Jeremy Corbyn Vol. 2

[B'stard Child]

jsf said:

The poll tax was a terrible system,

It was way fairer than what we have now or the rates before it.

jsf said:

it was a total disaster the way it was implemented compared to the rates ( the system before poll and council tax) people were paying at the time.

Now that is absolutely correct - it was badly rolled out

jsf said:

Forcing the poll tax on the Scottish a year before the rest of the UK is the reason the Tories have been wiped out north of the border. It was a huge political mistake.

And some of them never let anyone forget it!!!

[AJL308]

jsf said:

The poll tax was a terrible system, it was a total disaster the way it was implemented compared to the rates ( the system before poll and council tax) people were paying at the time.

Forcing the poll tax on the Scottish a year before the rest of the UK is the reason the Tories have been wiped out north of the border. It was a huge political mistake.

Why was it a terrible system?

Why was a system based on the size and type of your house a better way to fund local services?

[grantone]

Mobile Chicane said:

If ever there were a time to vote Labour it's now

"I’d rather live with Jeremy Corbyn’s gentle dithering in pursuit of a better world than give May a mandate to destroy what remains of British decency."

I couldn't agree more.

The Tories are eviscerating our public services, and will continue to do so. Record numbers of homeless, food bank usage, the demonisation of sick and disabled people while handing huge sums of money to private assessment companies only for 60% of their decisions to be overturned on appeal, the NHS and emergency services in crisis.

Britain we can do better than this.

I've done well in life but some things aren't about 'me'. I'm voting Labour for the junior doctor, the midwife, the cleaner, white van man, anyone in temporary insecure employment or needing the care they're not currently getting.

Companies can and should pay their due. Anyone on >£70k can consider themselves 'comfortably off' compared with the average salary of £26k. I personally have no issue with paying more tax to fund our public services.

I don't recognise this picture of hopelessness & crises you are painting, but we all have different experiences of life and that's why I don't think it's a great idea to vote on behalf of other people.

It's very difficult to really know other people's circumstances & motivations, so to think you know what is politically best for them is risky and possibly a little patronising.

[technodup]

AJL308 said:

Why was it a terrible system?

Why was a system based on the size and type of your house a better way to fund local services?

The poll tax was a far fairer system as described above because it links service users to the cost of those services. More people - more cost - more tax due.

The big problem with it compared to a property based tax is people move, houses don't. From a collection pov it's much easier to assign the tax to the fixed property rather than transient people. Plus it requires a degree of honesty or lots of checks, students, co-habitors, HMOs, skint families- who's going to admit (and pay for) five bodies when they can get away with two or three?

As a single person paying more than most families of four locally it's a pile of st. And the 'local income tax' often mooted is equally bad. Just as irrelevant to service usage.

[pingu393]

technodup said:

AJL308 said:

Why was it a terrible system?

Why was a system based on the size and type of your house a better way to fund local services?

The poll tax was a far fairer system as described above because it links service users to the cost of those services. More people - more cost - more tax due.

The big problem with it compared to a property based tax is people move, houses don't. From a collection pov it's much easier to assign the tax to the fixed property rather than transient people. Plus it requires a degree of honesty or lots of checks, students, co-habitors, HMOs, skint families- who's going to admit (and pay for) five bodies when they can get away with two or three?

As a single person paying more than most families of four locally it's a pile of st. And the 'local income tax' often mooted is equally bad. Just as irrelevant to service usage.

Simple solution to the transient person problem = if you are a registered voter, you pay the poll tax.

I wonder how that would affect the Labour and SNP vote

[andymadmak]

sidicks said:

andymadmak said:

Parrot alert!

Really?

Actually, possibly not - sorry. I thought MC was simply quoting the hapless Monbiot. On review, it's clear he's agreeing with the tripe.
I shall recall the colourful avian fly-by specialists immediately

[Kermit power]

teapea said:

I don't get that attitude about the conservatives.

I mean, I run a business, I don't consider myself "rich" but I appreciate some would, it's all relative.
But in recently we've seen
- Major increase in business rates, £6,500 a year increase for us.
- Workplace pension, we're having to find the money for that as struggling to put up prices in our competitive market.
- Change in the rules on dividend income meaning I pay more tax

All of the above implemented by the conservatives, who have increased the tax threshold for low earners so more and more pay less and less tax.

Yet all I hear over and over again is "The conservatives just give tax breaks to the rich and screw over the poor"
I'm not massively politically astute I don't have the time to follow things too closely, but I don't see how, or am I being naive

I think you have to thank Tony Blair for that.

Before Blair came along, the Labour party was left wing and seen as such, and the Tory party was somewhat right wing, although arguably still seen as more right wing than it actually was.

Tories were essentially aware of the fact that we don't have a magic money tree and that increasing tax rates beyond a certain point actually decreases revenue, so set their policies accordingly, and that was fine, because enough of the electorate accepted that Labour were a bunch of loons, and the political system worked quite well over the long term.

Then Blair rocked up, and pulled off possibly the greatest marketing scam in history. He completely changed the outward appearance of the Labour party to give the impression of being a centrist, business friendly party, whilst at the same time keeping most of the old excesses, but dressing them up differently.

To respond to this, the Tories were forced to narrow the gap by moving to the left of their natural position, yet Blair's master stroke was to continue playing the nasty Tory line, despite there not being one shred of proof to support that position. Even Brown and Milliband managed to keep this going to an extent, and their spin doctors were bloody amazing at it, hence you get what to any sane person seems a perfectly sound policy spun into "The Bedroom Tax" where the Dickensian-style poor are apparently being forced to sleep eleventy three to a bed because of the nasty Tories!

Blair might've been a complete self-serving scumbag, but you have to stand somewhat in awe of his political genius.

[motco]

The only idea that the Lib Dems had that I liked was local income tax instead of any property tax. It died a death in about 2010 I believe although I don't know why. Perhaps it was too close to the Community Charge (poll tax)?

[anonymous-user]

sidicks said:

Anyone on £70k already pays massive amounts of tax.
HTH

Edited by sidicks on Wednesday 26th April 12:26

Try being in the marginal tax bracket (£100k - £120k) on PAYE. You pay the equivalent of 62% of every pound earned. Introduced by the last labour government.

As above, many people already pay two or three times the average national wage in tax. Personally, if I had to pay more, I'd simply take a lower paid, more local job with a shorter commute. Why should people be punished for working hard?

Trouble with labour is they and their supporters are good at spending other people's money. If that's a capitalist's view then sobeit.

I also think the NHS needs a rethink as it's clear we can no longer afford it.

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 27th April 07:56

[Fastdruid]

wormus said:

Try being in the marginal tax bracket (£100k - £120k) on PAYE. You pay the equivalent of 62% of every pound earned. Introduced by the last labour government.

As above, many people already pay two or three times the average national wage in tax. Personally, if I had to pay more, I'd simply take a lower paid, more local job with a shorter commute. Why should people be punished for working hard?

Trouble with labour is they and their supporters are good at spending other people's money. If that's a capitalist's view then sobeit.

"They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them."
-- Margaret Thatcher

wormus said:

I also think the NHS needs a rethink as it's clear we can no longer afford it.

It has totally changed from what was envisaged and ignoring all the waste (which is endemic) it needs more money each year above that required for just "normal" population growth and inflation/wage increases. It's unsustainable.

Eventually the cost will be too great to bear and a government is going to have to deal with it but Labour is just going to blow money on it.

[Oilchange]

I reckon the first way we can save money in the NHS is to accept people at the front desk only if they have a National Insurance Number or a credit card.
Neither of those, then cash will do, otherwise they get shown the door.

[quote=wormus

I also think the NHS needs a rethink as it's clear we can no longer afford it.

Edited by wormus on Thursday 27th April 07:56

[/quote]

[anonymous-user]

AJL308 said:

jsf said:

The poll tax was a terrible system, it was a total disaster the way it was implemented compared to the rates ( the system before poll and council tax) people were paying at the time.

Forcing the poll tax on the Scottish a year before the rest of the UK is the reason the Tories have been wiped out north of the border. It was a huge political mistake.

Why was it a terrible system?

Why was a system based on the size and type of your house a better way to fund local services?

It was a terrible system because it put too heavy a burden on the people least able to afford it.

In the UK, whether you like it or not, we have a tax system which is designed to have the people least able to afford tax pay less than those that can afford to burden a larger share.

The community charge broke that social contract.

Personally, I would be much better off under a community charge based system, but it's not the correct system for the majority of people in the UK.

The last time the system was tried it resulted in the peasants revolt. Whoever thought it was going to be accepted by the majority of people in the UK didn't read their history properly and didnt understand the financial burden it brought to a huge number of households at the time.

[technodup]

pingu393 said:

Simple solution to the transient person problem = if you are a registered voter, you pay the poll tax.

I wonder how that would affect the Labour and SNP vote

I see where you're going but collection is still the problem.

[sidicks]

jsf said:

It was a terrible system because it put too heavy a burden on the people least able to afford it.

In the UK, whether you like it or not, we have a tax system which is designed to have the people least able to afford tax pay less than those that can afford to burden a larger share.

The community charge broke that social contract.

Personally, I would be much better off under a community charge based system, but it's not the correct system for the majority of people in the UK.

The last time the system was tried it resulted in the peasants revolt. Whoever thought it was going to be accepted by the majority of people in the UK didn't read their history properly and didnt understand the financial burden it brought to a huge number of households at the time.

It was certainly flawed, yet they converse also applies - just because someone can afford to pay something, does mean that it is 'fair' for them to do so!

Edited by sidicks on Thursday 27th April 10:38

[BigMon]

MobileChicane said:

I personally have no issue with paying more tax to fund our public services.

Me neither and yet, judging by this thread, plenty of people do. Probably the same people who moan about the state of the roads or bin collections dropping from weekly to fortnightly.

I used to work for a local council, and still know people who do. It has changed massively over the past decade and there is no longer any 'fat' to be trimmed from it.

Cuts from this point forward for the local councils I'm familiar with can only be achieved by dropping services.

I agree that the NHS needs fundamental reform though. I'm resigned to it being nothing like it is at present when I'm retired in 20 years time.

[Dr Jekyll]

jsf said:

It was a terrible system because it put too heavy a burden on the people least able to afford it.

In the UK, whether you like it or not, we have a tax system which is designed to have the people least able to afford tax pay less than those that can afford to burden a larger share.

The community charge broke that social contract.

Not really. Only a small proportion of tax was raised via the community charge, the bulk of local government funding still came from central government.

[sidicks]

BigMon said:

Me neither and yet, judging by this thread, plenty of people do. Probably the same people who moan about the state of the roads or bin collections dropping from weekly to fortnightly.

Most people have seen their Council Tax bills increase consistently at well above the rate of price (or wage) inflation, yet services are seen to be reducing. They can also witness what apears to be 'luxury' spend, while basic (essential?) services have been cut back.

Also, Council tax is paid from post tax income, so is a form of tax on tax.

BigMon said:

I used to work for a local council, and still know people who do. It has changed massively over the past decade and there is no longer any 'fat' to be trimmed from it.

And yet gold-plated DB pensions persist in local government, 10-20 years after these were found to be unaffordable in the private sector.

BigMon said:

Cuts from this point forward for the local councils I'm familiar with can only be achieved by dropping services.

See above!

BigMon said:

I agree that the NHS needs fundamental reform though. I'm resigned to it being nothing like it is at present when I'm retired in 20 years time.

Agreed.

[Burwood]

sidicks said:

jsf said:

It was a terrible system because it put too heavy a burden on the people least able to afford it.

In the UK, whether you like it or not, we have a tax system which is designed to have the people least able to afford tax pay less than those that can afford to burden a larger share.

The community charge broke that social contract.

Personally, I would be much better off under a community charge based system, but it's not the correct system for the majority of people in the UK.

The last time the system was tried it resulted in the peasants revolt. Whoever thought it was going to be accepted by the majority of people in the UK didn't read their history properly and didnt understand the financial burden it brought to a huge number of households at the time.

It was certainly flawed, yet they converse also applies - just because someone can afford to pay something, does mean that it is 'fair' for them to do so!

Edited by sidicks on Thursday 27th April 10:38

Precisely the point! It is not fair to have any situation where anyone pays >50% of their income in direct taxation. We all know Labour would see the top rate at 60%

[Fastdruid]

Interesting (but long) article on Corbyn and the Labour party.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/june2017/2017...

[BigMon]

sidicks said:

Most people have seen their Council Tax bills increase consistently at well above the rate of price (or wage) inflation, yet services are seen to be reducing. They can also witness what apears to be 'luxury' spend, while basic (essential?) services have been cut back.

Also, Council tax is paid from post tax income, so is a form of tax on tax.

And yet gold-plated DB pensions persist in local government, 10-20 years after these were found to be unaffordable in the private sector.

I cannot comment on the gold-plated pensions but I was under the impression that the current pension scheme is much less lucrative than previous ones. If that's not the case and it's still unaffordable then I agree it should be reformed.

However, why are we paying more and getting less back? The council I used to work for have merged with another council, been through a strategic review where many jobs have been lost and are a much, much leaner operation than they were when I was there yet they are still being targeted with cost savings.

They are not blowing money on vanity projects or anything similar that I can see.