the snap general election thread

POPPYOSCAR

wotsthat wrote: »

I certainly intend that my estate pays not a penny in IHT. Currently that plan involves me giving away money before I have enough saved to secure my own future.

Yes.

We have decide the same.

We can also get pleasure from seeing our children secure for the future while we are alive.

They both work extremely hard and deserve for their lives to be made a little easier.

economic

Chrysalis wrote: »

As always its about getting the balance right to keep everyone happy.

Of course we will never get everyone happy.

My belief is those with more wealth should contribute more and its based on the ability to afford the tax. However I also say that any tax system should ensure wealthy people also stay more wealthy so I am not saying communism before anyone jumps in

Everyone pays tax multiple times.

VAT, NI, income tax, import tax, and all the other stuff.

If it were me making the decisions, I would massively simplify the tax system.

Income tax would be a lot higher than it is now, I consider it the fairest tax in the system.
There would be no VAT
No inheritance tax.
No council tax.
No tax on petrol.
I would perhaps keep NI.
Also some form of tax would need to stay for corporations otherwise business owners would just declare no personal earnings and pay no tax.

The idea been you only pay tax on what you earn, and thats it you done, you have paid your dues.

We got what we got today because income tax is seen as toxic to rise, so instead we get tax by stealth.

raising income taxes too high from already high levels will cause massive problems, people will just flee this country. yes all ther taxeswill be 0 but most of it wont make much difference anyway.

again i dont think there should be any changes to taxes (if anyhing income tax should be lowered). what needs to happen is massivly cut government spenading for which i think there is a lot of room for such as:

- only let immigrants in if they can add value to the economy. have a period of say 2 years in whic if they have done no work, they are chucked out of the country.
- provide minimum benefits for the poor enough so they can only spend it on THE MOST BASIC of shelter and food required and nothing else. make it criminal for them to spend the money on anything else in fact.
- sort out spending on public services like NHS where there is a lot of waste particularly in admin departments which can be automated and perhaps in future AI can replace even more jobs which would be great.
- get rid of housing benefits/incentives etc for politicans.
- state pension amounts given in proportion to how long they worked in this country - someone with 10 years employment gets less then someone with 40 years employment. Someone with less then 5 years get absolutely nothing (chances of them gaming the system very high).

Chrysalis

So in short you just want to pay less taxes end of, doesnt matter how you taxed.

We will never agree on that

I like a big state that helps everyone, you prefer a smaller state and with it your lower taxes.

Income tax is historically very low by the way. Check early 1980s rates.

POPPYOSCAR

economic wrote: »

raising income taxes too high from already high levels will cause massive problems, people will just flee this country. yes all ther taxeswill be 0 but most of it wont make much difference anyway.

again i dont think there should be any changes to taxes (if anyhing income tax should be lowered). what needs to happen is massivly cut government spenading for which i think there is a lot of room for such as:

- only let immigrants in if they can add value to the economy. have a period of say 2 years in whic if they have done no work, they are chucked out of the country.
- provide minimum benefits for the poor enough so they can only spend it on THE MOST BASIC of shelter and food required and nothing else. make it criminal for them to spend the money on anything else in fact.
- sort out spending on public services like NHS where there is a lot of waste particularly in admin departments which can be automated and perhaps in future AI can replace even more jobs which would be great.
- get rid of housing benefits/incentives etc for politicans.
- state pension amounts given in proportion to how long they worked in this country - someone with 10 years employment gets less then someone with 40 years employment. Someone with less then 5 years get absolutely nothing (chances of them gaming the system very high).

From what I understand lower tax brings in more revenue as when taxes are high people are more inclined to find ways to reduce the amount they actually pay.

wotsthat

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Yes.

We have decide the same.

We can also get pleasure from seeing our children secure for the future while we are alive.

They both work extremely hard and deserve for their lives to be made a little easier.

It seems obvious doesn't it?

I could retire at 52 - 53 and live a perfectly happy life. I'd be just as happy to work until 60 and give every penny of 8 years earnings to my kids.

Would I be willing to do the same for 'society'? Of course not.

Joe_Horner

There is a God, and he has a sense of humour

Tory 'strong and stable' advertising van overturns in the wind
Van was delivering message about Brexit while driving along M6

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/election-tory-strong-stable-van-overturns-conservatives-theresa-may-advert-a7776136.html?cmpid=facebook-post

POPPYOSCAR

Joe_Horner wrote: »

There is a God, and he has a sense of humour







Yes he created Diane Abbot.

economic

Chrysalis wrote: »

So in short you just want to pay less taxes end of, doesnt matter how you taxed.

We will never agree on that

I like a big state that helps everyone, you prefer a smaller state and with it your lower taxes.

Income tax is historically very low by the way. Check early 1980s rates.

raising income taxes will hurt the middle class the most - the middle class are the lifeblood of the coutnrys economy.

you raise income taxes in a big way, you will seriously hurt the economy.

the 80s like any other period were different to now. there is never the same level of taxation that is optimum in any given period. there are so many factor involved in determining the optimum tax that you can not easily conclude anything just based on tax levels historically.

also please do some reading on laffer curve.

also the income taxes were lowered massively in the mid 80s causing economy to boom and standard of livign to rise. similar thing happened in the US.

also please do not even think about running for chancellor

kinger101

Chrysalis wrote: »

As always its about getting the balance right to keep everyone happy.

Of course we will never get everyone happy.

My belief is those with more wealth should contribute more and its based on the ability to afford the tax. However I also say that any tax system should ensure wealthy people also stay more wealthy so I am not saying communism before anyone jumps in

Everyone pays tax multiple times.

VAT, NI, income tax, import tax, and all the other stuff.

If it were me making the decisions, I would massively simplify the tax system.

Income tax would be a lot higher than it is now, I consider it the fairest tax in the system.
There would be no VAT
No inheritance tax.
No council tax.
No tax on petrol.
I would perhaps keep NI.
Also some form of tax would need to stay for corporations otherwise business owners would just declare no personal earnings and pay no tax.

The idea been you only pay tax on what you earn, and thats it you done, you have paid your dues.

We got what we got today because income tax is seen as toxic to rise, so instead we get tax by stealth.

Current IT receipts are about £176B.

Council Tax (poss £30B)
Fuel Duty (£28)
VAT (£119B)
IHT (£4B)

So you'd need to double the amount of income tax collected, and still collect NI.

Don't think it's workable.

GreatApe

Chrysalis wrote: »

I like a big state that helps everyone, you prefer a smaller state and with it your lower taxes.

There is a balance to be had, you can not go to 0% state or 100% state both would be a disaster.

If we look at functioning developed larger economies we have the USA at about 35% and France at closer to 55% so that can be seen as a functional range with the UK in the middle of the two at about 45% of GDP as government spending

I think we are about where we should be