Turn on thread page Beta

Cameron says the rich must pay more tax watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    Except it isn't that is it.
    Its 50p in the £1 for everything over £150,000 (which is 6 times the average wage).
    I don't mean to sound rude or condescending but tax on the upper-middle class is to high. I admit I come from a background that is well off. My parents are professionals, and surely they shouldn't have to suffer because they worked hard in life.

    Whereas the poor keep getting benefits upon benefits, moreover my parents have made it very clear that they aren't paying for my Uni fees. So i'm going to have to take a student loan out, but i will find it hard to due to my background, also poorer students get a larger loan.

    This is so unfair, how the hell am i supposed to live?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ish90an)
    They don't have a leg to stand on against tax avoidance, since by definition it is legal. Funny how all the left wing students hate Philip Green as well, the Guardian Media Group is one of the biggest culprits, I doubt they would stop reading that paper due to it.
    Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Or even allowed: http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/avoidance/index.htm
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crazycake93)
    and surely they shouldn't have to suffer
    Suffer??
    Please.
    Unless they made their way up the ladder, then they do not know the meaning of suffering.

    Suffering certainly does not involve having a £1 million bonus cut to half a million.
    Nor does it involve having a high tax rate on any earnings over £150k.

    Suffering is being poor enough to not afford the food.
    Suffering is not being able to afford the mortgage or rent.

    I am not defending the high tax rate, or attack people who earn more. But to claim they are suffering is just plain insulting to those who genuinaly are suffering and struggling to cope.

    (Original post by tibbles209)
    Even with that being the case, higher earners do pay an enormous amount of tax and they are also penalised when it comes to pensions, child benefit, student loans etc. so I don't think it would be particularly fair to tax them even more.
    But when you are earning £150k, pensions and child benefit doesn't really matter IMO.
    Although I do agree about student loans - it is a bit unfair on the child if the parents decide not to help out.

    (Original post by JW92)
    I'm quite aware of how to tax system works. Once a person has earned over £150 000, for every £1 he earns, he loses 50p to the government and this is before VAT, council tax and all the other ways in which the government take money from the rich. Whatever way you look at it, that's a lot of money. For every million a banker earns in a bonus, the government directly gets £500 000 and indirectly probably much more.

    I'm not saying I'm particularly opposed to the 50p tax rate, but I think the tax system and the rich have been squeezed as much as is realistically possible.
    But when you are earning £150k a year, does all that really matter?
    Especially what you said about bankers bonuses. To people on that money, the difference between half a million and 1 million is bugger all.

    (Original post by tehFrance)
    :eek: 50% tax (it is 50% if you earn over 150k, isn't it?) not good enough?
    No its not. That would mean someone earning £160k would take home just £80k. Its around £6k tax free, then 20% on the next £30k ish, then 40% on the next £100k ish. Then 50% on anything earnings over £150k.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    Suffer??
    Please.
    Unless they made their way up the ladder, then they do not know the meaning of suffering.

    Suffering certainly does not involve having a £1 million bonus cut to half a million.
    Nor does it involve having a high tax rate on any earnings over £150k.

    Suffering is being poor enough to not afford the food.
    Suffering is not being able to afford the mortgage or rent.

    I am not defending the high tax rate, or attack people who earn more. But to claim they are suffering is just plain insulting to those who genuinaly are suffering and struggling to cope.
    How does these sufferings occur though?

    Also The Disabled recieve welfare, the unemployed recieve welfare, the sick recieve welfare. So don't say that people are suffering. Everyone has an equal oppertunity (i went to a state school). Whether your willing to grab oppertunities or not will determine how the rest of your life is spent, comfortably, or begging the government for money.

    Also taxing the professionals may lead to a brain drain away from the country, if bankers and doctors move to other countries because the taxation rate is lower. That wouldn't be to helpful to the economy... would it? I think it would mean people are worse off in the country, and the poor get even poorer.

    I'm in a situation where i will have to pay my own fee's, the government will not give me a loan as large as they give to students from poorer backgrounds. All because my parents earn more then the boundary required.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crazycake93)
    How does these sufferings occur though?

    Also The Disabled recieve welfare, the unemployed recieve welfare, the sick recieve welfare. So don't say that people are suffering. Everyone has an equal oppertunity (i went to a state school). Whether your willing to grab oppertunities or not will determine how the rest of your life is spent, comfortably, or begging the government for money.

    Also taxing the professionals may lead to a brain drain away from the country, if bankers and doctors move to other countries because the taxation rate is lower. That wouldn't be to helpful to the economy... would it? I think it would mean people are worse off in the country, and the poor get even poorer.

    I'm in a situation where i will have to pay my own fee's, the government will not give me a loan as large as they give to students from poorer backgrounds. All because my parents earn more then the boundary required.
    The amount of benefits sometimes given really does not help at all. My parents and I helped care for my Gran until she passed away last year. We didn't even bother applying for carers allowance as the amount we would have got would have been next to nothing and would no where near have been enough to pay for her care. In the end we were lucky as she qualified for free care from the NHS, but to get that it is VERY difficult and they will make you jump through a million and one hoops first, and even then you may not get it.

    As for oppurtunities, not everyone gets them. And the ones that richer kids get are much better and more useful than poorer kids.
    There is a reason why most people in politics etc come from more priviladged backgrounds. It isn't impossible for other people, but it is an awful lot harder.

    As for student loan - why do you have to pay your own fees :confused: Everyone gets fee loan no matter how much their parents earn.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    x
    I am sure the poor in Africa agree, so we should increase overseas aid. You know, because rich people should have to pay more.
    If people spent half the energy they spend on moaning about rich people, immigrants and the Tories on the Guardian website and TSR, they would probably be better off themselves.

    (Original post by L18)
    Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right.
    I can see this working very well when trying to tax a company that employs armies of accountants and lawyers to reduce its tax bill:rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Cameron says a lot of things.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    As for student loan - why do you have to pay your own fees :confused: Everyone gets fee loan no matter how much their parents earn.
    Loan sadly only covers about 72% of fee's if your parents earn above a certain threshold.

    You can still get the full tuition loan I think for 2011 but the maintinence loan only covers about 3-4 grand which isn't really enough to cover accommodation costs + going out, buying food etc...

    This is a pretty uncommon example as I'd imagine most parents who earn above the income threshold would be willing to put some money towards there childrens living expenses, however if they don't then I guess you're screwed and have to get a job to support yourself
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phil1541)
    Loan sadly only covers about 72% of fee's if your parents earn above a certain threshold.

    You can still get the full tuition loan I think for 2011 but the maintinence loan only covers about 3-4 grand which isn't really enough to cover accommodation costs + going out, buying food etc...

    This is a pretty uncommon example as I'd imagine most parents who earn above the income threshold would be willing to put some money towards there childrens living expenses, however if they don't then I guess you're screwed and have to get a job to support yourself
    Is this part of the new system? Because I have never ever heard this before. Everything I have read says that everyone from the UK is entitled to the full tuition fee loan. No matter what your parents earn. The maintance loan and grant are what depend on your parents income. Not the fee loan.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    Is this part of the new system? Because I have never ever heard this before. Everything I have read says that everyone from the UK is entitled to the full tuition fee loan. No matter what your parents earn. The maintance loan and grant are what depend on your parents income. Not the fee loan.
    Yea your correct about the tuition fee loan, is just the maintinence loan which depends on your parents income and if your parents are in the high earners bracket, if they are then you're going to fall short on living costs.

    The maintinence loan for high earners sadly doesn't cover the accommodation costs for 2011 (atleast where I applied and I'm not going for an ensuite or anything)

    They should really make the maintinence loan big enough so it can provide anyone from any income to be able to support themselves free of there parents, If you couldn't get a job for whatever reason and your parents refused to help you out with accommodation costs you would be in quite a bit trouble money wise
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phil1541)
    Yea your correct about the tuition fee loan, is just the maintinence loan which depends on your parents income and if your parents are in the high earners bracket, if they are then you're going to fall short on living costs.

    The maintinence loan for high earners sadly doesn't cover the accommodation costs for 2011 (atleast where I applied and I'm not going for an ensuite or anything)

    They should really make the maintinence loan big enough so it can provide anyone from any income to be able to support themselves free of there parents, If you couldn't get a job for whatever reason and your parents refused to help you out with accommodation costs you would be in quite a bit trouble money wise
    That problem isn't really limited to just high earners. Middle earners are also affected.

    I understand that it is unfair, and I do think the maintance loan should be big enough for everyone. Sadly, I just don't think that is viable. Especially as the new fee system will probably cost the government more than the current system.

    Tbh, I really don't understand that mentality of not wanting to help your kids out though. Fair enough if you can't afford it, but for the higher earners (in the higher tax band - so £150k +) then you really can't use that reason.

    I would still like to know why crazycake93 thinks they need to pay their own fees.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Think the rich get taxed enough. And that's from someone that certainly isn't in that section of society. Theres got to be an incentive to work harder. 50p in every £1 is ridiculous.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    That problem isn't really limited to just high earners. Middle earners are also affected.

    I understand that it is unfair, and I do think the maintance loan should be big enough for everyone. Sadly, I just don't think that is viable. Especially as the new fee system will probably cost the government more than the current system.

    Tbh, I really don't understand that mentality of not wanting to help your kids out though. Fair enough if you can't afford it, but for the higher earners (in the higher tax band - so £150k +) then you really can't use that reason.

    I would still like to know why crazycake93 thinks they need to pay their own fees.
    High earners are classed as ££50,020 or above a year for both your parents incomes I think (I have a bad feeling its the sum of both there incomes but I may be wrong in this)

    So you can be liable to only the basic maintinence grant while having not having amazingly well of parents, (albiet £50,000 a year is still a very good household income)

    I agree I can't understand why someones parents would not want to help there child through university if they could afford it? If there child wasn't able to find work who would pay the remainder of the fee's :/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=WelshBluebird;30708457]
    But when you are earning £150k a year, does all that really matter?
    Especially what you said about bankers bonuses. To people on that money, the difference between half a million and 1 million is bugger all.




    What matters is that if the 50% tax rules stay everyone will bugger off to other countries so that they pay less tax. 20% or 40% of something is better than any percent of nothing...
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Maybe he's hoping that if the rich of Pakistan are taxed enough, they will move to the UK and pay taxes here instead...

    jk
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Well there goes his support if he were to actually go ahead on that.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kevR94)
    Firstly i dont thing they contribute enough.

    Secondly, the rich dodge the tax and he dosent do anything about it. Thats what this argument is about.
    What? They don't contribute enough? Explain to me how it is just that somebody is coerced into giving away possessions that society has given them based on objective performance and not whimsical subjectivity.
    The rich EVADE tax [which is illegal] sure, but you know what? If he were to stop them, they would see the country as an investment opportunity that is no longer worth their time, and they would withdraw their services.
    Tax AVOIDANCE [how most of it is done], is legal, and done simply by hiring clever accountants, and is a perfectly legitimate way to minimize lost revenue.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    But when you are earning £150k a year, does all that really matter?
    Especially what you said about bankers bonuses. To people on that money, the difference between half a million and 1 million is bugger all.
    I think the 50p tax rate treads a very precarious line. If a businessman knows he is going to lose more than half of every pound he earns beyond a certain point, is there really enough incentive for him to create more wealth, provide his goods/services to more people, create more jobs or even stay in the country? Is there enough incentive for a wealthy employee to do an extra shift or work that extra week?

    I think the wealthy have been squeezed to the limit. Squeeze any more and you will damage government revenue and public services.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by mangoh)
    -rep how much does that make sense?

    On topic: I'm glad, I think they should. Why should the gap between poor and rich widen?
    So we should make everyone poorer? Taxing is one of the worst ways to close an equality gap.

    And it does make sense check the revenue projections.
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.