What extra taxes would you volunteer to pay?

GreatApe

Herzlos wrote: »

This has come up before, but you seem entirely mistaken regarding who can use food banks or why. You can't just stroll in, get free food and then spend your dole money on fags instead.

Anyone who claims food poverty in 2018 UK is a liar or extremely dysfunctional

Do some people go hungry, sure, the man who takes his weekly wages to the slot machines might go hungry. To pretend this is a problem with free markets or the Tories is propaganda lies its an addictions problems

The UK with free markets is so productive food is almost free.
A loaf of bread costs 50p a loaf of bread has the calories for 1 day for 1 man.
One half of one weeks work at min wage will buy you the calories you need for one whole year.
Food has never been cheaper. If we were talking about 100 years ago I would have agreed food was expensive but not anymore

Eggs cost just 10p are protein rich and a superfood
Milk again a superfood costs £1 for four pints
One hours min wage will buy you 75 eggs or 30 pints of milk

Food is not a problem in the UK
Pretending it is takes away from the real problems of dysfunctional people and families.
They don't need food banks they need help becoming functional individuals and families.

Also a lot of food bank users are simple liars.
Like the obease single mother on question time with two big dogs claiming she has so little she goes to bed hungry so she can feed the kids and dogs first.

GreatApe

Herzlos wrote: »

I think you need to go and spend some time in the real world.

Sure, there is some benefits fraud in whatever capacity, but your notion of scale is wildly out. It's likely to cost us peanuts compared to, say, tax evasion.

Most people on benefits have barely anything, have little room for leeway, or want to be there. Almost none are living the high-life you think they are.

But I think we've covered all of this elsewhere, since you seem to think poverty is purely the fault of the poor due to some sort of disfunction.

I have seen this country from top to bottom I know reality

Do you know any alcoholics?
Do you know any drug addicts?
Do you know any gambling addicts?
Do you know any wife beaters?

I know plenty of people with these problems their problems are not government or free market induced. Their problem's will not be fixed by a lefty government.

Crying for more benefits won't fix them
Actually trying to help them with their dysfunctions and addictions might help them but you can't help them if you pretend their problems are free markets or not enough benefits

michaels

GreatApe wrote: »

This is a really silly argument
Healthcare can never be fully funded never
The reason is we are mortal for every ill we solve it just kicks the can down the road for more expensive healthcare and arguably there are diminishing returns on quality if life extended.

Healthcare should be funded at an affordable acceptable level not more.
Maybe there should be an agreed fixed limit to get the politics out of it
9% of GDP on healthcare then its using that as best as possible not seeking more.

Would have to be a running % of GDP so as and booms do not impact the service too much in one year.

Problem is demand for health care is going up faster than GDP, main reasons are:
Aging population
Success of NHS in keeping sick people alive
Inflation in medical costs such as new drugs

When GP was growing 2-3% pa it was possible to increase health share as a percentage of GDP without reducing post tax income in real terms.

Since the GFC with GDP growing at 0-2% pa this is not possible, to increase health care as a proportion of GDP every year pretty much requires real post tax incomes to fall.

The latter is a much harder political sell than it was for Labour in the noughties.

GreatApe

michaels wrote: »

Problem is demand for health care is going up faster than GDP, main reasons are:
Aging population
Success of NHS in keeping sick people alive
Inflation in medical costs such as new drugs

When GP was growing 2-3% pa it was possible to increase health share as a percentage of GDP without reducing post tax income in real terms.

Since the GFC with GDP growing at 0-2% pa this is not possible, to increase health care as a proportion of GDP every year pretty much requires real post tax incomes to fall.

The latter is a much harder political sell than it was for Labour in the noughties.

Thus is one of the problems in the GDP and productivity's figures
If the NHS cares for more people or at a better quality of care it doesn't shoe up
Even if the NHS gets more efficient it doesn't show up in GDP figures

My hope is tech will solve a lot of the healthcare problems.
Specifically computer vision is the key to so much from self driving cars to automatic blood taking machines.

One of the historic and current problems is doctor training.
Why do we train so few doctors?
The argument is that its expensive to train doctors.
Well what's more expensive £80k on a photography degree that produces nothing and won't be paid back or £120k on a medicine degree that will pay it all back plus marginally lower doctor costs for the NHS for 40 years too?

Why do we have more photography students than the whole of Europe would ever need and so few doctors trained it doesn't even cover England let alone wales and Scotland.

Massively increase doctor places we can do that while still retaining triple A grade students.
With lots more doctors the supply goes up so the NHS can afford more at lower wages. 20% more at 20% lower wages would result in more healthcare and less waiting.


On the other side we should go back to most kids leaving school at 16
If the ratio of old to young is becoming a problem then the solution is to have the young enter the workforce sooner.

Herzlos

GreatApe wrote: »

Anyone who claims food poverty in 2018 UK is a liar or extremely dysfunctional

Which highlights your ignorance beautifully. But I doubt anyone will change your mind, especially if you're apparently aware of reality. Nothing can be done about that level of cognitive dissonance.

Of course everyone fits into those categories if you feel everyone without rich still-married-and-alive parents are disfunctional.

I know lots of people you'd write off as disfunctional somehow, that don't have any spare money, are very frugal, and aren't addicts to anything. those are the ones who'll suffer if their food shopping goes up by 20% (since they already buy the cheap stuff).
Some on benefits, but often both in work but with almost nothing left at the end of the month.

I've never been to a food bank personally, but the feedback I get from them is of people who've ended up in poverty for reasons beyond their control - normally bereavement or illness paired with losing a job. Perfectly normal people who've had a run of badluck and are struggling (often temporarily).

I'm not saying everyone who goes poor/hungry is saintly, or that some of them can't cut back further, but for the norm most of their budget is consumed with necessities and very little is spent on actual luxuries. Though I suspect you'll claim anything beyond a shed with running water is a luxury.

All addicts are disfunctional, some of them are poor.
Not all poor are addicts or disfunctional.

GreatApe

Herzlos wrote: »

Which highlights your ignorance beautifully. But I doubt anyone will change your mind, especially if you're apparently aware of reality. Nothing can be done about that level of cognitive dissonance.

Of course everyone fits into those categories if you feel everyone without rich still-married-and-alive parents are disfunctional.

I know lots of people you'd write off as disfunctional somehow, that don't have any spare money, are very frugal, and aren't addicts to anything. those are the ones who'll suffer if their food shopping goes up by 20% (since they already buy the cheap stuff).
Some on benefits, but often both in work but with almost nothing left at the end of the month.

I've never been to a food bank personally, but the feedback I get from them is of people who've ended up in poverty for reasons beyond their control - normally bereavement or illness paired with losing a job. Perfectly normal people who've had a run of badluck and are struggling (often temporarily).

I'm not saying everyone who goes poor/hungry is saintly, or that some of them can't cut back further, but for the norm most of their budget is consumed with necessities and very little is spent on actual luxuries. Though I suspect you'll claim anything beyond a shed with running water is a luxury.

All addicts are disfunctional, some of them are poor.
Not all poor are addicts or disfunctional.

Please give me just one example of someone you know who is not dysfunctional and actually have food poverty to worry about. Don't lie don't make !!!! up one real example is enough

I doubt you will be able to give me an example of one person you know its mostly stories in the media or friends of friends of friends. Basically lies

On the other hand I can give you close to 100 people I know or have known who live very !!!! lives and they are almost universally to do with addictions or dysfunctional lives.

The reality the truth is the UK is a high wage full employment country. We have it so good in this country that you can choose not to work a day in your life and you will not have food poverty. If you are functional you can live a decent life in the UK. Eg one of my old neighbors was a migrant came here in the 1990s and hasn't worked a day speaks almost no English and also has had cancer. Yet she managed to bring up her two kids just fine clean home well behaved kids. If a migrant with no English no work history and cancer doesn't suffer food poverty in the UK then what's your complaint?

Food bank users are a combination of liars and dysfunctional people and the very very rare case of people on hard times. But even someone in hard times often has a dysfunctional element too. Eg someone I know of got kicked out of his home and divorced and had a mental breakdown and ended up losing his job and sleeping in his car. That's a terrible case and if he knew what and where food banks wrrre he would probably have made use of them. My sympathyfor him. But the root cause wasnt capitalism or free markets or Tories the root cause was his breakdown and his dysfunctional relationship (used to abuse his wife who took it for years and years until she couldn't take it anymore). So even many cases of 'bad luck' have dysfunction as the cause.

My idea isn't to punish these people its to help them. Maybe give them social services help so they don't become or stop being wife beaters. Maybe to give them medication to help their mentional problems. Maybe to give counciling. Maybe make gambling harder or illegal. Maybe give them free class A drugs rather than have them steel from their families to feed their habits. I don't know its all a complicated issue. What won't help them is to pretend they don't exist or that somehow free market capitalism's and Tories are to blame and if only a kind caring lefty would get in they would stop abusing their wives and children and becoming problem free citizens. That is dream land that is fantasy.

westernpromise

Herzlos wrote: »

Would it actually bring in any money? If you make food 20% more expensive, lots of people will take that 20% from somewhere else, and thus not pay any VAT on whatever luxury items they can no longer afford. You'd also really hurt local economies as you'll produce a noticable drop in non-vital spending.

There's already VAT on food. It's a myth that there's none. There is VAT on the preparation element, so if you buy potatoes for £1 there's no VAT but if you buy mashed potatoes for £2.20 that's £1 for the potatoes, £1 for the prep and £0.20 VAT on the latter.

michaels

GreatApe wrote: »

Please give me just one example of someone you know who is not dysfunctional and actually have food poverty to worry about. Don't lie don't make !!!! up one real example is enough

I doubt you will be able to give me an example of one person you know its mostly stories in the media or friends of friends of friends. Basically lies

On the other hand I can give you close to 100 people I know or have known who live very !!!! lives and they are almost universally to do with addictions or dysfunctional lives.

The reality the truth is the UK is a high wage full employment country. We have it so good in this country that you can choose not to work a day in your life and you will not have food poverty. If you are functional you can live a decent life in the UK. Eg one of my old neighbors was a migrant came here in the 1990s and hasn't worked a day speaks almost no English and also has had cancer. Yet she managed to bring up her two kids just fine clean home well behaved kids. If a migrant with no English no work history and cancer doesn't suffer food poverty in the UK then what's your complaint?

Food bank users are a combination of liars and dysfunctional people and the very very rare case of people on hard times. But even someone in hard times often has a dysfunctional element too. Eg someone I know of got kicked out of his home and divorced and had a mental breakdown and ended up losing his job and sleeping in his car. That's a terrible case and if he knew what and where food banks wrrre he would probably have made use of them. My sympathyfor him. But the root cause wasnt capitalism or free markets or Tories the root cause was his breakdown and his dysfunctional relationship (used to abuse his wife who took it for years and years until she couldn't take it anymore). So even many cases of 'bad luck' have dysfunction as the cause.

My idea isn't to punish these people its to help them. Maybe give them social services help so they don't become or stop being wife beaters. Maybe to give them medication to help their mentional problems. Maybe to give counciling. Maybe make gambling harder or illegal. Maybe give them free class A drugs rather than have them steel from their families to feed their habits. I don't know its all a complicated issue. What won't help them is to pretend they don't exist or that somehow free market capitalism's and Tories are to blame and if only a kind caring lefty would get in they would stop abusing their wives and children and becoming problem free citizens. That is dream land that is fantasy.

Whilst I think you take it to an extreme, I do notice that the emergency way to make sure people get to eat is via a foodbank rather than by handing out money, presumably foobanks could sell the food they have or use donations to give money to those who are desperate but instead give them food to ensure they get to eat. It would not be impossible for some element of benefits to be given as coupons that could only be used for food just as they do in the US - demeaning perhaps but it makes sure that if welfare is given to prevent starvation then it actually does achieve that.

westernpromise

Ballard wrote: »

What is stopping me is that my paying a few quid extra wouldn!!!8217;t make the slightest difference whereas everyone paying a few quid extra would make a difference. It!!!8217;s simple really.

You lost me with the tax avoidence part I!!!8217;m afraid.

So you're not prepared to pay anything at all - you want other people to pay. I thought so.

Edmund Burke is reputed to have said words to the effect that no man made a worse mistake than to do nothing because he could only do a little. You've actually inverted that principle to argue that doing nothing is better if it costs you momey to be the one who does the little. You're not actually prepared to do it. If you think you don't pay enough tax, go out, find someone homeless and give him £50 or £100 or £1,000 as the level of your guilt instructs you. Why do this? Because it works, apparently. According to Rutger Bregman, author of Utopia for Realists,
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Utopia-Realists-How-Can-There/dp/1408893215/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1518454932&sr=1-1&keywords=utopia+for+realists&dpID=41fdbiCr8RL&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

charidees working with the homeless did exactly that and it works. They identified 13 homeless vagrants in the City of London and gave them all £3,000. All of them transformed their lives. Most didn't even use the whole £3,000. They just figured out what they needed. Some just needed a couple of decent sets of clothes so they could present properly and get a job. They only spent £800 each.

Another charity gave $500 to everyone in an African village. They spent it on fixing their houses and buying things like motorbikes which they then used to provide a taxi service. Sometimes giving poor people money is the right thing to do, apparently.

So your money can make a difference. I get that you like the idea that it can't. It affords you the opportunity to do some virtue signalling and preaching, while not actually doing a thing. You just shake your head regretfully at the meanness of those who unaccountably refuse to fork over their dough on your say so. Thanks to them, there's no point your doing a thing, so you don't - you hang on to your money, you do nothing and blame others.

There are three problems with you and the mentality you represent. First, you've not answered the question. You were asked what tax that affected you you'd pay, and your answer is basically "none". Second, you really seek taxes on other people. And third, you're a tax avoider, because you could pay more but you pay only the minimum you have to pay, like all tax avoiders. You don't pay a penny more than you're forced to and you want the state to force others to pay more.

But it doesn't have to be that way. Put your hand in your pocket and make a difference. You know you want to. Go on. Do it. Give £1,000 to a vagrant today.

Herzlos

I already said I don't personally know of anyone using food banks, but that's only part of my point.

Are all these people dysfunctional?
https://www.trusselltrust.org/what-we-do/real-stories/
Even if they are, why shouldn't we help them?

I do agree we should also be looking to treat the root causes as well as the symptoms.