'Do you think you get good value from paying tax?' poll discussion

danothy

As a student I'm fairly sure I'm getting more out than I put in, partly because of the education (all though I fear the cost of that is just being deferred at the moment) but mainly because of the council tax relief full time students get which would be a massive slice of the pie that is the tax I have to contribute.

I still pay VAT, VED, fuel duty, tax on the interest from my savings (as modest as that is), NI and income tax on the income from my weekend job and teaching assistance for the university, air passenger duty and alcohol duties. I wouldn't think that this covers the portion of public services supposedly available to me (although the police appear to have done nothing when my bike was stolen so it doesn't seem to me that public services are divided up evenly).

I am expecting to become a net contributor after I graduate as all the tax relief I currently enjoy will end and I will also be faced with repaying my (substantial) student loan.

I wonder if anyone thinks this is unfair?

SurreyGirl_2

Well said Yorkshiremeat and Sunstarrr. I am sick of people who have NO idea how 'the other half' live moaning about the state of the country, scroungers etc.

I am very proud of our NHS Services, Emergency Services and general attititude to a civil society. Do the people who talk about "bins once a fortnight, Police did nothing, don't go to the doctors" really want a lawless society with no support for the needy or vulnerable?

Good luck to them if they think they could 'opt out' and pay for private insurance to provide the same cover as Police, Fire Services, Council Amenities etc - they're either choosing to ignore all the the 'free' things they take for granted ...or perhaps they've just been reading The Daily Mail!? :rotfl:

danothy

SurreyGirl wrote: »

Do the people who talk about "bins once a fortnight, Police did nothing, don't go to the doctors" really want a lawless society with no support for the needy or vulnerable?

While the police did nothing about my bike (and I am annoyed about that) I still do appreciate what they do overall. I'm very willing to pay tax to fund things like the SOCA for example and even things like the EA and the Ofwat/com etc. regulators, neither of which have my personal interests at heart but that of societies (obviously some quangos are better value than others). My comment about the police not acting over a bike theft was just one aspect of where tax money supposedly providing an individual front line service seemed ineffective and I didn't feel that part of it gave value.

BigSofty

I reckon my family receives more than we pay. We don't receive benefits and I have an above average salary but as my wife works for the NHS I'm counting her income as a part of receiving from the state. We also have 3 children in state schools and I use the road system which isn't cheap.

dam50

I too voted 'pay in much more' but I think there should be a follow up question - 'is it right that you should?'. If we all paid directly for what we are using at the moment the I don't think we would be living in much of a society. The whole point of taxes etc is that you pay when you can afford it (ie are earning) so that the safety net is there when you can't.

chanie

3 years ago, I would have said I pay in a lot more than I get out - as I was a relatively healthy person with no dependents, who worked full time.

However, I am now a home-owner with an 8 month old son, so I did the NHS during my pregnancy and and afterwards. I also used SureStart when I was on my maternity leave. Over the summer, I expect to use the parks and maybe libraries with DS.

I still think overall that I have paid in more than I have used, now that I have DS, this will start to even itself out over the years and then when I get old.

My one bugbear?
Most services seem to be open during the week, Mon-Fri. I work, full-time, Mon-Fri so I'm paying for services I rarely get to use.

stevemcol

Voted D becuase I'd guess I break even.
I don't really care though because that's not what taxation is all about.
You contribute based on what you can afford and take based on what you need.

Yes there are spongers bouncing along the bottom but they are massively outweighed by tax avoiders and evaders at the top and to be fair in the middle of society. Most self employed people I know, if they were honest, pay less tax than they should.

GreenQueen

I voted that I receive much more than I put in. However in the past (5+ years ago), I would definitely have been putting in much more than I received. I'm now on a much smaller wage and receive some benefits, have a child who has just started school and have recently had a poor run of health (nothing serious, but costly to the NHS)

Your net contributor/receiver status will change through your life, due to health, lifestyle changes (either chosen e.g. children or enforced e.g. redundancy). When I was a significant contributor, I was very happy to do that, as I could afford it and saw it as a responsibility to put into the system, and I also didn't know what I would need in the future (so a bit of insurance!)

Couldn't really say whether I'm a lifetime contributor or beneficiary - too many variables!

avinabacca

teddyco wrote: »

......as with other failed socialist societies......

"Socialist society"?

When was this, then?

evespikey

David Willetts targeted this question in his book "The Pinch: How the baby boomers took over their children's future and how they can give it back". He basically details the amount the baby boomers put in through tax, and how much they got out of it. He looks at the fact that the baby boomers paid low taxes, got free education, cheap housing, low fuel costs, yet this was not sustainable economically. So through this the country ended up in debt resulting in the baby boomer's children paying higher taxes, higher fuel, much higher university costs and getting far LESS back from the system than they paid, and will also pay in the future.

So it seems it depends what years you were born in when calculating whether you get more out of the system when you were put in. Willetts calculates this so the baby boomers get over 100% of what they put in, and the young generation now get less than 100%. You can find his exact figures in his book and in the podcast.

I predict the most popular reply on the poll will be that people feel as though they pay far more than they get back (despite this often being not the case).

You can also view him discussing this at Warwick University. Can't post links, but just google 'David Willetts Warwick University' and you'll find the podcast.