This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Midlands Eagle 26 Oct 17 9.40am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Tinkering with taxes will not make any difference. To deliver a society for the majority not the few requires upheaval. I do think labour can make a big difference on social issues like Attlee and Wilson did.
The highest tax rate under Wilson's Labour Government was about 95% if I remember rightly and the major effect it had was the brain drain where all of out captains of industry upped sticks and moved to America where the tax regime wasn't as penal
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Pussay Patrol 26 Oct 17 9.46am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
I was made redundant 20 years ago and was out of work for a couple of years and I would have sunk without trace if it wasn't for the mortgage protection insurance You must be the only person in the country who wasn't mis-sold PPI
Paua oouaarancì Irà chiyeah Ishé galé ma ba oo ah |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
steeleye20 Croydon 26 Oct 17 9.58am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
The highest tax rate under Wilson's Labour Government was about 95% if I remember rightly and the major effect it had was the brain drain where all of out captains of industry upped sticks and moved to America where the tax regime wasn't as penal Only a handful of people would have paid 95% if that's true, on the highest portion of income over 100k a fortune then. You are not remembering the facts but the Daily Mail version of them.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Lyons550 Shirley 26 Oct 17 10.43am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Tinkering with taxes will not make any difference. To deliver a society for the majority not the few requires upheaval. I do think labour can make a big difference on social issues like Attlee and Wilson did.
I think that the ONLY tinkering of taxes that needs to be done in order to make a far great magnitude of difference to the economy is to ensure that business can't evade/avoid it....but this needs to be on an international level, as otherwise only Turkey's voting for Xmas would take it on!
The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
CambridgeEagle Sydenham 26 Oct 17 10.58am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Lyons550
I think that the ONLY tinkering of taxes that needs to be done in order to make a far great magnitude of difference to the economy is to ensure that business can't evade/avoid it....but this needs to be on an international level, as otherwise only Turkey's voting for Xmas would take it on! OECD already doing this. Companies being fined for not paying taxes and not paying fines. Problem is no one will then stand up to them and say, OK you're no longer allowed to trade here.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
steeleye20 Croydon 26 Oct 17 12.09pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
OECD already doing this. Companies being fined for not paying taxes and not paying fines. Problem is no one will then stand up to them and say, OK you're no longer allowed to trade here. I read that the EU are fed up with tax evasion by companies and are considering taxing on turnover not profit. That would put the cat among the pigeons.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
beak croydon 26 Oct 17 12.28pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
I think you are a Labour Party drone who spends most of his life trying to bad mouth the Tories. A very poor response, the O.P.tried to Initiate a debate and you chose to be rude,if you have nothing to contribute -don't bother replying.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
npn Crowborough 26 Oct 17 12.40pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
That's where we differ, I think. I like the lower end being tax free, that's fair enough to keep people from poverty and afford a decent standard of living, but to levy higher taxes on greater earnings makes little to no sense to me. It seems like a "you don't need it" approach, which may well be true but is fundamentally not fair. If I choose to work loads of overtime, and the bloke next to me doesn't, why should I take home 60% of my wage while he takes home 80% (for exactly the same work done to the same standard) because I've passed some arbitrary threshold? I may be thrashing myself to save for a deposit on a house, to put a kid through university, or to buy a new kidney for great auntie Doris.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 26 Oct 17 12.44pm | |
---|---|
As it's now a politics thread!!!!!!
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
npn Crowborough 26 Oct 17 12.47pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by steeleye20
I read that the EU are fed up with tax evasion by companies and are considering taxing on turnover not profit. That would put the cat among the pigeons.
Wow! If true that would be both radical and daft! No startups would ever get going - lots of them make big losses in the early years, on what may be decent turnovers, also depending on the business area, they may be working on low profit margins. I think the mega-businesses need to be targetted where they are quite clearly taking the p**s, but I don't have the first idea how to do that. Making your tax bill expensive in country A may well make the company not wish to do business there at all (may not, in itself, be a bad thing - maybe more competition on the high street).
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 26 Oct 17 12.49pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by beak
A very poor response, the O.P.tried to Initiate a debate and you chose to be rude,if you have nothing to contribute -don't bother replying.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Lyons550 Shirley 26 Oct 17 1.30pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by tome
Couldn't the government compel landlords to retain or accept equal offers regardless of benefit status? I am divided on the idea of giving the cash straight to landlords, doesn't seem likely to engender positive behaviour by either landlords or tenants. Speaking as a landlord myself not ALL landlords are shysters...just as not all benefit claimants are. For me having the money go straight into my account is beneficial for both my tennants and myself, it saves chasing for/and the chance for there to be any missed payments and it aids a good relationship between the two.
The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.