Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
White Craw

Workers Will Not Notice 40Pc Tax Rate, Says Nick Clegg

Recommended Posts

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/nick-clegg/8305512/Workers-will-not-notice-40pc-tax-rate-says-Nick-Clegg.html

And Cameron and Osborne used to think far too many were already paying higher rate tax.

I hope that most people on here think what they are doing is a good thing. Raising the pretax earnings up to £10,000. If you earn more than £42,000 a year consider yourself lucky and stop moaning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I probably wouldn't notice the tax part of it but I would notice the removal of child benefit as planned in 2013.

This is a huge issue that has gone quiet after the initial outbursts

+1

It's only if OH gets a bonus that we currently notice it, because it's 40% of the ruddy lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope that most people on here think what they are doing is a good thing. Raising the pretax earnings up to £10,000. If you earn more than £42,000 a year consider yourself lucky and stop moaning.

Bob earns about £42k every 2.1 days. And that does not include his salary. He may well be getting £42,000 every DAY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope that most people on here think what they are doing is a good thing. Raising the pretax earnings up to £10,000. If you earn more than £42,000 a year consider yourself lucky and stop moaning.

I agree that people on low incomes should not be paying much tax, if any. However £42000 isn't 'rich' for a single earner household, who pay more tax than two earners on £21K.

The one and only thing that ever grated about the changes to child benefit is that households with a much greater take home can still receive it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope that most people on here think what they are doing is a good thing. Raising the pretax earnings up to £10,000. If you earn more than £42,000 a year consider yourself lucky and stop moaning.

I don't have a problem with sensible increases in tax or sensible reductions in benefits, universal or otherwise but creating a tax black hole where earning an extra £1 can lose you £1040 net for one child (£1700+ gross wages ffs!!!) is not a sensible decision. And that is only for 1 child, it costs you even more if you have more children. Not joined up thinking at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you earn more than £42,000 a year consider yourself lucky and stop moaning.

We're not all "lucky" to earn over £42,000 some of us just work hard and for long hours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope that most people on here think what they are doing is a good thing. Raising the pretax earnings up to £10,000. If you earn more than £42,000 a year consider yourself lucky and stop moaning.

You seem to be forgetting a whole heap of things just like Nick Clegg is. ;)

Firstly we don't yet have a raise to £10K for untaxed earnings. And I'll happily wager that we will not see it.

You seem to be forgetting the built-in unfairness. Two people on £40k each, total £80k will continue to get almost £1800k a year extra in child benefit if they have two kids. One person on £44k and the other not working they lose child benefit from 2013. To replace the lost child benefit they have to earn approx £2500 gross most likely banged on top of a move to paying higher rate tax. Include the loss of child tax credits and I don't think we've ever seen such a high marginal tax rate (must be approaching 100%) imposed on people earning such modest salaries.

Couple this with inflation, job losses and a potential rise in interest rates and in Tory parlance you have a doube/triple/quadruple/quintuple/sextuple.....(*) whammy ;)

So, I'm pretty sure a lot of people will notice it - the tax band changes cannot be seen as having an isolated effect because they have to be framed both in terms of other tax/benefit changes and also deteriorating economic circumstances

Finally, it's jolly nice of Cleggy to be doing Baron Eejit's dirty work for him. What a tosser.

(*) delete as appropriate

Edited by needsleep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that people on low incomes should not be paying much tax, if any. However £42000 isn't 'rich' for a single earner household, who pay more tax than two earners on £21K.

The one and only thing that ever grated about the changes to child benefit is that households with a much greater take home can still receive it.

I think it's would be much fairer if you are a couple then one persons tax allowance should be able to be added to the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Workers with jobs might notice it! :huh:

Politicians are pretty much removed from the world of "work"! <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with sensible increases in tax or sensible reductions in benefits, universal or otherwise but creating a tax black hole where earning an extra £1 can lose you £1040 net for one child (£1700+ gross wages ffs!!!) is not a sensible decision. And that is only for 1 child, it costs you even more if you have more children. Not joined up thinking at all.

I have to agree with you on the Not joined up thinking bit. personally I'm not in favor of the whole child tax credit thing I found it quite insulting to be claiming benefits when I was on a average wage. If you want kids and can afford kids have kids. If I wanted a dog I wouldn't expect hand outs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with sensible increases in tax or sensible reductions in benefits, universal or otherwise but creating a tax black hole where earning an extra £1 can lose you £1040 net for one child (£1700+ gross wages ffs!!!) is not a sensible decision. And that is only for 1 child, it costs you even more if you have more children. Not joined up thinking at all.

In essence they set a maximum wage for the lower middle class, which will become a ceiling for everyone else.

Not company can afford to give their people a raise that is as large as to make up the shortfall that occurs, watch everyone's incomes fall in line with the tax threshold.

Another thing to consider is that even if people can park the extra earnings in their pensions, it's no good because the money will not enter the economic game and the sum missing will be the high velocity money which makes the economy go round and brings in the taxes. It's the luxury goods, not the staples that makes the money!

But hey, they are trying to get people to stop buying things -- as I type, there are two German Euroweenies (Norbert Roettgen(CDU) and his FDP friend whose name I forgot) busily drawing up the new EU rules about electric appliances. And those two are planning busily that machines like air conditioners, computers and fridges will be verboten if they use too much electricity.

This all is East Germany reloaded, and it's no surprise if you know where the East German communist aristocracy ended up... in the EU parliament.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's would be much fairer if you are a couple then one persons tax allowance should be able to be added to the others.

Couldn't agree more. I've freed up what was a fairly well paid job, one less on JSA, housing benefit etc. Then there is all the free time I give to school as a volunteer..

I have no tax allowance, I pay full whack for all prescriptions, eye tests, dental care, public transport....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope that most people on here think what they are doing is a good thing. Raising the pretax earnings up to £10,000. If you earn more than £42,000 a year consider yourself lucky and stop moaning.

"The harder I work, the luckier I get"

Quote from Empire of the Sun I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with you on the Not joined up thinking bit. personally I'm not in favor of the whole child tax credit thing I found it quite insulting to be claiming benefits when I was on a average wage. If you want kids and can afford kids have kids. If I wanted a dog I wouldn't expect hand outs.

But the majority of kids will be net contributors to society in the future. The majority of dogs will not be net contributors to society in the future. It is good for people to have incentives to have kids. It is not necessarily good for people to have incentives to own dogs. New generations of children (healthy, well-educated if possible) are vital to the future of society. New generations of canines are not.

etc... etc... etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope that most people on here think what they are doing is a good thing. Raising the pretax earnings up to £10,000. If you earn more than £42,000 a year consider yourself lucky and stop moaning.

What a load of rubbish!

If you earn £42k then the the starting point is that every penny of that is yours.

From there, every penny you have to give away needs to be reasonable, justified and fair, and you still need to feel as if you are getting good value for that money.

That doesn't just stop because you're 'lucky' enough to earn more money.

It's still your money that you are giving away, and in greater volumes than people who make daft arguments like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

50 hours a week without overtime payments not unusual where I work.

+1

At the very least, and in my OH's case some overseas travel. Which on more than one occasion has involved less than 24 hours notice for me, leaving to hastily rearrange our home life.

Getting 7 kids home from a birthday party at the local swimming pool at 8 to 8:30 ish on a Saturday night, with only one small car and 'Plan B' on holiday, was one of the more 'interesting' problems I've had to solve at short notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the majority of kids will be net contributors to society in the future. The majority of dogs will not be net contributors to society in the future. It is good for people to have incentives to have kids. It is not necessarily good for people to have incentives to own dogs. New generations of children (healthy, well-educated if possible) are vital to the future of society. New generations of canines are not.

etc... etc... etc...

+1

Which is why it boils my urine when I hear the arguement 'as a childless person, why should I pay to educate someone else's kids'. Err, because one day you may need them to give you medical treatment or wipe your backside, either cough up for them now, or expect to pay full whack for their services in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the majority of kids will be net contributors to society in the future. The majority of dogs will not be net contributors to society in the future. It is good for people to have incentives to have kids. It is not necessarily good for people to have incentives to own dogs. New generations of children (healthy, well-educated if possible) are vital to the future of society. New generations of canines are not.

etc... etc... etc...

One thing the world is not short of and thats people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of rubbish!

If you earn £42k then the the starting point is that every penny of that is yours.

From there, every penny you have to give away needs to be reasonable, justified and fair, and you still need to feel as if you are getting good value for that money.

That doesn't just stop because you're 'lucky' enough to earn more money.

It's still your money that you are giving away, and in greater volumes than people who make daft arguments like this.

oh my bleeding heart. you could always ask for a pay cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which is why it boils my urine when I hear the arguement 'as a childless person, why should I pay to educate someone else's kids'. Err, because one day you may need them to give you medical treatment or wipe your backside, either cough up for them now, or expect to pay full whack for their services in the future.

:lol:

This arguement is obsolete for various reasons:

#1 Having children does not mean they will make anything of their lives, it is more likely than not they will end up on benefits as 25% of the graduates are finding out today. Thus you can't even say 1 child = 1 productive worker in 18 years time, it is more like 1 in 3. As technology and outsourcing increases this will grow to 1 in 10 then 1 in 20.

#2 Your whole theory depends on technological progress standing still, who is to say that by 2050 a self maintaining robot won't be the thing wiping my bum? Honda and Toyota have designed some excellent human shaped robots. They are the realm of millionaires today but 10-20 years down the line they will be common house hold white goods. Like washing machines television and vacuum cleaners.

#2.1 Genetics may also come up with a cure so that when I'm 60 I have the body of a 25 year old meaning your child is again obsolete.

#3 Even if they grow up to be productive it doesn't mean they'll want to be wiping your bum theu may well just emigrate or as above live a life on benefits.

#4 Even if we do pay now, does not proculde the possibility of having to pay again in the future at full whack. Thus paying twice anyway. Just look at pensions, I have to pay NIC else I get my legs broken. Come 2050 there will be no state pension meaning I have to pay twice.

Thus the odds are massively against your child or any other child being there to wipe my bum, the odds that they will be holding a knife to deprive me of my stuff is much higher. Also I do not get my money back if I am proven correct.

Your arguement is the typical anti luddite arguement whereby things will always continue as they have done. Thus stop trying to justify theft.

Edited by ken_ichikawa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

Which is why it boils my urine when I hear the arguement 'as a childless person, why should I pay to educate someone else's kids'. Err, because one day you may need them to give you medical treatment or wipe your backside, either cough up for them now, or expect to pay full whack for their services in the future.

Just import these "children" from another country. I thought we already did that anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that people on low incomes should not be paying much tax, if any. However £42000 isn't 'rich' for a single earner household, who pay more tax than two earners on £21K.

The one and only thing that ever grated about the changes to child benefit is that households with a much greater take home can still receive it.

Universal benefits don't grate with me. Simple and easy to administer, like income tax.

The removal of child benefit for a single higher rate household is a ridiculous proposal, and seems to me to be designed to create a trap capping salaries.

What should be completely removed over time is working family tax credits. Complex and beaureacratic nightmare.

Why should a household pulling 60k a year qualify for benefits. The whole lot should be gradually abolished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.