Bassman62 Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 i think cyclone has some real points and facts to put into this discussion. he seems to know what he's talking about. while I'm the polar opposite of what he believes i do think he has some really valid questions to ask of the system.Everyone has a point but to slate those who can't afford financial advisors to show them how to milk away a paltry £5 per week so they choose ISAs is not a just point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Low income earners pay more in proportion than high earners. If a footballer on £100k per week pays £20k he's still got £80k per week, if a low earner on £200 per week pays tax at the same rate he pays £40 and only has £160 per week. But in reality the footballer then gets advice on how to pay less than £20k per week, that is the immoral part. A high earner only pays the same for a loaf of bread, so inproportion to his wage compared to a low earner in reality he pays far less.. this is the problem we having the those in support and those against. i for one, support what you saying, bass. no one needs more than a million pounds to live. but very few can live on 200 a week before tax. this needs to be recognized. especially with the loopholes available(only available to those who can pay for them) it's not fair to allow some people to be able to get away of paying the maximum they should yet thousands of letters are sent out to people every year for taxes people can hardly afford even with over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Everyone has a point but to slate those who can't afford financial advisors to show them how to milk away a paltry £5 per week so they choose ISAs is not a just point. you type too quick:hihi: just posted something below you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Low income earners pay more in proportion than high earners. If a footballer on £100k per week pays £20k he's still got £80k per week, if a low earner on £200 per week pays tax at the same rate he pays £40 and only has £160 per week. But in reality the footballer then gets advice on how to pay less than £20k per week, that is the immoral part. A high earner only pays the same for a loaf of bread, so inproportion to his wage compared to a low earner in reality he pays far less.. i think this is what cyclone cant understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevski35 Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Low income earners pay more in proportion than high earners. If a footballer on £100k per week pays £20k he's still got £80k per week, if a low earner on £200 per week pays tax at the same rate he pays £40 and only has £160 per week. But in reality the footballer then gets advice on how to pay less than £20k per week, that is the immoral part. A high earner only pays the same for a loaf of bread, so inproportion to his wage compared to a low earner in reality he pays far less.. Why is it immoral? It has always been the case in a capitalist society's. I work for a company that is owned by the directors. In the early days they took a chance by putting thier house's on the line etc to purchase the company. The company has done very well and the directors now drive nice cars and I am sure live in very nice houses. I am sure that they pay more tax than me but as a ratio to income will probably be less than mine through good accountants. So should people like me hand thier notice in and be bitter about it, or be happy that I have a well paid job, as probably as secure a job is possible through a full and expanding order book, and overtime in order to get these orders out. Tax the wealth generators too much and they will simply up sticks and move thier business to cheaper economies like China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Why is it immoral? It has always been the case in a capitalist society's. I work for a company that is owned by the directors. In the early days they took a chance by putting thier house's on the line etc to purchase the company. The company has done very well and the directors now drive nice cars and I am sure live in very nice houses. I am sure that they pay more tax than me but as a ratio to income will probably be less than mine through good accountants. So should people like me hand thier notice in and be bitter about it, or be happy that I have a well paid job, as probably as secure a job is possible through a full and expanding order book, and overtime in order to get these orders out. Tax the wealth generators too much and they will simply up sticks and move thier business to cheaper economies like China. how much tax did you get returned to you last year because you paid too much ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Why is it immoral? It has always been the case in a capitalist society's. I work for a company that is owned by the directors. In the early days they took a chance by putting thier house's on the line etc to purchase the company. The company has done very well and the directors now drive nice cars and I am sure live in very nice houses. I am sure that they pay more tax than me but as a ratio to income will probably be less than mine through good accountants. So should people like me hand thier notice in and be bitter about it, or be happy that I have a well paid job, as probably as secure a job is possible through a full and expanding order book, and overtime in order to get these orders out. Tax the wealth generators too much and they will simply up sticks and move thier business to cheaper economies like China.So you agree that the family who were the owners of Dewhursts paid less tax than just one nurse through tax loopholes created by the upper class for the benefit of the upper class? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Tax the wealth generators too much and they will simply up sticks and move thier business to cheaper economies like China.And put tax levvies on imported goods where UK assetts have been stripped and moved abroad like Dyson, those levvies will pay unemployment benefit caused by Dyson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevski35 Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 And put tax levvies on imported goods where UK assetts have been stripped and moved abroad like Dyson, those levvies will pay unemployment benefit caused by Dyson. No country, not even the US can afford a trade war with China. Recent figures show US exports to China $80 billion. China exports to US $360 billion. Not hard to tell who has the upper hand. Most people are also hypocritical, we all like our cheap goods like £500 LCD TV's, £5 T shirts etc, all of which are immpossible to produce in western society due to high labour cost, taxation etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevski35 Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 how much tax did you get returned to you last year because you paid too much ? Don't understand the relevance of the question? nothing if the truth be known because my tax code was correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.