to think this response is unreasonable??

[nellynaemates]

Was just listening to Jeremy Vine on the radio and they're talking about the 45p tax band to be introduced after the next election (if labour get in again) for those who earn more than £150,000.

I'm not sure if it'll work or not but that's beside the point.

A caller phoned in with the response you hear every time anyone suggests higher taxes for high earners. Namely "Well, they work very very hard for that money, we shouldn't be punishing those who work hard."

Right. I just don't like the implication that those who aren't high earners aren't working hard enough. What about people doing manual labour, waitresses spending hours on their feet knackering their knees and wrists and schmoozing customers for minimum wage?

Having a very high paid/prestigious job is not just about hard work. It's also about inherited intelligence (not much anyone can do about that), social/educational background, who you know etc. etc.

Does anyone think that earning power is directly correlated with how hard you work? (I mean obviously it's part of it but YKWIM).

Nelly, I don't think you are being unreasonable to dislike that implication.

To answer your last question, I guess that earning power can be correlated with hard work, if you equalise all other factors - ie if you have two people with similar abilities, backgrounds, educational opportunities etc, the one that works harder at school and once in employment is likely to advance faster and higher than the one who doesn't work as hard.

Of course it isn't..

It is just another 'unfair' tax ...

Well I'm pretty sure that no one can work 1000 times as hard as me, but there are people who earn that much. Also in a lot of cases jobs are given to others in the same circle regardless of qualifications or how hard they are likely to work.

In any case tax isn't a punishment. It's just a practical way of getting money to pay for public services.

i agree with your sentiment on hard work. especially with manual labour. i work hard in my job and while it may be mentally more taxing than manual labour it has none of the physical expenditure or risk that manual work entails.

as for the tax measure, my argument would not be about how hard people work but over here (ireland) so many political solutions seem to revolve around targetting high earners and essentially punishing success.which gets on my nerves. but then a lot of that is probably protectionism.

no, you're not being unreasonable - and since this whole banking crisis started I think it should get a lot harder to use the "we need to pay these amounts to get the very best people" arguments as well, given a whole load of these "very best people" have shown themselves to be sadly lacking in judgment.

Not saying that I would have done it any better, but I'd have done it at half the price - Bargain

Seriously, if people are earning 150K and don't employ a tax accountant to mitigate the increase in tax liability, they probably don't deserve their salary ...

Thanks for the replies, will come back later - a certain little boy needs his lunch

Nagapie, if you're a PAYE taxpayer, there's absolutely nothing you can do. It comes straight out of your pay packet like it does for every other tax payer.

I know loads of people who earn shitloads and do very little. Most 'management' positions where I work for example.

"Marx reckoned that a doctor needed a potato farmer just as much as a potato farmer needed a doctor, so they should be rewarded equally.

in practice, this hasn't really worked out."

Because you can automate processes like potato farming, but you can't automate being a doctor.

How hard you work doesn't correlate to pay - I'm a sahm on zero but in that case I'd be quids in