THE FOURTH OF JULY

[Adam W.]

How does a society level up and share the wealth more fairly, is there were revolutions come in and we copy the french .

It levels up by making sure everyone pays their allotted share of tax. The more you earn, the more you can afford to pay.

It also levels up by increasing taxes radically across the board. People seem to want Scandi levels of service, but forget that countries such as Denmark pay 52% basic rate of tax and 100% tax on cars.

The less tax people pay, the lower levels of equality, education and services (such as health) they receive.

It really is that simple.

 

[Jacob]

.......

The less tax people pay, the lower levels of equality, education and services (such as health) they receive.

It really is that simple.

There's a point where if the services aren't maintained then standards fall and demand on the services increases - hence bigger tax rises to remedy.
This is what is happening in UK. Pot holes, waiting lists, water services, housing...long list.
The more things are left as they are the worse they get.

 

[ey_tony]

Nobody is blaming "the successful", in fact the more the better, we want more of them.
Nobody "resents" your's and other's successes.
It's about taxation "the price of civilisation" , making life better for the less successful, making success more possible for more people. It has to be about wealth, however come by, well earned, inherited, whatever
You have had the benefit too, one way or another, of public spending at many levels.
I don't believe that 14.4 million people in Britain are just feckless ne'erdowells who should pull their fingers out. They do exist, but at all levels of society, not just the less well off.
https://www.jrf.org.uk/uk-poverty-2024-the-essential-guide-to-understanding-poverty-in-the-uk
Interesting graph in the poverty report - shows how much poverty rose under `Thatcher.

You'll never have a fair and just society as long as the lion's share of taxation is paid by so few!
Taking an even bigger share of the better off's income to subsidise the failure of the majority not to pay enough tax is a recipe for disaster.
It's little wonder that the wealthy will find loopholes to hive off their money so that the socialist minded can't access it and frankly I don't blame them.

It all comes down to entitlement! As far as I'm concerned no one is entitled to the earnings of others. If taxation was a flat rate for everyone, the wealthy would still pay their share of taxation as the more they earned, the more tax they pay.
Now that would be a fair system, but it wouldn't be acceptable to those who feel entitled to take away more from the successful.

I'm not a Tory nor against left wing policies but unfortunately left wing policies usually include taking away yet more money from the better off which I think is a short sighted approach.
The top 10% already pay over 60% of the tax burden, the answer is for government and society to find a reasonable way for the other 90% to pay for the services they expect to receive.

If two people live in a Band F home, how much more in services, waste collection etc do they produce than a couple living in a Band B house?
The fairest tax was arguably the so called Poll Tax which replaced the earlier unfair rating system but the socialists objected to it so as a result we have the banding system which for many is grossly unfair.

If we want to get back to having quality services which we expect government to deliver, then everyone needs to step and pay their fair share of taxation.

 

[Jacob]

......
The top 10% already pay over 60% of the tax burden,

That's because they've got the money

the answer is for government and society to find a reasonable way for the other 90% to pay for the services they expect to receive.

What way would that be then? Any suggestions?

It's not about "fairness" it's more important than that - it's about how you make a civilised society.

 

[RobinBHM]

Rishi Sunak seems to be hiding, there are rumours he has cancelled public engagements

Is he about to resign

Nadine Dorries tweeted as such……so it’s probably not true

 

[ey_tony]

That's because they've got the money

What way would that be then? Any suggestions?

It's not about "fairness" it's more important than that - it's about how you make a civilised society.

So your civilised society is what? A society perhaps where success is met with punitive taxes while mediocrity is rewarded and subsidised?
Civilised Society sounds very much to me like a meaningless left wing political sound bite if I'm honest.
Up there with other political sound bites like 'hard working families'. What about the families which don't work hard? What reward should they receive in this Civilised Society?

I was raised in a very odd form of reality where I was taught that the world doesn't owe me a living and success is usually based on effort, a sort of meritocratic society where effort is rewarded and I adhered to that mantra throughout my life.

My suggestion for raising tax in a fair manner is to educate the majority that it's wrong and not a fair society which expects others to pay their share of tax. If the top 10% were only paying 10% of the tax burden then you would have a valid argument but when they already contribute over 60%, then it's up to the other 90% as to how to organise funding for social policies without plundering the pockets of others.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Blaming the tax system, and insisting increased taxes are the solution to inequality has elements of denial within it. Answers are first needed to some fundamental questions - eg:

• UK productivity is at a materially lower level than many developed other economies. We should better understand why and what needs to be done.
• health related benefit claimants have increased substantially. Some clearly have problems and need support or are the product of NHS waiting lists. Some (I suspect) feel "entitled" and GPs etc are too busy or disinclined to challenge spurious claims.
• all key services can be improved with more resources - healthcare and education would materially benefit. Explicit debate is needed to properly understand the balance between quality and affordability. The best of everything is not affordable (however desirable)
• the number of civil servants has increased from 390k in 2016 to 500k in 2023. We need to understand why and act where activities and jobs are no longer needed.
• selective statistics to prove preconceived points does not add to the debate. For instance OECD poverty statistics OECD shows the UK firmly mid table, not some sort of pariah state with gross levels of deprivation.

Tax increases would be better justified if answers to important questions were forthcoming. In their absence, higher taxes are perceived as an unacceptable solution to state sponsored inefficiency.

It is no surprise that many prefer lower taxes - individually they can decide where their money should be spent.

 

[Adam W.]

Access to the same levels of free education for all increases peoples skills, which in turn increases productivity and innovation and also leads to higher wages, better living standards and increased wellbeing.

Education is paid by tax revenue and people with a higher level of education generally earn more and pay more taxes. If anyone wants a 4 year apprenticeship, degree, masters or PhD, they pay it back later through their tax and in turn fund the next generations education, so that they have the same level of opportunity.

My generation (Gen X) had access to free education and we benefited from it. Now it is denied to the current generation by my generations reluctance to pay tax, which is incredibly unfair and the primary reason why I moved my family to Denmark and joined in paying much higher levels of Danish tax.

We live in a nice tidy place with good facilities, there is no litter, there are busses in the countryside, the roads are mended, the hospitals and health service are excellent; and I can generally get a doctors appointment the same day if I need it. Those who can't work get looked after in a civilised way and freeloaders get sussed out by the system and booted up the arris pretty quickly.

Looking at your OECD poverty chart Terry, Denmark is second best where it belongs and that is funded by higher taxes. So yes please I'll have some of that any day, even though I paid for all of my university education and all subsequent training myself.

 

[DrPhill]

Nobody is blaming "the successful", in fact the more the better, we want more of them.
Nobody "resents" your's and others' successes.
It's about taxation "the price of civilisation" , making life better for the less successful, making success more possible for more people.
It has to be about wealth, however come by, well earned, inherited, whatever
You too will have had the benefit of public spending at many levels, one way or another.
I don't believe that 14.4 million people in Britain are just feckless ne'erdowells who should pull their fingers out.
They do exist, but at all levels of society, not just the less well off.
https://www.jrf.org.uk/uk-poverty-2024-the-essential-guide-to-understanding-poverty-in-the-uk
Interesting graph in the poverty report - shows how much poverty rose under `Thatcher.

Nice link, thanks Jacob.

 

[Jacob]

...
... higher taxes are perceived as an unacceptable solution to state sponsored inefficiency.

Cart before the horse; low tax leads to public services under-funded inadequacy.
What is more: this should be blatantly obvious to all but the deeply unwoke. It has been the story of Britain for some time now and looks likely to continue. Banana republics here we come!
All the experts are pointing to the urgent necessity for more public spending and higher taxation.

• the number of civil servants has increased from 390k in 2016 to 500k in 2023. We need to understand why and act where activities and jobs are no longer needed.

Well you'd have to ask the tory government why. They are the leading proponents of low taxation and have been in power since 1979. It obviously isn't working.

It is no surprise that many prefer lower taxes - individually they can decide where their money should be spent.

.. and discover that they can't afford basics such as health care and that are living on fantasy island

 

[Jacob]

Access to the same levels of free education for all increases peoples skills, which in turn increases productivity and innovation and also leads to higher wages, better living standards and increased wellbeing.

Education is paid by tax revenue and people with a higher level of education generally earn more and pay more taxes. If anyone wants a 4 year apprenticeship, degree, masters or PhD, they pay it back later through their tax and in turn fund the next generations education, so that they have the same level of opportunity.

My generation (Gen X) had access to free education and we benefited from it. Now it is denied to the current generation by my generations reluctance to pay tax, which is incredibly unfair and the primary reason why I moved my family to Denmark and joined in paying much higher levels of Danish tax.

We live in a nice tidy place with good facilities, there is no litter, there are busses in the countryside, the roads are mended, the hospitals and health service are excellent; and I can generally get a doctors appointment the same day if I need it. Those who can't work get looked after in a civilised way and freeloaders get sussed out by the system and booted up the arris pretty quickly.

Looking at your OECD poverty chart Terry, Denmark is second best where it belongs and that is funded by higher taxes. So yes please I'll have some of that any day, even though I paid for all of my university education and all subsequent training myself.

Yesterdays news:
"In Denmark, the Socialist People's Party (SF) became the largest party with 17.4 percent of the vote, up 4.2 percentage points compared to the 2019 result -- with all votes counted."
Denmark highest tax rates in EU and they know it makes sense!

 

[RobinBHM]

Conservatives have cancelled their digital campaign, So all those ads pushing the "labour will cost you £2000 tax" have been pulled...although I suspect they might be changing their strategy as a result of Farage standing, maybe we shall see Conservatives going further right of Reform!!

"The Conservative Party has paused its digital advertising on major platforms, having spent tens of thousands of pounds a day in the early period of the election.

The party has halted all its campaigns on Google and Meta platforms – which include YouTube, Facebook and Instagram – in a move that may suggest the party is changing its political strategy"
https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/conservative-facebook-meta-labour-rishi-sunak-b2558586.html

 

[Jacob]

Conservatives have cancelled their digital campaign, So all those ads pushing the "labour will cost you £2000 tax" have been pulled...although I suspect they might be changing their strategy as a result of Farage standing, maybe we shall see Conservatives going further right of Reform!!

"The Conservative Party has paused its digital advertising on major platforms, having spent tens of thousands of pounds a day in the early period of the election.

The party has halted all its campaigns on Google and Meta platforms – which include YouTube, Facebook and Instagram – in a move that may suggest the party is changing its political strategy"
https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/conservative-facebook-meta-labour-rishi-sunak-b2558586.html

Time for Starmer to start telling the truth about public spending and higher taxes. People want to hear truth. Another open goal for the useless berk.
There is a truth deficit in politics. Which is the same as saying they are all ****ing liars.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Time for Starmer to start telling the truth about public spending and higher taxes. People want to hear truth. Another open goal for the useless berk.
There is a truth deficit in politics. Which is the same as saying they are all ****ing liars.

It's not often I agree with Jacob - but in this case I am happy to make an exception!

 

[Keith Cocker]

Time for Starmer to start telling the truth about public spending and higher taxes. People want to hear truth. Another open goal for the useless berk.
There is a truth deficit in politics. Which is the same as saying they are all ****ing liars.

I don’t believe you are doing your cause any good here Jacob. Corbyn and his followers are history. Corbyn contributed big time to Labour loosing the last GE. Labour isn’t going to give me at all as much as I would like following a victory in three weeks time but it’s a damn sight better than we have now. There is no way Labour with a significant lean to the hard left will ever be elected.

 

[ey_tony]

Of course you can have excellent services if EVERYONE pays their fair share of income tax!
But not everyone is!
One can't expect excellent services if you're not contributing enough and the top 10% of earners are already contributing over 60% of the revenue to the tax burden so to see service improvements it means that the other 90% between them will have to figure out just how much extra they are prepared to contribute in order for services to meet their expectations.
It will mean less disposable income to spend on non-essentials but that is a price that has to be paid if one is to expect the government to deliver high quality services.

The government simply can't deliver the kind of services the public expects when many services are run on a shoestring budget. You get what you pay for or don't if you don't pay for it but expecting someone else to pay for it is not the answer.

 

[Jacob]

I don’t believe you are doing your cause any good here Jacob. Corbyn and his followers are history. Corbyn contributed big time to Labour loosing the last GE. Labour isn’t going to give me at all as much as I would like following a victory in three weeks time but it’s a damn sight better than we have now. There is no way Labour with a significant lean to the hard left will ever be elected.

It's such an open goal for Starmer that he could be laying out some sensible policies and persuading people of the need to raise taxes to pay for them. And to talk about Brexit - the other big elephant in the room.
Softening the ground before the advance, if any is intended?
Nothing to do with Corbyn - though the swing in 2017 should give pause for thought. Even turnout in 2019 wasn't abysmal, just panned out badly in terms of seats.

 

[Jacob]

...

The government simply can't deliver the kind of services the public expects when many services are run on a shoestring budget.

Yes.

You get what you pay for or don't if you don't pay for it but expecting someone else to pay for it is not the answer.

Getting people who can afford to pay for it is the answer!
If it's any consolation - wealth in most forms is worth much less to those who already have excess. They lose less in terms of the quality of their lives even if massive amounts are taxed. £500m taken wouldn't make much difference to the life of a billionaire but could be incredibly valuable if distributed amongst large numbers of those who have next to nothing., or paying for services which they could not afford
That's what "fairness" means in the real world. The burden falls on those with the broadest shoulders, always has, always will.

 

[RobinBHM]

so to see service improvements it means that the other 90% between them will have to figure out just how much extra they are prepared to contribute in order for services to meet their expectations.

Unfortunately you arent looking at this in the correct way:

the wealthiest people have large disposable incomes, after paying their housing costs and essentials they have a large headroom

those living on low and middle incomes dont have much, often no money left after housing costs and essentials. There are 4.8million living with food insecurity and 6 million on fuel poverty.

what you are saying is those on lower incomes should be taxed more despite the fact they may not be able to pay for rent, food and fuel

You might try arguing the "they should cancel their netflix and expensive coffees....but those in poverty have already done that


Tony, do you live in a mortgage free house?

 

[RobinBHM]

Labour isn’t going to give me at all as much as I would like following a victory in three weeks time

wise words................

"don't let perfection be the enemy of good"