• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

I said it first

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    I said it first

    http://www.thebusinessonline.com/Sto...8-E1AC85BF7FDF

    I could not have put it better myself
    Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyone

    #2
    It's not a very well argued article is it?

    Anyway, rather than have a flat rate it would work out much better to remove tax alltogether for the first say 15k. The povert trap would become less of an issue, removing many from benefits and into work. Those on low incomes with the highest propensity to spend would boost the economy. Jobs a good un.
    The court heard Darren Upton had written a letter to Judge Sally Cahill QC saying he wasn’t “a typical inmate of prison”.

    But the judge said: “That simply demonstrates your arrogance continues. You are typical. Inmates of prison are people who are dishonest. You are a thoroughly dishonestly man motivated by your own selfish greed.”

    Comment


      #3
      Tories, Labour and Liberal Democrats are all committed to retaining the 40% top rate of income tax; they all agree that the tax burden should continue to creep up to reach an all-time high as a share of non-oil GDP by the end of the decade; they do not lose a wink’s sleep over the fact that taxes in the United Kingdom are now higher even than in Germany.
      It's only fair.

      Comment


        #4
        The increasing spiraling levels of Socialist UK taxation reduces personal freedom prosperity and liberty therefore it is tantamount to State Terrorism.

        For those whom would doubt this statement the following list of countries makes depressing reading, will Britains Taxation Addiction lead to our inclusion on the Axis of evil?

        The British political elite’s thick-headed refusal even to think about how to reverse the country’s plummeting competitiveness stands in stark contrast to the tax debates ranging in almost every other country, with the possible exceptions of North Korea, Cuba and France.
        Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 12 June 2006, 13:54.

        Comment


          #5
          If Ive said it a hundred times before, Ill say it a hundred times again...the only answer is a flat rate tax regime. Its as simple as that.

          Tax people once with a uniform rate and encourage the rich to get in to the tax system (after all, it would be cheaper for them to actually pay tax than to avoid or evade paying tax).

          Take the poorest and most vulnerable out of the tax system altogether and everyone becomes a winner.

          Honestly, its not like its rocket science or anything!

          Mailman

          Comment


            #6
            The issue is not how much should we tax - that's just a function of how much we choose to spend. As this blog points out (near the bottom) we could abolish income tax, NI and Corporation tax altogether and have tens of millions in change if we abolished all social spending.

            If we want to keep our current level of spending then (if the personal allowance stays roughly the same as now) the flat tax would have to be introduced at a rate of 40%. You should not be surprised the rate is so high. Most people get their taxable income from employment, and are already effectively taxed at a marginal rate of something like 40% once they are earning over £7K, if you take into account hidden taxes like employers NI as well.

            Comment


              #7
              The reason why Cameron will not discuss Tax abolition or reduction is not so much for the fear of closing down hospitals as the article notes, altough its interesting to reflect that it did not consider the potential vast savings to be made by closing down other arms of the State other than the Health Service, eg millitary bases ,nuclear weapons etc

              The true reason is thanks to NL.there are too many people in the UK who are dependent on unproductive State jobs, they would be horrified if their parasitic way of life was to be challenged by ending the Tax burden and ipso facto would never vote for any party which offered Tax reduction.

              A case in point is to consider the sheer number of UK contractors who are now dependent on assignments via Government Projects rather than the Private Sector, which is the only sector which generates genuine wealth and employment.

              Unfortunately the current crop of politicans lack the courage to make unpopular but critical decisions, yes there would be a rise in unemployment initially when the State Jobs are cut, but this would be offset over a few years by free enterrpise.

              This means a very gloomy outloook for the UK as the State Sector dominates the entire country supported by pandering politicians, meanwhile private enterprise is taxed to unbearable levels.
              Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 12 June 2006, 15:44.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by IR35 Avoider
                The issue is not how much should we tax - that's just a function of how much we choose to spend.
                Did that take into account indirect taxes?

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by AlfredJPruffock
                  Unfortunately the current crop of politicans lack the courage to make unpopular but critial decisions, yes there would be a rise in unemployment initially when the State Jobs are cut, but this would be offset over a few years by free enterrpise.

                  This means a very gloomy outloook for the UK as the State Sector dominates the entire country with pandering politicians and private enterprise is taxed to unbearable levels.
                  Unfortunately the idiot populace would not vote for a party that proposed to cut public sector spending. So what will happen is that the economy will gradually slow down until a crisis hits. Then politicians will respond, and if they have sense, cut taxes. But remember that it took a long while before Mrs T. took the required steps last time.

                  Fortunately Cameron is wise to the current Nescafe politics, and knows to avoid saying unpalatable truths, and dress everything up in New Liar speak. That sadly is the legacy of Flash and Teflon: Treat the electorate like dumb children and use superficial lifestyle statements rather than policy.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by AlfredJPruffock
                    The true reason is thanks to NL.there are too many people in the UK who are dependent on unproductive State jobs, they would be horrified if their parasitic way of life was to be challenged by ending the Tax burden and ipso facto would never vote for any party which offered Tax reduction.
                    I think there is a lot of truth in that. New Liar creates its own voter constituency.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X