Jump to content

UKIP and the Eastleigh by election - results now in


green

Recommended Posts

Many minimum wage earners are part-time,so they remain poor.If you remove all allowances,then everyone pays a flat rate,which is therefore highly damaging to the poor.They will therefore claim benefits quite rightly.

 

On page 10 of today's mirror newspaper Kevin McGuire writes about ukip wanting to abolish the 40 and 50p tax rates charged on high earners and bring in a flat 31p including national insurance for everyone. :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ive just checked their website, it will totally take me out of paying tax & ni as it doesnt start until you earn £11,500 which is a good thing for me.

 

There speaks a UKIP member. UKIP would abolish higher rates of tax so that everyone above your conveniently-quoted level of £11,500 would pay the same rate of 31% on that extra income. In other words a regressive right-wing form of taxation. Even the Tories support higher rates of tax for high earners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it isn't a valid point

 

the more you earn over a certain level, the more, as a proportion of your income, you should pay in tax

 

in my opinion it is common sense - human nature being what it is, most higher earners would not voluntarily pay more - i don't see any problem with it being compulsory that those of us who are lucky enough to earn more are expected to pay more to assist those that are less fortunate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it's a valid point.

Why should the tax rate increase for higher earners? As higher earners, they already pay more income tax.

 

I have always thought this. Higher earners do not use the services more. We do not charge high earners more for their electricity do we, so why for their government provided services?

 

---------- Post added 05-03-2013 at 13:26 ----------

 

the more you earn over a certain level, the more, as a proportion of your income, you should pay in tax

 

Why? What logic are you using to come to this conclusion?

 

in my opinion it is common sense - human nature being what it is, most higher earners would not voluntarily pay more - i don't see any problem with it being compulsory that those of us who are lucky enough to earn more are expected to pay more to assist those that are less fortunate

 

What has luck got to do with it? These people are not lucky, they are hard working individuals who have worked their way to a point where they can earn more money. Why does that mean they should pay even more than they already do.

 

This method of taxation is called Progressive, but it has no relation to the meaning of the word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting idea from UKIP that is worth considering if overall tax take was increased. In terms of admin it would greatly simplify the system too.

 

If you reduce the tax rate paid by higher earners and increase the tax threshold, as UKIP are proposing to do, then either the tax take will go down or they'll have to increase the tax paid by those in the middle to make up the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.