Tax Hell: 73% rates cripple UK families, killing 'aspiration nation'

[xoggoth]

It certainly needs to be pointed out to far too many that the tax they pay is not limited to what they see on their payslip. VAT, fuel duty, VAT, council tax, higher prices due to corporation tax and business rates. That figure would not surprise me at all, I did a back of envelope calculation once and came up with a figure of 60pc+.

[fullyautomatix]

So men shagging women and buggering off without contributing to the support of the resultant child aren't the problem?

Is it only the men who shag and bugger off ? or are there women who get rid of husbands because they can then claim benefits and dont depend financially on the man ?

[formant]

Is it only the men who shag and bugger off ? or are there women who get rid of husbands because they can then claim benefits and dont depend financially on the man ?

This. And, well, there are usually two people involved in every break-up. It's never just down to one person.

[mudskipper]

Those men can be chased and made to pay through the CSA.

For every one of those men there are probably two who are denied access to their children by bitter, devious, and greedy mothers. Cause, you know, sometimes those men bugger off for a reason, which may just be that the mother wasn't half as decent a human being as she'd like to pretend.

Assuming they're working in the first place...

[mudskipper]

Is it only the men who shag and bugger off ?

Of course not. But my point is that blaming all society's problems on single mothers is rather ignoring the fact that it takes two to bring a child into the world.

or are there women who get rid of husbands because they can then claim benefits and dont depend financially on the man ?

Seriously? Maybe there are, but it seems an unlikely reason for divorce in an otherwise stable relationship.

[formant]

Assuming they're working in the first place...

Yeah, well maybe shagging the unemployed or unemployable isn't such a great idea in the first place.

I don't think anyone should be bringing children into this world if they can't afford to raise them on their own.

Apart from the fact that the most effective methods of contraception are only available to women, women are also usually the ones who have the opportunity to terminate an existing unwanted pregnancy. If they get all mushy and hormonal about it and have a child the guy probably never wanted in the first place, I personally don't think they're entitled to any child support.

Men have a lot less influence on whether they end up with an unplanned/unwanted child or not.

[mudskipper]

Yeah, well maybe shagging the unemployed or unemployable isn't such a great idea in the first place.

I don't think anyone should be bringing children into this world if they can't afford to raise them on their own.

Apart from the fact that the most effective methods of contraception are only available to women, women are also usually the ones who have the opportunity to terminate an existing unwanted pregnancy. If they get all mushy and hormonal about it and have a child the guy probably never wanted in the first place, I personally don't think they're entitled to any child support.

Men have a lot less influence on whether they end up with an unplanned/unwanted child or not.

A condom used correctly is almost 100% effective - I think the official figure is 98%, but doubtless includes many people who don't use as instructed. Agreed that in the tiny number of cases where correctly used contraception fails, the man has no choice about the eventual outcome, but he is just as capable of insuring that the conception never happens in the first place.

[formant]

A condom used correctly is almost 100% effective - I think the official figure is 98%, but doubtless includes many people who don't use as instructed. Agreed that in the tiny number of cases where correctly used contraception fails, the man has no choice about the eventual outcome, but he is just as capable of insuring that the conception never happens in the first place.

Wow, that's one (pretty uncomfortable) option, compared to various, much more effective ones for women. Factor into that those couples who mutually agree not to use condoms, while the woman is on something homonal. There you go, all contraceptive powers transferred to the female, who may of course miss a pill here and there, maybe on purpose, maybe by accident, maybe by sheer neglect. If you now advise against the concept of trust, yeah, then it's probably still all the guy's fault...

Of course even then, men still don't have the option to terminate an existing unplanned pregnancy.

Women have a hell of a lot more choice in reproduction than men do.

[VectraMan]

The 40% tax band at 32k is sign that it is all over for this country.

There's a lot of truth in that

Not much truth. It's £42K.

[mudskipper]

Wow, that's one (pretty uncomfortable) option, compared to various, much more effective ones for women. Factor into that those couples who mutually agree not to use condoms, while the woman is on something homonal. There you go, all contraceptive powers transferred to the female, who may of course miss a pill here and there, maybe on purpose, maybe by accident, maybe by sheer neglect. If you now advise against the concept of trust, yeah, then it's probably still all the guy's fault...

Of course even then, men still don't have the option to terminate an existing unplanned pregnancy.

Women have a hell of a lot more choice in reproduction than men do.

Of course it's not 'all the guy's fault'. But the standard rhetoric seems to be that it's 'all the woman's fault', which is equally ridiculous.

Blaming societies ills on 'single mothers' is absolving the man of any responsibility in the process.

I suspect that the majority of the children of single parents are either a) conceived whilst in a stable relationship with both partners complicit in bringing the child into the world or b) conceived within a casual relationship where neither partner particularly bothered with ensuring effective contraceptive was used.