Are the Tories going to tear themselves apart?

mwpt

Mistermeaner wrote: »

To answer your question directly: USA in terms of taxation and welfare model

In this country welfare is such that not only is it prohibitively expensive it is an incentive for the wrong kind of behaviours; how about for example if a young lady gets herself pregnant with no means to provide a roof for herself instead of the tax payer being asked to fund that she stays at home with her parents; family responsibility and an incentive for her parents to raise her right. Do we want people to make sensible and rational decisions that they are personally responsible for based on their circumstances and what they can / cannot afford or do we want to say to people 'do whatever you like, don;t worry about consequences someone else will sort that out'

Once again, I do understand the intent behind your post. I too believe in incentives. I question what part the welfare state has to answer for in the amount of broken homes. If someone sees no value for them in joining productive society and instead chooses to live off state largess, then maybe this influences other areas of behaviour. I don't know, just questioning. Anecdotally, my partner (teacher) says that the common view amongst teachers is that troubled kids in class, disruptive behaviour, is almost always correlated with a problem home life, mostly in the form of a missing father figure.

But that statement must be made carefully, because most single mothers will be excellent parents and role models. We can't lump them all in together.

I also support a universal basic income, which I think is going to be impossible to avoid in the future as machines start doing more jobs and "wealth" concentrates in fewer hands. So for me, a person living off the state is already on a form of basic income. You could have the same if you choose. But I choose not to, because I enjoy being productive, I enjoy striving, I enjoy working to improve the options available to me now and later in life. If someone is less able than me, I still want them to have a modicum of a decent life.

But on to your answer: I question that America is a model society. It may be your preferred society, that's fine, but they also have a lot of areas of poverty and people can easily slip through the cracks and perpetuate this poverty. Very difficult to climb out of.

Mistermeaner

regards the intent of my post: no intent per se I'm just ranting about something I believe in - my fundamental position is one of low tax, low welfare and more personal / family responsibility, less state intervention.

You asked me which society I think matches this and I think USA in these terms.... there are other things I do not like about the US but in terms of level of state intervention and taxation that is the way I would prefer things to be done.

mwpt

Mistermeaner wrote: »

regards the intent of my post: no intent per se I'm just ranting about something I believe in - my fundamental position is one of low tax, low welfare and more personal / family responsibility, less state intervention.

Yeah, I got that. I meant I understand where you are coming from, meaning I don't see you as some vile person for having these views. I'm just offering an alternative view and reasons for it.

kinger101

Mistermeaner wrote: »

To answer your question directly: USA in terms of taxation and welfare model

In this country welfare is such that not only is it prohibitively expensive it is an incentive for the wrong kind of behaviours; how about for example if a young lady gets herself pregnant with no means to provide a roof for herself instead of the tax payer being asked to fund that she stays at home with her parents; family responsibility and an incentive for her parents to raise her right. Do we want people to make sensible and rational decisions that they are personally responsible for based on their circumstances and what they can / cannot afford or do we want to say to people 'do whatever you like, don;t worry about consequences someone else will sort that out'

It's a myth that income taxation is particularly low in the USA. Federal income taxes are between 10% and 39.6%, but the personal allowance (exemption) is very low at $4,000, though you can also claim one for any dependents.

On top of that, you then have to pay state and sometimes city taxes. And social security of 7.65% (15.3% if self-employed). And then you (and/or your employer) have to pay for your healthcare (which is about $4,500 for a single employer, or $16,000 for a family). So in many cases, you end up with a better take home pay based on the UK system. It's difficult to do direct comparisons though as the USA allows joint filing for married couples.

Indirect taxes however are much lower. Sales tax is typically around 8%. But on large purchases, you can avoid it simply by buying online from a store that does not have a presence in your state.

Mistermeaner

I thought in the US you are also able to offset alot more of your costs against your tax; e.g. mortgage etc

mwpt

kinger101 wrote: »

It's a myth that income taxation is particularly low in the USA. Federal income taxes are between 10% and 39.6%, but the personal allowance (exemption) is very low at $4,000, though you can also claim one for any dependents.

On top of that, you then have to pay state and sometimes city taxes. And social security of 7.65% (15.3% if self-employed). And then you (and/or your employer) have to pay for your healthcare (which is about $4,500 for a single employer, or $16,000 for a family). So in many cases, you end up with a better take home pay based on the UK system. It's difficult to do direct comparisons though as the USA allows joint filing for married couples.

Also need to pay for private medical insurance.

Moby

mwpt wrote: »

What has that got to do with people who do pay a lot of tax?

I know a lot of people who claim they pay a lot of tax but this doesn't necessarily mean they do or actually pay the correct amount. I wish I could do my job 'cash in hand' or had enough dosh to instruct a creative accountant!;)

mwpt

Moby wrote: »

I know a lot of people who claim they pay a lot of tax but this doesn't necessarily mean they do or actually pay the correct amount. I wish I could do my job 'cash in hand' or had enough dosh to instruct a creative accountant!;)

I have no idea why you're talking about tax evaders. We were discussing people who pay a lot of tax.

Moby

mwpt wrote: »

I have no idea why you're talking about tax evaders. We were discussing people who pay a lot of tax.

What's 'a lot of tax'....is it as long as a piece of string and who decides value? By the way not a good idea to tell me what 'we' were discussing......just say 'I'...after all you can only speak for yourself and not everyone else....unless you are Donald Trump or the Queen.;)

mwpt

Moby wrote: »

What's 'a lot of tax'....is it as long as a piece of string and who decides value? By the way not a good idea to tell me what 'we' were discussing......just say 'I'...after all you can only speak for yourself and not everyone else....unless you are Donald Trump or the Queen.;)

No, I can explain exactly what happened. Cells was responding to a comment about social spending vs tax take. He said that people who pay a lot of tax have a right to know how their tax is being spent.

You took this as an opportunity to make the sweeping and basically tangental statement that most self employed are tax evaders.

Firstly, that made no contribution to the meta topic being discussed that people who pay a lot of tax have a right to know. Secondly, you'd have a complete meltdown if someone claimed most people on benefits were benefit cheats.

Anyway, have at it.