Explain Poll Tax to me...
Discussion
mybrainhurts said:
blindswelledrat said:
Eric Mc said:
It wasn't but the psychological effect of bringing in such a radical change so quickly was just too much. It was a misjudged political move - no matter how rational anyone might have thought it was. People are not rational much of the time. They are emotional and Mrs T just didn't get that.
Exactly this. Such an instant radical change is bound to seem highly unfair no matter how rational. Looking back it was a surprisingly obvious mistake.Even wealthy people tend to agree that progressive taxes are fair, within reason, so it was an unnecessary and massive change.
We lived near each other back then and I knew an awful lot of people that were very very angry. I wasn't old enough to understand what they were angry about but I do know that they were normal human beings. In fact I don't think the welfare state was as 'advanced' enough to support freeloaders back tehn
Of course the misadministration by members of the next union she had in her sights helped stoke the outrage. I was in college at the time but the local council decided that as I couldn't claim for my course to be free then I should pay 100% poll tax. I, like many others I know, simply left the country and used my skills abroad. Although when I returned they had turned a 2k debt into nearly ten.
The other issue in addition to it being costly to implement re a moving section of the population was that Labour councils having been forced to implement it then made a meal of doing so.
In some cases, and yes Sheffield I'm looking fairly and squarely at you, deliberately acted in ways that were designed to brass off all sectors of the community other than the Can pay won't pay rent a mob.
Yes I deliberately got their catchphrase wrong but right in the above. If you see what I mean.
In some cases, and yes Sheffield I'm looking fairly and squarely at you, deliberately acted in ways that were designed to brass off all sectors of the community other than the Can pay won't pay rent a mob.
Yes I deliberately got their catchphrase wrong but right in the above. If you see what I mean.
The Tories cocked up the poll tax. They made students pay it at 20%. It wasn't a lot of money (maybe £100 a year or so), but they were noisy, politically active and, above all, ready to protest and riot.
If they had exempted students I have no doubt that the poll tax would still be here today.
If they had exempted students I have no doubt that the poll tax would still be here today.
Riff Raff said:
DJRC said:
incompetent Poll Tax rioters lumbered us with the Council Tax which is basically just a glorified Rates, but at double the previous prices.
But I get at least twice as many services as I did before.I mean, I've got four times as many bins...............
oyster said:
The Tories cocked up the poll tax. They made students pay it at 20%. It wasn't a lot of money (maybe £100 a year or so), but they were noisy, politically active and, above all, ready to protest and riot.
If they had exempted students I have no doubt that the poll tax would still be here today.
^^^ This, absolutely. If they had exempted students I have no doubt that the poll tax would still be here today.
oyster said:
The Tories cocked up the poll tax. They made students pay it at 20%. It wasn't a lot of money (maybe £100 a year or so), but they were noisy, politically active and, above all, ready to protest and riot.
If they had exempted students I have no doubt that the poll tax would still be here today.
IIRC it wasn't the students that were central to the riots - it was the militant wings of various unions? The students joined in, but they weren't the central critical mass to the opposition.If they had exempted students I have no doubt that the poll tax would still be here today.
Why can't we have a combination of the Poll Tax and the current Council Tax?
You currently get a discount of 1/3 if you live alone but don't pay any more if there are 10 of you in a house.
Why can't it be based on the value of your house with a multiplier for number of residents (not necessarily a linear one)?
This way matey on his own in his mansion pays a lot as do the people with 10 in a smaller house.
I guess fairness isn't the aim of the system though.
You currently get a discount of 1/3 if you live alone but don't pay any more if there are 10 of you in a house.
Why can't it be based on the value of your house with a multiplier for number of residents (not necessarily a linear one)?
This way matey on his own in his mansion pays a lot as do the people with 10 in a smaller house.
I guess fairness isn't the aim of the system though.
The Jolly Todger said:
You currently get a discount of 1/3 if you live alone but don't pay any more if there are 10 of you in a house.
Why can't it be based on the value of your house with a multiplier for number of residents (not necessarily a linear one)?
This way matey on his own in his mansion pays a lot as do the people with 10 in a smaller house.
currently only 25% for sole occupier but this should really be 50%.Why can't it be based on the value of your house with a multiplier for number of residents (not necessarily a linear one)?
This way matey on his own in his mansion pays a lot as do the people with 10 in a smaller house.
People in high value properties who've been there for a long time (20+ years) often can't afford the council tax rates. Often they have a small income. They should not be forced to move especially if they are elderly. The council tax system is extremely unfair. A council tax by individual would be much more appropriate.
DJRC said:
voyds9 said:
Amused2death said:
the Poll tax was for individuals. Ended up with the anomoly of one person in a mansion paying less than a working couple in their rented home.
.
This was considered to be unfair even though the guy in the mansion was educated privately, carried private medical insurance and was generally little drain on resources..
Whereas the people using the services, the couple above who later had 2 kids, educated on the state, she didn't work but was on the social for stress thought and still think it was the rich peoples duty to pay their lifestyle.
The clever trick was going from the rates to poll tax back to council tax (rates under another name) and doubling the money taken on the two years it took to do this. The population were even grateful.
And this is what makes me so ragingly angry whenever this subject crops up (as I may have hinted at again in the Maggie thread yesterday which kicked off this latest thread). The useless, incompetent Poll Tax rioters lumbered us with the Council Tax which is basically just a glorified Rates, but at double the previous prices.
But hey, it was the principle that mattered. f
king morons.REALIST123 said:
DJRC said:
voyds9 said:
Amused2death said:
the Poll tax was for individuals. Ended up with the anomoly of one person in a mansion paying less than a working couple in their rented home.
.
This was considered to be unfair even though the guy in the mansion was educated privately, carried private medical insurance and was generally little drain on resources..
Whereas the people using the services, the couple above who later had 2 kids, educated on the state, she didn't work but was on the social for stress thought and still think it was the rich peoples duty to pay their lifestyle.
The clever trick was going from the rates to poll tax back to council tax (rates under another name) and doubling the money taken on the two years it took to do this. The population were even grateful.
And this is what makes me so ragingly angry whenever this subject crops up (as I may have hinted at again in the Maggie thread yesterday which kicked off this latest thread). The useless, incompetent Poll Tax rioters lumbered us with the Council Tax which is basically just a glorified Rates, but at double the previous prices.
But hey, it was the principle that mattered. f
king morons.Painting this picture of a scummy useless incompetent minority. Were you alive? It was half the population as my memory recalls. It wasn't a few workshy people marching against it, it was hundreds of thousands of working class people.
And the claim that this resulted in the subsequent council tax doubling there rates is just completely incorrect. Not even based on anything.
blindswelledrat said:
Except it's not exactly accurate though is it?
Painting this picture of a scummy useless incompetent minority. Were you alive? It was half the population as my memory recalls. It wasn't a few workshy people marching against it, it was hundreds of thousands of working class people.
Really? My recollection is that it was just the 'scummy useless incompetent minority'. And a couple of pensioners.Painting this picture of a scummy useless incompetent minority. Were you alive? It was half the population as my memory recalls. It wasn't a few workshy people marching against it, it was hundreds of thousands of working class people.
V8mate said:
blindswelledrat said:
Except it's not exactly accurate though is it?
Painting this picture of a scummy useless incompetent minority. Were you alive? It was half the population as my memory recalls. It wasn't a few workshy people marching against it, it was hundreds of thousands of working class people.
Really? My recollection is that it was just the 'scummy useless incompetent minority'. And a couple of pensioners.Painting this picture of a scummy useless incompetent minority. Were you alive? It was half the population as my memory recalls. It wasn't a few workshy people marching against it, it was hundreds of thousands of working class people.
Hardly "half the population"
ha...the poll tax the irony of it. notwithstanding the social experiment about starting it in Scotland first (c.f. PIPs initiation in NW) you have the superficiality of her then economic foundations argument http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff