Should the rich pay more?

Phil1974

Phil1974

Suspended / Banned
Messages
868
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
Yes
After listening to a rather angry caller on LBC radio today, saying that higher earners should pay substantially more tax than lower earners, I was wondering if I was in a big minority who thinks this is unfair? Why should people who have (generally) worked blooming hard to attain a job worthy of a large salary be penalised?
 
Phil1974 said:
After listening to a rather angry caller on LBC radio today, saying that higher earners should pay substantially more tax than lower earners, I was wondering if I was in a big minority who thinks this is unfair? Why should people who have (generally) worked blooming hard to attain a job worthy of a large salary be penalised?
Click to expand...

I pay enough tax thanks why should I pay even more just because I earn a bit more than the next guy?
 
Because you have the means to? I wouldn't class it as bring penalised. I see it more as a responsibility. The money isn't being wasted (the depends on how you look at things) but goes to improving services and support for the entire country.
 
Last edited:
Actually, people who earn more DO pay more tax. ie 20% of £30k is more than 20% of £20k. Then there are those that fall into the 40% tax bracket who pay even more.
 
pepi1967 said:
So? I have the means to because I work for it. Why should I have to give it away?
Click to expand...

Well if you were assume that everyone were to pay the same percentage of their earnings as a tax, then yes, you'd pay more. And quite rightly so. Or do you believe you should be taxed at a lower percentage than those less fortunate than you?
 
Wealthier people do pay more, considerably more.

A lot of people pay no tax.

A lot pay 20%

Over 40k (give or take) you'll fall into a 40% tax bracket.

If you earn over £150k you have to pay an extortionate 50% tax which is disgusting.

Not sure the point of the question?
 
Last edited:
I don't think they should.

If someone is hard working or enterprising or just lucky, all the best to them.

What we should do is ensure that everyone pays their full amount.

Edit: I mean as a % of earnings.
 
I love the government's latest soundbite that it's "immoral" to avoid tax! Which level of tax is it particularly immoral to avoid? 20%? 40%? 50% this year or 45% next year? 96% in the mid-1970s? Is it more immoral for a Frenchman to avoid 75% tax than an American avoiding 21% tax?

Or was the famous American jurist, Judge Learned Hand right all along when he cut through the deliberately incomprehensible verbiage of the Inland Revenue and said "there is nothing sinister in so arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible"
 
What's that old cliche? 95% of the wealth belongs to 5% of the population. That disgusts me.
 
You're all missing the point here.
Tax payers who pay the 20%/40% the rest of us do, pay their fair share. The ones who exploit loopholes and pay next to nothing, like when vodafone got out if paying billions in tax are the ones you should worry about.
No richer people shouldn't pay 50% or 60% they should pay the same rates as you and I. (I'm not rich by the way).
This problem will never go away though and I'll tell you why......
Businesses run politicians, through contributions, through funny hand shakes and mostly because big politicians are share holders in big companies, so tax dodging increases their dividends.

This will never change until politics is funded by the tax payer, political contributions are made illegal, after all bribery is illegal to the rest of us.
And no political leaders are allowed to be share holders in companies or be connected to them.

Then and only then will everyone pay equal tax contributions as we all should for the good and benefit of society.
 
Yves Geza said:
I love the government's latest soundbite that it's "immoral" to avoid tax! Which level of tax is it particularly immoral to avoid? 20%? 40%? 50% this year or 45% next year? 96% in the mid-1970s? Is it more immoral for a Frenchman to avoid 75% tax than an American avoiding 21% tax?

Or was the famous American jurist, Judge Learned Hand right all along when he cut through the deliberately incomprehensible verbiage of the Inland Revenue and said "there is nothing sinister in so arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible"
Click to expand...

I agree with both of these points.

The gov. get themselves into ridiculous position by talking about morality when they should be adjusting the legal position to minimise tax avoidance.

You can't blame rich people or companies for taking advantage of the law as it stands.
 
I personally don't think "morals" have any place in the tax argument.
I am Mrs average. I pay an average amount of income tax on an average income. But if I were Mrs "slightly above, or considerably above average" and I had a legal LEGAL option to pay as little tax as possible, then I would take that option. Morals have no place in that thought for me and I would lose no sleep.
 
odd jim said:
Wealthier people do pay more, considerably more.

A lot of people pay no tax.

A lot pay 20%

Over 40k (give or take) you'll fall into a 40% tax bracket.

If you earn over £150k you have to pay an extortionate 50% tax which is disgusting.

Not sure the point of the question?
Click to expand...

Sorry Jim, your example was my exact point. Higher earners already pay more. The chap on the radio, and others, seemed to believe they should be taxed even more because they could "afford it". I think everyone paying the same % is fair but not sure why higher earners should pay any more than they are now.
 
Ricardodaforce said:
Well if you were assume that everyone were to pay the same percentage of their earnings as a tax, then yes, you'd pay more. And quite rightly so. Or do you believe you should be taxed at a lower percentage than those less fortunate than you?
Click to expand...

No I think every one should pay the same tax rate regardless of what they earn.
 
it's not so much the tax that annoys me, it's the ineffieciencies within local, regional councils and the government... as a whole.

If any of them were run as a FTSE100 the savings would be astronomical , cutting out the red tape and bureaucracy... thereby lower taxes for all.

However, I guess Johnny Taxpayer is needed to fund those civil servant final salary pension schemes!!
 
I think we have too many taxes. By which, I don't mean we pay too much tax.

Our wages are taxed, then when we go to buy something, it's taxed again in the form of VAT. We pay council tax, national insurance, etc.

There should be just one tax on income which would have to be higher than it is now and scrap all the rest.

And whilst I am a recipient of tax credits and child allowance, why do they take tax from me then use two separate departments who don't talk to each other to work out how much of it to give back? Just scrap the tax credits and child allowance and reduce my income tax to compensate.


Steve.
 
Well if you add on NI when you hit he 40% mark you in fact start paying 50% (just getting used to all this) and it is a pain in the balls i am told. then the bloke over the road on the dole get every sodding thing paid for.. and works on the sly.. makes my blood boil hubby works where he does and with out a day off in 12 weeks to pay for people like that.
 
gumbo-67 said:
Well if you add on NI when you hit he 40% mark you in fact start paying 50% (just getting used to all this) and it is a pain in the balls i am told. then the bloke over the road on the dole get every sodding thing paid for.. and works on the sly.. makes my blood boil hubby works where he does and with out a day off in 12 weeks to pay for people like that.
Click to expand...

Take responsibility then. Stop complaining and do something about it.
 
gumbo-67 said:
Well if you add on NI when you hit he 40% mark you in fact start paying 50% (just getting used to all this) and it is a pain in the balls i am told. then the bloke over the road on the dole get every sodding thing paid for.. and works on the sly.. makes my blood boil hubby works where he does and with out a day off in 12 weeks to pay for people like that.
Click to expand...

And it's hardworking people who do earn the cash pay for the people on the dole so why should we pay even more tax than we already do? I pay more than I think is fare already.
 
Maybe it should be re-phrased as 'More rich people should pay tax'?
 
pepi1967 said:
And it's hardworking people who do earn the cash pay for the people on the dole so why should we pay even more tax than we already do? I pay more than I think is fare already.
Click to expand...

Exactley
 
Any one called Rich should definitely pay more tax.
 
Let's get something clear. All rich people are not loophole exploiters. All benefit recipients are not cheats. Continue.
 
KayJay said:
Let's get something clear. All rich people are not loophole exploiters. All benefit recipients are not cheats. Continue.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Kayjay i didn't say they were but when you have to live and see what is going and i put up with it first hand it bloody annoys
 
Phil1974 said:
Sorry Jim, your example was my exact point. Higher earners already pay more. The chap on the radio, and others, seemed to believe they should be taxed even more because they could "afford it". I think everyone paying the same % is fair but not sure why higher earners should pay any more than they are now.
Click to expand...

Oh I see what you mean.

In that case no I don't think they should pay more!
 
Yes, the rich should both pay more than those poorer than them, and also more than they do now.

Not only do the rich control an overwhelming amount of the nation's wealth, but the gap between the richest and the poorest continues to grow at an alarming rate.

This article is a particularly interesting read. I deliberately chose a Telegraph article rather than a more strongly worded analysis you'd find from the Guardian etc.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...rich-and-poor-growing-fastest-in-Britain.html

The biggest problem is the inevitable correlation of wealth and power in society. How do you enforce higher taxes on the rich, when the rich have the greatest influence and often the final say? This was perfectly illustrated by the French President's attempt to implement a 75% tax rate on earners of over €1m that fell on its face once it reached their Constitutional Council.

Then there's the topic of tax avoidance schemes that typically only the rich have access to. That really makes my blood boil.
 
Last edited:
Don't put up with it. You'll only have yourself to blame.
 
I'd rather the massive amount of people who don't pay taxes actually contributed...
 
Ricardodaforce said:
What's that old cliche? 95% of the wealth belongs to 5% of the population. That disgusts me.
Click to expand...

It doesn't worry me at all. That's just the politics of envy! [and I'm very far from being one of those 5%]

What is important is not how rich the richest are - nor even the gap between rich and poor. The only thing that's important is how "un-poor" the poorest are!
 
gumbo-67 said:
Well if you add on NI when you hit he 40% mark you in fact start paying 50% (just getting used to all this) and it is a pain in the balls i am told.
Click to expand...

No, you don't. When you reach the 40% income tax band, NI contributions go down to 2% at the same time so you pay 42% of your income above the threshold.
 
Mark as i said this is all new to us and as we have been informed we have to pay employee and employer NI due to the nature of the job. . very complicated
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top