JFKvsNixon Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 That’s an interesting point, people expect the services they rely on to be paid for by people that don't need the service, maybe it would be farer for the people that used the service to contribute the most towards it. Read what I have posted. I haven't suggested that Carr doesn't need the services, he does. What I posted is that if the services stopped being free at the point of use, it wouldn't effect Carr in the slightest; but it would me and you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Read what I have posted. I haven't suggested that Carr doesn't need the services, he does. What I posted is that if the services stopped being free at the point of use, it wouldn't effect Carr in the slightest; but it would me and you. My mistake sorry:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 That’s an interesting point, people expect the services they rely on to be paid for by people that don't need the service, maybe it would be farer for the people that used the service to contribute the most towards it. The idea that the high earners don't need services is completely wrong. They will most likely rely on emergency services, public utilities infrastructure, specialised emergency care in hospitals, legal system, subsidised rail, roads, air traffic control etc... Notwithstanding all that the money spent builds a framework of infrastructure and services within which they conduct their business. Many of them will have relied on that framework to get rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 The idea that the high earners don't need services is completely wrong. They will most likely rely on emergency services, public utilities infrastructure, specialised emergency care in hospitals, legal system, subsidised rail, roads, air traffic control etc... Notwithstanding all that the money spent builds a framework of infrastructure and services within which they conduct their business. Many of them will have relied on that framework to get rich. Yes, sorry it was an answer to a post that I misunderstood, and I have already been corrected on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Read what I have posted. I haven't suggested that Carr doesn't need the services, he does. What I posted is that if the services stopped being free at the point of use, it wouldn't effect Carr in the slightest; but it would me and you. It would affect him if he needed to be cut out of a burning vehicle and needed 3 months of specialised burns unit care. None of that will be provided by the private sector. He will be using all kinds of state provided and state subsidised services day in, day out without even knowing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Yes, sorry it was an answer to a post that I misunderstood, and I have already been corrected on. Ok, no worries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 It would affect him if he needed to be cut out of a burning vehicle and needed 3 months of specialised burns unit care. None of that will be provided by the private sector. He will be using all kinds of state provided and state subsidised services day in, day out without even knowing. Read my post again I haven't suggested that Carr doesn't need the services, he does. What I posted is that if the services stopped being free at the point of use, it wouldn't effect Carr in the slightest; but it would me and you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 But they paid there fair share of tax £1.25billion to be exact and the National Audit Office (NAO) ruled that Vodafone’s settlement of its UK tax bill was reasonable. They also employed lots of people that pay tax, they provide a service that people want and without them and companies like them the country would be significantly worse off, and we wouldn't have a NHS, education, police. my bold what would you think if those people paid tax at a %equivalent to that of vodaphone/jimmy carr and the rest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Read my post again I haven't suggested that Carr doesn't need the services, he does. What I posted is that if the services stopped being free at the point of use, it wouldn't effect Carr in the slightest; but it would me and you. My apologies Still not quite sure it is completely true though. There are situations where very few individuals, even wealthy ones, would be able to fund their own private services for the rest of their life. For example if Jimmy Carr fell down the stairs and snapped his spine and became quadraplegic would his existing resources cover 24/7 care for 30+ years. Unlikely. Where is the private Stoke Mandeville? There isn't one. I know it's an extreme example but this kind of thing is just one part of the safety net provided for everybody by the services we all should be contributing towards through taxes. I'm happy that my taxes support these services even though it's not likely I'll use all of them in my life/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 My apologies Still not quite sure it is completely true though. There are situations where very few individuals, even wealthy ones, would be able to fund their own private services for the rest of their life. For example if Jimmy Carr fell down the stairs and snapped his spine and became quadraplegic would his existing resources cover 24/7 care for 30+ years. Unlikely. Where is the private Stoke Mandeville? There isn't one. I know it's an extreme example but this kind of thing is just one part of the safety net provided for everybody by the services we all should be contributing towards through taxes. I'm happy that my taxes support these services even though it's not likely I'll use all of them in my life/ Then there's the secondary benefits. His children may benefit from a private education, but he does benefit indirectly from the education around of those whose goods and services that he requires, and these people being kept safe and healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.