Should UK income tax be higher - discuss
Discussion
lamboman100 said:
Having said that, if you actually work for the state, it is a great place to be. Do few hours, take days or weeks off for no reason, have zero chance of getting the boot, retire early on a fat wedge, etc. etc.
Ever worked for any element of it? I do, buying plant and putting together contracts, structured finance agreements et al. Was working 7.45 - 8.30, 8 - 7.30, those sorts of hours this week - same as plenty of other people, private or public, do. Forgive me if I find your sweeping generalisation as offensive as it is ignorant.I've had six months off work this year. Largely because the amount of tax I pay is sufficiently high that I don't see the point in working myself to the bone when I can pay the mortgage, bills and take the odd holiday. The staggered rises in income tax annoy me, I don't see why it can't just be a flat rate although I've no issue with the personal tax allowance.
I'd have to take even more time off if they increase it. I'd quite like the incentive to earn more.
I'd have to take even more time off if they increase it. I'd quite like the incentive to earn more.
Qwert1e said:
UK taxes are already massive.
Income Tax
National Insurance
VAT
Council Tax
Fuel duty
Even non-taxpayers are paying about 25% through this lot.
The problem isn't raising taxes; the problem is wasteful spending.
Corporation tax.Income Tax
National Insurance
VAT
Council Tax
Fuel duty
Even non-taxpayers are paying about 25% through this lot.
The problem isn't raising taxes; the problem is wasteful spending.
NI on employers as well as employees.
Capital gains.
Inheritance.
Business rates.
Import duty.
SDLT.
VED.
God knows how long the list is.
StevieBee said:
And in countries where there is no income tax at all (most of the oil rich Middle Eastern states such as KSA), life is very good for those at the top of the pile but utterly terrible for the others - although historical tribal issues do have a part to play in this.
On balance, I think the UK has it more or less right.
.....and yet whilst life is not great in these places, some of us choose to come here because we believe the tax burden in the UK is just too high.... On balance, I think the UK has it more or less right.
mph1977 said:
teachers, LGPS and NHS pensions currently require 40 years full time service to get the full (50 % of final basic salary) pension - which means many staff in these female heavy professions stand little or no chance of a full pension even if they work to 65 or beyond...
Your lack of understanding and misrepresentation of the facts concerning public sector pensions was highlighted and corrected here:http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
No need to repeat the same carp you incorrectly claimed last time....
Edited by sidicks on Saturday 6th September 12:29
sidicks said:
Your lack of understanding and misrepresentation of the facts concerning public sector pensions was highlighted and correct here:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
No need to repeat the same crap you incorrectly claimed last time....
it is a simple and inalienable fact that under the current 80ths based schemse you need 40 years full time service toget the 'full pension' http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
No need to repeat the same crap you incorrectly claimed last time....
for the average Teacher or Health professional who will be 22 or 23 when they have the first opportunity to join the scheme this means working until 62 or 63 years old - assuming no career breaks or maternity / extended parental leave periods. that's hardly 'early' , arguable even for support staff who could join the scheme at 18 it;'s not dramtically early compared to some private sector staff who are retiring as soon as they can draw on their pot.
as usual people are quiet about whether the pay for none Medicla Health professionals adequately reflects responsibility and accountability of the role - but thats becasue of the idiots who shout down those who have experience of the roles becasue the poerfully built idiot knows better...
I don't see manay private sector roles for graduates with 5 , 10 or more years experience working in 24/7 process and life critical settings paying as little as 28 k basic / low thirties aftershift allowances especially with the absence of BiKs forced on the Public Sector forced by the media pressure or the troughers in previous adminstrations ( such as the ban on official or 'courtesy' NHS queue jumping for staff - private health insurance is common in private sector professional roles - despite the fact it costs the NHS money and diminishes service to have a staff member on sick leave )
it is a simple and inalienable fact that current Sworn Police and Operational Fire service staff need 30 years service an do not have access to enhanced accrual that may have previously been offered.
Welshbeef said:
Given the years of minimal cuts we are now needing police and army cuts when we actually need more.
When such issues arise surely it makes sense to up income tax to pay for the added costs not cut.
My view is that we have a 0% up to £20k and thereafter 35% (or adjust the % /tax free £ value to balance the books).
Let's aim for a £10/hr minimum wage
Not sure why we need more police or army, we should learn to manage our resources better and stop meddling in other countries. When such issues arise surely it makes sense to up income tax to pay for the added costs not cut.
My view is that we have a 0% up to £20k and thereafter 35% (or adjust the % /tax free £ value to balance the books).
Let's aim for a £10/hr minimum wage
As for tax, the only sustainable way to run the economy is low tax and low government spending.
Those figures really put things into perspective, especially the borrowing section.
otolith said:
Where the money goes and where it comes from (2013 budget)
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/p...
If anyone wants to pay more tax, perhaps Mr Osborne will take a cheque.
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/p...
If anyone wants to pay more tax, perhaps Mr Osborne will take a cheque.
0000 said:
I've had six months off work this year. Largely because the amount of tax I pay is sufficiently high that I don't see the point in working myself to the bone when I can pay the mortgage, bills and take the odd holiday.
This is exactly my view.I just had a month off to go scuba diving in Bali- allowing for the reduction in my annual tax bill & cheaper cost of living out there it cost me virtually nothing.
If taxes are increased as I earn more, why should I bother? I'm not working myself into the ground to support a bloated/inefficient/expensive public sector (deny it all you want) & a collection of benefit spongers.
mph1977 said:
it is a simple and inalienable fact that under the current 80ths based schemse you need 40 years full time service to get the 'full pension'
As explained on numerous occasions, you keep ignoring the lump sum benefit, which makes it an equivalent 2/3 salary pension.mph1977 said:
for the average Teacher or Health professional who will be 22 or 23 when they have the first opportunity to join the scheme this means working until 62 or 63 years old - assuming no career breaks or maternity / extended parental leave periods. that's hardly 'early' , arguable even for support staff who could join the scheme at 18 it;'s not dramtically early compared to some private sector staff
it's early compared to normal retirement age.mph1977 said:
who are retiring as soon as they can draw on their pot.
Who suffer dramatic actuarial adjustments because they've retired early.mph1977 said:
as usual people are quiet about whether the pay for none Medicla Health professionals adequately reflects responsibility and accountability of the role - but thats becasue of the idiots who shout down those who have experience of the roles becasue the poerfully built idiot knows better...
I don't see manay private sector roles for graduates with 5 , 10 or more years experience working in 24/7 process and life critical settings paying as little as 28 k basic / low thirties aftershift allowances especially with the absence of BiKs forced on the Public Sector forced by the media pressure or the troughers in previous adminstrations ( such as the ban on official or 'courtesy' NHS queue jumping for staff - private health insurance is common in private sector professional roles - despite the fact it costs the NHS money and diminishes service to have a staff member on sick leave )
An entirely different discussion.I don't see manay private sector roles for graduates with 5 , 10 or more years experience working in 24/7 process and life critical settings paying as little as 28 k basic / low thirties aftershift allowances especially with the absence of BiKs forced on the Public Sector forced by the media pressure or the troughers in previous adminstrations ( such as the ban on official or 'courtesy' NHS queue jumping for staff - private health insurance is common in private sector professional roles - despite the fact it costs the NHS money and diminishes service to have a staff member on sick leave )
Perhaps you should stick to other things that you know and understand and leave the pensions stuff to the experts...
Edited by sidicks on Saturday 6th September 13:06
Edited by sidicks on Saturday 6th September 13:11
sidicks said:
An entirely different discussion.
Perhaps you should stick to other things that you know and understand and leave the pensions stuff to the experts...
the 'early retirement' and early pensions point is much over played - if everyone in the public sector was leaving at 50 with 2/3rds of final salary pensions the point may be valid ... but very few people even in the operational Fire service /Sworn police schemes have sufficient service to retire at 50 . Perhaps you should stick to other things that you know and understand and leave the pensions stuff to the experts...
while the lump sum has an effect on the value of the contributions vs the total value of benefits assuming people are living longer ( remembering that many NHS workers despite those retiring at this point in time were working in a introduction of / post 1974 HASAWA working environment they still have significant exposure to practices or substances currently subject to much stricter control if they are used at all ... ( York 4 ambulance trolley, ' the australian lift' , mixing bone cement in open pots ...to mention just 3 things which have caused significant health problems in healthcare staff - York trolleys were in use to the mid to late 1990s on A+E ambulances and later in reserve fleets and on PTS )
overall 'compensation' pacakage may be a seperate discussion, but for many of the Frontline Professionals in the public sector be ther Police Officers, Health Professionals , teachers or other roles which require Professional / higher education training and education their TaCoS are not necessarily as generous as they seem and/or certain people with certain agendas focus on one or two partso f the overall package and forget other things
the media, the left of labour and the genuinely left wing political parties would have a field day if an NHS trust offered staff private health insurance , yet Labour banned trusts from favouring their staff and other PS staff in waiting lists ... ( 'equality' ahead of equity and/;or good business sense )...
whichever way you slice it, we are a high tax high spend country and this has to change.
look how much we spend on tax credits and the like.
then look that we get more from NI than income tax, what does that tell you?
as somebody already said, 4 regional assemblies is a joke, and let's face it, most councils you could cut the headcount by 75% without issue.
then cut the number of MP's to ~250, same with the house of lords.
then start on the MOD bureaucracy, etc etc etc.
look how much we spend on tax credits and the like.
then look that we get more from NI than income tax, what does that tell you?
as somebody already said, 4 regional assemblies is a joke, and let's face it, most councils you could cut the headcount by 75% without issue.
then cut the number of MP's to ~250, same with the house of lords.
then start on the MOD bureaucracy, etc etc etc.
mph1977 said:
the 'early retirement' and early pensions point is much over played - if everyone in the public sector was leaving at 50 with 2/3rds of final salary pensions the point may be valid ... but very few people even in the operational Fire service /Sworn police schemes have sufficient service to retire at 50 .
while the lump sum has an effect on the value of the contributions vs the total value of benefits assuming people are living longer ( remembering that many NHS workers despite those retiring at this point in time were working in a introduction of / post 1974 HASAWA working environment they still have significant exposure to practices or substances currently subject to much stricter control if they are used at all ... ( York 4 ambulance trolley, ' the australian lift' , mixing bone cement in open pots ...to mention just 3 things which have caused significant health problems in healthcare staff - York trolleys were in use to the mid to late 1990s on A+E ambulances and later in reserve fleets and on PTS )
overall 'compensation' pacakage may be a seperate discussion, but for many of the Frontline Professionals in the public sector be ther Police Officers, Health Professionals , teachers or other roles which require Professional / higher education training and education their TaCoS [b]are not necessarily as generous as they seem and/or certain people with certain agendas focus on one or two partso f the overall package and forget other things
You're the one that is focusing on the accrual rate and ignoring the lump sum benefit (and ignoring the other schemes which are 1/60ths....)while the lump sum has an effect on the value of the contributions vs the total value of benefits assuming people are living longer ( remembering that many NHS workers despite those retiring at this point in time were working in a introduction of / post 1974 HASAWA working environment they still have significant exposure to practices or substances currently subject to much stricter control if they are used at all ... ( York 4 ambulance trolley, ' the australian lift' , mixing bone cement in open pots ...to mention just 3 things which have caused significant health problems in healthcare staff - York trolleys were in use to the mid to late 1990s on A+E ambulances and later in reserve fleets and on PTS )
overall 'compensation' pacakage may be a seperate discussion, but for many of the Frontline Professionals in the public sector be ther Police Officers, Health Professionals , teachers or other roles which require Professional / higher education training and education their TaCoS [b]are not necessarily as generous as they seem and/or certain people with certain agendas focus on one or two partso f the overall package and forget other things
It's patently false to claim that these vastly subsidised schemes are anything but hugely generous. And yet you keep trying to mis-represent the benefits and post misleading information about those benefits
Edited by sidicks on Saturday 6th September 13:31
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff