"we're all in this together"

[gratedenini]

Yet rather than put a bit of effort in to collect that money (it's known that the average cost of getting it is just a sixth of the money it costs to get it!), the govt let Vodaphone off £6Bn in tax the courts had ruled they were legally obliged to pay, and then cuts every service they possibly can.

As I keep saying, the level of cuts we're getting is naff all to do with the deficit, and everything to do with ideology.

The bullshit that the Libs keep spouting to justify their policy u-turns of "the country is bankrupt" is utter bollox. If we cut nothing at all our borrowings would still be more managable over an economic cycle than some other major countries have.

[eFestivals]

Oway man... its got a bit to do with it surely!

there's certainly a need to manage the deficit, but there's a big gap between what is necessary and what they're actually doing.

What exactly do you think this ideology is then?

Surely you know what the tories stand for?

They are against "big govt" of any form, so that they are as free as possible to use their wealth to exploit others to the fullest extent, to ensure they stay wealthy and no 'oiks' are able to join their exclusive club. The tory party is essentially the continuation of a Britain ruled by the landed gentry.

And they don't even have to be in power to have that continuation, as the operation of the machine of govt has always remained in the hands of those 'landed gentry'.

The 'reform' of the higher education system announced yesterday is a part of this, reserving (as much as they feel they can on a political level) the personal benefits of University for the richest, and excluding the 'oiks'.

The creation of 'free schools' and the NHS changes are parts of that plan too. They've come to realise over the last 20 years that the public won't accept deep cuts to normal schooling or to the NHS, and so the plan is to channel taxpayers money thru those things to benefit them and their cronies. The 'free schools' aren't going to be allowed to operate a selection policy initially, but that will come in time - and so turn them into 'private schools' where the rich can send their kids away from the oiks but where they no longer have to pay school fees for their private schooling, and giving the NHS budget to doctors changes where that money goes, from being almost always into NHS hospitals to any hospital that any doctor might choose to use. Via these things, public services turn into things for private (and limited) benefit.

The deficit is there... and some steps must be taken. Its the extremes that worry me.

Yep, and those extremes are what their ideology is driving.

[worm]

Oway man... its got a bit to do with it surely! What exactly do you think this ideology is then?

The deficit is there... and some steps must be taken. Its the extremes that worry me.

den

Edited October 13, 2010 by worm

[zlatan07]

the worrying thing in the long run for me is where to go next, im not voting for the lib dems again after they have climbed into bed with the tory's, i would never vote tory and labour have elected a communist to run their party

equally as worrying is that i fundamentally do not trust cameron and especially george osbourne to manage our finance's

"we're all in this together" sure george but you are still set for life being a multi millionaire while my friends get made redundant due to you threatening to cancel the new warships that are employing so many people (a large majority of which i imagine would never vote tory) across the UK.

I gather there is a deficit that needs managed but massie cuts wont work alone, to get out of debt you have to make money and to make money you have to spend money - its not complicated. Things would be helped greatly if britain got back to making goods

[jump]

Just do what I do and write in Monster Raving Looney Party (they never run in my area), whatever girl I'm seeing at the moment, my Mum or whatver other bullshit comes to mind. I waste my vote but make an effort to vote.

[eFestivals]

Conservative ideology is about preserving the social strata so that the fortunate can help the less fortunate.

Complete crap. It's about preserving their social position at the top of the tree. It's about trying to conserve things as they are (or more correctly, as they used to be) - they want to turn back time, to when Lords were really lords-and masters.

That's all there is to it, nothing more.

Anything else that comes along with that basis - such as (patronisingly) wanting to help others (after screwing them in the first place so they're in need of help ) - is an aside from that, and driven by of-the-moment ideas which flit in and out and which are not a part of their central ideology. Essentially, they've wised up enough to know that withoin a democracy they can't only f**k people over at every step if they want to keep enough support to give them power.

[paddydog]

what complete and utter bollocks. Slimy Gideon, Dave Moron and cronies would be so very proud of you, putting out bullshit propaganda like this for the country to believe.

1. the average % tax paid by those in the higher tax brackets (earning £44k+ a year) actually pay a lower proportion of their wages in tax than those on the standard tax bracket. Cos there's so many fiddles open to them that aren't open to 'normal' people.

2. the NI rate for higher rate tax payers is just 1% on those higher earnings, compared to the 11% paid on lower rate earnings (with the 11% due to increase from next April).

3. no NI contributions are paid by those over retirement age, irrespective of wealth or income.

So if you add standard tax rate and standard NI you get a tax rate of: 20% + 11% = 31%

So if you add the higher tax rate and higher NI you get a tax rate of: 40% + 1% = 41%

That's of course before factoring the legal tax fiddles open to higher earners, which easily gets to wipe the 10% differencde in those rates.

[llcoolphil]

labour have elected a communist to run their party

[eFestivals]

Stopped reading most of this thread, but got this far. I'd just like to point out this is not true.

It is you know. The govt admits that it is.

If you earn £20K you pay about 21% of your gross salary out again in tax and NI. If your earn £50K, you pay about 28% out in tax and NI. All things being equal, the exact reverse of what you said is true. The more you earn, the more proportionally and absolutely you pay in taxes.

those things only apply if all income goes thru the tax system as income that's taxable using the standard income tax regime.

I'd also like to see what evidence there is that "legal tax fiddles" are avaiable to someone earning £50K. Can you describe one?

The majority of people with an income of £44k or greater don't get all of that income from their day-to-day job.

Income that comes from elsewhere is taxed in a different way from the standard income tax way.

Check out the tax on interest ('lost' I think posted only yesterday how easy it is to avoid higher rate tax on that); check out tax on dividends; check out tax on capital gains. Etc, etc, etc.

(those three are, I think, the main ones that higher earners exploit, but there's many many many more of them).

[sifi]

Stopped reading most of this thread, but got this far. I'd just like to point out this is not true.

If you earn £20K you pay about 21% of your gross salary out again in tax and NI. If your earn £50K, you pay about 28% out in tax and NI. All things being equal, the exact reverse of what you said is true. The more you earn, the more proportionally and absolutely you pay in taxes.

Edited October 13, 2010 by sifimaster

[paddydog]

It is you know. The govt admits that it is.

those things only apply if all income goes thru the tax system as income that's taxable using the standard income tax regime.

The majority of people with an income of £44k or greater don't get all of that income from their day-to-day job.Income that comes from elsewhere is taxed in a different way from the standard income tax way.

Check out the tax on interest ('lost' I think posted only yesterday how easy it is to avoid higher rate tax on that); check out tax on dividends; check out tax on capital gains. Etc, etc, etc.

(those three are, I think, the main ones that higher earners exploit, but there's many many many more of them).

Edited October 13, 2010 by paddydog

[eFestivals]

I dispute this absolutely.

Dispute it all you like, it doesn't make you right. The govt's own figures get to show that you're wrong.

I'm trying to google something to back up what I've said, but you clearly weren't paying attention during the election, as Vince Cable was making a big thing of it, and it was never disputed by anyone.

[worm]

Complete crap. It's about preserving their social position at the top of the tree.

[eFestivals]

here you go...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1216304/Vince-Cable-I-stirred-hornets-nest-Mansion-Tax-fair.html

(third para from the bottom, to save you reading it all)

[eFestivals]

That's not an ideology. It's the corruption of an ideology.

Conservatives wanting to preserve social status for their own selfish reasons is a corruption of conservative ideology. Much like you get corrupt socialists.

OK, so it might not strictly fit as an "ideology".

But it is, without any doubt whatsoever, what they primarily stand for - ensuring they stay rich, by ensuring that they keep their hands on effective power (whether in govt or not).

[paddydog]

isn't it different from your figures..?

[eFestivals]

I've taken proportions of income paid as *income* tax and NI against gross salary.

corrected for you.

Not all tax is income tax.

[dakyras]

here you go...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1216304/Vince-Cable-I-stirred-hornets-nest-Mansion-Tax-fair.html

(third para from the bottom, to save you reading it all)

[paddydog]

here you go...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1216304/Vince-Cable-I-stirred-hornets-nest-Mansion-Tax-fair.html

(third para from the bottom, to save you reading it all)

[paddydog]

corrected for you.

Not all tax is income tax.

[eFestivals]

That doesn't say anything about people earning £44k not getting all of their income from their day job.

it doesn't, but it's how it pans out as that scenario.

[worm]

OK, so it might not strictly fit as an "ideology".

But it is, without any doubt whatsoever, what they primarily stand for - ensuring they stay rich, by ensuring that they keep their hands on effective power (whether in govt or not).

[eFestivals]

Yes, VAT. Not PAYE, not NI. Or CGT or tax on interest or savings. The bit on bold is critical.

A household with and income of £50K from benefits alone will pay a huge amount of indirect tax using that logic. I fear you are falling for the Daily Mail's subeditor's idealogical leaning when the article puportedly written by a member of David Cameron's cabinet was publihed.

If I earn only £1 and spend it on a bag of sweets I'll pay more tax than someone who earns £10,000 and buys nothing.

It's far more than just the simple scenario you insist on sticking to.

The UK tax regs is 10,000 pages.

[paddydog]

It's far more than just the simple scenario you insist on sticking to.

The UK tax regs is 10,000 pages.

[dakyras]

it doesn't, but it's how it pans out as that scenario.