An across the board rise in Income tax?

mamba80

Should we?

Already putting up council tax to pay for Elderly social care, so the Tories agree in principal but why should nt everyone contribute and not just house owners?

seems to me we cannot afford basic services any more, roads, schools, health services even generating our own electricity has become unaffordable, unless we mortgage ourselves to very expensive 'lecy for years to come.

Its all very well having personal wealth but if you smash up your bike and yourself in a pot hole and then spend 8 hours in AE... what worth is that?

DC has been put on the spot over schools renewal program (by school children) and he has had to relent and promise more cash but from where?

whoever wins the next GE has to face the reality that we ve cut services to a point beyond where they actually work.

singleton

Taking a simple approach - the books should balance. I know, I know I'm already opening up debate from some people but I said I'd keep it simple.

So, whatever is spent on services has to be raised form taxation. But this is where it gets tricky. We live in quite an individualistic society and so most people want to get more "out" of the system than they put "in" - and thats where the problems and the politics comes in.

It's fair if everyone pays versus it's fair if those who are better off pay more - personally I think both statements are true.

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Should we?

Here's how to increase tax revenue, £8 billion already raised - unfortunately the opposite of the question you are asking. I've made this point before and it is counter-intuitive. Fyi the figures are from HMRC:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3471566/George-Osborne-claims-rate-tax-cut-45p-RAISED-8billion-year.html
http://www.cityam.com/235732/uk-income-tax-chancellor-george-osborne-says-lowering-the-top-rate-of-tax-from-50p-to-45p-raised-an-extra-8bn-for-the-treasury-in-one-year
So logically, the best way to raise more...

Of course there are other taxes to look at, such as VAT.

markhewitt1978

Income tax is very politically sensitive, most governments avoid messing with it at all costs. Which is why our tax system is so complex so it looks like you're still paying the same rate of tax when you aren't.

markhewitt1978

Income tax is very politically sensitive, most governments avoid messing with it at all costs. Which is why our tax system is so complex so it looks like you're still paying the same rate of tax when you aren't.

slowmart

Throwing more money into service provision which is already poorly delivered, internally flawed in its structure isn't sustainable nor are some of the drivers for the drain on resource.

Otherwise your just pi55ing the public purse down the nearest gutter much to the benefit of shareholders in private companies and to the detriment of the public purse.

At what point is the waiting time in A & E unacceptable- Its the old equation cost v resource. Take the wider drivers for visits to A & E and excessive alcohol intake plays a significant part? Why not tax the drink companies more or charge the individuals for use of the health service? Responsibility for your own actions.

Add in fat people who have no self control, why the fuck should I pay for someone who exercises no self control in what and how many times they feed themselves during the week? Its preventable and again personal responsibility sits at the heart of that approach.


Add Trident, it needs to be debated rather than signed off as a must have deterrent.

Add the charging structures employed by drugs companies with a massive disparity in regional pricing.

markhewitt1978

A large amount of A&E work is simply because GPs are crappy. e.g. When I fell off my bike and my eblow needed a stitch that sort of thing should have been dealt with by a GP or minor injury place, but it was Sunday and they were all closed and couldn't have dealt with me anyway, so it was waiting at A&E.

There is already quite a bit of tax on alcohol which I'm sure does get spent on the NHS. But taxing it more wouldn't bother me any

Charging for the NHS at point of use would be a massive backwards step.

veronese68

If everybody paid their tax without trying to wriggle out of it we'd be in a much better position, except some would be out of a job. Presumably this is why Osborne is saying cutting the tax rate increased revenue as more people are prepared to pay. Unfortunately I don't find Osborne even remotely trustworthy.

homers_double

How about we stop giving money to some godforsaken place half way across the globe and sort our own problems out first?

oldbazza

markhewitt1978 wrote:

A large amount of A&E work is simply because GPs are crappy. e.g. When I fell off my bike and my eblow needed a stitch that sort of thing should have been dealt with by a GP or minor injury place, but it was Sunday and they were all closed and couldn't have dealt with me anyway, so it was waiting at A&E.

There is already quite a bit of tax on alcohol which I'm sure does get spent on the NHS. But taxing it more wouldn't bother me any

Charging for the NHS at point of use would be a massive backwards step.

Had the opposite when I came off last year.

Went straight to our local injuries clinic,on a Thursday admittedly but had to go back on the Sunday to check the dressings;after another couple of visits was transferred to my surgery for the follow up dressing changes.

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Should we?

Here's how to increase tax revenue, £8 billion already raised - unfortunately the opposite of the question you are asking. I've made this point before and it is counter-intuitive. Fyi the figures are from HMRC:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3471566/George-Osborne-claims-rate-tax-cut-45p-RAISED-8billion-year.html
http://www.cityam.com/235732/uk-income-tax-chancellor-george-osborne-says-lowering-the-top-rate-of-tax-from-50p-to-45p-raised-an-extra-8bn-for-the-treasury-in-one-year
So logically, the best way to raise more...

Of course there are other taxes to look at, such as VAT.

i take your point BUT Ossie is under pressure to give that money away as tax cuts.... they must come a point where tax cuts start to have a negative impacton tax receipts ?

VAT is high enough but the fuel escalator needs to be looked at again.

Councils are deemed responsible enough to rise CT by 2% to fund social care, so i assume Gov has checked their probity?
and because ct is nt high enough at the top end, its a bit of a regressive tax.

As i said to me, there seems to be a lack of money across the board to pay for essential public services, i m not talking about swimming pools etc but roads, schools, nhs, mental health services etc

Taxing a drinks company to pay for AE ? would be just a one off and isnt going to the rise the billions needed.

sungod

first cut costs by wiping out pfi, it's an obscene bloated catastrophe, the perpetrators should be stripped of all their assets and banged up for life for the damage they've done

then get ruthless on the log rolling, jobs for the boys, revolving door practices that have corrupted uk public services

stop outsourcing public services and infrastructure based on models that failed pretty much every time, but are still being used to award new contracts even though the government knows they are failures

scrap all agreements to build nuclear power plants based on guaranteed electricity costs far higher than any projection, create a public nuclear agency to build and run them, no need to stuff our money down the throats of the chinese

a well run public service is always better value than a privately run one, the problem is not public services, it's incompetent and corrupt leadership, sack the fµckers and run it properly, taxes go down

etc.

once the people we've elected to do a job have done that job and stopped pissing away taxpayers' money, then and only then, if there's still a deficit should tax raises be considered (but they won't be necessary, the problem will be solved)

rick_chasey

Wrong point in the business cycle to be doing that. Things are on the verge of being bad (they're not bad yet...), so can't see the case in the short term for raising tax.

BelgianBeerGeek

Put an extra 10p a litre on fuel. It would raise £loads, and petrol would still be relatively inexpensive.

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Should we?

Here's how to increase tax revenue, £8 billion already raised - unfortunately the opposite of the question you are asking. I've made this point before and it is counter-intuitive. Fyi the figures are from HMRC:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3471566/George-Osborne-claims-rate-tax-cut-45p-RAISED-8billion-year.html
http://www.cityam.com/235732/uk-income-tax-chancellor-george-osborne-says-lowering-the-top-rate-of-tax-from-50p-to-45p-raised-an-extra-8bn-for-the-treasury-in-one-year
So logically, the best way to raise more...

Of course there are other taxes to look at, such as VAT.

i take your point BUT Ossie is under pressure to give that money away as tax cuts.... they must come a point where tax cuts start to have a negative impacton tax receipts ?

VAT is high enough but the fuel escalator needs to be looked at again.

Councils are deemed responsible enough to rise CT by 2% to fund social care, so i assume Gov has checked their probity?
and because ct is nt high enough at the top end, its a bit of a regressive tax.

As i said to me, there seems to be a lack of money across the board to pay for essential public services, i m not talking about swimming pools etc but roads, schools, nhs, mental health services etc

Taxing a drinks company to pay for AE ? would be just a one off and isnt going to the rise the billions needed.

You're making the statement that there isn't enough money to pay for essential services and that itself is debateable - and we've already had that sort of debate.

As for what level of income tax maximises revenue, that is hard to say but my own feeling is that is somewhere in the 35%-40% range.

But if you are going to raise taxes then personally I prefer to raise VAT as then there is at least some choice over whether/how much to spend. It will also please the 'banker bashers' as irrecoverable VAT is a big cost for financial institutions. However as has been said above, it may not be the right time in the economic cycle to raise taxes.

veronese68

Stevo 666 wrote:

However as has been said above, it may not be the right time in the economic cycle to raise taxes.

Did you just agree with Rick :shock:

Stevo_666

Veronese68 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

However as has been said above, it may not be the right time in the economic cycle to raise taxes.

Did you just agree with Rick :shock:

Yep :shock: Although I was a bit surprised that he came out with a statement like that. I think he is starting to see the light

mamba80

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wrong point in the business cycle to be doing that. Things are on the verge of being bad (they're not bad yet...), so can't see the case in the short term for raising tax.

When is the right time? it seems to me that everyone wants better this or that, the liberals current plan is to boost mental health services BUT no one wants to pay for these :?

Mine is education and road repair (nhs also but so much could be done to reduce demand without extra money) but i would be prepared to pay extra, either through income tax or VAT, extra CT whatever, so long as it was ring fenced.

rick_chasey

mamba80 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wrong point in the business cycle to be doing that. Things are on the verge of being bad (they're not bad yet...), so can't see the case in the short term for raising tax.

When is the right time? it seems to me that everyone wants better this or that, the liberals current plan is to boost mental health services BUT no one wants to pay for these :?

Mine is education and road repair (nhs also but so much could be done to reduce demand without extra money) but i would be prepared to pay extra, either through income tax or VAT, extra CT whatever, so long as it was ring fenced.

You want counter cyclical fiscal policy. So lower taxes and/or higher gov't spending in times of low growth/recession, and higher taxes and/or lower gov't spending in high growth.

mamba80

the liberals want to spend far more on mental health, arguing that up to £100bn is lost through mental illness and that a relatively small investment would save many times the amount initially spent.

Where is this money going to come from? thin air?

so, same with education, better educated workforce, earns more, pays more in taxes etc
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/11 ... sites.html
what drain will these kids become on the state for next 60/70 years that they are likely live?

Somewhere along the line we need to invest in the future - infrastructure and our people, we ve had 8 years of austerity and no sign at all it is coming to an end, in fact exactly the opposite.

rick_chasey

3rd biggest cause of train delays isn't it? Suicides?