. In every other country in the world outside of Western Europe is be earning far more for the job I do both before and certainly after tax.

And the public services we get for this high taxation are rubbish. Most councils are more bothered about rainbow crossings than pot holes

So we both earn £48k, overnight my salary drops to £600 a month SSP due to cancer
In addition we have high costs due to my treatment, for 6 weeks we had an onlver 2 hour round trip to the hospital, I couldn't drive so needed someone to take me....our overheads are not lowered and you don't think during that period someone may need help?
If your income dropped that much overnight, how would you cope?

I am not advocating higher taxes, I'm advocating not wasting money and ensuring benefits are a genuine support when needed for all. IF our welfare system helped people at times of need I'd be in full support, but right now we don't just pay more in tax, we have to pay insurances because that tax isn't there to help us and yet we're not even classified as high tax payers. How is that acceptable?

but in the end theres only so many roles whe companies outsource production to other countries, then buy up other compaines etc then if you have eg chip shops well towns only need so many food joints, then with amazon ebay etc its not like society used to be needing large numbers for the coal mines or factories etc

What a load of shit.

So, let’s say Person B from a normal background, has gone to university, studied hard for many years, on the back of it has set up a company requiring many many hours of hard work and become successful off the back of it. Company employs and provides a living to 4 or 5 people and that owner, that person who has put all the hours in, takes home a good wage. Why are they not ‘more deserving’ of the fruits of their labour than let’s say their brother who didn’t try hard at school, didn’t strive for success from an early age, didn’t build up a successful company, isn’t a net contributor but who came from the same back ground. Tell me how person A doesn’t deserve it more?

The ‘paying public’ need jobs themselves, right? People being paid the big bucks create jobs for people, as well as paying a shed load of tax themselves. Jobs don’t just grow on trees.

TBH almost all complaints about tax I see, are because we have marginal rates of 50%+ at various points due to tax / NI / student loans / removal of benefits.

At the point the government get more than half of every pound you earn, people start to feel a bit aggrieved about it all.

How much tax do you pay OP for education

It appears that money is being wasted…

Have you thought this through? If youhouseholds on £48k were entitled to benefits then taxes would need to increase substantially to pay for that. Are you advocating for higher taxes?

I'm a higher rate taxpayer. No problem with it if I, and the general public including the vulnerable, get value for money. We don't though, do we. My problem isn't with tax it's with waste and mismanagement.

Benefit recipients tend not to hoard money, it all gets recycled back into the economy as payments for food, rent, utilities, consumer goods. What the miserly wealthy don’t understand is that if all benefits and public sector jobs were cut the economy would tank, businesses would go under as the consumer base would be devastated, there’d be a recession like no other, no one would be educated, life expectancy and ability to work would plummet, innovation would be over, the streets would pile up with rubbish. They seem totally oblivious to how much government support is required to keep society functioning.

The issue is rarely the tax paid but the lack of services as a result.
I was diagnosed with cancer last year and unable to work for 5 months, even now I'm on reduced hours. I was entitled to nothing - no benefits at all, and I'm only entitled to SSP
My husband's income of £48k was supposed to be enough for both of us, yet this was almost a 50% cut in income.
There was no cut in having 2 children at uni and their accomodation that were expected to pay for
Our mortgage didn't cut in half

So in addition to paying taxes, note we are not high rate tax payers, I also thankfully paid for income protection insurance which is the only thing that keeps us afloat.
In summary, not even high tax payers, get bugger all help AND have to pay additional insurances to cover the basics that those who don't work, earn less get automatically.

Now, let's swing back 20 years when I was a single Mum working full time and getting less take home pay after childcare fees than someone who only claimed benefits.

In neither situation were taxes helping or supporting me at a time I needed it.
If I was then paying 50% plus tax and getting just as little help as I do now? Yeah, I'd be mad
I'll happily pay a higher tax when that tax actually helps and supports people when it's needed

I think the problem with high levels of tax is when people don’t bother working any more, and slow down their efforts because why bother? They wont get to keep much of it. This damages the economy because it harms growth and aspiration, which means less money for everyone. It also directly affects healthcare when, for example, surgeons don’t bother working full time because it’s not worth their time. I am near the 100k tax cliff edge (through various different sources of income) and I make very little effort to grow my own tiny sole trader business because for each extra £100 profit I earn I will essentially only keep £40.

I used to work for a company set up by two men. In the early years of the company, they both worked brutal hours (up to 70 hours a week ) to launch their company. They took the risks, they borrowed the capital and all the stress that involved. If they had got it wrong they would both have been bankrupted.They have both ended up as multi, multi millionaires.

I chose not to work those hours or take those risks or live with that stress. I don't begrudge them their millions.

They employ about 6,000 people.

If your argument is that high earners are paid with money from the general public (which doesn't make much sense but let's not get into that) - the same applies for middle earners, low earners, economically inactive people and particularly anyone receiving any form of government benefit. What is your point?

I pay high taxes & don't mind paying whatever I owe. I mind the government making terrible financial decisions and squandering vast sums on nonsense - but I felt the same when I was a student & when I was on mat leave and not paying tax!

tax is a shared social contract. People at all levels of taxation feel aggrieved if they see/hear about tax being wasted or cannot access the public services they need.

Totally agree op.

This.

And I don’t really in real life know many people who complain about the tax they pay. My husband & I are both higher rate taxpayers- nowhere near £400k mind- and it would never occur to either of us to complain about the tax we pay. We all have to pay our bit to keep things ticking over.

Very few people earn £400k for ‘whatever management’. Jobs like that come with a lot of stress and usually a lot of sacrifice in terms of being on call 24/7 and missing out on family life. And despite all that, you seem to think it’s ok for the government to help themselves to 70% over a certain threshold because you spent £50 at Tesco and thus technically that £400k was sort of indirectly funded by you. Ok then.

Suspect this is just a goady thread.

Say a CEO does a terrible job and the company goes bankrupt. Hundreds of people lose their jobs. Don't you think it's worth paying the most senior people well to stop that kind of thing happening?

Normal people paying for things get something in return for their money. It’s not a donation, it’s an exchange they freely entered into.

If a shop owner becomes very successful, it’s because they put their time and capital at risk and worked hard to make the shop successful. The fact that you bought something there doesn’t entitle you to part of the profits.

It’s concerning that this has to be explained to people. Have they stopped teaching economics in the UK?

Well when you pay 75k in tax a year and can’t get a gp appointment and are forced to go private and your mum waits 22 hours for an ambulance while laying on the floor with a fractured pelvis, then yes I think that is something you complain about.