To be sick of politicians using 'fairness' as justification for tax rises?

[Itchthescratch]

Fairness is completely subjective and I notice that this is often shorthand for giving more money to those that contribute the least.

Of course there will always be those that can't contribute much due to factors outside of their control, but we are kidding ourselves if we pretend that there aren't already lots of people that are scraping by doing the bare minimum (sometimes even less) and making completely irresponsible decisions knowing the state will ultimately insulate them from the consequences.

I personally know people that have had lots of children that they can't afford and can't parent properly simply because they wanted to. They are now on an incredible amount of money as the two child cap has been lifted. I know people that have stopped working because they weren't much better off than being on benefits and they couldn't be bothered with the hassle. I know young people that are already planning to stay on disability benefits their whole lives for mental health issues as they want to stay home and game.

Is it really 'fair' to charge the rest of us more to subsidise all of this?

Socialists believe in wealth redistribution on a mass scale. All the talk about “growth” is for the birds. This started with Gordon Brown and the introduction of tax credits which incentivised people to limit their working hours and allowed an effective state subsidy to employers through making up workers’ salaries to full-time job level of pay on part-time hours. It’s been downhill from there.

Well Ms Mahmood won't know until she tries will she ?

These guys don't have British Passports AFAIK

Stopping the visas would probably have more effect.

More tax does not boost the economy, it hinders its growth.

The problem is, if we start seeing taxation as unfair and reduce it, there will always be innocents at the bottom of the heap/social structure who are punished through lack of financial. Yes, there are some that abuse public money. But they are much more likely to be higher up in the system than they are benefit scroungers.

My ire is saved for the wealthy who perpetuate cheating, because they cheat / defraud hugely higher amounts. Michelle Mone (29 million), Gary Barlow & Take That (66 million) are just 2 examples.

As opposed to Susan who doesn't really need PIP but gets it for 20 years, at a cost of around 100K.

Correct.
You cannot tax your way to growth.

😆 🤣

Not his fault. The society is so entitled, massively entitled. I am regularly approached by Shelter in the street and most recent spiel was 'people at 18 can't afford their own accommodation, we need to do something about it. Direct debit?' Me: why don't they rent privately? Shelter: they can't afford it. Me: why don't they live with their parents until they can afford it? Shelter: Some of them don't have a good relationship with their parents. Me: 'I did not have a good relationship with my parents and I lived with them until I was able to afford to move out'. They looked at me as if I were mentally ill. They simply don't grasp it that nobody owes anybody anything, apart from civility. Look at MN threads, demanding to rip off the rich. Slightly to the left of Lenin.

If your effective marginal tax rate is 55% then you are somewhere in the 100-125k band where personal allowance tapers off. If you worked a bit harder to push yourself out of the band then the marginal rate drops down again.

Maybe you could take some washing in?

I 💯 agree
I think the sheer waste of public money on failed projects of mis spending should be a criminal offence
i believe there should be a minimum wage that every working household should earn and the government tops that up accordingly and everyone has to cut their cloth to fit. For instance say it’s £25k a year and you earn £19k you are entitled to £6k benefits. If you earn £24k you are entitled to £1k benefits.

My sister, as a single parent, was encouraged not to work or to work a maximum of 16 hours a week and claim benefits - she never did as we were brought up to work. She was considerably worse of working full time, her son wasn’t entitled to free school meals or help with school trips which meant he went on none. She also lived with my parents for the first 4 years of her sons life because my parents refused to ‘make her homeless’ so she could jump the housing wait list. She waited until her name reached the top. Was it ideal no, was it a squash and sacrifice for my parent yes but it wasn’t taking what she could just because she was ‘entitled’ to it and it hopefully meant it went to someone who actually needed it in desperate circumstances. She wasn’t desperate. She was in a situation that she chose.

Benefits should be there for those who desperately need it as a safety net

I also believe that every government department should be run like private businesses by people who have experience of such. The way people waste government money, the way people are treated by government departments would not be accepted or tolerated in the private sector. You would loose your job as a receptionist in a private business if you dealt with Client’s the way some doctors receptionists deal with patients. The unhelpfulness is astounding.

we have worked hard and have ourselves come from council house beginnings. We have started and closed businesses and we were lucky enough that we have now had successes. We paid 50% of income above a certain level in tax - we are business people so we should have some say in how that money is spent. Our son is in the army, another is a firefighter so they are on low incomes in public roles but their benefits are fantastic.

anyway off my soap box - I know we are very privileged to be higher rate tax payers etc but we have lived hand to mouth, worked as temps emptying bins at one point after being made redundant for minimum wage so have an understanding of not having enough money to cover bills. Never claimed benefit other than child benefit .

It always strikes me as a bit pathetic to work less and consequently take home less money yourself, solely because you want to avoid handing over the tax.

There are far more Susans though than there are Michelle Mones. So £100k multiplied by the number of people that get PIP when they don't really need it and suddenly we are talking about an enormous figure. All funded by the 40% of net tax contributors in this country.

The problem is most of us have a Susan and not a Michelle in our lives. I have a few Susans. It absolutely breaks down trust in the system and the social contract.

Wrong, I’m a business owner - that 100-125 is even higher. It’s fine you getting a bit snarky but the fact I employ people and pay 6 figures in tax should not be lost on people. My tax is paying for a lot of services, which I am happy to do but building my business any further seems a bit of a waste of time. Why miss out on things by working when the benefit is much lower. I now take more time off as I think ‘fuck it’. Less jobs too as I’ve decided not to expand.

I’m happy to pay tax, but I’m not happy to pay more than I get. 50% was the tipping point for me.

Edit to say - I would be happy if they doubled my council tax too. The system is unfair. I'm not against tax, we need it, but we also need people to work hard

You said you know people who have had lots of children and now get more money than when they were working.
That you know of people ( not a person but more than one) who have given up work because they have told you they are better off on benefits.
And of young people who are not planning to work due to disability.

No, I know nobody let alone many as described. I find it odd you do.

This 👆

I also agree the super wealthy avoid paying what is due including super wealthy businesses.

i also don’t agree in private businesses that provide public services taking enormous dividends when the service is at breaking point. Fuel companies posting record peofita in a fuel crisis . Water companies taking record dividends when the water infrastructure is at breaking point

Not a great response. Ik it probably feels good to be sarky but we need tax receipts.

Do people still pay NI at that level of income?

It's not that long ago that employees stopped paying NI on income over around £50k or so iirc.

I’m over the personal allowance taper band as are many friends and most of my work colleagues (I work in tech). I’ve never met a single person who has decided to work less in order to pay less tax.

Forgive me if I smell a fish whenever this line gets trotted out. I just can’t imagine any scenario in which someone on 90k is refusing a promotion because it will take them into the 100k band and they will start losing their personal allowance - doesn’t happen.

Seriously? Your issue is that it's all subjective, and your proof for this is your own subjective argument.

Also, I doubt most people would agree that bankers are doing a great job. The 2008 financial crash and the global shockwave that we're still experiencing today show there's a serious problem. This isn't subjective. It's a fact. Others facts that show bankers aren't really that much of an asset include:
1973-74 stock market crash
followed by a banking crisis
followed by a recession
1976 sterling crisis
1980s inflation and mass unemployment
1990s recession and housing market collapse
Black Wednesday
The list goes on

The fact they bring in 10% but seem to cause nearly 100% of the problems is a big issue.

We fund the NHS and nurses' salaries with our taxes, our hard work, our graft. Personally, and entirely subjectively, I think it's fairer that we reward people who positively contribute to our society rather than prop up systems that are, by their very nature, designed to screw us all over.

Trouble with people having more kids than they can afford is that it's not the children's fault but they suffer too if we crack down on their parents. It's a tricky moral choice: who to punish? Unless we just agree the Victorians had it gripped, the kids should suffer for the sins of their fathers & mothers, and reinstate the workhouse. We might even get some more enjoyable musicals out of it, that would be the kids contributing something in kind, wouldn't it?

Yeah, 2%

There seems to be this continuation of the left-wing belief that someone on £100k should be taxed loads while someone with lots of kids that doesn't work, shouldn't have vastly different lifestyles. Of course they should.

Well once you have a lot of money (let's not dress this up) there is a point where you think: is this worth it? I now go to the gym one morning a week, do and see my mum more. I haven't taken on that next person and my business will remain lucrative but now the balance has shifted where my time is worth more than the extra money.

Perhaps that would have been the case anyway, but the tax has definitely influenced my thinking. Research and history shows I'm not alone.

You seem to know a lot of grifters op. Have you tried widening your social circle?

So you think 'fairness' isn't subjective? Is this what you're suggesting?

Scapegoating bankers for all society's woes is strange. They certainly exacerbated the issues that caused the 2008 crash but they weren't the only contributing factor by any means. I don't know why you've listed random crashes and blamed them all on bankers. Do you even know what caused the 1976 Sterling crash? I would wager that you don't if you're trying to pin that on bankers. Also blaming them for inflation and unemployment in the 1989s. Nothing to do with macroeconomic factors then? Just bankers? Honestly, this is crazy.

Well doctors did, that's why the changes were made to pension legislation.