Crosswords1 min ago
Budget
Is anyone surprised that the Tories want to cut taxes for the rich and benefits for the poor ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bobsy. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
No because both are far too high.
Also the definition of "rich" and "poor" needs clarification. It seems anybody who has a decent and responsible job (i.e. police officers, nurses, London Underground train drivers) and who earns more than about £42k is "rich" (because they pay the higher rate of income tax). Meantime anybody taking in less than about £20k (and are thus eligible for Working Tax Credits) is "poor".
Both descriptions are inaccurate.
Also the definition of "rich" and "poor" needs clarification. It seems anybody who has a decent and responsible job (i.e. police officers, nurses, London Underground train drivers) and who earns more than about £42k is "rich" (because they pay the higher rate of income tax). Meantime anybody taking in less than about £20k (and are thus eligible for Working Tax Credits) is "poor".
Both descriptions are inaccurate.
Not in the least Bobsy.
What we saw last week was a typical Tory budget, in which the poor were made poorer, and the rich became richer. No surprise whatsoever. Twas ever thus.
Osborne and Dave seriously misjudged the situation yet again
Its like the fairy story of the kings new clothes, but it has taken IDS and a few of his fellow Tory MPs to realise it.
What we saw last week was a typical Tory budget, in which the poor were made poorer, and the rich became richer. No surprise whatsoever. Twas ever thus.
Osborne and Dave seriously misjudged the situation yet again
Its like the fairy story of the kings new clothes, but it has taken IDS and a few of his fellow Tory MPs to realise it.
TTT...but so few poorer people pay tax, certainly not the disabled, and that is what this all about. The billions that were going to be given to the better off, came directly from the pockets of the disabled and vulnerable.
There is not a secret store of money in the basement of Number 11 Downing Street....if you want to give tax cuts to wealthy people, the money has to come from someone else. That is why the Tories, Osborne especially, have been left with egg on its face...he has cocked it up..... again.
The Tory party is plunging itself in open warfare, and its still weeks to go to the Referendum. That overall majority of just 12 is looking very thin at the moment.
There is not a secret store of money in the basement of Number 11 Downing Street....if you want to give tax cuts to wealthy people, the money has to come from someone else. That is why the Tories, Osborne especially, have been left with egg on its face...he has cocked it up..... again.
The Tory party is plunging itself in open warfare, and its still weeks to go to the Referendum. That overall majority of just 12 is looking very thin at the moment.
Mikey: "if you want to give tax cuts to wealthy people, the money has to come from someone else" - no! when they abolished the 50% rate, tax receipts increased by 8 Billion. Early tax cuts in the 80s actually increased tax receipts. When People have more of their own money they tend to work harder and spend harder, thus paying more into the coffers for the deserving cases you talk about as well as for WSS. A fact that has always mystified the left who like to use direct taxation as a weapon.
Well, you might think that TTT, but whatever.....the Tories are on the run here, and its all due to their niaivity and ineptness.
They cocked it up, big time !
Osborne is going to have to explain where he going to get the £4billion from, for the tax cuts, now that he has had to make a u-turn on his attack on the disabled.
That is an enormous amount of money to find down the back of the sofa...where do you think he is going to find it ?
They cocked it up, big time !
Osborne is going to have to explain where he going to get the £4billion from, for the tax cuts, now that he has had to make a u-turn on his attack on the disabled.
That is an enormous amount of money to find down the back of the sofa...where do you think he is going to find it ?
//the Tories want to cut taxes for the rich and benefits for the poor ?//
Not true. Two Tories maybe but the vast majority of us were appalled by this(see my thread on the subject before this all blew up)
However TTT is correct. It has been show that reduction of taxes actually increases revenue. This is particularity true among the real rich since it no longer becomes necessary to avoid tax and in doing so end up paying less than a poor person. The left have never been able to grasp this for some reason.
Not true. Two Tories maybe but the vast majority of us were appalled by this(see my thread on the subject before this all blew up)
However TTT is correct. It has been show that reduction of taxes actually increases revenue. This is particularity true among the real rich since it no longer becomes necessary to avoid tax and in doing so end up paying less than a poor person. The left have never been able to grasp this for some reason.
That's because she's working for her living, youngmaf.
The tax take already too high (>36%). Of this more than a third goes on what is termed “welfare” though a large chunk of that sum actually goes to pay pensions which have been fully funded by the recipients (and often considerably over-funded to help pay for the non-funders). There is no justification or scope to increase the tax take.
Income tax is indeed vastly unfair in the way it is collected. The higher earners pay a considerably higher proportion of their pay than the lower earners. The top 3,000 income tax payers pay more tax than the bottom 9 million. There is no scope to lessen the burden on the lower paid. Nobody now pays income tax unless they earn £11,000 and many people earning up to £26,000 are eligible for working tax credits (so what the taxman taketh with one hand, he giveth back with the other, meaning tens of thousands of scribes have to be employed to administer the farce).
The Conservative government was elected predominantly by middle earners (and indeed some lower paid) because they were fed up with seeing considerable sums taken from their modest earnings to fund schemes from which they would see absolutely no benefit. The Tories are now betraying the trust those voters placed in them. The current disabled benefit is a shambles. It is clear that disability benefit is being widely abused. Drunks, drug addicts and the workshy routinely are declared “disabled” to attract greater benefits than if they were simply unemployed (and unemployable). Radical overhaul is necessary, not the tinkering round the edges that was proposed and quickly abandoned. Unfortunately, as is usually the case, the publicity has centred on the genuinely disabled (who are comparatively few in number) instead of those who are not disabled but who are sucking money from those in need.
But by far the greatest betrayal was the abandonment of the Tax credit revisions. Nobody had Tax Credits until 1999 and now nobody can live without them. The cost of this ridiculous system has ballooned 30 fold in that time and is now unsustainable. Yet less than a year ago the Tories caved in on their very modest reforms for fear of being portrayed as “nasty”.
Last week’s budget continued with the tinkering. Contrary to what has been suggested there was no great tax giveaway for the “rich”. The only significant measure was an increase to the threshold for the 40% tax band from £42,395 to £43,000. This threshold had suffered for a number of years from “fiscal drag” where it had not be raised in line with inflation and the latest change means a tax bill reduction of £121 for those earning over that amount - some giveaway.
Mr Duncan-Smith said he did not want to see the UK become a two-nation society. Well I’ve news for him – it already is. There are those who pay in and those who draw out. The latter are becoming an increasingly heavy burden on the former. Many of them have no need to be a burden at all (as youngmaf's daughter proudly demonstrates) but have chosen to do so because it’s easy. Rather than tinkering round the edges of the problem the government needs to sort out the lazy from the sick then there would be more cash for those who genuinely need it.
The tax take already too high (>36%). Of this more than a third goes on what is termed “welfare” though a large chunk of that sum actually goes to pay pensions which have been fully funded by the recipients (and often considerably over-funded to help pay for the non-funders). There is no justification or scope to increase the tax take.
Income tax is indeed vastly unfair in the way it is collected. The higher earners pay a considerably higher proportion of their pay than the lower earners. The top 3,000 income tax payers pay more tax than the bottom 9 million. There is no scope to lessen the burden on the lower paid. Nobody now pays income tax unless they earn £11,000 and many people earning up to £26,000 are eligible for working tax credits (so what the taxman taketh with one hand, he giveth back with the other, meaning tens of thousands of scribes have to be employed to administer the farce).
The Conservative government was elected predominantly by middle earners (and indeed some lower paid) because they were fed up with seeing considerable sums taken from their modest earnings to fund schemes from which they would see absolutely no benefit. The Tories are now betraying the trust those voters placed in them. The current disabled benefit is a shambles. It is clear that disability benefit is being widely abused. Drunks, drug addicts and the workshy routinely are declared “disabled” to attract greater benefits than if they were simply unemployed (and unemployable). Radical overhaul is necessary, not the tinkering round the edges that was proposed and quickly abandoned. Unfortunately, as is usually the case, the publicity has centred on the genuinely disabled (who are comparatively few in number) instead of those who are not disabled but who are sucking money from those in need.
But by far the greatest betrayal was the abandonment of the Tax credit revisions. Nobody had Tax Credits until 1999 and now nobody can live without them. The cost of this ridiculous system has ballooned 30 fold in that time and is now unsustainable. Yet less than a year ago the Tories caved in on their very modest reforms for fear of being portrayed as “nasty”.
Last week’s budget continued with the tinkering. Contrary to what has been suggested there was no great tax giveaway for the “rich”. The only significant measure was an increase to the threshold for the 40% tax band from £42,395 to £43,000. This threshold had suffered for a number of years from “fiscal drag” where it had not be raised in line with inflation and the latest change means a tax bill reduction of £121 for those earning over that amount - some giveaway.
Mr Duncan-Smith said he did not want to see the UK become a two-nation society. Well I’ve news for him – it already is. There are those who pay in and those who draw out. The latter are becoming an increasingly heavy burden on the former. Many of them have no need to be a burden at all (as youngmaf's daughter proudly demonstrates) but have chosen to do so because it’s easy. Rather than tinkering round the edges of the problem the government needs to sort out the lazy from the sick then there would be more cash for those who genuinely need it.
Mikey: "Osborne intended to make those cuts directly from savage cuts to disabled people. " - c0bblers, we can all take an amount and say it came from somewhere else. I still don;t understand what the cuts even are to the disabled all I can find is a load of hysteria.
Bobsy, when the tories are wrong I say so regularly, read my posts.
Bobsy, when the tories are wrong I say so regularly, read my posts.
The real problem TTT is Gideon proposing cuts to disability when
a) Cutting taxes to the better off (which were pointless really)
b) Funding the EU to the tune of 50m a day
c) Overseas aid to the tune of 12bn
I really dont know what he was thinking, it sends all the wrong messages. It is a mistake a person in his position should not have made, and he should go now.
As NJ points out there is plenty of scope to stop the fraudulent use of disability, but this does not require a budget. Someone just needs to use the exitsing rules and get on with it.
a) Cutting taxes to the better off (which were pointless really)
b) Funding the EU to the tune of 50m a day
c) Overseas aid to the tune of 12bn
I really dont know what he was thinking, it sends all the wrong messages. It is a mistake a person in his position should not have made, and he should go now.
As NJ points out there is plenty of scope to stop the fraudulent use of disability, but this does not require a budget. Someone just needs to use the exitsing rules and get on with it.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
News8 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
Is This Man A Good Pick For Secretary Of...
News15 mins ago
