Oh Dear: 'Families are being taxed until the pips squeak'

[BobTheCrate]

It still means that the Iraq conflict is not being paid for in totality out of new money. I agree if the shortfall is also made up after the conflict is over and above the standard premium, that is new money.

Interestingly, the article says that the defence budget has also been steadily increasing. I wonder how much of that is due to Iraq and how much could be construed as what this Gov't loves to call 'investment'; but rarely amounts to investment.

Investment as in updating weaponry & hardware; or investment as in hiring more pen pushers in the MoD to boost the batallions of MoD bureaucrats already out-numbering troops by what ... 10 to 1 ?

[ASB]

That £5billion is actually expenditure 'to date' and not an annual figure, I’m glad to say. Let's not forget that the subject of this thread is the rising tax burden on households in recent times. Although £5Billion represents only a small part of the '£600Billion' public sector budget, it is significant when you bear in mind that the actual increase in tax burden since going to war with Afghanistan and Iraq war probably only amounts to a few billion pounds.

Personally, I find the increasing in tax burden difficult to stomach in the light of needless expenditure in the Iraq, however small it may be.

Having done a bit of scurrying around it appears that a reasonable estimte of the additional costs might be GB's increase of 3bln in the war chest. Quite a lot with a defence budget of < 30bln.

Anyway I guess that works out at about 1.5bln a year. Ignoring BobTheCrates valid suggestion that the real figure could conceivably be much higher for reasons of indirect costs this works out at about 75 quid per household.

Given the huge increase in other burdens I don't think this is particularly significant (whether right or not is a different matter of course).

[ALM]

Anyway I guess that works out at about 1.5bln a year. Ignoring BobTheCrates valid suggestion that the real figure could conceivably be much higher for reasons of indirect costs this works out at about 75 quid per household.

Given the huge increase in other burdens I don't think this is particularly significant (whether right or not is a different matter of course).

Your calculations are obviously a rough estimation but lets assume that the 'Iraq Tax' equals £75. Even this lowly figure represents a significant part of the increase in tax for each household this year (10%-20% surely?). Furthermore, examining this figure in isolation is pointless. For example, the increase in the price crude-oil over the last few years was largely caused by the war in Iraq. The price of a litre of unleaded has shot from 80-100p over the last 3 years or so. Most of this 20p increase is composed of tax (60% I think). The amount of additional taxation collected as a result, represents more than a couple of £Billion!

[DimPrawn]

If all tax was spent on killing foreigners I'd gladly pay more.

It's when they spend it on pointless socialist things like hospitals and schools it really pisses me off.

[ALM]

What annoys me most is that not only are most numpties happy to finance the war they argue in favour of it. This is tantamount to pulling your trousers down, bending over and asking Mr Brown to shaft them a bit harder!