No cuts at HMRC then....

[escapeUK]

People struggle because of high taxation - fuel is taxed like crazy, income tax is effectively nearly 50%+ for everybody (20% income + ~13% NIC employee + ~13% NIC employer).

Guess what, the rich always get more disposable income anyway - the high taxation clobbers everyone who isn't rich.

The real problem is that the Govt spends so much dosh on public sector jobs and crazy expensive projects that it needs a lot of tax - until this is rebalanced taxes can hardly be cut massively, only in areas where it makes sense (like removal of 50% tax bracket but this is now political not economical issue).

I agree. Its totally undemocratic. If asked the vast majority (democracy) would say dont give my money to the EU, dont give it to other countries. Dont pay for equality officers, or for translation of everything for foreign visitors. Dont pay for wars that have nothing to do with us.

Also like you say we had the last government taking money with menaces to give to people who would vote for them via hand outs in benefits, non jobs for their supporters and so on creating people that would vote for them. I have no doubt the Labour party will be back in power very soon, it will not end well.

[doodab]

People struggle because of high taxation - fuel is taxed like crazy, income tax is effectively nearly 50%+ for everybody (20% income + ~13% NIC employee + ~13% NIC employer).

Not a causal link IMO. There are lots of places with higher taxation and less struggling people.

They struggle because they don't have enough coming in relative to what is going out. Taxation is part of the equation but the simple fact that wages haven't kept pace with prices for quite a while has a lot to do with it.

[NickFitz]

He actually said "This month 2250 staff will move into anti-evasion and anti-avoidance." Moving staff into some area of activity sounds like redeploying existing staff. He goes on to mention 1000 of these jobs being advertised, which still suggests that more than half of the "new" staff will in reality be existing staff taken away from other duties.

[AtW]

Not a causal link IMO. There are lots of places with higher taxation and less struggling people.

It all depends how much left in the pocket to pay other essential stuff - in those places you probably referring to (Sweden) people get a lot of stuff cheap so that they don't have to get in debt to live half decent life.

[doodab]

It all depends how much left in the pocket to pay other essential stuff - in those places you probably referring to (Sweden) people get a lot of stuff cheap so that they don't have to get in debt to live half decent life.

Yes exactly, and when you have a wide discrepancy in what people start with then without extreme redistribution via the tax system you get a wide discrepancy in what they end up with. As prices will adjust to median income this inevitably means more people are going struggle. So you either need redistributive taxation or you need to look at the pre tax distribution of income. Hence my assertion that flat rate taxation will only work if you have a relatively even distribution of wealth to begin with.

[AtW]

Hence my assertion that flat rate taxation will only work if you have a relatively even distribution of wealth to begin with.

That's not true, but I am too busy coding one important part of SKA to debate the obvious.

HTH

[thunderlizard]

Why should rich people pay more tax for provide services for others? Do they use the NHS, the free schools, would they get benefits?

Yes. They own much more stuff; therefore they benefit much more from spending on prisons, which lock up people who would otherwise be out stealing their stuff. They have more investments, so they benefit more from a system that teaches maths to people who then go and work in banks investing their money. They go on more exotic foreign holidays, so they benefit disproportionately from the foreign aid and military support that help to stop prime long-haul destinations turning into lawless hellholes.

[swamp]

Yes. They own much more stuff; therefore they benefit much more from spending on prisons, which lock up people who would otherwise be out stealing their stuff. They have more investments, so they benefit more from a system that teaches maths to people who then go and work in banks investing their money. They go on more exotic foreign holidays, so they benefit disproportionately from the foreign aid and military support that help to stop prime long-haul destinations turning into lawless hellholes.

If they funded things directly they would not need the tax... Upmarket foreign holiday providers could provide overseas military assistance, hedge funds could pay for maths scholarships, and the police and prisons could offer security services to people with big houses.

[bobspud]

Yes. They own much more stuff; therefore they benefit much more from spending on prisons, which lock up people who would otherwise be out stealing their stuff. They have more investments, so they benefit more from a system that teaches maths to people who then go and work in banks investing their money. They go on more exotic foreign holidays, so they benefit disproportionately from the foreign aid and military support that help to stop prime long-haul destinations turning into lawless hellholes.

This years CT is about £30K plus the same in vat... Value for that money is fsck all.

Answers to the following:
Stealing stuff : I have a shotgun and a pair of large dogs that handle theft from my house rather better than the police have managed with my neighbours. Everyone in the village knows I have them and funnily enough the little Herberts that nick things, turn over the other houses in the area and give me a very wide berth. I wonder why... Also as an aside the tulipty litlle c*nts that were coming down from Bristol to sell drugs at our playing field also decided upon appraisal that it would be better to go somewhere else to do it. All it took was a few mates and a very short and rather sharp discussion. The safer neighbourhood team struggled to solve that for 2 years.

Training Bankers:
Yes in the 80's there was a massive barrow boy influx to the square mile (would have included me if I was better at maths) and yes I'm sure most of Essex migrates into Fenchurch Street on a Monday morning but I think the days of you getting near a banks trading floor or the top end fund managers without going to the right schools is remote to say the least.

Last year the money that went to my wife perfectly legally (but seen by the heathen masses as a tax dodge) paid local craftsmen to build an office in an out building. Refurbish two bathrooms and build us a solid oak stable door. All that money flowing into my local businesses and being spent in pubs and restaurants.

How much money got spent by the government in the same venues?

Next year providing I stay billable the money gets to go on a new 100 foot pan tile roof and a nice fuel guzzling sports car that I will run for the next 10 years...

I will buy the car second hand using my local tame mechanic's time to negotiate a trade price for his cut and he will service it for me along with our other V8 Landrover that he got for me the same way the year before...

Then there is the issue of entertaining customers and general partying that goes on when I need to stay in London on business. All heavily taxed streams of the economy...

I'm not rich, but I am clever enough to know that 20% of some legally declared income plus the VAT and servicing on a new sports car is more than enough money in the pot for anyone...

and its time that the Rich put that case better.

[Doggy Styles]

Hence my assertion that flat rate taxation will only work if you have a relatively even distribution of wealth to begin with.

It doesn't need higher marginal tax rates. Using a flat-rate tax system, someone who earns ten times as much as me will pay ten times as much tax for the same services.

I don't see a problem with that.