Stupid Question???

[Finney on the Wing]

Would definitely forgo the Owls winning the League just to see the

 

smug, self-serving Tory scum kicked out of government.

[Guest The Horse]

Just seen this thread and thought I'd go straight to the last page to see how far the bickering had developed.

Thing is now, whatever your allegiance, any side can pick up on lies and contradictions from the other.

Quote figures that back them up and put down the others.

And no amount of debate or arguing will sway anyone with a different view.

We've all made our minds up.

We've all chosen a side.

Nothing will sway your opinion now.

So be nice to your fellow Wednesday fans here. Or get this moved to the politics section.

WAWAW.

 

But in response to the OP, Wednesday every time!

[Harrysgame]

38 minutes ago, sten said:

 

I don't think an extra 5% would hurt those highest earners, do you? We're talking £80k plus here. It really is a small percentage of the population. Where would they go? We are a country whose tax rates are among the lowest in the world already! Do your own fact checking; I'm afraid the 'they'll leave the country' argument is fairly tragic.

 

Not so low, when you factor 20% on all purchases. Then death duties etc, which really hits wealthier sectors. Return on savings etc.

 

[Guest Ash76]

Easy, election. The country is f*cked and needs drastic and radical change, only one party capable of delivering that

[TrickyTrev]

15 minutes ago, Ash76 said:

Easy, election. The country is f*cked and needs drastic and radical change, only one party capable of delivering that

 

[cross owl]

17 minutes ago, Ash76 said:

Easy, election. The country is f*cked and needs drastic and radical change, only one party capable of delivering that

 

 

  Which ?

[cross owl]

1 minute ago, TrickyTrev said:

 

 

 

  It's funny because it's true 

[The Dukeries Owl]

53 minutes ago, TrickyTrev said:

 

 

These days he would be the focus for the centre ground.

[nevthelodgemoorowl]

A massive ***** in Johnsons armour as he is oblivious to the plight of those along the banks of the Don. Sympathy didn't trigger him but the opportunity should have done and he has missed that opportunity. He has more waffles than an American breakfast bar and his 'Get this Done' line is becoming a bore.

 

A little pride restored in the Wednesdayite sensibility compared to some of the guff appearing on the politics page. Well done fellow Owls !  

[shandypants]

5 hours ago, LondonOwl313 said:

Well there’s a few problems with this.. one is it diminishes aspiration as there’s no point pushing yourself to earn more if they just tax it all so productivity takes a hit

 

And the other one is that if, as you say, it’s a small percentage of the population, then it isn’t going to raise anywhere near enough revenue to make a difference 

 

They need to focus on wealth taxes but in a way that doesn’t crash the economy. So probably levies on ultra high net worth and inheritance taxes are the way to go 

 

5 hours ago, Harrysgame said:

Not so low, when you factor 20% on all purchases. Then death duties etc, which really hits wealthier sectors. Return on savings etc.

 

I’m assuming that you two know how tax bands work? You do know that it would be an only increase on earnings over the tax bracket? E.g. someone earning £100,000 per year would pay an extra £1000 in tax if the increase was 5% on an £80,000 upper tax threshold. If someone can’t afford that then they’re either selfish, greedy, in all sorts of financial trouble or all three. 
 

Also, I am assuming that you two know that higher rate tax bands have increased and decreased over the years and not triggered mass influx or exodus of people to or from this country? 

 

Also, I am assuming that you two know that the Tory government has been trying to close current tax loopholes for a few years now - loopholes that would affect the very people and organisations that I believe you allude to. 

The “Tax Punishment” argument is flawed and just cheap politics. 

 

BTW, and for the record, I am no Corbyn supporter although I do feel that change is needed and would welcome a non-Tory government. 

Edited November 14, 2019 by shandypants

[Guest LondonOwl313]

4 hours ago, shandypants said:

 

I’m assuming that you two know how tax bands work? You do know that it would be an only increase on earnings over the tax bracket? E.g. someone earning £100,000 per year would pay an extra £1000 in tax if the increase was 5% on an £80,000 upper tax threshold. If someone can’t afford that then they’re either selfish, greedy, in all sorts of financial trouble or all three. 
 

Also, I am assuming that you two know that higher rate tax bands have increased and decreased over the years and not triggered mass influx or exodus of people to or from this country? 

 

Also, I am assuming that you two know that the Tory government has been trying to close current tax loopholes for a few years now - loopholes that would affect the very people and organisations that I believe you allude to. 

The “Tax Punishment” argument is flawed and just cheap politics. 

 

BTW, and for the record, I am no Corbyn supporter although I do feel that change is needed and would welcome a non-Tory government. 

I think there's a misconception that someone who earns £100,000 a year is wealthy... they aren't particularly. On average they'll be middle aged with a family to support, live in London with high house prices and working long hours. So I think a lot of them deserve their money tbh. My main point is that if you earn £100k, you're probably in the top 2% of earners. So if 2% of people pay an extra grand, it doesn't add up to very much at all in the context of raising money to benefit everybody.

 

Most of the people who are actually wealthy don't pay much income tax as most of their money comes from dividends and capital gains, or inheritance. These things are taxed at a much lower rate. Should go after that if they want to see inequality drop... these things would help whereas heavy income tax just stops social climbing which is a bad idea.

 

Think Corbyn and friends (McDonnell, Abbott etc) are completely unelectable. The problem with this government is we have no effective opposition. Will take another Tory win for Corbyn to quit and maybe then Labour can get someone in who most people can vote for

[Harrysgame]

4 hours ago, shandypants said:

 

I’m assuming that you two know how tax bands work? You do know that it would be an only increase on earnings over the tax bracket? E.g. someone earning £100,000 per year would pay an extra £1000 in tax if the increase was 5% on an £80,000 upper tax threshold. If someone can’t afford that then they’re either selfish, greedy, in all sorts of financial trouble or all three. 
 

Also, I am assuming that you two know that higher rate tax bands have increased and decreased over the years and not triggered mass influx or exodus of people to or from this country? 

 

Also, I am assuming that you two know that the Tory government has been trying to close current tax loopholes for a few years now - loopholes that would affect the very people and organisations that I believe you allude to. 

The “Tax Punishment” argument is flawed and just cheap politics. 

 

BTW, and for the record, I am no Corbyn supporter although I do feel that change is needed and would welcome a non-Tory government. 

Quite aware of how tax bands work. Filling in self assesments etc etc, gives a slight insight.

It is not just the bands though is it. We may have a low tax band but it does not stop there does it. It is all the other taxes, duty on fuel etc, inheritance tax, tax on savings etc. I assume that Labour would need to increase tax, duties etc or extra tax for wealthier people / companies. This would seem to be cutting your nose off to spite your face. Capitalism is what made this country a success and allowed us to build the society we have now. Anything that discourages companies, entrepeneurs  and the wealth economy will just lead to increased government debt, that in and future government will need to pay off.

Think history tells us that the type of socialism that Corbyn and his cronies wish for has been shown to be an abject failure in most countries.

Not saying what we have is perfect but it can get a lot worse with the amateurs standing in the wings.

 

[s.armo]

15 hours ago, cross owl said:

 

 

  And the several billion pounds will come from where , tax everyone to the hilt , make britain an undesirable place for all business by squeezing them until they leave . And you really think there would be any train on time if it was bought back . They would spend most of the time stood still during yet another strike . Europeans have a different outlook to the british that's why , nothing to do with who owns it . Sorry but in my experience unions make more problems than they solve . The care about their power , their own jobs followed by the jobs of the union members and britain doesn't even figure at any level  . Do exactly as we demand or we are on strike and if britain crumbles I couldn't care less as our members have what we wanted . Just my opinion which I imagine is the polar opposite of yours . 

Yes the tax will come from the big corporations who have their accounts off shore to avoid paying tax .And as for the tories raising the higher tax bracket from £50,000 to £80,000 that is a loss of 9.5 billion less into our coffers.

I think there are enough businesses leaving Britain because of Brexit

Why do Europeans have a different outlook to us? their public transport makes ours look 3rd world all their employees are union members.

Sick pay,maternity pay.working hours and many other benefits gained over the years by unions

Yes we are polar opposites

[Harrysgame]

22 minutes ago, s.armo said:

Yes the tax will come from the big corporations who have their accounts off shore to avoid paying tax .And as for the tories raising the higher tax bracket from £50,000 to £80,000 that is a loss of 9.5 billion less into our coffers.

I think there are enough businesses leaving Britain because of Brexit

Why do Europeans have a different outlook to us? their public transport makes ours look 3rd world all their employees are union members.

Sick pay,maternity pay.working hours and many other benefits gained over the years by unions

Yes we are polar opposites

Think in many European states, there seems to be an attitude where they want to make a contribution to their country by working and building a better state. Sorry to say but there seems to be a high number of people who seem to be happy to think that the state will provide them with everything from cash, housing all for free without putting effort in themselves. We obviously must have provision for the people in our society who need help the most but simple economics should tell all that you can't just take forever.

As for taxing corporations more all very well until they move countries or decide to build in a different plant.

Need to support business and those people who genuinely  need help. 

 

[Harrysgame]

Back to the Football, can't imagine our players would be too happy with a Labour win, think of the tax they would pay.

 

I do have a suggestion though if Corbyn reduced the Vat rate on football tickets then would that stop the ticket price moaners on here!

[Gnarwolf]

2 hours ago, LondonOwl313 said:

I think there's a misconception that someone who earns £100,000 a year is wealthy... they aren't particularly. On average they'll be middle aged with a family to support, live in London with high house prices and working long hours. So I think a lot of them deserve their money tbh. My main point is that if you earn £100k, you're probably in the top 2% of earners. So if 2% of people pay an extra grand, it doesn't add up to very much at all in the context of raising money to benefit everybody.

 

Most of the people who are actually wealthy don't pay much income tax as most of their money comes from dividends and capital gains, or inheritance. These things are taxed at a much lower rate. Should go after that if they want to see inequality drop... these things would help whereas heavy income tax just stops social climbing which is a bad idea.

 

Think Corbyn and friends (McDonnell, Abbott etc) are completely unelectable. The problem with this government is we have no effective opposition. Will take another Tory win for Corbyn to quit and maybe then Labour can get someone in who most people can vote for

 

People who earn 100k aren't wealthy apparently... What an absolute flipping joke, it's literally insulting... Need to get yourself in the politics section where someone was claiming they struggled on 70k a year, you'll fit right in

[shandypants]

1 hour ago, LondonOwl313 said:

I think there's a misconception that someone who earns £100,000 a year is wealthy... they aren't particularly. On average they'll be middle aged with a family to support, live in London with high house prices and working long hours. So I think a lot of them deserve their money tbh. My main point is that if you earn £100k, you're probably in the top 2% of earners. So if 2% of people pay an extra grand, it doesn't add up to very much at all in the context of raising money to benefit everybody.

 

Most of the people who are actually wealthy don't pay much income tax as most of their money comes from dividends and capital gains, or inheritance. These things are taxed at a much lower rate. Should go after that if they want to see inequality drop... these things would help whereas heavy income tax just stops social climbing which is a bad idea.

 

Think Corbyn and friends (McDonnell, Abbott etc) are completely unelectable. The problem with this government is we have no effective opposition. Will take another Tory win for Corbyn to quit and maybe then Labour can get someone in who most people can vote for

I never said that being on £100,000 made you wealthy; I was illustrating the tax implications of an increase at the higher tax bracket. I sympathise with your desire for a less extreme opposition but how much of this is propaganda from the Tory press and how much is truth? None of us really know. My opinion is that if Labour win a majority, the moderates will take control and Corbyn will be a figure head in a similar way to how the ERG control the Conservatives via bumbling Boris. 
 

As I stated earlier, I am a moderate but right now, I’d rather have Corbyn and McDonald than Boris and the ERG. 

[shandypants]

18 minutes ago, Harrysgame said:

Back to the Football, can't imagine our players would be too happy with a Labour win, think of the tax they would pay.

 

I do have a suggestion though if Corbyn reduced the Vat rate on football tickets then would that stop the ticket price moaners on here!

Sorry mate but thats not going “back to football”. Also, why should we allow footballers to guide our opinions?

[shandypants]

26 minutes ago, Harrysgame said:

Think in many European states, there seems to be an attitude where they want to make a contribution to their country by working and building a better state. Sorry to say but there seems to be a high number of people who seem to be happy to think that the state will provide them with everything from cash, housing all for free without putting effort in themselves. We obviously must have provision for the people in our society who need help the most but simple economics should tell all that you can't just take forever.

As for taxing corporations more all very well until they move countries or decide to build in a different plant.

Need to support business and those people who genuinely  need help. 

 

You’re au fait with the “free market”  scare mongering tripe I see. If you look around the world, you’ll see big organisations in countries with far more restrictive tax rules than ours - Germany and France for example who, along with the UK, are the economic powerhouses in Europe. 

[Guest LondonOwl313]

34 minutes ago, Gnarwolf said:

 

People who earn 100k aren't wealthy apparently... What an absolute flipping joke, it's literally insulting... Need to get yourself in the politics section where someone was claiming they struggled on 70k a year, you'll fit right in

You obviously don't have an appreciation of how expensive it is in London... I'm on £60k here so I'd guess you'd say I'm well off and should pay more tax. But it's all relative... I pay a grand a month in a house share for what's basically a bedroom, have little prospect of buying a place of my own, and everything is expensive. If you go out, you're looking at £5.50 for a pint and given the culture here is to head out for a few after work on a semi regular basis it adds up. Not going to lie, £60k in London is basically the same as about £35k in Sheffield.

 

Given most of the 'high' earners are concentrated in London then I'd say yes they're not that well off. I know lots of people on £100k+ and they work very hard for their money, and lots of them are 40-50, have a family to provide for with many of them having family all over the country so they have to pay for childcare which is very expensive here.

 

Just saying if you look at how much disposable income people have left over it's not a huge amount.

 

There are literally billions upon billions of financial assets which are mainly owned by the top 1% with minimal taxes paid on them as they all have clever accountants. Your average guy on £100k a year is a sitting duck via PAYE.. he's just like you or me but sacrifices more of his life to work than we do. If they really wanted to fix inequality, then wealth taxes is the way... particularly as these people have benefited disproportionately from low interests over the last decade as it's inflated the price of everything

 

 

Edited November 14, 2019 by LondonOwl313