Page 9 | To think we can’t revive the country on the backs of the poor, the struggling, or the middle class?

ForBreezySloth · 2025-07-27T19:44:59+00:00

Every time there’s an economic crisis, it seems like the burden always fall on the same groups - through tax hikes, cuts to services, and stagnant wages, while the wealthiest remain untouched. Surely a country can’t truly recover if the majority of its people are struggling just to get by? Yet time and time again, we’re told we all have to “tighten our belts” - except, conveniently, those at the top. AIBU to think this approach isn’t sustainable or is it just the reality of how economies work?

Weshallwearpurple · 28/07/2025 11:26

Extravirginolive · 28/07/2025 11:08

Oh god it's Arun Advani, the Indian university lecturer that came up with the idea of destroying British farming and family businesses. An idea the treasury kept trying to sell to chancellors unsuccessfully until Reeves comes along and agrees with the Indian academic that we must tax British farmers into oblivion and give the money to African farmers.

That's Arun Advani.

This country is now so stupid it deserves all it gets.

But the people do not.

TruckDiver · 28/07/2025 11:34

Mrsttcno1 · 27/07/2025 20:50

Well if you look at the figures, currently the top 10% of earners are paying 60% of all income tax, the top 1% of earners are already paying around 30% of all income tax.

Increasing that further will just drive those earners away, lots of them have already left to set up elsewhere and suddenly then we don’t see any of their tax.

Income tax is irrelevant because those who have benefitted most from rising inequality over recent years don't rely on income, they rely on wealth.

This country has an obscene level of wealth inequality which maintains the class system, restricts opportunity to a subset of young people, and ensures that a large mass of people are powerless in the face of falling living standards. Which is why public discourse about economic distribution always has to be confined to income tax, as a deflection from the things that actually matter.

HappyNewTaxYear · 28/07/2025 11:36

TruckDiver · 28/07/2025 11:34

Income tax is irrelevant because those who have benefitted most from rising inequality over recent years don't rely on income, they rely on wealth.

This country has an obscene level of wealth inequality which maintains the class system, restricts opportunity to a subset of young people, and ensures that a large mass of people are powerless in the face of falling living standards. Which is why public discourse about economic distribution always has to be confined to income tax, as a deflection from the things that actually matter.

Show quote history

Yes indeed, and OP is one of those who benefits from that wealth inequality.

EasternStandard · 28/07/2025 11:56

Extravirginolive · 28/07/2025 11:08

Oh god it's Arun Advani, the Indian university lecturer that came up with the idea of destroying British farming and family businesses. An idea the treasury kept trying to sell to chancellors unsuccessfully until Reeves comes along and agrees with the Indian academic that we must tax British farmers into oblivion and give the money to African farmers.

That's Arun Advani.

This country is now so stupid it deserves all it gets.

Great. How depressing is that.

Strawberrri · 28/07/2025 12:32

WE. …. ALL…..PAY

So tax levels rise a little bit for all.
farmers are already hit
Remove or tweak the triple lock on pensions
Cut benefits a wee bit (all)
chuck the wfa as it was a bribe to pensioners by G Brown
chuck any other bribes.
tax air bnbs a wee bit -there are too many so if a few give up that’s a plus
Also second homes -council tax is not enough
chase up cash in hand and tighten up on this
edit - demand more tax from Netflix etc though there wil be spiteful repurcussions but at the mo Ireland is getting their tax

MushMonster · 28/07/2025 13:02

Yes, it is good for some. But we get to the same point, the majority does stay, work, contribute, here, in UK.
I just wish a bunch of them become real politicians and economists and stop the drift in tge wind ways we are having at present. What we need is a proper plan, implement it and put UK intetest as the number one. Not the banks, not corporations, not numbers. But the present and future of the citizens. Because we are hard working, despite of what so many in this thread think.
And I do see helping the ones that have a temporary problem or ap disability as part of the needs and must of any country.
Enough of finding scapegoats: the ill and disabled, those on lower income, pensioners... where will it stop?
We need to face the problems, indeed. Not just pass the blame and essentially allow the government to do nothing about it. But.... the price cannot be worst healthcare, worst roads, undrinkable water, no medicadion available... Maybe, lesser bonuses for the hyperrich would do? A better wealth distribution and a manufacturing UK? Surely we can make our own goods, instead of buying them from the other side of the world.

Mastercom · 28/07/2025 22:36

ForBreezySloth · 27/07/2025 21:10

I’m not saying we don’t need high earners. But it’s a stretch to suggest that asking them to contribute proportionally more, especially during national crises, is the same as “punishing” them.

The idea that spending on services like cleaners and taxis equals social contribution oversimplifies what a functioning economy and fair society look like. And I’d be careful about writing off benefit claimants - many work, many can’t work for legitimate reasons, and they’re part of the same economy, often doing the hardest jobs with the least recognition. Fairness isn’t about blaming one group - it’s about everyone contributing in a way that reflects both their capacity and the collective need.

Show quote history

We already do contribute proportionally more, in two ways - if we were taxed the same percentage as lower earners we’d still be contributing more because it’s against a higher salary, but we’re actually stung twice over as we pay a higher percentage too.

Many people in the higher tax bracket are squeezed to the point where it’s not worth it anymore. We go part-time, and then don’t employ a nanny or a cleaner because it’s not worth the extra work just to lose it all. And it’s usually women impacted by that. Meanwhile the billionaires and corporations like Amazon use every trick to get away without paying. It’s like worrying about my plastic straw when Bezos is sending his cockrocket into space with impunity.

metellaestinatrio · 29/07/2025 10:10

footiego · 28/07/2025 09:35

Lower earners are taxed less, proportionately, than lower earners in other European countries. If we want better public services everyone needs to pay more tax but lower/middle earners are more reliant on the services (and want those services to do more and more) while being unwilling to pay more tax to fund them.

But they don't have the same housing & childcare costs in other countries so can pay more tax.

This is true and you’re right, it’s a chicken and egg situation. If we want good quality, state subsidised childcare we need to pay more tax but those who need the better funded childcare can’t pay more tax because they are paying for childcare! I guess both things would have to be introduced at once: better state funding for childcare immediately available and some kind of price cap (not the current ridiculous system of over promise and under deliver) alongside tax rises.

PeonyPatch · 31/07/2025 10:42

TruckDiver · 28/07/2025 11:34

Income tax is irrelevant because those who have benefitted most from rising inequality over recent years don't rely on income, they rely on wealth.

This country has an obscene level of wealth inequality which maintains the class system, restricts opportunity to a subset of young people, and ensures that a large mass of people are powerless in the face of falling living standards. Which is why public discourse about economic distribution always has to be confined to income tax, as a deflection from the things that actually matter.

Show quote history

Very good reflection here 👏🏼

TempestTost · 31/07/2025 11:00

Sunflowersurprise · 28/07/2025 04:53

No as housing etc reflect what people can afford. I have lived in Scandinavia and it’s an excellent tax system. Benefits are harder to get so people all work. Childcare is cheaper and deemed better for the child than staying at home (and who’s to argue with their happiness ratings?) and the society is totally invested in everyone working and paying tax. Everyone pulls together for the benefit of the community.

It’s interesting though in recent years to see how immigrants who have a different attitude to society, work and tax are leading to a lot of social unrest. Denmark’s socialist government has massively clamped down on immigration as a result. It’s not playing along with the immigration rules accepted by countries such as the UK, and the government is very popular as a result.

Show quote history

Yes, it's interesting because a few years ago the left in places like the UK were all in love with the Scandi model. Now that it's clear it is not compatible with high immigration, they seem to be much quieter about it.

Personally, I object to a system that would prefer to have children in care and puts significant pressure on families for that. But I don't think that's a deal breaker.

I do think it's interesting that they make benefits harder to access, I don't think most people on the left here realise that.