Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

ukip (LOCKED)

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 39 of 311 < 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 >

Topic Locked

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 14 May 14 8.35am
Quote kangel at 14 May 2014 8.28am Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies. Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS? That's a surprise. Do you think lots of people are supporting UKIP because they disagree with their policies then? I think a lot of people are ignorant of their policies beyond the European question.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 14 May 14 8.35am

Quote kangel at 14 May 2014 8.28am

Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm

Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm

Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies.

Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS?
That's a surprise.

Do you think lots of people are supporting UKIP because they disagree with their policies then?

I think a lot of people are ignorant of their policies beyond the European question.

Alert a moderator to this post

Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 14 May 14 8.38am
Quote Romford-Eagle at 14 May 2014 1.14am UKIP cos they are the only party which will stick two fingers upto the rest of Europe, and make Britain great again, UKIP will not be in any position to deliver and pull the UK out of the EU.They can promise what they like knowing they will never be in a position to fulfil any promises.It is only the 'Conservatives' who are promising a referendum where the people will decide.
Alert a moderator to this post

Willo

South coast - west of Brighton. 14 May 14 8.38am

Quote Romford-Eagle at 14 May 2014 1.14am
UKIP cos they are the only party which will stick two fingers upto the rest of Europe, and make Britain great again,

UKIP will not be in any position to deliver and pull the UK out of the EU.They can promise what they like knowing they will never be in a position to fulfil any promises.It is only the 'Conservatives' who are promising a referendum where the people will decide.

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 14 May 14 8.43am
Quote Willo at 14 May 2014 8.38am Quote Romford-Eagle at 14 May 2014 1.14am UKIP cos they are the only party which will stick two fingers upto the rest of Europe, and make Britain great again, UKIP will not be in any position to deliver and pull the UK out of the EU.They can promise what they like knowing they will never be in a position to fulfil any promises.It is only the 'Conservatives' who are promising a referendum where the people will decide. Didn't the Tories promise a referendum last time, too?
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 14 May 14 8.43am

Quote Willo at 14 May 2014 8.38am

Quote Romford-Eagle at 14 May 2014 1.14am
UKIP cos they are the only party which will stick two fingers upto the rest of Europe, and make Britain great again,

Didn't the Tories promise a referendum last time, too?

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 14 May 14 8.51am
Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies. Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS? That's a surprise. I must admit I've never understood the objection to this. Simplifies the tax system, and is completely fair - regardless of what you earn, you pay x% of it to the governement, whether that be x% of £10,000, or x% of £2,000,000. I've never seen any logic behind the idea that earning more should alter the percentage you pay. Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible.
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 14 May 14 8.51am

Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm

Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm

Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies.

Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS?
That's a surprise.

I must admit I've never understood the objection to this. Simplifies the tax system, and is completely fair - regardless of what you earn, you pay x% of it to the governement, whether that be x% of £10,000, or x% of £2,000,000. I've never seen any logic behind the idea that earning more should alter the percentage you pay.

Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible.

Alert a moderator to this post

Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 14 May 14 8.59am
Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.43am Didn't the Tories promise a referendum last time, too? Mr Cameron was intent on a referendum on the 'Lisbon Treaty', not on our membership of the EU. He wanted to get into power before the treaty was ratified but it went through before our General Eelection. Then after the election he said that since we'd signed it and it had been ratified that it was then too late to do anything about. 'Labour' promised a referendum on the 'Lisbon Treaty and of course were in power at the time - they had the chance to fulfil their promise of a referendum but of course never kept to that promise.
Alert a moderator to this post

Willo

South coast - west of Brighton. 14 May 14 8.59am

Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.43am

Didn't the Tories promise a referendum last time, too?

Mr Cameron was intent on a referendum on the 'Lisbon Treaty', not on our membership of the EU. He wanted to get into power before the treaty was ratified but it went through before our General Eelection. Then after the election he said that since we'd signed it and it had been ratified that it was then too late to do anything about.

'Labour' promised a referendum on the 'Lisbon Treaty and of course were in power at the time - they had the chance to fulfil their promise of a referendum but of course never kept to that promise.

Alert a moderator to this post

crystal balls The Garden of Earthly Delights 14 May 14 9.04am
Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies. Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS? That's a surprise. I must admit I've never understood the objection to this. Simplifies the tax system, and is completely fair - regardless of what you earn, you pay x% of it to the governement, whether that be x% of £10,000, or x% of £2,000,000. I've never seen any logic behind the idea that earning more should alter the percentage you pay. Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible. Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f***! how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem. I used to be immortal
Alert a moderator to this post

crystal balls

The Garden of Earthly Delights 14 May 14 9.04am

Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am

Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm

Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm

Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies.

Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS?
That's a surprise.

Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible.

Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f***!

how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem.

I used to be immortal

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 14 May 14 9.15am
Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.04am Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies. Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS? That's a surprise. I must admit I've never understood the objection to this. Simplifies the tax system, and is completely fair - regardless of what you earn, you pay x% of it to the governement, whether that be x% of £10,000, or x% of £2,000,000. I've never seen any logic behind the idea that earning more should alter the percentage you pay. Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible. Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f***! how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem. Because everyone gives up the same proportion of their income, regardless of what that income is - seems pretty sensible to me (obviously I'm not mega-rich). Every pound you earn, you give 25% (for instance) in tax - simple. Why on earth should you take home 75% of the first £30,000, then 60% of the next £50,000, then 50% of the remainder? Where's the logic in that? Just seems to be punishing people for earning more than most.
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 14 May 14 9.15am

Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.04am

Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am

Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm

Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm

Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies.

Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS?
That's a surprise.

Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible.

Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f***!

how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem.

Because everyone gives up the same proportion of their income, regardless of what that income is - seems pretty sensible to me (obviously I'm not mega-rich). Every pound you earn, you give 25% (for instance) in tax - simple. Why on earth should you take home 75% of the first £30,000, then 60% of the next £50,000, then 50% of the remainder? Where's the logic in that? Just seems to be punishing people for earning more than most.

Alert a moderator to this post

Bomber 1945 Northampton 14 May 14 9.25am
Quote nickgusset at 29 Apr 2014 10.38pm Quote SloveniaDave at 29 Apr 2014 10.34pm who are TUSC? Trade Union and Socialist Coalition [Link] Edited by nickgusset (29 Apr 2014 10.39pm) Bunch of Communists and trouble makers!!!!
Alert a moderator to this post

Bomber 1945

Northampton 14 May 14 9.25am

Quote nickgusset at 29 Apr 2014 10.38pm

Quote SloveniaDave at 29 Apr 2014 10.34pm

who are TUSC?

Trade Union and Socialist Coalition
[Link]

Edited by nickgusset (29 Apr 2014 10.39pm)

Bunch of Communists and trouble makers!!!!

Alert a moderator to this post

crystal balls The Garden of Earthly Delights 14 May 14 9.31am
Quote npn at 14 May 2014 9.15am Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.04am Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies. Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS? That's a surprise. I must admit I've never understood the objection to this. Simplifies the tax system, and is completely fair - regardless of what you earn, you pay x% of it to the governement, whether that be x% of £10,000, or x% of £2,000,000. I've never seen any logic behind the idea that earning more should alter the percentage you pay. Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible. Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f***! how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem. Because everyone gives up the same proportion of their income, regardless of what that income is - seems pretty sensible to me (obviously I'm not mega-rich). Every pound you earn, you give 25% (for instance) in tax - simple. Why on earth should you take home 75% of the first £30,000, then 60% of the next £50,000, then 50% of the remainder? Where's the logic in that? Just seems to be punishing people for earning more than most. Because if you pay 25% of £10,000 you are left with £7,500 to spend and if you pay 25% of £2,000,000 you are left with £1,500,000. Therefore the more you earn the more you can afford to contribute. Simple really! Reducing tax hasn't increased philanthropy either (with some exceptions) and the gap between the wealthiest and poorest has widened dramatically since tax rates have been reduced. The system is already skewed against low earners as they pay a disproportionate amount on N.I. and a massively higher proportion of their income in VAT, which is far more difficult to avoid. BTW the highest rate of tax is now 45% on earnings over £150,000. I used to be immortal
Alert a moderator to this post

crystal balls

The Garden of Earthly Delights 14 May 14 9.31am

Quote npn at 14 May 2014 9.15am

Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.04am

Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am

Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm

Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm

Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies.

Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS?
That's a surprise.

Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible.

Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f***!

how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem.

Because if you pay 25% of £10,000 you are left with £7,500 to spend and if you pay 25% of £2,000,000 you are left with £1,500,000. Therefore the more you earn the more you can afford to contribute. Simple really! Reducing tax hasn't increased philanthropy either (with some exceptions) and the gap between the wealthiest and poorest has widened dramatically since tax rates have been reduced.

The system is already skewed against low earners as they pay a disproportionate amount on N.I. and a massively higher proportion of their income in VAT, which is far more difficult to avoid.

BTW the highest rate of tax is now 45% on earnings over £150,000.

I used to be immortal

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 14 May 14 9.35am
Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.31am Quote npn at 14 May 2014 9.15am Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.04am Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies. Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS? That's a surprise. I must admit I've never understood the objection to this. Simplifies the tax system, and is completely fair - regardless of what you earn, you pay x% of it to the governement, whether that be x% of £10,000, or x% of £2,000,000. I've never seen any logic behind the idea that earning more should alter the percentage you pay. Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible. Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f*! how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem. Because everyone gives up the same proportion of their income, regardless of what that income is - seems pretty sensible to me (obviously I'm not mega-rich). Every pound you earn, you give 25% (for instance) in tax - simple. Why on earth should you take home 75% of the first £30,000, then 60% of the next £50,000, then 50% of the remainder? Where's the logic in that? Just seems to be punishing people for earning more than most. Because if you pay 25% of £10,000 you are left with £7,500 to spend and if you pay 25% of £2,000,000 you are left with £1,500,000. Therefore the more you earn the more you can afford to contribute**. Simple really! Reducing tax hasn't increased philanthropy either (with some exceptions) and the gap between the wealthiest and poorest has widened dramatically since tax rates have been reduced. The system is already skewed against low earners as they pay a disproportionate amount on N.I. and a massively higher proportion of their income in VAT, which is far more difficult to avoid. BTW the highest rate of tax is now 45% on earnings over £150,000. Who measures that? A youngster living at home with his parents has less outgoings than someone with rent to pay - does that mean they should be taxed higher simply because they can afford it? Who are you, or I, or the government to say who can afford what? Nope, I stand by my assertion that a flat percentage is a fairer system of tax - you earn it all, you keep a set percentage of it all
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 14 May 14 9.35am

Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.31am

Quote npn at 14 May 2014 9.15am

Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.04am

Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am

Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm

Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm

Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies.

Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS?
That's a surprise.

Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible.

Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f***!

how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem.

Because if you pay 25% of £10,000 you are left with £7,500 to spend and if you pay 25% of £2,000,000 you are left with £1,500,000. Therefore the more you earn the more you can afford to contribute. Simple really! Reducing tax hasn't increased philanthropy either (with some exceptions) and the gap between the wealthiest and poorest has widened dramatically since tax rates have been reduced.

The system is already skewed against low earners as they pay a disproportionate amount on N.I. and a massively higher proportion of their income in VAT, which is far more difficult to avoid.

BTW the highest rate of tax is now 45% on earnings over £150,000.

Who measures that?
A youngster living at home with his parents has less outgoings than someone with rent to pay - does that mean they should be taxed higher simply because they can afford it?
Who are you, or I, or the government to say who can afford what?

Nope, I stand by my assertion that a flat percentage is a fairer system of tax - you earn it all, you keep a set percentage of it all

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 14 May 14 9.46am
Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.31am Quote npn at 14 May 2014 9.15am Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.04am Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies. Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS? That's a surprise. I must admit I've never understood the objection to this. Simplifies the tax system, and is completely fair - regardless of what you earn, you pay x% of it to the governement, whether that be x% of £10,000, or x% of £2,000,000. I've never seen any logic behind the idea that earning more should alter the percentage you pay. Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible. Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f***! how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem. Because everyone gives up the same proportion of their income, regardless of what that income is - seems pretty sensible to me (obviously I'm not mega-rich). Every pound you earn, you give 25% (for instance) in tax - simple. Why on earth should you take home 75% of the first £30,000, then 60% of the next £50,000, then 50% of the remainder? Where's the logic in that? Just seems to be punishing people for earning more than most. Because if you pay 25% of £10,000 you are left with £7,500 to spend and if you pay 25% of £2,000,000 you are left with £1,500,000. Therefore the more you earn the more you can afford to contribute. Simple really! Reducing tax hasn't increased philanthropy either (with some exceptions) and the gap between the wealthiest and poorest has widened dramatically since tax rates have been reduced. The system is already skewed against low earners as they pay a disproportionate amount on N.I. and a massively higher proportion of their income in VAT, which is far more difficult to avoid. BTW the highest rate of tax is now 45% on earnings over £150,000. Read today's Telegraph Mr Balls. People earning between GBP 100,000 and GBP 121,000 are paying 60% on the portion excess of GBP 100,000 and GBP 121,000. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 14 May 14 9.46am

Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.31am

Quote npn at 14 May 2014 9.15am

Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.04am

Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am

Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm

Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm

Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies.

Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS?
That's a surprise.

Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible.

Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f***!

how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem.

The system is already skewed against low earners as they pay a disproportionate amount on N.I. and a massively higher proportion of their income in VAT, which is far more difficult to avoid.

BTW the highest rate of tax is now 45% on earnings over £150,000.

Read today's Telegraph Mr Balls. People earning between GBP 100,000 and GBP 121,000 are paying 60% on the portion excess of GBP 100,000 and GBP 121,000.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 14 May 14 9.54am
Quote matt_himself at 14 May 2014 9.46am Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.31am Quote npn at 14 May 2014 9.15am Quote crystal balls at 14 May 2014 9.04am Quote npn at 14 May 2014 8.51am Quote nickgusset at 13 May 2014 10.11pm Quote kangel at 13 May 2014 10.01pm Could it be that UKIP are getting a lot of support because a lot of people agree with their policies. Such as stopping maternity pay? An equal tax rate so the rich pay less and the poor pay more and wholesale privatisation of the NHS? That's a surprise. I must admit I've never understood the objection to this. Simplifies the tax system, and is completely fair - regardless of what you earn, you pay x% of it to the governement, whether that be x% of £10,000, or x% of £2,000,000. I've never seen any logic behind the idea that earning more should alter the percentage you pay. Who knows, a fairer system might even lead to less people trying to avoid paying their tax bills in any way possible. Tax rates for the wealthy have been reduced dramatically in the last 30 years, has it stopped them from trying to avoid tax by any means possible? Has it f***! how is it "fairer" for the rich and poor to pay the same rate of income tax? It certainly wouldn't simplify things, the tax system can easily cope with graduated rates of tax, that's not the problem. Because everyone gives up the same proportion of their income, regardless of what that income is - seems pretty sensible to me (obviously I'm not mega-rich). Every pound you earn, you give 25% (for instance) in tax - simple. Why on earth should you take home 75% of the first £30,000, then 60% of the next £50,000, then 50% of the remainder? Where's the logic in that? Just seems to be punishing people for earning more than most. Because if you pay 25% of £10,000 you are left with £7,500 to spend and if you pay 25% of £2,000,000 you are left with £1,500,000. Therefore the more you earn the more you can afford to contribute. Simple really! Reducing tax hasn't increased philanthropy either (with some exceptions) and the gap between the wealthiest and poorest has widened dramatically since tax rates have been reduced. The system is already skewed against low earners as they pay a disproportionate amount on N.I. and a massively higher proportion of their income in VAT, which is far more difficult to avoid. BTW the highest rate of tax is now 45% on earnings over £150,000. Read today's Telegraph Mr Balls. People earning between GBP 100,000 and GBP 121,000 are paying 60% on the portion excess of GBP 100,000 and GBP 121,000. Not to mention that the personal allowance is £10,000, so zero tax is paid on it.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 14 May 14 9.54am

Quote matt_himself at 14 May 2014 9.46am