Do you want less tax or more spend? Poll Results/Discussion

Results: This Poll Ran Between 4-11 September 2007. Do you want less tax or more spend?

With all the political shenanigans at the moment over tax versus spend, for a bit of fun I wanted to test people’s attitudes; assuming the system actually worked and changing spending actually changed service.

So your choice is to increase taxes and focus it on four popular areas: health, education, policing and transport (each 1% tax increase would roughly increase spending here by 2.5%). Alternatively you can opt for tax cuts which would have an across the board impact (as if you were doing that you’d be unlikely to focus spending reductions on the popular areas).

Which option would you prefer… for the poll’s sake assume increased or decreased spending actually increases/decreases service!


A. Taxes up 20% health, education, policing & transport spend up 50% - 5% (120 votes)
B. Taxes up 10% health, education, policing & transport spend up 25% - 6% (144 votes)
C. Taxes up 5% health, education, policing & transport spend up 12.5% - 11% (290 votes)
D. Taxes up 2% health, education, policing & transport spend up 5% - 15% (385 votes)
E. No Change - 13% (328 votes)
F. Cut taxes by 2%, spending cut proportionally across the board - 9% (230 votes)
G. Cut taxes by 5%, spending cut proportionally across the board - 11% (271 votes)
H. Cut taxes by 10%, spending cut proportionally across the board - 8% (198 votes)
I. Cut taxes by 20%, spending cut proportionally across the board - 22% (565 votes)

Total Votes: 2525 - Thanks to everyone that voted :)

This poll has now ended, but you can still click reply and have your say below.

threadbanner.gif
Former MSE team member
«134

Replies

  • Even if taxes are upped there are no guarantees that the money will be spent on health, education, policing & transport. Taxes seem to be a slush fund to be squandered in stupid, imperialist wars which have nothing to do with the defence of this country.:mad:

    I would prefer a switch around whereby the government fund THEIR little wars by collection tin at street corners and then they can see how popular they are.

    I am at war with no one!
  • KylieKylie Forumite
    562 Posts
    I couldn't even vote on this because I believe money is so badly wasted "across the board" that I could not even IMAGINE more taxes increasing service (or less; any impact whatsoever).

    In fact, this has just got me all worked up, I am at risk of ranting so I will go lay down in a darkened room and try to forget all about it.
  • JDAdamsJDAdams Forumite
    26 Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10 Posts Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    Lemee see now:

    Health - I'd rather pay privately if I needed anything urgent done
    Education - again, private is the way to go
    Police - mainly spend their time bothering me with speed cameras, these generate their own revene but less fudning = less plods to work them
    Transport - this is the only area where spending would really help me - we need more decent motorways! Having said that I'd rather keep what is currently taken as tax and fly or take a train.

    So overall, lower taxes and less public services would do me - they're privatised so much hardly any "services" are left now anyway.
  • Cut taxes by 20% and reduce spend. I dont use any of those "services" anyway. Everything I use is taxed independently anyway.
  • webwizwebwiz Forumite
    213 Posts
    Part of the Furniture 100 Posts Combo Breaker
    I voted for 20% reduction. I was in a majority at the time. I prefer to spend my money myself rather than give it an inefficient government to spend on my behalf. But the cut in services that we have been told to assume (unrealistic) would need to be introduced gradually to avoid excessive disruption, and alternative services paid for by the user introduced in parallal.
  • If we all go privately and cut taxes - then that means more money in our pockets -oooooooooh Hang on! No - wait - what REALLY happens is the daft spend more and end up in more debt! Private? All the companies will be competing and offer their cheap brands of service - "Tesco's Finest Schools" and "Tesco 's Value School" - who's to say the street sweeper can afford either! A Bus Driver was shouted at the other day by a snotty 17 year old to go get a real job!!!! What's that then. People have gone stupid - we are a nation of greedy, selfish people who want the best - even if we can't afford it ! No, I say pay taxes - the country could spend more wisely - but at least we all know if we get hit by a car - we get an ambulance (irrespective of how long you all think it should arrive - if more people rode bikes instead of the 4x4 they cant afford - to drive on roads instead of off-track like they are designed for(!!!)) then ambulances might get through quicker!).

    I'm sorry - I get so irrate by the amount of people who just spend spend spend whether they have money or not!!!
  • Cut taxes by 20% and reduce spend. I dont use any of those "services" anyway. Everything I use is taxed independently anyway.
    we don't all think about things we take for granted - like motorways - street lights - public loo's - pavements - parks - homeless families - victims of redundancies - victims of child abuse - selfish people speeding and causing accidents to innocent bystanders so the police and ambulance have to clean up the mess - DIY'er - natural disasters like the floods (possibly caused by manmade CO2 emmisions) require emergency support - etc.
  • JDAdams wrote: »
    Lemee see now:

    Health - I'd rather pay privately if I needed anything urgent done
    Education - again, private is the way to go
    Police - mainly spend their time bothering me with speed cameras, these generate their own revene but less fudning = less plods to work them
    Transport - this is the only area where spending would really help me - we need more decent motorways! Having said that I'd rather keep what is currently taken as tax and fly or take a train.

    So overall, lower taxes and less public services would do me - they're privatised so much hardly any "services" are left now anyway.
    ok - so if you get burgarled? or if there's a pile up on the next new motorway that you want? You get attacked outside the new bar in Knightsbridge? Who you gonna call? the ghostbusters? - no - I bet you'll dial 999 - but in your fantasy - they services are all private and you're asked to hold whilst you're raped just as your titanium ring is being snatched off your finger, the automated voice is asking you to select a number for the level of urgency!!! lol - it's funny because I don't think you realise how selfish you are - how can you come on a site like this and get snotty?
  • caroline1973leftycaroline1973lefty Forumite
    355 Posts
    Part of the Furniture 100 Posts I've been Money Tipped!
    Forumite
    JDAdams wrote: »
    Lemee see now:

    Health - I'd rather pay privately if I needed anything urgent done
    Education - again, private is the way to go
    Police - mainly spend their time bothering me with speed cameras, these generate their own revene but less fudning = less plods to work them
    Transport - this is the only area where spending would really help me - we need more decent motorways! Having said that I'd rather keep what is currently taken as tax and fly or take a train.

    You forget that 'no man is an island' (John Donne). You might be able to afford private healthcare if you catch TB, for example, but wouldn't you prefer not to catch it in the first place because there was a proper public health service in place which made sure this disease didn't first take hold amongst the poor? (This was the main reason the Victorians started providing health care for the poor in the first place).

    Of what if you're mugged by a kid who's a complete lost cause to society, never been to school cos his or her parents can't afford to send them? Not only would there be no police to try and catch them, but no A&E services at hospital to go to, either - even if you could afford to pay! The history of the last 10 years or so has shown clearly that the private sector is only interested in taking over the plum bits of our public sector - ie the bits you can turn a profit from, like hip replacements and other elective surgery, not thing like A&E. And even here, they only turn a profit by ripping off the tax payer - privatisation often ends up costing us more, not less - which is why the government has consistently refused demands to hold a public enquiry into whether the Private Finance Initiative / Public Private Partnership provides value for money for the taxpayer. For example, the recently collapsed metronet (private tube maintenance firm made up of Balfour Beatty and the privatised utility companies) was costing a £1billion a year whereas it was estimated to run it in house would have cost about half that. A shockingly large chunk of money is wasted on lawyers and management consultants who draw up the often incomprehensible privatisation contracts, too.

    I'd rather pay my taxes and have the government provide proper, publicly owned, publicly accountable services. In fact there is some evidence we'd all be happier (even you, D Adams!) if this were the case. For an interesting read about why lower tax societies are less happy than higher tax ones, read 'Happiness' by Richard Layard.

    Proud of my user name!
    "The Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed" - Ghandi
  • Cutting taxes and removing many state 'services' is the best way to restore personal responsibility and a true sense of personal achievement. At the moment we work hard, pay huge taxes, and the state lets us keep 'pocket money.' It's OK I suppose as politicians know best how to spend my money.
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides

The 'Ask An Expert' event

Last week's energy Q&A with MSE experts

MSE Forum

Ninja Kitchen air fryer & grill £175

Normally £250. Excl Northern Ireland

MSE Deals