UK tax system Watch

Mike172
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 week ago
#21
K
(Original post by RogerOxon)
Obviously, anyone earning more than me should pay a lot more tax


I'd be for a flat tax percentage, but I'd pay a lot less. I don't mind paying for a safety net for those genuinely in need, but I do for people that won't get off their backsides and put some effort into work, or have children that they can't afford.

I do find it nasty that so many think that "the rich" should pay for everyone else - moving to US avoids some, but I hate not having basic healthcare for all.


Many cannot. They often don't have one of the education, ability or desire. In the US, I see a lot of people that work incredibly hard to make a life for themselves (the US certainly has its issues though). It's a shame that many in the UK don't.
Not my problem I’m afraid. Get a better education, there are plenty of adult courses out there. Same with ability, no one is born with the ability to do anything other than the very basics required to keep living. Learn a trade, a skill, anything. As for desire, 110% not my problem. If you can’t be arsed to better yourself I have zero sympathy and you don’t deserve a penny of taxpayers money.

Capitalism is fantastic, equality of opportunity doesn’t discriminate at all. You just need to put the effort in to make it.
0
reply
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 week ago
#22
(Original post by Mike172)
Not my problem I’m afraid. Get a better education, there are plenty of adult courses out there. Same with ability, no one is born with the ability to do anything other than the very basics required to keep living. Learn a trade, a skill, anything. As for desire, 110% not my problem. If you can’t be arsed to better yourself I have zero sympathy and you don’t deserve a penny of taxpayers money.

Capitalism is fantastic, equality of opportunity doesn’t discriminate at all. You just need to put the effort in to make it.
I agree, although some people start with major disadvantages (including some shocking state schools). Those that are driven will succeed, IMO.
0
reply
Admit-One
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 week ago
#23
(Original post by Mike172)
K


Not my problem I’m afraid. Get a better education, there are plenty of adult courses out there. Same with ability, no one is born with the ability to do anything other than the very basics required to keep living. Learn a trade, a skill, anything. As for desire, 110% not my problem. If you can’t be arsed to better yourself I have zero sympathy and you don’t deserve a penny of taxpayers money.

Capitalism is fantastic, equality of opportunity doesn’t discriminate at all. You just need to put the effort in to make it.
"Work harder to better yourself" is not a magical catch-all solution for social mobility I'm afraid.
0
reply
Mike172
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 week ago
#24
(Original post by Admit-One)
"Work harder to better yourself" is not a magical catch-all solution for social mobility I'm afraid.
It really is for the most part.
0
reply
Mike172
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 week ago
#25
(Original post by Admit-One)
This is a straw man. No one is arguing this point.
Nope, not a straw man argument at all. It’s a genuine question. If your answer to why tax higher earners more is because they can afford it then why not sacrifice all disposable income? You don’t need it to live so you can afford to give it up... No?
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 week ago
#26
(Original post by Mike172)
Because they can afford it isn’t an argument. Where do you draw the line? Should all disposable income be forfeited to the state to help those lower down the ladder?

What gives lower earners the right to take my hard earned money? Why is that not selfish but me wanting to keep what I earn is?

Those on lower wages can get a better paying career if they like.
In answer to you're questions:

-the line is drawn where motivation to earn is still alive and well
- no that's communism
- They aren't the state is
- well that depends on how you feel about leaving those with nothing with actual nothing.

This with respect what we are getting into here is the classic I'm OK Jack arugement right wing arugement vs the cotton wool left wing debate.

Lower earners are not taking your money, the state is which provides the whole of society with service, including yourself. Now if you are a high earner you will have plenty of disposable income to pay for luxury because you are lucky enough to of gained access to a job where trade unions or supply and demand has allowed a demand a high salary. Therefore why should you not pay proportionately more than those that is struggling to makes ends meat?

Also you missed my question, why should those who did not share your fortune but make huge contributions to society be left in poverty just to give those with an abundance of money in more to stash anyway in off shore bank accounts?

Why should we allow those unable to work suffer?
Why should those more able not support their fellow country men?
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 week ago
#27
(Original post by Admit-One)
This is a straw man. No one is arguing this point.
That's why I ignored it
1
reply
Mike172
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 week ago
#28
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
In answer to you're questions:

-the line is drawn where motivation to earn is still alive and well
- no that's communism
- They aren't the state is
- well that depends on how you feel about leaving those with nothing with actual nothing.

This with respect what we are getting into here is the classic I'm OK Jack arugement right wing arugement vs the cotton wool left wing debate.

Lower earners are not taking your money, the state is which provides the whole of society with service, including yourself. Now if you are a high earner you will have plenty of disposable income to pay for luxury because you are lucky enough to of gained access to a job where trade unions or supply and demand has allowed a demand a high salary. Therefore why should you not pay proportionately more than those that is struggling to makes ends meat?

Also you missed my question, why should those who did not share your fortune but make huge contributions to society be left in poverty just to give those with an abundance of money in more to stash anyway in off shore bank accounts?

Why should we allow those unable to work suffer?
Why should those more able not support their fellow country men?
Ahhh so it’s all to do with luck, I see! Typical response from a person who clearly doesn’t believe in the concept of taking responsibility for ones self. Everything has to be handed to you, right?

I didn’t get my job through luck. I spent years training, spending tens of thousands of pounds in the process. It was hard work and I got my job on merit, nothing else.

I can’t take you seriously, anyway, with your absolutely appalling spelling and grammar.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 week ago
#29
(Original post by Mike172)
K


Not my problem I’m afraid. Get a better education, there are plenty of adult courses out there. Same with ability, no one is born with the ability to do anything other than the very basics required to keep living. Learn a trade, a skill, anything. As for desire, 110% not my problem. If you can’t be arsed to better yourself I have zero sympathy and you don’t deserve a penny of taxpayers money.

Capitalism is fantastic, equality of opportunity doesn’t discriminate at all. You just need to put the effort in to make it.
Capitalism is fantastic is it? Maybe you should tell that to those who live in the slums that's capitalism creates.

What about those that have trades that the free market capitalist society has been able to pay a pittance too, these are some civil servants. Who is going to care for our eldery, bake our bread, look after your children while you work? Are you prepared to leave those services vacant?

Likewise we have low skilled jobs which get paid high salaries. Are you aware of any of this?
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 week ago
#30
(Original post by RogerOxon)
I agree, although some people start with major disadvantages (including some shocking state schools). Those that are driven will succeed, IMO.
How are we defining success then in this world of sunny capitalism?
0
reply
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 week ago
#31
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
How are we defining success then in this world of sunny capitalism?
That's for people to decide for themselves. Not being able to pay the bills isn't fun though.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Mike172
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 week ago
#32
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Capitalism is fantastic is it? Maybe you should tell that to those who live in the slums that's capitalism creates.

What about those that have trades that the free market capitalist society has been able to pay a pittance too, these are some civil servants. Who is going to care for our eldery, bake our bread, look after your children while you work? Are you prepared to leave those services vacant?

Likewise we have low skilled jobs which get paid high salaries. Are you aware of any of this?
Such as?
0
reply
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 week ago
#33
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Also you missed my question, why should those who did not share your fortune but make huge contributions to society be left in poverty just to give those with an abundance of money in more to stash anyway in off shore bank accounts?
Who?

(Original post by Burton Bridge)
What about those that have trades that the free market capitalist society has been able to pay a pittance too, these are some civil servants. Who is going to care for our eldery, bake our bread, look after your children while you work? Are you prepared to leave those services vacant?
In an ideal capitalist society, supply and demand should cover it.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 week ago
#34
(Original post by Mike172)
Ahhh so it’s all to do with luck, I see! Typical response from a person who clearly doesn’t believe in the concept of taking responsibility for ones self. Everything has to be handed to you, right?

I didn’t get my job through luck. I spent years training, spending tens of thousands of pounds in the process. It was hard work and I got my job on merit, nothing else.

I can’t take you seriously, anyway, with your absolutely appalling spelling and grammar.
There's the safety walls being erected to protect the fragility of your beliefs. You then result to an ad hominem, attacking my spelling and grammar because you are uncomfortable sticking to the points in question.

I noticed you avoided answering all the questions aimed at you, while I have answered every one of yours, why is that?

Now I did not mention luck, but being as so you have I'll roll with it because at the moment I'm confident I can defeat your argument pretty easily from any angle

A baby boy is born to a wealthy family, they buy a private education this education provides a goldern ticket for said child, runs as a average person, C stream and becomes a Dr.

Vs

A baby boy born to a single parent, parents in and out of prison. A state education is provided and he is of average intelligenc, C streams and becomes a FLT Driver on minimum wage.

I call that luck of the draw, how do you define it?
0
reply
Admit-One
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 week ago
#35
(Original post by Mike172)
It really is for the most part.
If that were the case then I would have to conclude that the reason you pay so much tax now is because you were either lazy or stupid. Because if social mobility were as straightforward as “get your head down and graft” then you’d have the means to live in Monaco or another low tax domicile and also take advantage of shell companies and suchlike.

But apparently you’re just choosing not to be better off than you are?
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 week ago
#36
(Original post by Mike172)
Such as?
Brazil for one.

This country is an example if the continued trend continues, the gap between the richest and poorest is ever growing since 79, when the witch took over.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 week ago
#37
(Original post by RogerOxon)
That's for people to decide for themselves. Not being able to pay the bills isn't fun though.
Well is it? Because unregulated free market capitalism will simply strave the majority of society for the benefits of the elite.

Right wing poltics fed to us by the rich is the cancer that will destroy the social safety net that socialism has built up.
0
reply
Mike172
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 week ago
#38
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Brazil for one.

This country is an example if the continued trend continues, the gap between the richest and poorest is ever growing since 79, when the witch took over.
What? I was asking you which low skilled jobs pay a high salary.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 week ago
#39
(Original post by RogerOxon)
Who?


In an ideal capitalist society, supply and demand should cover it.
I've already said huge sevtio d of people who are needed to make up society from care works to skilled butcher's to skilled nursery nurses all very low paid but needed.
0
reply
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 week ago
#40
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Well is it? Because unregulated free market capitalism will simply strave the majority of society for the benefits of the elite.

Right wing poltics fed to us by the rich is the cancer that will destroy the social safety net that socialism has built up.
I disagree. You've made assertions, but not provided any evidence, so it's not very convincing.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are cats selfish

Yes (143)
61.11%
No (91)
38.89%

Watched Threads

View All