Ooooh! SNP Raise Stamp Duty!!
Discussion
McWigglebum4th said:
Hollowpockets said:
I think that's always been there, it's just well exposed nowadays. I'm not saying it's fair, but history shows these people will leave and go elsewhere if taxed too much or a better offer turns up for the same job in another big city.
the SNP want all the rich to f
k off out of scotlandAfter the referendum, I'm one of many thousands who have paid up and joined the SNP. I don't particularly want anyone to go away, but I do think that those best able to pay should do so.
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income. As I understand it from your frequent posts, that's a fair summary of your view and you are entitled to it. I disagree, as I am also entitled to.
I have a fairly nice, detached 4 bedroom house in a beautiful part of the country so this change could affect me if I was planning to trade up. Unlike you, I look at my home as somewhere to live, not as an investment or a pension. Indeed, I'd suggest that property speculation has driven up prices to the detriment of a huge part of the population, and would say that it is quite an unproductive form of income.
I've been in this house for over 20 years and don't plan to move so this change won't have any actual effect on me. When I do move it will probably be to downsize so this could save me money. I've put two kids through university education and, thanks to the SNP Government, I didn't have to pay tuition fees for them and that helped me to help them keep their debt down. Now, if I choose to help my kids get on the housing ladder it will certainly help me and them. What rotten rascals we have in charge, eh?
GoneAnon said:
This isn't a bad place to live, otherwise I'm sure these wealthy people wouldn't want to trade their studio flat in London and come here to buy a country house and pocket the change!
After the referendum, I'm one of many thousands who have paid up and joined the SNP. I don't particularly want anyone to go away, but I do think that those best able to pay should do so.
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income. As I understand it from your frequent posts, that's a fair summary of your view and you are entitled to it. I disagree, as I am also entitled to.
I have a fairly nice, detached 4 bedroom house in a beautiful part of the country so this change could affect me if I was planning to trade up. Unlike you, I look at my home as somewhere to live, not as an investment or a pension. Indeed, I'd suggest that property speculation has driven up prices to the detriment of a huge part of the population, and would say that it is quite an unproductive form of income.
I've been in this house for over 20 years and don't plan to move so this change won't have any actual effect on me. When I do move it will probably be to downsize so this could save me money. I've put two kids through university education and, thanks to the SNP Government, I didn't have to pay tuition fees for them and that helped me to help them keep their debt down. Now, if I choose to help my kids get on the housing ladder it will certainly help me and them. What rotten rascals we have in charge, eh?
Funny old lot, the SNP. Council tax freezes for millionaires while councils complain about all the cuts they have to make, free university education for people with more money than could be shat at the Grand National, etc.After the referendum, I'm one of many thousands who have paid up and joined the SNP. I don't particularly want anyone to go away, but I do think that those best able to pay should do so.
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income. As I understand it from your frequent posts, that's a fair summary of your view and you are entitled to it. I disagree, as I am also entitled to.
I have a fairly nice, detached 4 bedroom house in a beautiful part of the country so this change could affect me if I was planning to trade up. Unlike you, I look at my home as somewhere to live, not as an investment or a pension. Indeed, I'd suggest that property speculation has driven up prices to the detriment of a huge part of the population, and would say that it is quite an unproductive form of income.
I've been in this house for over 20 years and don't plan to move so this change won't have any actual effect on me. When I do move it will probably be to downsize so this could save me money. I've put two kids through university education and, thanks to the SNP Government, I didn't have to pay tuition fees for them and that helped me to help them keep their debt down. Now, if I choose to help my kids get on the housing ladder it will certainly help me and them. What rotten rascals we have in charge, eh?
And minimum alcohol pricing to affect only the less affluent drinkers.
Free prescriptions, free personal care even for the richest who could pay for it...?
Have they actually done anything to help lower earners?
P.S. I forgot about the latest greatest idea to forget about unpaid taxes cos they were introduced by Tories
GoneAnon said:
This isn't a bad place to live, otherwise I'm sure these wealthy people wouldn't want to trade their studio flat in London and come here to buy a country house and pocket the change!
After the referendum, I'm one of many thousands who have paid up and joined the SNP. I don't particularly want anyone to go away, but I do think that those best able to pay should do so.
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income. As I understand it from your frequent posts, that's a fair summary of your view and you are entitled to it. I disagree, as I am also entitled to.
I have a fairly nice, detached 4 bedroom house in a beautiful part of the country so this change could affect me if I was planning to trade up. Unlike you, I look at my home as somewhere to live, not as an investment or a pension. Indeed, I'd suggest that property speculation has driven up prices to the detriment of a huge part of the population, and would say that it is quite an unproductive form of income.
I've been in this house for over 20 years and don't plan to move so this change won't have any actual effect on me. When I do move it will probably be to downsize so this could save me money. I've put two kids through university education and, thanks to the SNP Government, I didn't have to pay tuition fees for them and that helped me to help them keep their debt down. Now, if I choose to help my kids get on the housing ladder it will certainly help me and them. What rotten rascals we have in charge, eh?
In summary you personally are better off so it's a good thing and anyone with more money than you is infinitely wealthy so can afford any level of taxation thrown at them. But if the better off should pay their fair share surely you should be paying more if you can afford to help your children buy a home? The SNP supporter contradiction that people should pay their fair share but clearly never meaning themselves - they despite being able to afford are happy to support policies so they pay less.After the referendum, I'm one of many thousands who have paid up and joined the SNP. I don't particularly want anyone to go away, but I do think that those best able to pay should do so.
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income. As I understand it from your frequent posts, that's a fair summary of your view and you are entitled to it. I disagree, as I am also entitled to.
I have a fairly nice, detached 4 bedroom house in a beautiful part of the country so this change could affect me if I was planning to trade up. Unlike you, I look at my home as somewhere to live, not as an investment or a pension. Indeed, I'd suggest that property speculation has driven up prices to the detriment of a huge part of the population, and would say that it is quite an unproductive form of income.
I've been in this house for over 20 years and don't plan to move so this change won't have any actual effect on me. When I do move it will probably be to downsize so this could save me money. I've put two kids through university education and, thanks to the SNP Government, I didn't have to pay tuition fees for them and that helped me to help them keep their debt down. Now, if I choose to help my kids get on the housing ladder it will certainly help me and them. What rotten rascals we have in charge, eh?
GoneAnon said:
McWigglebum4th said:
Hollowpockets said:
I think that's always been there, it's just well exposed nowadays. I'm not saying it's fair, but history shows these people will leave and go elsewhere if taxed too much or a better offer turns up for the same job in another big city.
the SNP want all the rich to fk off out of scotlandAfter the referendum, I'm one of many thousands who have paid up and joined the SNP. I don't particularly want anyone to go away, but I do think that those best able to pay should do so.
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income. As I understand it from your frequent posts, that's a fair summary of your view and you are entitled to it. I disagree, as I am also entitled to.
I have a fairly nice, detached 4 bedroom house in a beautiful part of the country so this change could affect me if I was planning to trade up. Unlike you, I look at my home as somewhere to live, not as an investment or a pension. Indeed, I'd suggest that property speculation has driven up prices to the detriment of a huge part of the population, and would say that it is quite an unproductive form of income.
I've been in this house for over 20 years and don't plan to move so this change won't have any actual effect on me. When I do move it will probably be to downsize so this could save me money. I've put two kids through university education and, thanks to the SNP Government, I didn't have to pay tuition fees for them and that helped me to help them keep their debt down. Now, if I choose to help my kids get on the housing ladder it will certainly help me and them. What rotten rascals we have in charge, eh?
All i ever hear from the 38%ers is how life is terrible and everything must be free
All i ever here is how they want what i have but they can't be arsed to work for it
highest unemployement = the highest YES votes
Lowest turnout = Highest YES votes
basically lazy scum want everything for free without lifting a finger
The only way these folk can be kept happy is by absolutely raping those that work
And those with brains and talent will f
k offThose with brains and talent tend to be the rich folk
As a side note
I live in a 2 bedroom house and I am paying for your kids to have a free education
Is this the fairness you seek?
GoneAnon said:
After the referendum, I'm one of many thousands who have paid up and joined the SNP. I don't particularly want anyone to go away, but I do think that those best able to pay should do so.
The real question though is, what should "those best able" i.e those that have more, be expected to pay for, particularly for those who can't be bothered (yes there are always lots of genuine cases...but Scotland does feel full of those who just can't be bothered to get a job!! (how many hotels / pubs / shops etc are now staffed by willing, efficient Eastern Europeans??)Free housing,free Skye TV, free booze, free fags, free....the list goes on and on!....should hard working, high earners really be paying for all this and ending up with only comparable benefits than those who haven't done so well?.........where is the motivation to do well?
simoid said:
P.S. I forgot about the latest greatest idea to forget about unpaid taxes cos they were introduced by Tories
That's an interesting one.What's actually happened is that a lot of people who dodged paying the original Poll Tax managed to keep doing so by moving address a few times, and then staying off the Electoral Roll.
In the run-up to the Referendum, quite a lot of these people re-registered.
Alec Salmond was trying to push the notion that this new information on where tax dodgers live shouldn't be used by local authorities to pursue the money owed. Nice work there.
I've been poor and am now comfortable enough that I'd be wrong to complain.
I think it takes a particularly hard-line idiot to suggest that someone wealthy should pay the same bottom line figure in to the overall pot as someone poor. The vast majority of people recognise the additional ability contribute.
Wealthy people do pay disproportionately more in than poor people do due to our tax system. Poor working people are given a tax break. Middling working people pay a percentage and higher paid working people pay twice that percentage above a threshold. Someone on national average salary pays in X in income tax. Someone earning 3 times the national average gross salary pays 6X in income tax.
Stamp duty is the same principle.
The majority of wealthy people will accept that even after being stripped of significantly more money each year than many will contribute to the nation in a decade. It's how it works. Those unhappy enough leave.
Speaking purely for myself, I'm happy with the principle too but the goodwill towards the national tapers off very quickly when some hard-of-thinking unemployable muppet regurgitates the old "The rich b******s need to start paying their share" line. The higher earner's share is worth many times more to the nation than low earner shares. They're already paying their way - and then some, and then some more.
Nobody in Scotland asking for dodgy loopholes to reduce tax liabilities to £10 for the year. Those affected by the new stamp duty in a negative way will just bear it. They'll get no sympathy from the people who's education, benefits and healthcare they're funding. A little appreciation for those who pay large sums in to the national pot might be nice, gratitude if you will. Tell all the "rich f***ers" to leave and they perhaps will, then once everyone is equal and all is 'fair' the remainder can reach in to public purse and see how little is left.
I think it takes a particularly hard-line idiot to suggest that someone wealthy should pay the same bottom line figure in to the overall pot as someone poor. The vast majority of people recognise the additional ability contribute.
Wealthy people do pay disproportionately more in than poor people do due to our tax system. Poor working people are given a tax break. Middling working people pay a percentage and higher paid working people pay twice that percentage above a threshold. Someone on national average salary pays in X in income tax. Someone earning 3 times the national average gross salary pays 6X in income tax.
Stamp duty is the same principle.
The majority of wealthy people will accept that even after being stripped of significantly more money each year than many will contribute to the nation in a decade. It's how it works. Those unhappy enough leave.
Speaking purely for myself, I'm happy with the principle too but the goodwill towards the national tapers off very quickly when some hard-of-thinking unemployable muppet regurgitates the old "The rich b******s need to start paying their share" line. The higher earner's share is worth many times more to the nation than low earner shares. They're already paying their way - and then some, and then some more.
Nobody in Scotland asking for dodgy loopholes to reduce tax liabilities to £10 for the year. Those affected by the new stamp duty in a negative way will just bear it. They'll get no sympathy from the people who's education, benefits and healthcare they're funding. A little appreciation for those who pay large sums in to the national pot might be nice, gratitude if you will. Tell all the "rich f***ers" to leave and they perhaps will, then once everyone is equal and all is 'fair' the remainder can reach in to public purse and see how little is left.
shtu said:
That's an interesting one.
What's actually happened is that a lot of people who dodged paying the original Poll Tax managed to keep doing so by moving address a few times, and then staying off the Electoral Roll.
In the run-up to the Referendum, quite a lot of these people re-registered.
Alec Salmond was trying to push the notion that this new information on where tax dodgers live shouldn't be used by local authorities to pursue the money owed. Nice work there.
From what I heard at the time (couple of weeks ago?) they are bringing a bill to make it illegal for councils to chase ANY poll tax debts.What's actually happened is that a lot of people who dodged paying the original Poll Tax managed to keep doing so by moving address a few times, and then staying off the Electoral Roll.
In the run-up to the Referendum, quite a lot of these people re-registered.
Alec Salmond was trying to push the notion that this new information on where tax dodgers live shouldn't be used by local authorities to pursue the money owed. Nice work there.
The SNP government would cover the losses by councils. Therefore, every other taxpayer is paying the tax dodgers' debts for them. Grand.
Edited by simoid on Thursday 16th October 15:39
McWigglebum4th said:
Worked hard
built yourself a nice career or business
the scottish government fking hate you
Get back on the dole where you belong
built yourself a nice career or business
the scottish government f
king hate youGet back on the dole where you belong
Here's a novel idea, how about everyone pays a fixed tax fee of, say, £3000 per home purchase. That way everyone is treated fairly.
"No, the rich should pay more" you hear them cry.
OK, how about make it a fixed percentage of the price, say 1.5%? That way, the rich pay more than poor.
"No, the rich should pay a lot more." you hear them cry. "Make it an increasing percentage rate so those with higher end properties pay a lot more".
Gotta love socialism.
GoneAnon said:
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income.
Surely a fixed percentage means everyone pays in proportion to their income? i.e. People with more will pay more.
GoneAnon said:
the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working)
Are you saying there's an inverse relationship between 'hard word' and 'pay'?
simoid said:
GoneAnon said:
This isn't a bad place to live, otherwise I'm sure these wealthy people wouldn't want to trade their studio flat in London and come here to buy a country house and pocket the change!
After the referendum, I'm one of many thousands who have paid up and joined the SNP. I don't particularly want anyone to go away, but I do think that those best able to pay should do so.
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income. As I understand it from your frequent posts, that's a fair summary of your view and you are entitled to it. I disagree, as I am also entitled to.
I have a fairly nice, detached 4 bedroom house in a beautiful part of the country so this change could affect me if I was planning to trade up. Unlike you, I look at my home as somewhere to live, not as an investment or a pension. Indeed, I'd suggest that property speculation has driven up prices to the detriment of a huge part of the population, and would say that it is quite an unproductive form of income.
I've been in this house for over 20 years and don't plan to move so this change won't have any actual effect on me. When I do move it will probably be to downsize so this could save me money. I've put two kids through university education and, thanks to the SNP Government, I didn't have to pay tuition fees for them and that helped me to help them keep their debt down. Now, if I choose to help my kids get on the housing ladder it will certainly help me and them. What rotten rascals we have in charge, eh?
Funny old lot, the SNP. Council tax freezes for millionaires while councils complain about all the cuts they have to make, free university education for people with more money than could be shat at the Grand National, etc.After the referendum, I'm one of many thousands who have paid up and joined the SNP. I don't particularly want anyone to go away, but I do think that those best able to pay should do so.
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income. As I understand it from your frequent posts, that's a fair summary of your view and you are entitled to it. I disagree, as I am also entitled to.
I have a fairly nice, detached 4 bedroom house in a beautiful part of the country so this change could affect me if I was planning to trade up. Unlike you, I look at my home as somewhere to live, not as an investment or a pension. Indeed, I'd suggest that property speculation has driven up prices to the detriment of a huge part of the population, and would say that it is quite an unproductive form of income.
I've been in this house for over 20 years and don't plan to move so this change won't have any actual effect on me. When I do move it will probably be to downsize so this could save me money. I've put two kids through university education and, thanks to the SNP Government, I didn't have to pay tuition fees for them and that helped me to help them keep their debt down. Now, if I choose to help my kids get on the housing ladder it will certainly help me and them. What rotten rascals we have in charge, eh?
And minimum alcohol pricing to affect only the less affluent drinkers.
Free prescriptions, free personal care even for the richest who could pay for it...?
Have they actually done anything to help lower earners?
P.S. I forgot about the latest greatest idea to forget about unpaid taxes cos they were introduced by Tories
monthefish said:
GoneAnon said:
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income.
Surely a fixed percentage means everyone pays in proportion to their income? i.e. People with more will pay more.
GoneAnon said:
the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working)
Are you saying there's an inverse relationship between 'hard word' and 'pay'?
Those same bankers then see their employer go bust, receive a huge bailout from taxpayers across the world (not just the UK), and then insist they STILL deserve their big salary and bonus or they will go elsewhere. Those people aren't risking their own capital so are NOT entrepreneurs, they are employees and should be paid as such. Instead, we give them all the upside and let taxpayers take the downside. Iceland sent theirs to jail!
Pistonheads is a funny old place, I come on here because I am one of you guys but on the other hand I disagree with just about everything on the independence debate. I love living in this country and love contributing to the tax system which works to keep the place a tidy. We have gripes and moans but all in all the streets are safe and the bins are collected. Policy's are matters of opinion but I believe that the snp have done well and continue to do well. The vote is gone and we go on. Let's move forward.
For clarity on this stamp duty change:
- It is revenue neutral so is not helping NHS or schools as some seem to believe.
- It is not helping the poorest buy homes as the cheapest homes don't pay any stamp duty.
- The sole benefactors are people buying between 125k and 320k. There is nothing to indicate this part of market had difficulty paying stamp duty.
It's just the SNPs way to buy some votes. It's not to help Scotland.
- It is revenue neutral so is not helping NHS or schools as some seem to believe.
- It is not helping the poorest buy homes as the cheapest homes don't pay any stamp duty.
- The sole benefactors are people buying between 125k and 320k. There is nothing to indicate this part of market had difficulty paying stamp duty.
It's just the SNPs way to buy some votes. It's not to help Scotland.
Edited by Jon666 on Thursday 16th October 22:43
slipstream 1985 said:
Am I missing a whoosh parrot here? To enforce a system where the wealthy pay for alcohal, pescriptions and healthcare would be impossible to enforce. The red tape and beurocracy required would cost far more than the gain in extra income. Thus some thing need to be free at the point of use.
Tax ensures that wealthy people pay more for alcohol, since they are more likely to buy expensive alcohol. The SNP minimum price (if legal, not sure what's actually going on) only affects people who drink the cheapest booze 
I'm not directly criticising the SNP for making stuff free, for example the prescriptions and personal care, but used them as an example of ways that they've spent money which doesn't appear to be (particularly) helping the more vulnerable.
Their constant pish about the food banks, poverty, etc is ridiculous when one considers their actions in government (especially the council tax freeze).
GoneAnon said:
monthefish said:
GoneAnon said:
No doubt you will tell us that people who have worked hard to become successful should get to keep all their dough, while the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working) should pay into the system out of all proportion to their income.
Surely a fixed percentage means everyone pays in proportion to their income? i.e. People with more will pay more.
GoneAnon said:
the less well-paid (but arguably harder-working)
Are you saying there's an inverse relationship between 'hard word' and 'pay'?
Those same bankers then see their employer go bust, receive a huge bailout from taxpayers across the world (not just the UK), and then insist they STILL deserve their big salary and bonus or they will go elsewhere. Those people aren't risking their own capital so are NOT entrepreneurs, they are employees and should be paid as such. Instead, we give them all the upside and let taxpayers take the downside. Iceland sent theirs to jail!
You could equally argue that the chaps who maintain the roads tend to work to rule, stand around a helluva lot, and won't be working even a minute more than they're paid to, take regular tea breaks, don't worry (or even think about) the job after they've clocked off, whereas those in a higher salary bracket are likely to be working longer hours, skipping lunch, no tea-breaks, and constantly thinking about/worrying about the job when not actually at work.
I don't actually have a hatred of bankers but do think some of them have behaved disgracefully, and continue to do so.
As for the dedicated wee souls skipping lunch and tea-breaks, working late and thinking about work after hours, I have to do all that too as do many, many other people on ordinary earnings.
After bonuses were capped at 100% of salary (or 200% with shareholder approval( the bankers cunningly disguised the payments as "allowances" so they could maintain their gravy train, largely at tax-payers expense.
Now that that wee deal has been banned as well, will they just double the salaries and see them all slope off home at 5pm?
As for the dedicated wee souls skipping lunch and tea-breaks, working late and thinking about work after hours, I have to do all that too as do many, many other people on ordinary earnings.
After bonuses were capped at 100% of salary (or 200% with shareholder approval( the bankers cunningly disguised the payments as "allowances" so they could maintain their gravy train, largely at tax-payers expense.
Now that that wee deal has been banned as well, will they just double the salaries and see them all slope off home at 5pm?
Gassing Station | Scotland | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff