Poll Tax

[Garry AKA Pod]

Do away with every tax other than VAT, and increase this by 100% at least.

That way, those that live beyond thier means and "spend spend spend", will be taxed the most. Do away with cash and force people to pay with debit cards.

Could lead to a big black market though.

Or am I going down the 1984 road?

[Garry AKA Pod]

Compare to the other end of the spectrum - cleaner has no qualifications (cant have worked hard throughout school etc), goes to work for 8 hrs a day, zero stress and leaves work behind when she goes home for the night. One makes for an easier life, the other brings about better financial rewards -chose which ever you like, just dont complain about making the wrong choice later on.

Yes, I'm sure they love going to work cleaning the $hite from the toilets "some" snort coke from.

It's heroin that bungs you up isn't? If they had to clean the cr@ppers of those injecting then yes, their jobs would be stress free.

Edited August 14, 2007 by Jimothy

[roadtoruin]

I really dont see how they are living off the backs of others? Stock borkers (playing markets not screwing over the little man), doctors (real drain on society), entrepeneurs (Mr. Sainsbury really meesed things up for working class people - wish all this competion that reduces prices for us would all go away). If it is not hard work then why don't more chose to do it - v little effort and much better money.

Broker for example - worked hard through school, then at uni and had to be very competitive to get a job at a good company. Then work a very high stress job for 14 hours a day. Compare to the other end of the spectrum - cleaner has no qualifications (cant have worked hard throughout school etc), goes to work for 8 hrs a day, zero stress and leaves work behind when she goes home for the night. One makes for an easier life, the other brings about better financial rewards -chose which ever you like, just dont complain about making the wrong choice later on.

Would I be correct in the assumption that you are in the high salary, low work levels, living off the back of others group as this is obviously best (and easy!!). Or did you not get the grades?

As for poll tax - take it one step furthur, reduce tax to the level required for basic govt requirements - defense, street lighting etc. Everything else private, paid for at the time of use. This is the fairest way. I don't expect you to pay for my cigarettes tomorrow, why should I be working to buy someone elses for them?

Well, I said most, and largely I meant those in the financial sector that set off from the outset to get an easy life (like mummy and daddy told them to). Actually I know feck-all about the lifestyle of brokers, but I think people who simply redistribute wealth produce nothing. Doctors at least try to heal and entrepreneurs to create something, but brokers - well why do you need an education to be a professional gambler? I rate cleaners and bus-drivers well above brokers on the social scale, but I'm sure many on this site will tell me why I'm deluded.

Tax to the minimum - if you like, but I've seen the European model and the US model and know which I prefer to live in (with my average income). But I guess you're a "there's no such thing as society" guy, yes ??

[youthoftoday]

I have undoubtedly contributed more than I have consumed so far - where do i get my rebate from? Scools and health both private, had a problem with neds...

Since you are Scottish / living in Scotland may I provide you with instructions on how you can give me a £1500 per annum rebate to repay the subsidy all you Scots get from the the English taxpayer?

[Guest anorthosite]

Since you are Scottish / living in Scotland may I provide you with instructions on how you can give me a £1500 per annum rebate to repay the subsidy all you Scots get from the the English taxpayer?

The English don't subsidise the Scots - do you believe everything the BBC says? The Barnett formula pays out more to the Scots per person, but it ignores the fact the Scots pay more per person in the first place.

Speaking of Scotland, one of the SNP's policies was to scrap council tax and replace it with a type of local income tax. Hopefully the other parties won't kill it, it could lead to the same being done in England & Wales.

[youthoftoday]

The English don't subsidise the Scots - do you believe everything the BBC says? The Barnett formula pays out more to the Scots per person, but it ignores the fact the Scots pay more per person in the first place.

In 2003-4 the Government spent £45.3 billion, putting Scotland in a rare club of countries where state spending is more than half of the entire economy. Only £34 billion was generated in tax. The remaining £11.3 billion was subsidised by English taxpayers.

Can you explain how it is the Scots pay more per person in the first place?

Edited August 15, 2007 by youthoftoday

[Guest anorthosite]

In 2003-4 the Government spent £45.3 billion, putting Scotland in a rare club of countries where state spending is more than half of the entire economy. Only £34 billion was generated in tax. The remaining £11.3 billion was subsidised by English taxpayers.

Can you explain how it is the Scots pay more per person in the first place?

Because Scotland is one of the richest parts of the UK. Apart from the London & south east areas its the richest place in the UK.

London gets even more spent on it per person than the rest of the country (over £8000), yet we don't hear constant complaints about London being subsidised by the rest of the UK.

[Chrysalis]

whilst the poll tax wasnt perfect I felt its fairer then the current system although I was too young at the time to understand it. But if I understand it correctly it means the following.

Based on number of adults living in property so more related to ability to pay and certianly better on singletons then a meagre 25% discount.

On empty properties if taxed based on number of rooms would discourage buy to leave culture.

I think the fairest proposal was the lib dems local income tax purely based on ability to pay, for empty properties they could simply multiply per properties.

So if paying 5% of income as local income tax and own 3 properties then pay 15% of income.

[iamnumerate]

I was quite young when the Poll tax was introduced.

I thought the Poll tax was introduced on the rich and poor alike in equal measures?

Surely not the fairest way of doing things?

I'll stand for a better infomred poster to come along.

It was unworkable. I have lodgers who move every 6 months on average - a poll tax would cost so much too collect.

[Guest anorthosite]

I think the fairest proposal was the lib dems local income tax purely based on ability to pay, for empty properties they could simply multiply per properties.

So if paying 5% of income as local income tax and own 3 properties then pay 15% of income.

A basic form of local income tax will hopefully be coming to Scotland soon, but I like your idea for multiple properties. Its quite delightfully evil

[iamnumerate]

Take 2 identical houses next to each other. Me and my girlfriend living in one, family of 6 living in the one next door. Both homes earn the same income - why should I pay the same for local services as a family of six - I will throw away less waste etc.

If you get burgled you get the same number of police as they do. The street light outside your house is the same strenght. It is very difficult to tax according to use of services if not impossible.

Why are we so keen on peanalising those who work hard and achieve in this country - is it any wonder a large amount become non-dom tax exiles?

I agree with that taxes should be lowered. They and the benefits systems should also be simplier - the poll tax would be more complicated.

[South Lorne]

Because Scotland is one of the richest parts of the UK. Apart from the London & south east areas its the richest place in the UK.

London gets even more spent on it per person than the rest of the country (over £8000), yet we don't hear constant complaints about London being subsidised by the rest of the UK.

...if this financial bubble keeps deflating ...."the City of" will looking for subsidies from the BofE.......

Edited August 15, 2007 by South Lorne

[youthoftoday]

Because Scotland is one of the richest parts of the UK. Apart from the London & south east areas its the richest place in the UK.

London gets even more spent on it per person than the rest of the country (over £8000), yet we don't hear constant complaints about London being subsidised by the rest of the UK.

Can you provide actual statistical evidence that Scots pay more tax per capita than the English? If you can, do they pay £1500 per capita more in tax so as to offset the £1500 per capita additional public spending?

Now, in 2003-4 the Government spent £45.3 billion on Scotland and only £34 billion was generated in tax. This leaves £11.3 billion to be subsidised by English taxpayers. Rough and ready calcs: 5 million Scots, £45.3bn = £9060 per capita spending, £34bn tax revenue = £6800 per capita. Deficit = £2260 per capita. This means that Scots are not self-sufficient, they rely on subsidies from the English taxpayer. Basically they are spongers.

[Guest anorthosite]

Can you provide actual statistical evidence that Scots pay more tax per capita than the English? If you can, do they pay £1500 per capita more in tax so as to offset the £1500 per capita additional public spending?

Now, in 2003-4 the Government spent £45.3 billion on Scotland and only £34 billion was generated in tax. This leaves £11.3 billion to be subsidised by English taxpayers. Rough and ready calcs: 5 million Scots, £45.3bn = £9060 per capita spending, £34bn tax revenue = £6800 per capita. Deficit = £2260 per capita. This means that Scots are not self-sufficient, they rely on subsidies from the English taxpayer. Basically they are spongers.

I'm at work, so I don't really have time to look it up (I spend too much time here as it is).

However, it should be noted that Scottish oil dragged the UK economy through the near bankruptcyof the early 80s, something that has never been repaid.

Also if you're going to use phrases like "they are spongers" you go forget it, I really can't be bothered debating with an Engerlander. People like you are the reason the Scots gets such a chuckle at the West Lothian question.

[South Lorne]

I'm at work, so I don't really have time to look it up (I spend too much time here as it is).

People like you are the reason the Scots gets such a chuckle at the West Lothian question.

........quite right...the spineless south of the border vote Labour...to keep Brown in.....time to take stock and vote anyone but and sort out the rest later.....after all freedom is a country's first basic need......with Brown , Nulabour and the West Lothian question 'you ain't got it'.............

[youthoftoday]

I'm at work, so I don't really have time to look it up (I spend too much time here as it is).

However, it should be noted that Scottish oil dragged the UK economy through the near bankruptcyof the early 80s, something that has never been repaid.

Also if you're going to use phrases like "they are spongers" you go forget it, I really can't be bothered debating with an Engerlander. People like you are the reason the Scots gets such a chuckle at the West Lothian question.

Actually, to be honest I quite like the Scots. My brother is married to one and lives there, lovely place, lovely people. I also have Scottish ancestry if I go back to Great-grandparents, along with more recent English and Irish ancestry, so I'm only 1/2 English and I'm breeding that out of my decendents as my wife is French and thus my children are 1/2 French, 1/4 English, 1/4 Irish!

As likeable as the Scots are it doesn't change the fact that the English subsidise them.

The English also subsidise Northern Ireland, another lovely place, more lovely people, lived there many years myself, lots of family there as well. All this still doesn't alter the fact that they are heavily subsidised by the English.

Edited August 15, 2007 by youthoftoday

[Guest pioneer31]

Some daft logic on this board. People don't like the idea of a multi millionaire paying the same as a 'poor bloke'. It seems very important that the rich are hit harder regardless of what you are paying. It's typical old Labour mindset - "punish anyone who is doing better than me, make 'em pay!!!"

As long as I'm not fleeced, I don't care what Johnny Millionaire pays.

meanwhile, we have the unfair council tax fair. A widow living in a modest house (how dare she!) is fleeced - paying the same as the BTL next door stuffed full of polish immigrants!

:angry: :angry:

Edited August 15, 2007 by pioneer31

[Guest anorthosite]

As likeable as the Scots are it doesn't change the fact that the English subsidise them.

The English also subsidise Northern Ireland, another lovely place, more lovely people, lived there many years myself, lots of family there as well. All this still doesn't alter the fact that they are heavily subsidised by the English.

This whole subsidy thing only came up when the Scots made noises about independence. Its like an abusive husband telling his wife she can't leave because she'll be nothing without him.

If the Scots were subsidy junkies they would have been given independence a long time ago. Margaret Thatcher would have loved to have gotten rid of us, but the Scottish oil money stopped the UK's economy collapsing.

Edited August 15, 2007 by anorthosite

[Guest pioneer31]

What a total waste of time this thread is.

The poll tax was completely discredited when brought in, was impossible to collect, led to riots on the streets and ultimately to the political death of Mrs Thatcher.

John Major ditched it about 20 seconds after becoming PM and replaced it with a simplified version of the rates.

Only a mad Tory with a death wish would even consider re-introducing it.

A local income tax does appeal to me as an alternative though.

Mainly because I'm a self-employed tradesman with declared earnings of around £15k a year. I'd save a mint!

What a strange country we live in. IIRC the council tax in my area was about £450/year. Students and unemployed paid 20%. Some paid nothing.

A £450 annual bill caused riots on the streets of Britain.

Contrast with today. More taxes than ever. Housing completely out of reach for a whole generation. People borrowing amounts that not only totally dwarf's the council tax but guarantee financial slavery for life.Nobody utters a murmur.

What the hell is wrong with you all? ??????

Edited August 15, 2007 by pioneer31

[svag]

Actually, to be honest I quite like the Scots. My brother is married to one and lives there, lovely place, lovely people. I also have Scottish ancestry if I go back to Great-grandparents, along with more recent English and Irish ancestry, so I'm only 1/2 English and I'm breeding that out of my decendents as my wife is French and thus my children are 1/2 French, 1/4 English, 1/4 Irish!

As likeable as the Scots are it doesn't change the fact that the English subsidise them.

The English also subsidise Northern Ireland, another lovely place, more lovely people, lived there many years myself, lots of family there as well. All this still doesn't alter the fact that they are heavily subsidised by the English.

I have posted this previously

There was research carried out by Oxfor Economics for the City of London Corporation in 2006 and I quote

"But our calculations

show clearly that the widely recognised picture of

England ‘subsidising’ other parts of the UK does

not tell the full story. In practice it is not England as

a whole that is subsidising other parts of the UK,

but the most prosperous parts of the UK

‘subsidising’ both the non-English parts of the UK

and the rest of England as well. It is only the wider

south east (Greater London, the South East and

the Eastern Region) that made a positive net

contribution to the UK public finances in 2004/05,

with the northern regions, the midlands and the

South West joining Northern Ireland, Wales and

Scotland as a net drain on the exchequer."

[youthoftoday]

I have posted this previously

There was research carried out by Oxfor Economics for the City of London Corporation in 2006 and I quote

"But our calculations

show clearly that the widely recognised picture of

England ‘subsidising’ other parts of the UK does

not tell the full story. In practice it is not England as

a whole that is subsidising other parts of the UK,

but the most prosperous parts of the UK

‘subsidising’ both the non-English parts of the UK

and the rest of England as well. It is only the wider

south east (Greater London, the South East and

the Eastern Region) that made a positive net

contribution to the UK public finances in 2004/05,

with the northern regions, the midlands and the

South West joining Northern Ireland, Wales and

Scotland as a net drain on the exchequer."

Don't get me started on Northerners or the Welsh

[huw]

Don't get me started on Northerners or the Welsh

Act of Union with Wales

"The Act of Union with Wales came about between the years 1536 and 1543 as a result of a series of laws passed in the English Parliament."

If you don't like the current arrangements, blame your ancestors

[nick22abdn]

Since you are Scottish / living in Scotland may I provide you with instructions on how you can give me a £1500 per annum rebate to repay the subsidy all you Scots get from the the English taxpayer?

Not Scottish, originally from Essex - just up here for a few years. I would also count myself as an English taxpayer seeing as it is Ltd company registered in England that I own and to them that I have to send a cheque for corporation tax. As I don't withdraw anything from local services (health etc) I really can't understand how I am being subsidised. Please explain

[apom]

Your all mad if you think the poll tax was a good idea. You pay the same for services if your living in a 12 bedroom mansion or just renting one room. How the hell was that fair?. Bring it back and ill kick your asses again, just like i did last time.

Large houses would rocket in value and smaller ones would stay the same. THINK! please.

It was going to cost us about 2 quid a day to live in the uk. If you were on ten thousand a year, or ten million, it made no differance.

It was a tax, everyone paid it, that was fair...

But it did not vary as to earnings...

Perhaps we need some sort of tax, a pay as you earn tax...

Surely with one of those we would need nothing else...

There is no point in taxing those on benifit, just drop the benifit and loose the paperwork..

I remember seeing that collecting and processing tax is a fair part of the actual revenue, if there was only one tax things would get cheeper to process.

Less tax..

Sorry, less tax... Labour scum... pah..

I was a student when the poll tax came and I paid it.

My mate paid it for two years while he was doing a HND at bristol...

After the HND he was eligible for a full grant from Bristol to go to another university to get a degree..

eligible as he had been paying poll tax at Bristol

Play the system.

Edited August 15, 2007 by apom

[patprimer74]

Act of Union with Wales

"The Act of Union with Wales came about between the years 1536 and 1543 as a result of a series of laws passed in the English Parliament."

If you don't like the current arrangements, blame your ancestors

I have to tell you that 'Schoolhistory', whoever they are, are mistaken. There have never been any Acts of Union between England and Wales. One of the Acts passed during the dates mentioned, famously starts with the words "Wales is, and always has been, part of this my realm." (In Latin, of course.) For any Act of Union, you obviously have to have two parties; these acts were nothing of the sort - they were more like declarations by Henry.

You will also find that, not only were they not given the titles of 'Acts of Union' at the time, it wasn't until some 350 years later - in the early 20th century - that some people started to give them this name just to give the impression that there had been some independence prior to this 'union'. There was, of course, no such independence. Prior to a hundred years or so ago, they had never been called 'Acts of Union'. That is why you will find in all the serious academic work that quote them, the words are placed in quotes.

Dyna'r gwir - cred fi. Dyma un testyn 'rwyn deall yn berffaith!

p