+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 94
General Chat Thread, Gordon Brown crashes the Labour Campaign....! in General; Originally Posted by Dos_Box Indeed, the very wealthy also do the following things: Employ people and pay wages + tax ...
  1. #61

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,684
    Thank Post
    516
    Thanked 2,453 Times in 1,899 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    833
    Quote Originally Posted by Dos_Box View Post
    Indeed, the very wealthy also do the following things:

    Employ people and pay wages + tax
    Buy bigger 'toys' and pay tax on these
    Invest their wealth in smaller companies and charities

    And a whole host of other things that I've just forgotten..........
    The George W Bush administration in the USA used a 'trickle down' economic policy, ie. lower taxes on the rich lead to more investment and more income for the government. It was shown not to work, plain and simple.

  2. #62

    mattx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    9,240
    Thank Post
    1,058
    Thanked 1,068 Times in 625 Posts
    Rep Power
    740
    Quote Originally Posted by Dos_Box View Post
    A gobal economy means that funds can be shifted very, very easily now from one part of the world to another electronically, just as goods and services can be ordered cheaply and quickly from abroad. It does not mean 'one economy'.
    Oh you mean like what happened 18 months ago with the banks and all that ?! Or when the banks are supposed to lend money to each other now, and they still arn't ? Thatcher and Regan got THEIR global economy alright when they got rid of the regulation back in the 80's, and now we are ALL paying for it.
    But the most annoying part of all this is the fact that the warning signs were there but no-one did a thing !!

  3. #63

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,665
    Thank Post
    850
    Thanked 893 Times in 738 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by torledo View Post
    will it be enough for the libdems to take some disillusioned labour votes ? under the current system, surely they need labour to do reasonably well, or atleast after today a lot better than expectations now are.
    Very roughly speaking (based on playing with BBC News - Election seat calculator) - Labour would need around 35% of the national vote for a majority, Torys around 40% and LD would need 42%.

    Current poll of polls on Beeb put Tory's at 33%, Lab at 28% and LD at 30% so all of them falling very far short of their respected marks. These percentages apparantly give Labour the most seats from the smallest share of the votes but the LD's announce on Sunday they'll work with a Tory govenment (assuming the Torys agree to PR?) based on the percentage share of the national vote.

    So current predictions would be a hung parliament with David Cameron as PM.

    Given the percentages needed the LD's are never going to win outright the best they (we?) can hope for is a hung parliament. I'd personally hate to see the Tory's get a majority, but GB is certainly doing his bit to make it easier for them! I'd love to see a bit of a Labour bounce so we get a Labour-LD coellition, but that's looking very unlikely at the moment

  4. #64
    AyatollahPies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    900
    Thank Post
    48
    Thanked 105 Times in 95 Posts
    Rep Power
    42
    This has made my day. I realise why Spitting Image called it a day now. They realised that the politicians are lampooning themselves these days.

    I'd have an ounce of respect for Gordy if he hadn't apologised, and in fact stood by his opinion.

  5. #65

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,684
    Thank Post
    516
    Thanked 2,453 Times in 1,899 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    833
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    I'd love to see a bit of a Labour bounce so we get a Labour-LD coellition, but that's looking very unlikely at the moment
    It wouldn't happen - LD have said they wouldn't work with Labour.

  6. #66
    DrCheese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,029
    Thank Post
    97
    Thanked 159 Times in 108 Posts
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    It wouldn't happen - LD have said they wouldn't work with Labour.
    No, they've said they won't work with Labour and prop up Gordon Brown if they come third in the popular vote.

  7. #67
    Jamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,350
    Thank Post
    66
    Thanked 175 Times in 147 Posts
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Dos_Box View Post
    Indeed, the very wealthy also do the following things:

    Employ people and pay wages + tax
    Buy bigger 'toys' and pay tax on these
    Invest their wealth in smaller companies and charities

    And a whole host of other things that I've just forgotten..........
    So the wealthy should be given more benefits than those without wealth? Is that the way things work, ah then its my fault! I should have been born into one of those wealthy families then I would be able to pay less tax!!

    I just don't get it, we shouldn't bash them for being wealthy but they shouldn't be able to get out of these things. Also things like plane tax.... its on per person.. so a plane carrying a full load of packages but no passengers it is taxed almost nothing but a plane full of passengers is taxed more? Surely we should be encouraging the use of full passenger planes?!?!? I swear things are backwards!

  8. #68

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    9,935
    Thank Post
    1,341
    Thanked 1,784 Times in 1,107 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    595
    With the wealthy it is a tough balancing act. One one side you need to tax them a certain amount because they have more available funds ... and it varies how they got this money. In ages gone past you could say that it was down to privilege and nobility ... and money was inherited ... so it was not earned through hard graft (or at least not that of the rich supposedly), but those days are gone and we are still in a position of where we view the rich as the bad ... unless they have become rich because they are a rock star, footballer or have made it big on reality TV.

    The thing about the rich ... we need to get just enough money out of them to be a healthy contribution to the pot on an individual basis, but also make it enticing enough to stick in the country, keep their money in the country and keep jobs here too. It can work out that by leaving some of the tax loopholes it costs a few million to the tax pot from rich individuals but increases the other pots by tens of millions.

    I know it is an over-simplifiaction and that you can go to lots of newspapers to see different variations of the figures, but most will only do the sensationalist stuff ... and gloss over how the figures work.

    I honestly can't remember where the quote is from but it is something like dealign with cows ... trying to get the most milk with minimum moo!

  9. #69

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,156
    Thank Post
    116
    Thanked 529 Times in 452 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    124
    Quote Originally Posted by Dos_Box View Post
    Indeed, the very wealthy also do the following things:

    Employ people and pay wages + tax
    Buy bigger 'toys' and pay tax on these
    Invest their wealth in smaller companies and charities
    Be lovely if it was all true but frequently it isn't. Some of the very rich seem to do their utmost to employ as few people as possible and avoid the tax (Cameron has said they won't even have to pay tax if they're employing 10 or fewer people; you can see a lot of companies that used to have 100 employees suddenly becoming several small, 10 employee companies so they don't pay tax) If all the people who have become so rich under Thatcher, Blair and Brown were really employing so many people then we wouldn't have got to the state where half the population is employed in the public sector.

    They might buy bigger toys but so many of them will magically find ways to make them company assets and avoid paying VAT and the income tax they could have paid because these purchases are offset against profits.

    There are some rich people who put huge amounts of money into charity - Bill Gates is a good example - but on the whole, poor people give a much higher percentage of their income to charity.

  10. #70
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    The George W Bush administration in the USA used a 'trickle down' economic policy, ie. lower taxes on the rich lead to more investment and more income for the government. It was shown not to work, plain and simple.
    sure, the trickle down thing is a red herring......but you have to look at the tax and regulation environment for wealthy individuals in totality. and how that shapes the economy of an area...

    it isn't simply the amount of taxes paid in the UK that has made london a top financial centre.....but i think the non-dom rule has been significant in wealthy foreginers choosing to base themselves here.
    and there's no doubt they bring their money with them.....that's not to say it does trickle down, but it has helped to boost this wealth management industry and financial services.

    i'd say it's crumbs falling off a very rich cake. the crumbs going to those who stick near the cake.....
    and those crumb eaters service the financial and leisure needs of the rich.

    you could argue that paying full tax wouldn't stop the niche services and businesses from continuing to do business....the posh boutiques, the luxury car dealers, the high end interior designers, the wealth managers, the premium property developers. But it has to be agreeable tax environment in the first instance which put london in the position it's in now....raising taxes now might not make much of a material difference only becuase it's position is well set, and the plusses outweigh the cons as far as the option of moving away.

    but if a non-accomdative tax and regulation policy was pursued in the beginning would companies and individuals not have flocked elsewhere ? that's why there must be a significant reason why they won't touch the non-dom tax.

  11. #71

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,665
    Thank Post
    850
    Thanked 893 Times in 738 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    328
    All this talk of over taxing the rich, filling in tax loop holes, etc reminds me of me way I agree with UKIP's stance on tax. I think the major problem with the tax system is it's too complicated. But of course that's the way the major parties want/need it to be. For Labour the more complex the tax system is the easier it is for them to hide stealth taxes and take more from us. The Tory's on the other hand have their paymasters to consider. The more complex the tax system is the more loopholes there are for the super-rich's lawyers to pick through to unfairly reduce their clients tax burden.

    One of UKIP's policies (the one I agree with) is to combin NI and Income Tax into one Flat Rate Income Tax. Everybody pays the same, percentage whys, it's simple, easy to understand and we all know where we are. Sure they are just two of meny different taxes levied but it's a good example of an existing tax system that is a little more complex than it probably needs to be.

  12. #72

    teejay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,176
    Thank Post
    284
    Thanked 773 Times in 583 Posts
    Rep Power
    335
    This is quite interesting snippet-
    The top 10 per cent of earners are already set to pay 53.6 per cent of income tax in 2008-09; the top five per cent will pay 43 per cent and the top one per cent 23.9 per cent. Yes, that’s right, just one per cent of the population will pay close to a quarter of the total income tax take, funding a massive chunk of the welfare state.

    So basically, drive the top 10% earners out of the country and our income tax payments more than double, drive the top 1% out and income tax for the rest of us goes up 50%.

  13. #73

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,684
    Thank Post
    516
    Thanked 2,453 Times in 1,899 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    833
    Quote Originally Posted by teejay View Post
    This is quite interesting snippet-
    The top 10 per cent of earners are already set to pay 53.6 per cent of income tax in 2008-09; the top five per cent will pay 43 per cent and the top one per cent 23.9 per cent. Yes, that’s right, just one per cent of the population will pay close to a quarter of the total income tax take, funding a massive chunk of the welfare state.

    So basically, drive the top 10% earners out of the country and our income tax payments more than double, drive the top 1% out and income tax for the rest of us goes up 50%.
    Put it slightly differently - 53.6% of income is going to just 10% of the population... Whilst those lower down are earning squat.

    Also, one of the reasons those people are in the country in the first place is because it is a good place for them to earn the income to pay tax on in the first place. Sure, the could all move to Somalia, and pay no tax, but would they do well there? No...

  14. #74

    teejay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,176
    Thank Post
    284
    Thanked 773 Times in 583 Posts
    Rep Power
    335
    So basically your solution is that everyone in the country, no matter what they do, gets exactly the same income? Nice idea, but why would any of us work then?

  15. #75

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,665
    Thank Post
    850
    Thanked 893 Times in 738 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by teejay View Post
    So basically your solution is that everyone in the country, no matter what they do, gets exactly the same income? Nice idea, but why would any of us work then?
    Actually my personal opinion wouldn't be too far off of that. Get rid of tax credits and personal allowances and significantly up the national minimum wage. At the other end of the scale there should be a national maximum wage - really can you justfy earning £250,000 per year?

    Of course that's just fantasy and is pretty much unworkable, especially in the financial sector. Nothing'll drive the top 1% away quicker than putting a cap on how much they can leagly earn. Sociallism is a nice ideology until it meets capitalism.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [Video] Andrew Marr Interview with Gordon Brown
    By mattx in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 4th January 2010, 07:33 PM
  2. [Video] Gordon Brown: Wiring a web for global good
    By mattx in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 6th December 2009, 09:16 PM
  3. Gordon Brown to become a teacher!
    By john in forum General Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 21st June 2009, 07:41 PM
  4. Gordon Brown get a verbal assault at the EU
    By Dos_Box in forum General Chat
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 27th March 2009, 12:26 PM
  5. Gordon Brown says very little!
    By Ric_ in forum General Chat
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 15th May 2008, 01:08 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •