HMRC Income Tax Summary

[wolfie]

Obs.... just seen an interview with a guy from Savills estate agents who have branches around the country and predominantly in London and South East. He was saying that the current levels of Stamp Duty last year in Chelsea & Kensington generated over £54,000,000.00 for the treasury..

So why, at a time that we are short of tax revenue and cutting benefits are the government cutting stamp duty for 98% of the people who pay it? (Government figures not mine)

[asperity]

Proportional Asp. Those "thieves" need the cash for all the promises they're now giving out ! Which means increasing taxes OR cutting services OR increasing borrowing - take your pick !

 

I see you subscribe to the opinion that the government owns us and all we earn, and only allow us to keep a proportion as they deem fit. Hang them all!!

[observer]

Baz, that merely underlines how HMG can increase it's revenues and just how Governments have been playing at it for the last 40 years or so. Asp, far from it; I subscribe to the view that every citizen has a stake in the Country and should contribute according to their means to the common wealth. Perhaps going a little further, we're all expected to fight for it, so I think it reasonable that we should all own it.

[asperity]

Obs, you say that we should contribute which is all well and good if that contribution is going to be spent wisely. Unfortunately under the system we have the government finds ways to take as much from us as they think they can get away with and then devise ways of wasting the proceeds. I say again, hang them all!!

[observer]

Now your talking about the incompetence or otherwise of Governments Asp; which in our democracy, are theoretically accountable to the people for their actions. Whether our current system truly reflects the will of "the people" or is fit for purpose in the 21st century, is open to question.

[asperity]

Dress it up in whatever fine words you want Obs, but it is patently obvious that if everybody in the country handed 100% of their money/wealth/call it what you will to them they would still want more. Hang them all!!!

[observer]

  Think the nub of the problem is: that the political factions in society (we call Parties), are dedicated to their own short term electoral interests, rather than the long term national interest; hence the bidding war of promises at elections, and their diversions into dogma based pet projects. Hanging some, may concentrate minds.

[P J]

  Think the nub of the problem is: that the political factions in society (we call Parties), are dedicated to their own short term electoral interests, rather than the long term national interest; hence the bidding war of promises at elections, and their diversions into dogma based pet projects. Hanging some, may concentrate minds.

We could start with Farage, the rich mans chum

[observer]

Think you'll have to look at the other three Party Leaders first !

[P J]

Please humour me, what are UKIPs policies on tax rates for high earners and inheritance tax, both measures which affect the wealth gap?

[observer]

Told you, one hurdle at a time.

[P J]

Hahahaha what a cop out . Come on, enlighten us

[observer]

Told you, you obviously don't listen - none of the political Parties will sort out the wealth gap - so no choice there.

[P J]

But what are UKIPs proposals regarding inheritance tax and income tax rates for the higher earning wealthy folk and will this help to shrink the gap?

[observer]

Think your missing the point here. The attraction of UKIP is that they are "none of the above" !  Making your point irrelevant.

[P J]

Come on, you seem to be UKIPs unofficial tubthumper on here and also harp on endlessly regarding the wealth gap.  Could you please explain how their policies on Income tax, inheritance tax and, while we are at it , their tax  breaks for owners of listed buildings and estates will affect the divide.  If implemented would they widen or narrow the wealth gap?  You are never bashful when promoting some of their other policies and these seem so close to your heart too.

[observer]

You obviously don't get it. None of the main Parties are promising to exit the EU; none have got a clue on dealing with immigration, in fact they've caused the mess. So in choice terms, it's a no brainer if you want those issues addressed. Not necessarily by UKIP, as they are unlikely to form a parliamentary majority; but voting for UKIP in sufficient numbers will and is altering the position of the big two parties already, which is the whole point of the exercise. So until the big two shift their ground sufficiently on the major issue; it has to be " none of the above".  So any excursion into other policy detail is irrelevant, as none offers anything radical on taxation, so the wealth gap will continue to widen; and most folk couldn't tell you what their manifesto details are anyway; so a rather futile digression.

[P J]

Im not asking about the main parties, I'm simply asking you to give us your opinion of UKIPs tax policies and how they would affect the wealth gap you bang on about so vehemently.  So if UKIP are a one trick pony why on earth do they have other policies other than an  ill explained EU exit.  Stop being a politician and avoiding the question and just answer , would implementing UKIPs tax policies benefit the rich at the expense of the poor?  Made it and easy yes or no for you.

[observer]

Academic question - no need to answer; well I suppose I have done, by saying NONE of the Parties will resolve the wealth gap.

[P J]

Now I know howPaxman felt trying to get the slimy politicians to answer a very straight forward question.  Observer, would implementing UKIPs tax policies widen the wealth gap?

[observer]

... as will Lib/Lab/Con policies - no one's going to deal with it - so no choice.

[P J]

So are you saying that you are going to vote for the only party who's policies are seeking to actually increase the wealth gap?

[observer]

No, because it's not "the only Party" that will be increasing the wealth gap; they all have and will; since 1979.

[P J]

Ukip appear to be the only party who's policies seem to be actively attempting to dramatically widen the wealth gap,

[observer]

   None of them is or will do anything about it; so no difference between them; so the issue isn't on their agenda, so no one to vote for on that issue. Which therefore leaves the next priority issue, the EU; with only one Party advocating our exit.