Council tax rises get go-ahead
Discussion
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
Of course I was around at the time. 
Under Poll Tax I saved, oh, probably no more than £30 a year, whereas my neighbours tax burden doubled. Not because Poll Tax was unfair per se, but because Councils saw the cash cow. Clearly an inequitable situation.
However, given that Community Charge is based upon a 'Service' based upon a houshold of 2 adults, and given that this is accepted in the fact that there is a single person discount, tell me how in any way, shape, or form, a single person discount of a mere 25% is either a. Equitable, or b. Reasonable, or c. Not subsidising couples.
Oh, that's right you CAN'T.
PS. Quoting Wiki, as opposed to research, is for the hard of thinking.
But why should a house with 2 adults only pay 2 lots of CT? If they've got 5 kids shouldn't they pay 7 lots?Under Poll Tax I saved, oh, probably no more than £30 a year, whereas my neighbours tax burden doubled. Not because Poll Tax was unfair per se, but because Councils saw the cash cow. Clearly an inequitable situation.
However, given that Community Charge is based upon a 'Service' based upon a houshold of 2 adults, and given that this is accepted in the fact that there is a single person discount, tell me how in any way, shape, or form, a single person discount of a mere 25% is either a. Equitable, or b. Reasonable, or c. Not subsidising couples.
Oh, that's right you CAN'T.
PS. Quoting Wiki, as opposed to research, is for the hard of thinking.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Thursday 31st March 21:50
Its not fair!!!!
Oh look, it's Countdown bringing reasonable discussion to the subject. NOT
Personally my view is that if you have kids you sould pay more. You already get Child Benefit and Child Tax Credits, why should I further subsidise you?
Especially given that Council Tax is not based upon ability to pay, but some obscure notion of wealth based upon house value.
And not even based upon house value (unlike the old Rates system, but based upon arbitary bands of house value.
Please tell me why my 2 bedroom house should be taxed the same as next doors 3 bedroom house.
Personally my view is that if you have kids you sould pay more. You already get Child Benefit and Child Tax Credits, why should I further subsidise you?
Especially given that Council Tax is not based upon ability to pay, but some obscure notion of wealth based upon house value.
And not even based upon house value (unlike the old Rates system, but based upon arbitary bands of house value.
Please tell me why my 2 bedroom house should be taxed the same as next doors 3 bedroom house.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Thursday 31st March 22:07
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
I'm sure me subsidising you does seem right to you.
I am really not that sort of bloke I can assure you.I think a 50% discount would be too much as not all services can be attributed to the number of residents in a house.
Maybe 25% isn't enough but apparently there is a war on and we are all in it together.
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
...tell me how in any way, shape, or form, a single person discount of a mere 25% is either a. Equitable, or b. Reasonable, or c. Not subsidising couples.
Oh, that's right you CAN'T.
I wasn't trying to - I was telling you what a bloody stupid idea the Poll Tax was, because you seemed to think that it was a great system that was hijacked by "the unwashed." Nothing could be further from the truth. But now you come to mention it:Oh, that's right you CAN'T.
Your Council Tax pays for the Fire Service. Perhaps you should have a discount if you don't have a fire.
Your Council Tax pays for the Police. Why should you pay for that if you haven't used their services?
Your Council Tax pays for Social Services. If you're not in their care why should you pay?
Until the government finally changes things, your Council Tax pays for local education. Why should you pay for that if you haven't got kids?
Or to put it another way - life's a s
t sometimes, isn't it?rs1952 said:
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
PS. Quoting Wiki, as opposed to research, is for the hard of thinking.
rs1952 said:
Your Council Tax pays for the Fire Service. Perhaps you should have a discount if you don't have a fire.
How am I 1 in 4 likely more to have a fire than a couple or, shock horror, a family?rs1952 said:
Your Council Tax pays for the Police. Why should you pay for that if you haven't used their services?
As above. After having had a Trailer stolen and he Police refusing to even give me a Crime Reference Number, that argument does not hold water with me.rs1952 said:
Your Council Tax pays for Social Services. If you're not in their care why should you pay?
I'm single, I don't have kids, I pay Income Tax. Your Point?rs1952 said:
Until the government finally changes things, your Council Tax pays for local education. Why should you pay for that if you haven't got kids?
Exactly. rs1952 said:
Or to put it another way - life's a st sometimes, isn't it?
Apparently so. More so if you are single. t sometimes, isn't it?Surely tax should be equitable and based upon ability to pay.
Apparently not in your world.
I'm sure you are so Socialist that you won't mind if I come to your house and just take what I need
desolate said:
I am really not that sort of bloke I can assure you.
I think a 50% discount would be too much as not all services can be attributed to the number of residents in a house.
Maybe 25% isn't enough but apparently there is a war on and we are all in it together.
That being the case, why do not houses of multiple (Adult) occupancy pay at least 25% more?I think a 50% discount would be too much as not all services can be attributed to the number of residents in a house.
Maybe 25% isn't enough but apparently there is a war on and we are all in it together.
We don't generally vary taxes by use of services (if we did, we'd end up reversing our tax burden so the poor paid most) but we do vary them by ability to pay. It seems to me that two or three wage earners in a house should probably collectively pay closer to two or three times what one person pays than the current 1/3 more.
As I understand it council tax discounts/exemption (why do they call it a benefit - it isn't) have been made pretty much discretionary now, so your council can essentially do what they like, e.g. force people who would have been 100% exempt to pay something, or remove the single person discount.
It's only a matter of time.
It's only a matter of time.
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
That being the case, why do not houses of multiple (Adult) occupancy pay at least 25% more?
I've got no idea.And to make it worse for you 4 of us live in my house so we are really taking the piss.
No one lives in the two offices I own and that costs a f
king fortune in rates. And I have to pay the bins as well.What about us poor landlords if we are renovating a property we used to get six months council tax free suddenly it changed even though the property is a building site and not habitable.
Fair nope but thems the rules now.
I'm not sure there is any fair way of council or local tax.
We already pay an income tax so to then have another income tax doesn't ring true
How's about a wealth tax - seems fine BUT what about those who are asset rich and cash poor? Would it be fair to turf out an OAP who's lived in that same property for 65yesrs just because chance has put her paper assets on a high value. She or he doesn't want to move from their home.
How about poll tax?
How about usage tax?
How about simply a higher national income tax job done get rid of local administrators and distribute the block grant based on postcode so that the cash is spent where you live.
Fair nope but thems the rules now.
I'm not sure there is any fair way of council or local tax.
We already pay an income tax so to then have another income tax doesn't ring true
How's about a wealth tax - seems fine BUT what about those who are asset rich and cash poor? Would it be fair to turf out an OAP who's lived in that same property for 65yesrs just because chance has put her paper assets on a high value. She or he doesn't want to move from their home.
How about poll tax?
How about usage tax?
How about simply a higher national income tax job done get rid of local administrators and distribute the block grant based on postcode so that the cash is spent where you live.
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
I'm sure me subsidising you does seem right to you.
I'm 50, been single all my life, lived on my own for most of my adult life and so have paid out a significant amount more tax over the years and received less back from the state than the equivalent bloke, married with kids on the same salary.Paying more tax than someone who gets more benefits from the state, or gets more use of the paid for services such as schooling and health care during birth, as the kids grow up etc is just the price you have to pay for living in a society that works and has a future.
If you cant see that you need to have a proper think about what sort of society you would be living in where the costs of bringing up the next generation are all put onto the parents.
A 25% discount seems fair enough to me based on the costs a single household requires, I still need the same police, fire, social cohesion services as a multi occupant household does. Should I get burgled they wont send 75% of a copper to interview me and help me get things sorted, so it seems a fair deal to me.
With regards to the Poll tax, that system and the way it was implemented was nuts and quite rightly scrapped.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff