Whats the point trying to achieve when Labour just want to tax?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Ron Paul
Movements towards free market capitalism are what have driven the masses out of poverty (improved standards of living and quality of life). So you aren't sacrificing anything for productivity.
That assumption has no evidence to support it whatsoever. The private sector will always offer a service better than the public sector.
That assumption has no evidence to support it whatsoever. The private sector will always offer a service better than the public sector.
Railtrack was created in the 1990s as the private company that would be in charge of the country's rail infrastructure. They promised shareholders and train operators that they would be able to totally modernise the West Coast Main Line and have rolling stock running at 140mph up and down the line within a few years. The best part? It would only cost 2 billion. The technology that would allow them to do this was called 'moving block', a type of dynamic signalling system where the trains are able to connect to each other and know precisely where they are in relation to one another along the line. This meant you could have more and faster trains, but best of all it meant there would be no need to rebuild the crumbling signalling infrastructure that existed along the WCML - they could simply tear it down and replace it with radio towers and antennas.
Sounds great. The problem? Moving block had never been tried before on a mainline scale. The technology didn't exist. Nobody was making it. But this didn't matter. What mattered is that the company looked promising to shareholders. That's right folks, the privatisation of our railways was predicated on a non-existent technology. To make matters worse, the bonehead in charge of the whole affair fired the army of experts, specialists and engineers he inherited from British Rail - hoping to contract out the development of the technology. The problem is, nobody knew what this technology was. Nobody was making it. Nobody could possibly accept a contract to develop technology if nobody even knew what it is they really wanted. They asked Japan, who already had their state-of-the-art bullet trains. They didn't know a thing about it. They asked France, with their high-speed TGVs. Nothing. It was a cluster****. They gave 10 million dollars to a company to design a new transistor, and then didn't even use it. Just an example.
Meanwhile the company signed a bunch of contracts with the various train companies who wanted to operate on the West Coast Main Line, including Virgin, to whom they had promised 140mph services from London to Glasgow. It soon became apparent that even if the new technology sprang into existence, they would be unable to honour this contract without violating the others. You can't have 140mph trains on the same line as 60mph freight trains no matter what the technology - amazingly they didn't realise this - perhaps because they decided they didn't need experts in their company.
Eventually they realised moving block wasn't going to happen any time soon. By this point it had been trialled on the new Jubilee Line extension in the London Underground and the outcome was nothing short of shambolic. The idea of implementing it on the enormous WCML was, and still is, pure fantasy. The projected costs of the renovation had jumped up to 9 billion (some estimates ran as high as 20 billion) and they faced enormous contractual fines from breaching their contracts with train operators - and the whole thing collapsed in on itself. Oh and also dozens of people died because they kinda forgot to maintain the signalling system at Paddington. And that's the story of why our railways are not fully private.
No, the private sector does not always offer a better service.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Doctor_Einstein
I guess that is your fault for not doing the calculations before hand. Nevertheless your point is valid in that tax is a disincentive for working hard. However we all should know this in advance so it is our fault if we choose to work hard anyway.
Do you see the language you use.. "our fault" ...as if we are blamed for our choice to work hard, as if there should be negative connotations for choosing to be like that. I really hate it. What about being rewarded for our hard work, rather than it being taken by those who choose not to work for whatever reason, can't find jobs etc.
Original post by redferry
Why is money the only motivation to work hard at your job? How about loyalty to your employer, job satisfaction, improving your CV or even working toward a promotion?
Also if you don't feel you are being paid enough for what you do why not ask for a raise? Minimising tax is not the only way to increase your take home.
Also if you don't feel you are being paid enough for what you do why not ask for a raise? Minimising tax is not the only way to increase your take home.
Money isn't the only motivation, but I tell you what, it's definitely top 3 on my list of reasons for having a job. It's a job, I'm not volunteering my time. Considering the extra grand I got taxed in January, (excluding the usual amount I get taxed, bar any bonus) I would have rather done something else with my time.
I didn't say I am not getting paid enough, I have a good salary BEFORE TAX. After tax, it's disheartening to see how much of what is rightfully yours, what you have rightfully earned disappeared. I have bills and my student loan to worry about without paying for other people's bills and loans, those who can't find jobs.
I can work towards a promotion - but who is going to benefit more? I would have more responsibility, probably more hours to work, additional stress for my job, whilst the government benefit from additional pounds, it really doesn't sound appealing. I got a bonus, and look what happened to it ... I'd rather not get the bonus, and the company keep the profits tbh, then it may at least benefit me in some way, e.g an upgrade in software or better working space or at least a pretty good office party.
The more you earn, the more money you have. That will always be the case an unless there is 100% tax, there will always be a financial incentive to earn more money.
Stupid thread.
Stupid thread.
Original post by stargirl63
Do you see the language you use.. "our fault" ...as if we are blamed for our choice to work hard, as if there should be negative connotations for choosing to be like that. I really hate it. What about being rewarded for our hard work, rather than it being taken by those who choose not to work for whatever reason, can't find jobs etc.
Money isn't the only motivation, but I tell you what, it's definitely top 3 on my list of reasons for having a job. It's a job, I'm not volunteering my time. Considering the extra grand I got taxed in January, (excluding the usual amount I get taxed, bar any bonus) I would have rather done something else with my time.
I didn't say I am not getting paid enough, I have a good salary BEFORE TAX. After tax, it's disheartening to see how much of what is rightfully yours, what you have rightfully earned disappeared. I have bills and my student loan to worry about without paying for other people's bills and loans, those who can't find jobs.
I can work towards a promotion - but who is going to benefit more? I would have more responsibility, probably more hours to work, additional stress for my job, whilst the government benefit from additional pounds, it really doesn't sound appealing. I got a bonus, and look what happened to it ... I'd rather not get the bonus, and the company keep the profits tbh, then it may at least benefit me in some way, e.g an upgrade in software or better working space or at least a pretty good office party.
Money isn't the only motivation, but I tell you what, it's definitely top 3 on my list of reasons for having a job. It's a job, I'm not volunteering my time. Considering the extra grand I got taxed in January, (excluding the usual amount I get taxed, bar any bonus) I would have rather done something else with my time.
I didn't say I am not getting paid enough, I have a good salary BEFORE TAX. After tax, it's disheartening to see how much of what is rightfully yours, what you have rightfully earned disappeared. I have bills and my student loan to worry about without paying for other people's bills and loans, those who can't find jobs.
I can work towards a promotion - but who is going to benefit more? I would have more responsibility, probably more hours to work, additional stress for my job, whilst the government benefit from additional pounds, it really doesn't sound appealing. I got a bonus, and look what happened to it ... I'd rather not get the bonus, and the company keep the profits tbh, then it may at least benefit me in some way, e.g an upgrade in software or better working space or at least a pretty good office party.
If money is your motivation for working hard, and working hard doesn't pay you enough, then why are you working hard? Surely you must have some other motivation other than money if you are still wanting to work hard despite not being adequately reimbursed.
This point aside, by taxing heavily on high incomes, people will be encouraged to do work in areas that they enjoy and are good at, rather than trying to work to maximize money. This will lead to a happier society.
What is the point of a society that encourages people to spend their lives slaving away chasing the almighty dollar. They can't take it with them when they go.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Davij038
Oh the hypocrisy...
Using your logic, why should the UK cater to losers who benefit so much from this country and turn out to be lazy, feckless dolescum when they could get a load of poles who work harder for less?
Why should my factory be forced to employ some chav just because he happened to be born here?
Ever hear surgeons going, "Gee, this cheap labour they're importing to take all of our surgery jobs..."
You're just as bad as Labour trying to blame other people for your own inadequacies!
Using your logic, why should the UK cater to losers who benefit so much from this country and turn out to be lazy, feckless dolescum when they could get a load of poles who work harder for less?
Why should my factory be forced to employ some chav just because he happened to be born here?
Ever hear surgeons going, "Gee, this cheap labour they're importing to take all of our surgery jobs..."
You're just as bad as Labour trying to blame other people for your own inadequacies!
Made me laugh, thank you.
Original post by Doctor_Einstein
If money is your motivation for working hard, and working hard doesn't pay you enough, then why are you working hard? Surely you must have some other motivation other than money if you are still wanting to work hard despite not being adequately reimbursed.
Well, I do have other reasons for working hard as well..including the fact that I have a good work ethic, which is more than I can say for a lot of people who I'm paying for via tax. Like I said, it's disheartening to see what is rightfully mine being taken.
This point aside, by taxing heavily, people will be encouraged to do work in areas that they enjoy and are good at, rather than trying to work to maximize money.
To be honest, it is our choice of where we want to work and for what reasons - if I choose to work for money, then that's my right, if someone wants to work because they are good at that job, that's their right...we all have our own reasons to do certain things. We are adults. The government don't need to "encourage" us to work anywhere.
This will lead to a happier, more productive society.
Whether you work or don't work. Somehow to me, that's not fair.
Original post by stargirl63
Well, I do have other reasons for working hard as well..including the fact that I have a good work ethic, which is more than I can say for a lot of people who I'm paying for via tax. Like I said, it's disheartening to see what is rightfully mine being taken.
To be honest, it is our choice of where we want to work and for what reasons - if I choose to work for money, then that's my right, if someone wants to work because they are good at that job, that's their right...we all have our own reasons to do certain things. We are adults. The government don't need to "encourage" us to work anywhere.
Whether you work or don't work. Somehow to me, that's not fair.
To be honest, it is our choice of where we want to work and for what reasons - if I choose to work for money, then that's my right, if someone wants to work because they are good at that job, that's their right...we all have our own reasons to do certain things. We are adults. The government don't need to "encourage" us to work anywhere.
Whether you work or don't work. Somehow to me, that's not fair.
If only a few elite people were able to bludge of government money, then the system would be unfair. But the system is fair, because everyone has the option to stop working and bludge if they choose that. You obviously have chosen to work, but the system isn't unfair just because you didn't choose to be a bludger yourself - you could have done this if you wanted.
Original post by Ron Paul
The only system that has enabled the masses to escape from poverty is free maket capitalism.
Actually whether you like it or not the Communist governments of Russia and China lifted more people out of poverty in a shorter timeframe than any other regimes in history. On the other hand the economic liberalisation that took place following the collapse of the Eastern Bloc was an abject disaster for a huge number of people.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by stargirl63
Do you see the language you use.. "our fault" ...as if we are blamed for our choice to work hard, as if there should be negative connotations for choosing to be like that. I really hate it. What about being rewarded for our hard work, rather than it being taken by those who choose not to work for whatever reason, can't find jobs etc.
Money isn't the only motivation, but I tell you what, it's definitely top 3 on my list of reasons for having a job. It's a job, I'm not volunteering my time. Considering the extra grand I got taxed in January, (excluding the usual amount I get taxed, bar any bonus) I would have rather done something else with my time.
I didn't say I am not getting paid enough, I have a good salary BEFORE TAX. After tax, it's disheartening to see how much of what is rightfully yours, what you have rightfully earned disappeared. I have bills and my student loan to worry about without paying for other people's bills and loans, those who can't find jobs.
I can work towards a promotion - but who is going to benefit more? I would have more responsibility, probably more hours to work, additional stress for my job, whilst the government benefit from additional pounds, it really doesn't sound appealing. I got a bonus, and look what happened to it ... I'd rather not get the bonus, and the company keep the profits tbh, then it may at least benefit me in some way, e.g an upgrade in software or better working space or at least a pretty good office party.
Money isn't the only motivation, but I tell you what, it's definitely top 3 on my list of reasons for having a job. It's a job, I'm not volunteering my time. Considering the extra grand I got taxed in January, (excluding the usual amount I get taxed, bar any bonus) I would have rather done something else with my time.
I didn't say I am not getting paid enough, I have a good salary BEFORE TAX. After tax, it's disheartening to see how much of what is rightfully yours, what you have rightfully earned disappeared. I have bills and my student loan to worry about without paying for other people's bills and loans, those who can't find jobs.
I can work towards a promotion - but who is going to benefit more? I would have more responsibility, probably more hours to work, additional stress for my job, whilst the government benefit from additional pounds, it really doesn't sound appealing. I got a bonus, and look what happened to it ... I'd rather not get the bonus, and the company keep the profits tbh, then it may at least benefit me in some way, e.g an upgrade in software or better working space or at least a pretty good office party.
Agh I just don't understand this attitude at all, which is why I think salary should be classed as take home and full salary not published.
It isn't your money in the first place, they don't take from you they take from the company.
The fact you'd rather your money went into the pockets of the people at the top of the company than to paying for peoples education, healthcare and this countries infrastructure comcenrns me. Even if you didn't pay for peoples JSA it would only reduce your tax by 7%
Original post by TurboCretin
I didn't say that you were an anarchist, but the idea of taxation as theft is an idea commonly espoused by anarchists
Meh, not really. It's an idea espoused by US-style libertarians, a few of the extreme end of whom try to claim to be anarchists. Actual anarchists, who generally don't accept their claim, oppose capitalist property rights and find the assertion by US libertarians that they're being 'robbed' by having to pay tax more than a little hypocritical when they're living in a country built on the robbery of its native population.
Original post by stargirl63
Do you see the language you use.. "our fault" ...as if we are blamed for our choice to work hard, as if there should be negative connotations for choosing to be like that. I really hate it. What about being rewarded for our hard work, rather than it being taken by those who choose not to work for whatever reason, can't find jobs etc.
Money isn't the only motivation, but I tell you what, it's definitely top 3 on my list of reasons for having a job. It's a job, I'm not volunteering my time. Considering the extra grand I got taxed in January, (excluding the usual amount I get taxed, bar any bonus) I would have rather done something else with my time.
I didn't say I am not getting paid enough, I have a good salary BEFORE TAX. After tax, it's disheartening to see how much of what is rightfully yours, what you have rightfully earned disappeared. I have bills and my student loan to worry about without paying for other people's bills and loans, those who can't find jobs.
I can work towards a promotion - but who is going to benefit more? I would have more responsibility, probably more hours to work, additional stress for my job, whilst the government benefit from additional pounds, it really doesn't sound appealing. I got a bonus, and look what happened to it ... I'd rather not get the bonus, and the company keep the profits tbh, then it may at least benefit me in some way, e.g an upgrade in software or better working space or at least a pretty good office party.
Money isn't the only motivation, but I tell you what, it's definitely top 3 on my list of reasons for having a job. It's a job, I'm not volunteering my time. Considering the extra grand I got taxed in January, (excluding the usual amount I get taxed, bar any bonus) I would have rather done something else with my time.
I didn't say I am not getting paid enough, I have a good salary BEFORE TAX. After tax, it's disheartening to see how much of what is rightfully yours, what you have rightfully earned disappeared. I have bills and my student loan to worry about without paying for other people's bills and loans, those who can't find jobs.
I can work towards a promotion - but who is going to benefit more? I would have more responsibility, probably more hours to work, additional stress for my job, whilst the government benefit from additional pounds, it really doesn't sound appealing. I got a bonus, and look what happened to it ... I'd rather not get the bonus, and the company keep the profits tbh, then it may at least benefit me in some way, e.g an upgrade in software or better working space or at least a pretty good office party.
I'm still confused how you got less than half the bonus...
So you didn't mind the taxpayer paying for you, but now you're the taxpayer its not ok?
Original post by redferry
Agh I just don't understand this attitude at all, which is why I think salary should be classed as take home and full salary not published.
It isn't your money in the first place, they don't take from you they take from the company.
The fact you'd rather your money went into the pockets of the people at the top of the company than to paying for peoples education, healthcare and this countries infrastructure comcenrns me. Even if you didn't pay for peoples JSA it would only reduce your tax by 7%
It isn't your money in the first place, they don't take from you they take from the company.
The fact you'd rather your money went into the pockets of the people at the top of the company than to paying for peoples education, healthcare and this countries infrastructure comcenrns me. Even if you didn't pay for peoples JSA it would only reduce your tax by 7%
No, they defo take it from you, they just collect it via PAYE rather than a tax return. The posters company could just pay them gross, but they'd still need to pay it.
Original post by redferry
Agh I just don't understand this attitude at all, which is why I think salary should be classed as take home and full salary not published.
It isn't your money in the first place, they don't take from you they take from the company.
The fact you'd rather your money went into the pockets of the people at the top of the company than to paying for peoples education, healthcare and this countries infrastructure comcenrns me. Even if you didn't pay for peoples JSA it would only reduce your tax by 7%
It isn't your money in the first place, they don't take from you they take from the company.
The fact you'd rather your money went into the pockets of the people at the top of the company than to paying for peoples education, healthcare and this countries infrastructure comcenrns me. Even if you didn't pay for peoples JSA it would only reduce your tax by 7%
7% reduction is better than 0% reduction, so I would be happy with that. The fact that there is the word "reduction" in the same sentence as the word tax, makes me happy.
And I don't understand how they are taking from the company and not myself? The way I read my paycheck is "money earned" vs "money received" .. My money earned isn't the company's money, it's mine, which the government help themselves to because apparently I can "afford" to pay more tax? I'm sorry but unless they have a detailed description of the expenses coming out of my account, the budgets I have to make, the family members I am financially helping, they don't have a clue about how much I can afford or cannot afford to pay.
Original post by Quady
I'm still confused how you got less than half the bonus...
So you didn't mind the taxpayer paying for you, but now you're the taxpayer its not ok?
So you didn't mind the taxpayer paying for you, but now you're the taxpayer its not ok?
I didn't get half the bonus..I said I got taxed an additional grand on top of what I usually get taxed per month. I haven't mentioned how much my bonus was. I was livid when I saw my tax amount, I think I would rather my paycheck just say my take home number with nothing else, ignorance is bliss for this situation for me.
I understand your point, but if I know I'm going to be paying back into the system, repaying my student loan, and contributing towards tax, then it's fine. Where I want my say, is for those people who don't put a penny into the tax system, have not given up one minute of their time in volunteering or community work, give excuses under the sun about "we don't have any money for food", yet spend £10 a day on fags... still expect me to pay for them.
Original post by stargirl63
I didn't get half the bonus..I said I got taxed an additional grand on top of what I usually get taxed per month. I haven't mentioned how much my bonus was. I was livid when I saw my tax amount, I think I would rather my paycheck just say my take home number with nothing else, ignorance is bliss for this situation for me.
I understand your point, but if I know I'm going to be paying back into the system, repaying my student loan, and contributing towards tax, then it's fine. Where I want my say, is for those people who don't put a penny into the tax system, have not given up one minute of their time in volunteering or community work, give excuses under the sun about "we don't have any money for food", yet spend £10 a day on fags... still expect me to pay for them.
I understand your point, but if I know I'm going to be paying back into the system, repaying my student loan, and contributing towards tax, then it's fine. Where I want my say, is for those people who don't put a penny into the tax system, have not given up one minute of their time in volunteering or community work, give excuses under the sun about "we don't have any money for food", yet spend £10 a day on fags... still expect me to pay for them.
No you haven't, but assuming you're a higher rate taxpayer, still paynig student loan you'd have been 49% of it, so you'd have still got a grand net.
Original post by stargirl63
I barely got anything extra. If I had known that, I wouldn't have bothered working so hard.
I don't see how an additional grand (3% of net salary) would made you work 'so hard' - you made it sound pretty strenuous additional work.
Sure, and the proportion of your taxes that goes on them is what?
Original post by Quady
No, they defo take it from you, they just collect it via PAYE rather than a tax return. The posters company could just pay them gross, but they'd still need to pay it.
The thing is though you never get that money - its never really 'yours' to take. Unless you're self employed that is.
Original post by redferry
The thing is though you never get that money - its never really 'yours' to take. Unless you're self employed that is.
That doesn't mean its not yours... thats just a payment mechanism.
Its not part of the companies tax bill is it? (unlike employers NI contributions)
If you earn £50k pre tax, and put £40k into a personal pension plan you pay no income tax. It is your money, just as much as its your money when you pay stamp duty.
Original post by Quady
No you haven't, but assuming you're a higher rate taxpayer, still paynig student loan you'd have been 49% of it, so you'd have still got a grand net.
I don't see how an additional grand (3% of net salary) would made you work 'so hard' - you made it sound pretty strenuous additional work.
Sure, and the proportion of your taxes that goes on them is what?
I don't see how an additional grand (3% of net salary) would made you work 'so hard' - you made it sound pretty strenuous additional work.
Sure, and the proportion of your taxes that goes on them is what?
I got more than a grand net, correct...but that's not the point. My point is what I got is different to what I earned. Just because I got more money, doesn't mean that its suddenly "extra"- I have bills to pay, which that additional taxed grand could have really helped with. That could have gone to my rent for the month, but it went to someone else's rent.
I feel that additional monies earned e.g. bonuses, rewards etc , (the one off payments) should be non-taxable, because it encourages employees to have a good work ethic and want to put in more, to get more. And their base rate could be the only taxable income? I'm not sure how it works, but yeah.
Original post by stargirl63
I got more than a grand net, correct...but that's not the point. My point is what I got is different to what I earned. Just because I got more money, doesn't mean that its suddenly "extra"- I have bills to pay, which that additional taxed grand could have really helped with. That could have gone to my rent for the month, but it went to someone else's rent.
I feel that additional monies earned e.g. bonuses, rewards etc , (the one off payments) should be non-taxable, because it encourages employees to have a good work ethic and want to put in more, to get more. And their base rate could be the only taxable income? I'm not sure how it works, but yeah.
I feel that additional monies earned e.g. bonuses, rewards etc , (the one off payments) should be non-taxable, because it encourages employees to have a good work ethic and want to put in more, to get more. And their base rate could be the only taxable income? I'm not sure how it works, but yeah.
Given its a bonus, I don't see what bills have to do with anything. You have bills to pay anyway... if you hadn't got the bonus, you'd still have a bill... presumeably payable out of your salary.
Right, so I could be paid minimum wage then a monthly bonus of £2k - my employer would save money and I'd have higher take home pay, its a win-win!
Surely you can see why thats a fail...
(edited 9 years ago)
Depends what you're trying to achieve. I don't want to be rich just comfortable.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Explain Liss truss policies to me
- Edexcel A Level Economics A Paper 3 (9ECO 03) - 5th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Labour plans to add 20% VAT to Private School fees.
- Help needed: Economics A-level question
- AQA A Level Economics Paper 2 (7136/2) -22th May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Rethinking the nation state - what a Labour Government could do
- 2023–24 by-elections thread
- Edexcel A Level Economics A Paper 1 (9ECO 01) - 18 May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Post Your Economics Question Here
- Have the Tories stopped being Conservative?
- Where can I find cash-in-hand jobs?
- TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?
- Jeremy Hunt to deliver budget on March 6 as election looms
- Should i vote Labour?
- 2020 - 5 wasted years, what could have been?
- 2024 Budget: Chancellor Jeremy Hunt under pressure to cut taxes
- microeconomics evaluation help
- 25 Mark economics essay!
- English lit - An Inspector Calls
- When will the next General election be ?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 11 hours ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 2 weeks ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 11 hours ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 2 weeks ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
