to think that 6000 per month is excessive for the government to take off my pay for tax?

[tootaxed]

Surely there should be a maximum limit that each person has to pay as tax? Six grand per month in tax is just excessive imo. And that is before NI contributions etc. If the government set a maximum tax limit they would take more care over how they spent their central funds. And I wouldn't have to work so many hours away from my DCs only to have 72 bloody grand a year taken off my income to fund their mis-spending.

Spokette, I am aware that tootaxed said that she rarely sees her dcs. Loads of men, many of them partners of mnetters, work all hours as well and hardly see their dcs. She may have decided having the money to support her current circumstances is more important to her family's overall wellbeing than her seeing her dcs more often. I see OP as being selfless, rather than selfish.

BTW, lots of people have perfectly healthy relatonships with their dcs despite not seeing them as much as they would like.

Your choice, her choice. She does not want to have to pay so much taxes, even if she is coming at it as a rant. I can understand that.

I think there is a certain amount of envy on this thread which actually is stopping people from thinking about this rationally.

Many people who have to work long hours do so because they see no real alternative given the professions that they are in.

All that -guff- stuff about transferable skills only really happens at a certain level mostly sub 50k a year, mostly in the public sector and certainly sub £100k a year. You need to know your job inside out and be focussed, competitive and competent to hold your own at higher levels.

It seems unfair to me for posters to be holier-than-thou about earning little (and it has to be said paying far less tax) and castigating the OP for not being home more from the position of not being the sole or main breadwinner.

But you don't agree with her re taxes smc? Think you've just said on another thread that you have no problem with "the principle of paying taxes to fund essential services and state functions."

Sheesh, 555 posts?

_

That's a red herring IMO.

We're grown up women in an imperfect world. Of course the money from taxation isn't all going to be spent the way you want it to be.

And if it really bothers you, campaign and try to do something about it - don't just demand that tax be capped at a level which is comfortable for you. From people who keep re-iterating how intelligent and professional they are that argument is a bit pathetic, TBH.

Quattrocentro "All that -guff- stuff about transferable skills only really happens at a certain level mostly sub 50k a year, mostly in the public sector and certainly sub £100k a year. You need to know your job inside out and be focussed, competitive and competent to hold your own at higher levels."

Being able to work as part of team or communicate at different levels are transferable skills or are all senior executives solo warriors?

There are many people at senior levels who can only be described as incompetent, manipulative half-wits who are full of their own self-importance and who leach of the achievements of those lower down the chain.

leach off

I think you are misquoting the OP actually smc, in that she says she has a problem with what she sees as the misuse of her tax.

A few people here have put forward that argument as a reason why they don't want to pay so much tax, and I'm just saying that it's two unrelated things - much as you are really...

One question for the OP: what would she rather we do as a nation, cap her taxes and tax the lower paid more?

A bit at hecate quoting Karl Marx to justify OP's tax:

"From each according to ability to each according to need"

I didn't realize you were such a communist at heart, hecate. For the rest of us, "from each according to the same tax law" would ring better.

I can't speak for the OP, nor would I really want a cap on tax, but I do think that the government should spend more wisely and be more accountable.

Spending on the NHS has increased by 50% in real terms with absolutely nothing to show for it. Wars? Who wants wars? Why are MPs allowed to fiddle their expenses and pay their children and spouses for sod all? Actually MPs themselves are taking home a bloody good whack for unskilled middle management. What on earth is happening in schools? My local comp is a jungle...

how can you say there is nothing to show for extra NHS spending? how do you know?

it's true that there are still problems with the service, and the target thing causes problems itself, but there have been major improvements especially in terms of things like waiting lists.

also remember that the older generation who didn't like to bother the doctor are dying off. people now are much more ready to go to the doctor and demand treatment than they were 10 years ago (figures for GP appts will back this up), plus the population is larger and older now, so the NHS does need to spend more just to keep up with itself.

and how bad do you think schools would be if we didn't pay as much tax as we do?

I think we should pay more tax, that government terms should be 6 years to encourage longer term planning, and that the national audit office should be given teeth and a bigger role.

... Agree Q, but as some other posters have pointed out, you can see the benefits of paying tax in this country, as opposed to other countries where there isn't so much public spending...

I sincerely do not believe that there have been major improvements in the NHS - in many areas such as infections, matters seem to be worse.

As for the local school, despite massive spending, which has been badly focussed and massive staff turnover, it is now out of special measures but getting an education there can't be easy.

We are taxed massively in the UK - but unfortunately that spending isn't properly regulated to deliver value for money.

you "believe" there have been no improvements. is this belief based on what you read in the papers then?

but anyway as I say, without the extra cash, the nhs would have deteriorated because there are more patients than ever before, and more expensive drugs.

People who say there has been no major improvements in the NHS or education despite the extra funding, don't know what they are talking about.

Period.

As for us being massively taxed, it is always those who complain the most about our public services who also want to pay less tax. What they don't realise is that those countries with better public services have them because their workers pay more tax.

Not sure about the countries who have better health care having higher taxes.

SWC, does your mother also complain about having to see more patients in return for a higher salary?

Practice based commissioning is about putting the patients at the centre of the new healthcare economy. Forward looking and flexible GP practices will do very well financially in the new healthare economy and the old dinsoaurs who can't or won't move with times, will be left behind.

findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20080130/ai_n21216624

I scent an NHS administrator in Spokette! Anyhow that article is one of many many articles arguing that increased spending on the NHS has not delivered benefits - the money has mostly gone on increases in salaries ahead of inflation, increased costs of drugs, increase in (wait for it) NHS administrators ...

they need more administrators to deal with the increase in patients, and nurses did deserve a pay rise.

they have wasted some money, but not as much as you imply.