|
||||||||
Vote for a 16% tax rise |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,588
|
The chit is going to hit the fan when the public accounts committee reports on the cost of administering Brexit to government coffers.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dark Satanic Mills
Posts: 4,809
|
Quote:
I would much rather elect a progressive central government that doesn't starve councils of much-needed cash in the first place.
Quote:
The chit is going to hit the fan when the public accounts committee reports on the cost of administering Brexit to government coffers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,588
|
Quote:
I think you are in the wrong topic. |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Storbritannia
Posts: 28,916
|
Vote for a 16% tax rise
That should all now be funded by the extra £340 million a day that we were promised by Boris and Gove. Oh, wait a minute, that was just one huge great Brexit lie. |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35,805
|
Quote:
I am sure that is a very good idea but the government has to have the money (via taxation) in the first place before it can be allocated to Councils for funding care.
I think you are in the wrong topic. |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Black Country lad in Yorkshire
Posts: 118,029
|
If you want to fund care. Give family carers a wage. It would be a lot cheaper.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 2,482
|
Quote:
I am sure that is a very good idea but the government has to have the money (via taxation) in the first place before it can be allocated to Councils for funding care.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,045
|
I am totally opposed to funding social care from an increase in council tax. I believe it should come from central government. Any increase in council tax will hit poorest hard, as those on benefits are still forced to pay a percentage of the council tax. To increase this burden on them, when they are already suffering from cuts to benefits, would be wholly unjust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GL51 0EX
Posts: 14,085
|
Quote:
I am totally opposed to funding social care from an increase in council tax. I believe it should come from central government. Any increase in council tax will hit poorest hard, as those on benefits are still forced to pay a percentage of the council tax.
We're not talking poll tax here, council tax is proportional at least in some way pegged to wealth. If you're not willing to put in the 16% extra fair enough. Lets leave things as they are. "The rich" can happily pay for their own care and "the poor" can be happy they didn't have to chip in. That's essentially what the OP was asking The underlying problem I suspect with council tax as a solution is it localises the benefit. You can't leech off the wealth of another county, city, town. You have to live within your local means for local people instead. That's not so great if you live under a cash poor northern Labour council - but the Tory Surrey County Council may just find support for it |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bristol
Posts: 46,964
|
Quote:
I believe this is being considered to fund social care for the disabled and frail elderly.
Maybe it doesn't affect you now - but it could be your mum or gran that is left without any support due to cuts. A week in a care home these days is more than most people pay in council tax in a year and home helps can cost £500 a month in some areas. This is not the best way to fund this vital service - but there before the grace of God go I. Cos you might need care one day. No one likes paying taxes - but when it's too support some of the most vulnerable and frail people who paid in all their lives and possibly fought for this country maybe it's morally right and possibly a bit mean to moan. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GL51 0EX
Posts: 14,085
|
Quote:
Agreed. Though I suspect the government could cover it more efficiently by topping up the basic rate of income tax by a penny or two. Everyone is saying that they'd be happy to pay a bit more to ensure social care is better.
If it's really true that "Everyone is saying that they'd be happy to pay a bit more" then council tax or some sort of national levy seems to be the way. I suspect the reality however (at least judged from this forum) is "Everyone is saying that they'd be happy to have others pay a bit more" I've seen one or two exceptions - willing to put their hands in their pockets regardless of their income, but they do seem to be exceptions |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bristol
Posts: 46,964
|
Quote:
Not quite the same thing though is it? All those earning less than £11K would not be paying a bit more, those earning £12 or £15K would be paying nowhere near a penny more.
If it's really true that "Everyone is saying that they'd be happy to pay a bit more" then council tax or some sort of national levy seems to be the way. I suspect the reality however (at least judged from this forum) is "Everyone is saying that they'd be happy to have others pay a bit more" |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GL51 0EX
Posts: 14,085
|
Quote:
Surely income tax is a national levy to pay for this sort of thing?
Heck eliminate the tax free allowances and you're probably a good way to funding it without a rise in the rates at all - that way everyone really would chip in |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,344
|
Quote:
Err.. no. Billions on administering Brexit or on Social Care. That is the decision that is looming in 2017.
There is money. Why is it being bled out? |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35,805
|
Quote:
Get rid of the tax free allowances, and the higher rate banding and yep everyone could be chipping in 1 or 2% more. As long as they remain however the "progressive" nature of the tax means that not everyone is chipping in the same percentage
Heck eliminate the tax free allowances and you're probably a good way to funding it without a rise in the rates at all - that way everyone really would chip in And have higher earners pay less tax? How does that equate to all paying 1 or 2% more? Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying here? |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bristol
Posts: 46,964
|
Quote:
Get rid of the tax free allowances, and the higher rate banding and yep everyone could be chipping in 1 or 2% more. As long as they remain however the "progressive" nature of the tax means that not everyone is chipping in the same percentage
Heck eliminate the tax free allowances and you're probably a good way to funding it without a rise in the rates at all - that way everyone really would chip in |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GL51 0EX
Posts: 14,085
|
Quote:
Is there an issue with progressive tax? I thought the whole idea was that it was fairer; didn't unduly impact the lowest earners?
I'd quibble about calling it "fair" when manifestly some are paying more than their fair share. I'd prefer to say it's reasonable rather than fair. My argument here (and I'll admit it was very pedantic) is simply with the idea that if "everyone" is happy to chip in more putting on income tax is not the way to do it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pimlico, central London, UK
Posts: 14,870
|
Wages for carers are very low - meaning most jobs are done by foreigners.
If Brexiteers get their way and immigration from the EU becomes much more difficult, then we will likely have a staff shortage in the care sector, meaning costs will spiral. |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GL51 0EX
Posts: 14,085
|
Quote:
Sorry, are you saying get free of the Income Tax personal allowance here? So a zero hours contract worker currently on £10k which is currently tax free would have to pay £2k of that in tax?
And have higher earners pay less tax? How does that equate to all paying 1 or 2% more? Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying here? ![]() Nope. As far as I'm concerned I'd rather go with a council tax hike than see it put on income tax and disappear into the bowels of 11 Downing St. Not a perfect solution by any means - but the best of a bad lot |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Gtr Manchester UK
Posts: 7,914
|
Quote:
Wages for carers are very low - meaning most jobs are done by foreigners.
If Brexiteers get their way and immigration from the EU becomes much more difficult, then we will likely have a staff shortage in the care sector, meaning costs will spiral. A question of sums, would it be cheaper for the state to pay daughter £25k/year (taxed) as a sole carer for mother and keep at home, or the state pay for mother to be in a nursing home? *Added benefit that if mother went into hospital, on release there would be somewhere immediate to go to rather than rehab thus sparing up and nHS bed* |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dark Satanic Mills
Posts: 4,809
|
Quote:
I was of the impression that or Government were actually reducing our deficit. Wouldn't that suggest they are running an annual surplus currently?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 443
|
This is just the start. By 2050. Upto 50p in every pound collected for council tax will be spent on pensions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 443
|
Quote:
Wages for carers are very low - meaning most jobs are done by foreigners.
If Brexiteers get their way and immigration from the EU becomes much more difficult, then we will likely have a staff shortage in the care sector, meaning costs will spiral. |
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35,805
|
Quote:
Sorry I was not seriously proposing that at all - I was just attempting using it as an example of what you would need to change to remove the progression so "everyone" could chip in their equal cut by a simple 2% rise. In my "defence" I was very, very drunk
![]() Nope. As far as I'm concerned I'd rather go with a council tax hike than see it put on income tax and disappear into the bowels of 11 Downing St. Not a perfect solution by any means - but the best of a bad lot ![]() ![]() Ah! You are excused! |
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 9,157
|
Quote:
If you want to fund care. Give family carers a wage. It would be a lot cheaper.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:34.





