To wonder why the conservatives won't just tax people more ??

[stopfuckingshoutingatme]

Am I missing something here ?

Clearly there is a scarcity of money - and certain areas are rightly ring fenced .

But don't tell me that most working families can't afford an average of £50 a month - this would exclude people on low income , and for some families it £10 and for some £200 -

The UK is full of families and individuals with disposable income - a minor tax increase for 40% of the working population could raise £11bn

So why won't they do it ??? Baffles me - I would personally rather pay more tax and know that the vulnerable are cared for

Because not everyone thinks the solution to all of society's ills is even bigger government.

Yes spring, I live on a rainbow tinted world.

Unfortunately the unicorns probably fucked off last year along with my 20 yr career, my house, my health & my marriage.

It's fucking great here in bunny land

Bunytyler, yes and???
If you are claiming disabiltiy, then surely the comment does not apply to you as it is talking about ability to contribute? Of which, i assume by your comments you dont have.

the irony is bunny, is I want a certain sector of society my sibling, my HR director friend, most of my office, in fact pretty much everyone I know! to pay a minimal tax increase (adjacent to other things being implemented of course) so that when someone like yourself hits ill health they are provided for

oh the irony!

Yes OP, but as has been repeatedly pointed out to you a tax increase will do fuck all to help people like me.

It will get swallowed up in wastage as it always does.

and sorry it all went downhill per your 17:04 post- and lets hope things start to improve for you, life is tough

I think some of us are already making a substantial contribution to paying for public services. In the past year on a salary of substantially less than £100k I have paid tax and NI of over £25k! Why should I pay more?

Greenishme: I'd be happy to live on the £25k per year that you pay in tax.

These two posts just about sum it up for me

Thanks Stop, it will get better I'm sure - it always does xx

Every time the government spends or taxes is a market distortion which stops the economy functioning at its maximum potential.

If I pay ≈ 40% already, why should I pay more? The percentage I pay is more than the majority.

For me to pay an extra £10 a month would be a fraction of a percent and barely worth the paperwork involved.

Would it be a flat £10 per family rate?

according to my calcs, that would raise £2.3 BN

that's assumes 40% of the UK population work, and of them 70% are able to pay this £10 without hardship

anyway......I am aware that my hastily constructed excel sheet is NOT the solution, its just been on my mind!

I'm always a bit baffled by the 'why should I subsidise others' arguments on threads like this

Either these are exceptionally wealthy MN's paying millions in tax or they don't use any public services at all

Most ordinary tax payer - like myself- don't really pay nearly as much tax as we take out of the system in education, healthcare etc - not really - lest be honest about it

it's a silly argument

"Most ordinary tax payer - like myself- don't really pay nearly as much tax as we take out of the system in education, healthcare etc - not really - lest be honest about it"

If that were true we'd live in Greece. Or are you saying that corporate tax makes the difference? Or the very wealthy pay for the rest of us? I think you'll find that for a country to function properly, you must be wrong.

I'd imagine that the wealthy (paying the most tax) are also the least likely to take money from the government. I'm not rich but our children go to public school, we have private pensions and we have health insurance.

Ghostly, maybe from your perspective it is a silly arguement!

It's a nice idea to say that people won't miss £50 a month, but the local economy would. Imagine in a large town you've got 1000 people who are £50 a month down. They decide not to go out one night a month to make up for it, that's £50,000 the local businesses are missing out on. How many waiting and bar staff do you think rely on that £50k to pay their wages? How many folk would loose their jobs because of it?

Well as i said up thread i could hardly contribute on £74 a week, if it weren't for my parent i couldn't have even eaten....i should have thought of that before i got a disability and life threatening illness i suppose
Before hand though i had contributed a lot in over a decade. up until two years ago i had never claimed benefits even though i was entitled too.
The disabled should not be having these cuts it's disgusting, but taxing people more isn't the answer.

potatoes

Not necessarily. Rich people, especially if they are business owners, may be net takers if you count the cost of public infrastructure and services on which their businesses rely. It depends.

The people most likely to be net givers are young immigrants who work in the UK for a few years then return home before they bear children or get old. Foreign taxpayers pay for these people's education, healthcare and training when they are young. They may not earn high wages but they also consume few services.

For most other people whether they are net givers or net takers depends on their life stage.

This government are borrowing heavily.

Yes spring, I live on a rainbow tinted world.

Clearly you do as you didn't believe another poster on this thread when they told you how many hours they worked and were rather rude to them. Some people do actually work a shitload of hours and pay a shitload of tax for the privilege.

Old Dear sorry my post was thoughtless.

It's a nice idea to say that people won't miss £50 a month, but the local economy would. Imagine in a large town you've got 1000 people who are £50 a month down. They decide not to go out one night a month to make up for it,

...and that one night out per month that the poor 'town folk' would be going without is almost two-thirds of what kali has to live on each week.

How can you understand anything if you're wearing the other shoe??

Always amuses me that the local economy only seems to miss the £50 spent by rich taxpayers. They are the ones more likely to not spend it. Taking the £50 from the rich to give to the poor whether or not deserving is much better for the economy. This is why growing income inequality is bad for growth. Ever increasing house prices despite stagnant average wages is one of the symptoms.

greenishme that's some shady as fuck editing there - did you actually read the rest of my post? Or do you just not give a fuck about people who's wages depend on other people's spending?

Mad unless you opt out of all things paid for by tax it really isn't - for example I have 3 kids - all born on the NHS - 2 by C section, all cared for on the NHS - including broken bones, hospital stays, surgery, all educated by the state - from 4-18 - I am guessing the amount of tax I pay as someone on an average wage doesn't cover the cost of all of that :) even if I have worked since I was 16 (so 30 years this year)

Oh and we receive CTC and CB