Should the rich be squeezed more?

marklv

The top 1% of people in this country own 23% of the wealth - in the mid 1980s, under Mrs Thatcher, the figure was 18%. This has gone up under the closet Tory, Tony Blair.

Do you think that it's time the rich were made to pay more to help this country lift itself out of the recession, or do you think ordinary people should be punished instead?

PrivatisetheNHSnow

How? The rich already pay most of income tax. What other taxes are you suggesting?

marklv

PrivatisetheNHSnow wrote: »

How? The rich already pay most of income tax. What other taxes are you suggesting?

Until Nigel Lawson came up with his catastrophic 'give away' budget the top rate of income tax was 60%. I am suggesting we restore that at a £150k level , and lower the 50% income tax threshold to c.£85k a year.

PrivatisetheNHSnow

marklv wrote: »

Until Nigel Lawson came up with his catastrophic 'give away' budget the top rate of income tax was 60%. I am suggesting we restore that at a £150k level , and lower the 50% income tax threshold to c.£85k a year.

Good luck persuading people that earn that money to stay in the UK then.

It's 60% + 11% NI + no personal allowance.

Generali

You have no idea. No understanding of economics, psychology or politics.

FATBALLZ

The useless rich should have much of their wealth repossesed, the ones who own vast swathes of land due to being born into the right families, but who don't have any useful economic output. Taxing highly skilled and entrepeneurial people who as a result earn a lot out of jealously is counter-productive.

PrivatisetheNHSnow

marklv wrote: »

the rich were made to pay more to help this country lift itself out of the recession?

I don't understand. How will taxing the rich more help to lift the country out of recession?

Casperthefriendlyghost

I don't see why rich people should pay more, they're the ones who get off their backsides and make their money work for them, even if they inherit the money, it takes good sense to keep and look after their money and they don't sit around waiting for handouts!

Good luck to them for being sensible and why shouldn't they enjoy it? and if they leave the economy will be in deeper than it is already. Once the businesses leave the country and take their revenue with them we'll be in trouble, people still want to invest in this country, and once it's gone, it's gone!

Businesses in other countries are only interested in one thing, making money and that's the way it should be. It appears to me that in Britain they couldn't give a toss the way they treat customers. In the US it's so different!

Cheers
Casper
x x

StevieJ

marklv wrote: »

Until Nigel Lawson came up with his catastrophic 'give away' budget the top rate of income tax was 60%. I am suggesting we restore that at a £150k level , and lower the 50% income tax threshold to c.£85k a year.

I think the top rate was 98% when Thatcher took over, Geoffrey Howe was the first to cut it to 60%.

In 1974 the top-rate of income tax increased to its highest rate since the war, 83%. This applied to incomes over £20,000, and combined with a 15% surcharge on 'un-earned' income (investments and dividends) could add to a 98% marginal rate of personal income tax. In 1974,

chucky

what a stupid poll and a pathetic thread

Batchy

Stupid Poll, if you take away entrepreneurs, then how will the non entrepreneurs be earning money, who will bother to own a business and have the hassle of employing people, ie lower earners.

Keep tax at 40% dont worry about the 50% its just driving business out of the UK. There are always tax loopholes and its always the rich who pay good money to find them out legally. the more you earn the more tax your pay, encourage people to earn more and YOU ie the government earn more... if you tax at 98% then the idividuals will not aspire to earn huge amounts... just enough, this would natually limit tax's Greedy governments are not the answer