5 facts about taxes and benefits
1. Before taxes and benefits, the average income of the richest fifth of households was x15 higher than the poorest fifth, in 2012/13. This gap falls to 4-to-1 after taxes and benefits.
2. 52% of households received more in benefits (including in-kind benefits such as education/NHS) than they paid in taxes, in 2012/13.
3. Since the start of the economic downturn in 2007/08, the average disposable income has decreased for the richest fifth of households but increased for the poorest fifth.
4. Cash benefits made up over half (56.4%) of the gross income of the poorest fifth of households, compared with 3.2% of the richest fifth, in 2012/13.
5. The richest fifth of households paid over six times as much tax (direct and indirect) as the poorest fifth, but both groups paid a similar % of their gross income, in 2012/13.
Source
FWIW - my view
1) Interesting - never knew that
2) Ditto
3) We've already heard this...
4) Pfft - meaningless
5) Struggling with this one. Is it inferring the tax system is broadly fair?
2. 52% of households received more in benefits (including in-kind benefits such as education/NHS) than they paid in taxes, in 2012/13.
3. Since the start of the economic downturn in 2007/08, the average disposable income has decreased for the richest fifth of households but increased for the poorest fifth.
4. Cash benefits made up over half (56.4%) of the gross income of the poorest fifth of households, compared with 3.2% of the richest fifth, in 2012/13.
5. The richest fifth of households paid over six times as much tax (direct and indirect) as the poorest fifth, but both groups paid a similar % of their gross income, in 2012/13.
Source
FWIW - my view
1) Interesting - never knew that
2) Ditto
3) We've already heard this...
4) Pfft - meaningless
5) Struggling with this one. Is it inferring the tax system is broadly fair?
0
Comments
No not really. I would say a fair and 'progressive' tax system would mean the richest fifth pay more % of their gross income than the bottom 5th.
Nothing in there that interested you?
Alas they weren't my calculations - but if you e-mail the nice people at this address they might be able to help you.
Top of the head so I could well be wrong - surely they must be doing that if the variance in income is reduced from 15 times down to 4 times after tax and benefits are taken into account?
A fair and progressive tax system is both a matter of political philosophy and debate, as is deciding how to reward shirkers, or claimants for their lack of effort.
Since the bottom fifth probably pay nil, and top fifth dont pay nil, you can rest assured your wishes have been answefed in that respect.
The Conservative supporters on this board will never learn will they? They just won't accept reality. They will continue to stick the knife in the poor and describe them as worthless. They will continue to excuse greed whilst demonising the poor. They seem stuck with tunnel-vision. They will disregard how the Tea Party and their views helped to lose the Republicans the last Presidential election. They forget how Labour's tax-the-rich because we hate them stance almost destroyed them as a political party. They will just blindly hit out at anyone that they deem unworthy. And then they wonder why the Party as a whole is as unpopular as it is and hasn't won an election since 1992.
It is a good thing that the disposable income has risen for the poorest and at the same time has fallen for the richest. This not an envy thing but a pragmatic thing. The poorest are more likely to spend that extra disposable income in this country than the richest. This trend needs to continue.
*sigh*
What ARE you on about ? Tea Party? Republicans?
1) This IS reality (unless you want to argue that the ONS are making this s**t up)
2) Who is "sticking the knife into the poor?".
Is that a reaction to my last post? All i said was that tax and redistribution of wealth was a matter of political philosophy. There is no absolute correct result.
Mind you i do think the UK is crazy to have a situation where anyone can be better off out of work, than someone in work.
If the poorest spend their extra income on buying imported goods, they're as good as spending it abroad.
The comparison is meaningless. The stat in the first half is interesting - it potentially shows the extent to which wages are insufficient.
What a bizarre comment.
No. It was about the article linked in the original post.
But way to go with the paranoia.
Oh, don't stop there....
Pity then that the last Labour government actually did the opposite, decreasing income taxes for the rich and increasing them for the poor. It is no accident that this is the case given the increase in the lower tax bracket.
I would say when it comes to people earning money, we should have a far more progressive system. At the end of the day work generally is work and people shouldn't expect to do back breaking work and struggle to live.
I never was an advocate of the living wage, but we need something that raises those out of taxation for the poorest workers. It just doesn't feel right that people who work still pay taxes and claim benefits.
We have a fundamental problem in this country - and maybe not just ours.
In my grandfather's generation one man's working wage was adequate to support a family.
In my father's generation one man's working wage and a woman's part-wage would do the job.
Now we have some families where both member's are working AND receiving state benefits.
There is something wrong.
And writing articles about how rough it is for the richest in society isn't going to fix it or get the Tories brownie points with the electorate.
The article isn't saying that. I quoted - verbatim - an article from the ONS. That you chose to see it as some kind of political statement supporting the Tories and (what did you say...?) "sticking the knife into the poor" is your paranoia working overtime. I just thought they were interesting stats - at least 3 of which I haven't heard before. Have you?
There is a reason why the Telegraph presented the facts in the way they did.
What on earth have the Telegraph got to do with this? I'm talking about the ONS.
The problem of having two threads on the same subject. The Telegraph linked in the other thread on the same subject is basically a woe-is-anyone-but-the-poor piece doing no-one any favours.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/uk-public-unaware-inequality-tax-system-1452822
Nice to know that you are a supporter of the living wage, based on that post
Little do they realise they are Turkeys voting for Christmas.
What an absolute load of meaningless garbage.