Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Question time man top 5 percent.

585 replies

refraction · 22/11/2019 08:06

Did anyone see the man on QT asking about tax?

Apparently he doesn't even think he is in the top 50 percent of earners.

All doctors earn more apparently and solicitors.

How out of touch with reality?

He didn't come across well and very out of touch.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
ReceptacleForTheRespectable · 24/11/2019 14:39

Exactly tabulahrasa. Those aren't the people QT man was talking about, and they won't be affected by the proposed tax increase this thread is discussing.

I have no idea why dontdisturbmenow is trying to pretend otherwise.

Dontdisturbmenow · 24/11/2019 14:41

The point is that your claim that people earning under £80k are in that position because they want immediate gratification is complete and utter bollocks. And offensive bollocks at that
Not once did I make it an under vs over £80K. It's about comparing people who started in a similar position (not all do), but whereas one ends up earning significantly more than the other 20 years later because of the different choices they've made.

It's interesting how some posters seem to think that making different choices that mean they are not as well off is actually offensive. It isn't at all. It's about what you value most, money and financial security, over family and better pace of life. I am genuinely not sure which one is best.

What I do believe is that it is not right that those who opt for family life and better pace of life should be entitled to the same financial position than those who have to give some of that up for better financial security.

Either everyone has it is all, or everyone makes some sacrifices. Everyone having it grand is not possible in our current economy, so one has to pick one or the other.

Alsohuman · 24/11/2019 14:41

I have no idea why dontdisturbmenow is trying to pretend otherwise

I have but I’d probably be banned if I said it.

Alsohuman · 24/11/2019 14:43

It's about what you value most, money and financial security, over family and better pace of life. I am genuinely not sure which one is best

Tell that to the nurses and paramedics working nights and Christmas Day. And their kids. What bollocks.

ReceptacleForTheRespectable · 24/11/2019 14:47

Not once did I make it an under vs over £80K.

This whole thread is about a tax increase on individuals earning over £80k. You stated that this would mean penalizing those who worked hard and made sacrifices in favour of those who sought immediate gratification.

It's entirely reasonable to infer that you are saying that those on over £80k work hard and make sacrifices, while those on much less do not. Context is everything.

The proposed £80k threshold is the whole topic of the thread you are replying to, and your faux wide-eyed "but I didn't mention £80k!" is extremely grating in that context.

Dontdisturbmenow · 24/11/2019 14:51

Of course they will get taxed more. The same than this governement announced that those on higher tax rate will see a reduction last year, except that the reduction was funnily enough upset by the exact same level of increase in NI! An increase that of course has gone extremely quiet and that sadly many people didn't even notice.

People are so naive! Of course people who have more to give will be taxed more one way or the other to benefit others, that's how it works, whether you vote for one or the other!

Tell that to the nurses and paramedics working nights and Christmas Day. And their kids. What bollocks
Two nurses or paramedics working FT will not be on a low joint income. Saying that, these roles, in addition to carers are amongst those jobs that deserve the most financial support for what they do. I wish these professions were paid higher.

ReceptacleForTheRespectable · 24/11/2019 14:53

Two nurses are likely to be lower rate taxpayers their entire lives. They are unlikely to be paying 40%, and won't be affected by the proposed rise that this thread is about

tabulahrasa · 24/11/2019 14:56

“Of course they will get taxed more“

No they won’t, they’re on 20% tax.... and still would be if labour won the election and implemented their proposed tax changes.

Which is what this thread is about, one 81k salary is where tax would be different to where it is now, not 40k, not two salaries adding up to 81k...

MIdgebabe · 24/11/2019 14:57

I think some people don't realise how much pure luck comes into things. Some people like to feel in control of their life, so they blind themselves to reality

All these have helped me
It's pure luck if you have the right genes to end up with skills that are highly valued in today's society
It's pure luck if you end up with the employer who is successful rather than the one who went bust
It's pure luck that I didn't go all out for promotion, avoiding the redundancies at the higher grades

Yes, some things are choice, but again genes and family background probably affect this also ...how confident are you as a person to go against the norm and buy a small house, cheap car , prefer a low cost camping holiday, dislike make up and fashion, so being able to feel rich when others feel strapped for cash trying to conform and show off

ReceptacleForTheRespectable · 24/11/2019 14:58

But hey, let's not get the truth get in the way of propaganda, eh?

Blibbyblobby · 24/11/2019 16:04

Yes, some things are choice, but again genes and family background probably affect this also

Also massively important is whether your family background is such that you can afford to take a risk. Retraining to switch careers or starting your own business is much easier if you know there's a safety net.

themental · 24/11/2019 16:05

Is this a joke? We certainly were not 'all in this together' when it came to austerity. The poor and vulnerable have borne the vast majority of the effects.

Exactly, it was pure propaganda and it WORKED!! We've had how many years of a tory government?

I genuinely WISH, hope and pray that labour can get into power (well, for England anyway, Scotland will vote SNP). Most educated folks can see through the Tory propaganda of "we're all in this together" but a lot of this country isn't educated.

People bought into the fact that "we're all in this together" in swathes. How many audience members on the recent runs of QT have made statements such as "labour will spend money we don't have" and "tories had to do austerity because labour caused the financial crisis" etc.

I don't believe any of that is true but there is clearly a fair amount of people in this country who do.

My suggestion to labour would be rather than having "tax the billionaires" as a slogan (when really they're taxing a small percentage of PAYE people more) they should either actually tax the billionaires, or come at it with a "we're all in this together approach" and introduce the 1% tax.

I'm just against the divide and conquer rhetoric. Anyone with half a brain can see that taxing those on £80k extra isn't going to make all that much of a difference in the grand scheme of things.

Blibbyblobby · 24/11/2019 16:06

Doesn't mean a person that situation didn't work hard to be successful once they'd taken the risk, just that the risk for them was much lower than for someone who has no safety net

twofingerstoEverything · 24/11/2019 17:14

Haven't RTFT but see there's the usual 'I work hard /DH works hard for fat salary and should not be expected to pay a penny more tax', thereby insinuating that low earners just don't work hard enough. If only they made more effort, eh?

Xenia · 24/11/2019 17:28

This issue comes up again and again and again. I htink people just divide into those tho think they cannot change their circumstances (not surpringly those lot never do change their circumstances) and those who think they have some agency in the process but of course luck does play a part as does IQ, hard work and all the other stuff.

if you push yourself into the category that you have no ability to improve your circumstances that tends to mean you are stuck where you are which is fine if money is not important to you but not fine if you had hoped to have more. On the other hand the more people in the group thinking no point in trying I will never earn more the easier it is for those who have a different thought process to get on in life.

Alsohuman · 24/11/2019 18:07

If all those carers, nurses, paramedics, fire crew and police officers “changed their circumstances”, where would we be @Xenia?

lovemylot1 · 24/11/2019 18:17

I have no choice but to pay for childcare! Honestly ! I have to work. Why wouldn’t I need to work just because I earn more than some? Bizarre. I’m not just paying for childcare then haVing a nice rest. And I have no choice but to pay for long days because of the travel time. If there were an option to work evenings so as to avoid childcare then absolutely I would take it.
The point I’m making is that childcare can affect those paying tax at higher rates very badly because you deduct the cost from your net salary.
Someone thinking 200 or 300k is a lot for a house - it would buy a shoebox in many areas

Also regarding the childcare cost being temporary well I have three children and they will need childcare for at least 16 years. So not that temporary and over that time I’ll have paid loads of childcare (and tax)

Alsohuman · 24/11/2019 18:22

You made the choice to have children @lovemylot1. If you’d chosen not to have them, you wouldn’t incur childcare costs.

tabulahrasa · 24/11/2019 18:44

“Also regarding the childcare cost being temporary well I have three children and they will need childcare for at least 16 years“

How can you need full time childcare for 3 children for 16 years? Where do the 4 extra years come from?

AndromedaPerseus · 24/11/2019 18:55

THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED - USING A BEER ANALOGY

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59. 
So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. 

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving). 
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free. 

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!" 
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!" 

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!" 

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. 

The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill! 

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier. 

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

SinkGirl · 24/11/2019 19:18

Well done for pasting that ridiculous straw man famously used by the trump administration- you keep great company.

I would explain why it’s ridiculous but that would take a very long time. Many people have done it for me, here’s the first one from google
splinternews.com/that-weird-analogy-about-beer-and-tax-cuts-was-dumb-as-1820002805

ReceptacleForTheRespectable · 24/11/2019 19:18

Has anyone, anywhere on this thread, expressed anger about tax reductions having a greater impact for higher taxpayers?

Are we even talking about tax reductions at all?

And who is suggesting beating anyone up?

This is more victim mentality stuff, implying that having a progressive tax system somehow constitutes 'picking on' higher rate taxpayers... You may think it sounds clever, but it's actually quite the opposite.

Blibbyblobby · 24/11/2019 19:20

FFS that’s the second time this weekend someone’s copy n pasted that trite beer story to a thread it’s got no real relevance to. It’s an illustration about the effect of tax cuts, not some wise answer to anything tax-related! And certainly not relevant to the actual complexity of an actual real world economy of which tax is just one component.

refraction · 24/11/2019 19:43

Wow that beer analogy.Confused

OP posts:
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread