Jump to content

Universal benefits?


observer

Recommended Posts

Any flat rate tax (EG 20% VAT) will hit those with the least most; as a ?20 increase in shopping bills is a bigger proportion of ?100 pw than ?1,000 pw. Income tax is the simplest means of increasing revenues, proportional to ability to pay - PROVIDING: we had effective tax gathering mechanisms, devoid of legal loop holes. No need to mess with benefits at all, other than to rationalise and simplify what has become an over complex system, which actually deters genuine claimants. :shock:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VAT is a tax on spending not earnings. The more you earn in all probability the more you spend on VAT rated items. It is still in proportion to total spend, everybody will have to spend 5% more than they did before. It does not hit anyone disproportiionately.

 

You spend ?1000 it will cost you an extra ?50, I spend ?100 it will cost me ?5. In proportion to what we were spending before the increase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You spend ?1000 it will cost you an extra ?50,

 

I spend ?100 it will cost me ?5

 

But if a ?100 is all you have as disposable income eagle or even ?50.00 something has to give, Gas or electric :?:

 

For someone on a high income it might just be a bottle of Malt a month that they for go :!:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Errrm, Eagle; do better off folk pay 10 times more for their weekly food shop - OK, they may add the odd tin of Baluga Caviar to their order; but their basic living costs are the same. Increase these costs through VAT, and it hits the poorest hardest - it's a no brainer. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

of course, but it's even simpler just to increase their income tax. :roll:

 

How is that simpler? Not everybody earning over ?44000 PA receives child benefit (I believe you have to have children to be able to claim?).

 

There's been a lot of crying over people who are just over the threshold losing the benefit thus giving them less earnings than someone just under the threshold. Simple solution - take a pay cut to put yourself under the threshold and let the taxpayer make up the difference. Or is that too simplistic?

 

In any case, how many families with children are there where both parents are earning over ?44000 PA? Anyone on here in that situation? Yes? Lend us a few quid will you? :lol::lol::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well how about setting tax thresholds at such a level that, if you earn enough to pay tax you can support yourself without needing the state to give you your own money back in the form of benefits. Thats the way to simplify the system, not by introducing more complicated tax/benefit systems :roll::roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Errm no, Universal Benefits are simply that - Universal - paid to everyone regardless of wealth; however, in the case of the wealthy, they receive what amounts to pin money whilst giving in tax in proportion to their earnings. Like the bus pass, you don't have to use it if you prefer your car, but it's there if you want it. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Food is zero rated so it is nowt to do with the comparisons.

 

Won't the fuel companies pass on their increases to the Supermarkets for delivering, and those with their own fleet pass on the added cost to the customer? so as not to take a drop in profits.

 

PLUS everyone will have added cost, so that will be passed on down the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...