Warning! Socialism ahead...
-
-
SeasideMan
Pro - 2008-07-31 @ 12:11:22
-
-
semafu
- 2008-07-31 @ 17:37:45
sometimes less is more.
I'd like a single flat rate at 16%.-
-
SeasideMan
Pro
- 2008-07-31 @ 17:43:05
Then for you it would be bye bye NHS and bye bye schools. Thankfully, your view is in an insignificantly tiny minority and no major party would ever adopt such a guaranteed mass vote-losing policy.
Tom.-
-
semafu
- 2008-07-31 @ 18:04:13
with lower tax business would be more efficient, so you'd get greater profits and hence greater tax take.
this country is at about the limit of what ppl will pay in tax.-
-
SeasideMan
Pro
- 2008-07-31 @ 18:19:13
You must have done the sums on this, so how about giving us the numbers: unless you're just guessing of course...
Tom.-
-
semafu
- 2008-07-31 @ 18:25:16
hong kong 1970s ...
piece of land the size of a stamp
natural resources, none
flat tax rate of ... you guessed it ... 16%
7th largest economy in the world.-
-
SeasideMan
Pro
- 2008-07-31 @ 18:26:44
So you haven't done the sums then - as I suspected!
Come back when you have...
Tom.-
-
semafu
- 2008-08-01 @ 20:46:16
LMAO, I'm not your teacher, although i think you should have paid more attention in school.
here's another one: Russia, Putin, flat 13%
what happened next? Growth or Decline.
owned, again!!!!!-
-
SeasideMan
Pro
- 2008-08-02 @ 11:24:38
If your desire is to try and convince people that your idea is a good one, you need to do the sums and demonstrate exactly how it would work here. 2 examples of countries with utterly different economies to ours that did this and for whom it worked means absolutely nothing.
And please: there's no need to be rude.
Tom.-
-
HektorRevisited
- http://thewindhover.blog.co.uk
- 2008-08-05 @ 10:07:34
Hi Tom,
I just think that it's fairer for people to pay a flat tax. Most people against it either are confused about it or are happy that others remain confused about it (I'm not suggesting that you fall into either camp, by the way). To be clear, a flax tax is not a poll tax.
Just doing a simple calculation, based on a flat tax rate of 10% (assuming for the example that there are no tax thresholds), a person earning GBP 100,000 per year would pay tax of GBP10,000; a person earning GBP50,000 per year would pay tax of GBP5,000; and a person earning GBP10,000 per year would pay tax of GBP1,000.
I think that that is fair - it means that those that earn more pay more tax and those that earn less pay less tax.
At the same time, as there are no higher or lower bands, people are not discouraged from earning or seeking to earn more money.
Most countries in Central and Eastern Europe have (or are seeking to introduce) a flat tax - Slovakia and the Czech Republics both have them and have healthy economies too. I agree that it probably needs to be tested in a major developed economy to see if it really works, as there can be other factors atributed to decent levels of growth in many CEE countries (EU accession has brought in foreign investment, for example); Russia may not be the best example, as Russia's economy has been helped by the rising cost of oil and gas. One thing that it can be credited for in Russia, I believe, is the reduction in tax avoidance.
Merkel in Germany is a proponent of a flat tax, but coalitiion partners (the social democrats) are not.
All the best.
Hektor.-
-
SeasideMan
Pro
- 2008-08-05 @ 10:35:40
Morning Hektor. I see a flat tax as inherently less fair since it extracts a smaller percentage of disposable income from those who earn more than from those who earn less. Some simple sums like yours:
Let's put a figure on the basic cost of living: food, rent, electricity, travel to work etc. and let's put it arbitrarily at £5000 per year. That figure may be wrong, but that doesn't matter: it's an amount, however you work it out.
Someone earning £10,000 per year pays £1,000, which is 20% of their earnings over the basic.
Someone earning £50,000 pays £5,000 which is only 11% of their earnings over basic.
This is why I like progressive taxes as they put more of the tax burden on those with higher disposable income.
Tom.-
-
wunderbra
- 2008-08-05 @ 11:23:27
Michelle Obama say hello to Socialist-Marxist-Communist SeasideMan
-
-
SeasideMan
Pro
- 2008-08-05 @ 11:27:54
Only the first of those 3 applies to me. If you must label me, then please let it be with Social Ecology. Murray Bookchin is my man.
Tom. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
wunderbra
- 2008-07-31 @ 17:47:16
Hello Michelle Obama.
You frickin commie. -
-
-
jenray
Pro - http://www.jenniferhunter.co.uk
- 2008-08-01 @ 11:23:01
His last comments showed what a selfish big mouth he was...quoting the American Constitution as giving the right of people in the USA to starve to death if they want to but don't go to the government to bail them out...great!! A caring society...I don't think so...mind you, would like to know why Michelle Obama couldn't afford to pay for piano lessons for her daughter...maybe that was earlier on before they earned half a million between them...hmmm...to have McCain in as an alternative would be a disaster for the world...more wars, more desire to control the rest of the world...no thanks....
-
-
semafu
- 2008-08-01 @ 12:26:05
why Michelle Obama couldn't afford to pay for piano lessons for her daughter
probably just lying, trying to "resonate" with ppl.
they sound like a right pair of champange socialists to me.
They are all bad this time round but if i had a vote, I'd vote for McCain. I hate war, but i hate socialism more.-
-
jenray
Pro
- http://www.jenniferhunter.co.uk
- 2008-08-01 @ 14:04:04
You scare me, Semafu...
-
-
-
That commentator is a complete idiot. Following his logic, there should be no taxation at all.
Tom.