LymmParent Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 The charge shifted the tax burden from the rich to the poor Cos poor people don't have houses? The poll tax shifted the tax burden from home owners to wage earners. Benefits to ensure anyone below a minimum income got help. The rich were already shouldering the burden of paying their rates with money taxed at 40%..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 The charge shifted the tax burden from the rich to the poor Cos poor people don't have houses? . The Poll tax was nothing to do with houses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 The charge shifted the tax burden from the rich to the poor Cos poor people don't have houses? . The Poll tax was nothing to do with houses. Precisely. Rates were all about houses, and now Council Tax is. So householders pay. The Poll Tax stopped that and shared the burden amongst all adults earning over a certain amount. Back then, my Community Charge was ?23 a month over the ten month charging period. Compare that to Council Tax for a single parent (as I was then) in the house I had then and the bill is now ?92 a month. That's not shifting the burden to the rich, is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 shared the burden amongst all adults Unfortunately it shared the burden regardless of a persons income. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 shared the burden amongst all adults Unfortunately it shared the burden regardless of a persons income. That should read "fortunately" surely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 How can it be fortunate that someone on ?10,000 per year and someone on ?100,000 pay the same? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 Wolfie, take your pink glasses off for a moment and consider this. If you had to pay for the binman to come and collect your rubbish directly to him rather than through local taxation, would you think it right that someone earning ?40000 a year should pay more than someone on ?20000 a year? After all they would both be getting the same service. By the same token is it fair that someone living alone should have to pay the same local tax as a family of 4 adults living together? The person living alone is effectively paying 4 times as much as his neighbour for the same service. By this measure a poll tax is infinitely fairer than a tax on the size of your house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 Asp, I never at any stage tried to compare the fairness of each tax, I was merely pointing out that the Poll tax was a tax that didn't take into consideration a persons ability to pay. That's why there were riots. Can.t pay wont pay, if you remember the slogan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 Wolfie, take your pink glasses off for a moment and consider this. If you had to pay for the binman to come and collect your rubbish directly to him rather than through local taxation, would you think it right that someone earning ?40000 a year should pay more than someone on ?20000 a year? After all they would both be getting the same service. By the same token is it fair that someone living alone should have to pay the same local tax as a family of 4 adults living together? The person living alone is effectively paying 4 times as much as his neighbour for the same service. By this measure a poll tax is infinitely fairer than a tax on the size of your house. Well, actually, a private firm would charge more for emptying the bins of the rich: (a) they consume more, so produce more rubbish; ( they live in areas of low density housing so it takes longer to get round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 Hang on a minute; you don't have to OWN your own home in order to become liable to pay Council Tax - Council and other tenants pay it too: unless they are on means tested benefits or a single occupier, which qualifies for a reduction. Any "progressive" tax system by definition, will or should. take proportionally more the richer you are. A flat rate tax for example could mean a poor person payng a huge proportion of their income in tax, while allowing the rich to pay a trifle. An important issue for us with whoever is the next Government, as of necessity, taxes are going to rise across the board and common fairness suggests (we "all being in it together!); that the broadest shoulders bare the heavier weight of the burden (which is basically the issue that's kicked off riots in Greece) . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted May 6, 2010 Report Share Posted May 6, 2010 Well, actually, a private firm would charge more for emptying the bins of the rich: (a) they consume more, so produce more rubbish; ( they live in areas of low density housing so it takes longer to get round. Leaving aside for the moment the fact that a private firm would be cheaper anyway, I think your presumption that they would be able to charge "rich" people more on the grounds that a) they produce more waste (no proof possible of that) b)don't poor people live in areas of low density housing e.g. in the countryside where poorly paid agricultural workers live, is debatable at the very least. Unfortunately for the socialists the reality will never match the dream because human nature isn't socialist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 Human nature is based on self interest - and the self interest of the majority relatively poor, should theoretically and democratically produce fairness. Alas, folk tend to look below them on the ladder, than than above them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted May 7, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 Well I am here if anyone is still awake - updates now on front page! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Durnim Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 Does anyone know the percentage of the great British public who took the time to vote or is it too early to tell? With all the news about people not being able to vote because of the 10am closing or not enough ballot papers, seems that this election has been the most popular for some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 From what I've seen it looks to be close on 10% up from the last general election. Anyone know if any local elections results have been announced yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted May 7, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 Does anyone know the percentage of the great British public who took the time to vote or is it too early to tell? With all the news about people not being able to vote because of the 10am closing or not enough ballot papers, seems that this election has been the most popular for some time. Well I poll was pretty accurate regarding Warrington South. Tories 1st - Labour 2nd and Lib dems 3rd. Something to take note of for the future. 71 per cent turn out in South and 62 per cent in North. Around 10 per cent up on 2005. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Durnim Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 This might be a silly question, but who is in power at the town hall? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted May 7, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 This might be a silly question, but who is in power at the town hall? Election count this afternoon! Keep your eye on the news page! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 So we still had over 30% of the electorate NOT voting at all and folk winning with less than 50% of those that did vote. Seems Warrington's increase in the number of polling stations, many moons ago, ensured that there were no queues! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Durnim Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 Looks like it's back to the 70's again? I can see the figures/percentages on the TV screens, but I do not know who has won the election? How soon will Brown be forced out and replaced and when will the next general election be, this October? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 Brown could stay in No 10 IF he can cobble together an alliance with the LibDems, Nats, Alliance etc: likewise IF Cameron can get the Ulster Unionists and any of the others to get him past the magic 326 votes, he'll be PM. However, the situation appears so polarised, that I can't see any coalition lasting long in the face of the inevitable pain that's going to have to be dished out - any fudge on this will see the markets taking their money elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 This is where the grovelling begins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Durnim Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 I thought the idea of voting Lib' Demo was to get the present government out of office, if it ends up being a lib/Lab pact, then it would have been a wasted vote, ditto if it is a Con/Lib pact. There must be another general election, we can not be a nation run by a coalition government, we need firm and decisive decisions to be made, not bickering between two opposing parties. I can't see labour doing any better now that they have the power to run WBC, I can only see more waste and more cuts at the town hall than ever before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 7, 2010 Report Share Posted May 7, 2010 They have "decisive" Government in China! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Durnim Posted May 8, 2010 Report Share Posted May 8, 2010 Just a thought, I have no doubt there will be another general election and if they keep the present voting system, who is to say that the same result wil not happen again? and if it does then what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.