Charlie Endell Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 (edited) 40% on earnings over £42,386 is scandalous. Edited February 2, 2016 by Charlie Endell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Posted February 2, 2016 Author Share Posted February 2, 2016 You really are losing your ability to troll effectively. It gets harder the more people see through you. Lamia I'm not sure if this caught SNP unaware as their and your message today is a tad mixed and confused. Finally we are talking about powers the Scottish Parliament has. Actually some policy that could offset funding constraints from Holyrood. It's a chance to put your money where your mouth is. More could be saved if the middle class perks were reined in. One Opportunity in less than 100 days to help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 40% on earnings over £42,386 is scandalous.Scandalously low? I agree! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Endell Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 (edited) Scandalously low? I agree! For Hector to swan off with 40% of what someone earns (above the current threshold) isn't right - it's far too big a chunk - it's not as if someone earning say £50k a year is mega weathy (especially if they have a mortgage and dependants to support). Edited February 2, 2016 by Charlie Endell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I don't pay anywhere near enough tax IMO. Said nobody ever! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampden_loon2878 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 What is more scandalous is that if a house hold has one adult earning 50k plus they have their child benifits removed while a house hold with two earners of 49k get full child benifit,,,, it should be based on house hold earnings 40% on earnings over £42,386 is scandalous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Posted February 2, 2016 Author Share Posted February 2, 2016 From Owen "Prince of Austerity" Jones in The Guardian. "a Scot earning the living wage would have an extra £51 in their pocket; while it points out cheekily the first minister, on a salary of £144,687, would have to fork out an additional £1,447 a year. That would leave the Scottish government with an extra near half a billion pounds. Suddenly cuts dont become an imposition of a Westminster..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumnio Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I have nothing to add apart from to say that Owen Jones is a fcking tosser, I cant be the only one who thinks that. Cant stand the little toad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lamia Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Lamia I'm not sure if this caught SNP unaware as their and your message today is a tad mixed and confused. Finally we are talking about powers the Scottish Parliament has. Actually some policy that could offset funding constraints from Holyrood. It's a chance to put your money where your mouth is. More could be saved if the middle class perks were reined in. One Opportunity in less than 100 days to help. I am obviously doing a much better job than you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scunnered Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I have nothing to add apart from to say that Owen Jones is a fcking tosser, I cant be the only one who thinks that. Cant stand the little toad. I like him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Just when you think Scottish Labour can't get any dafter, they prove you wrong by going around stealing Wullie Rennie's policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 From the Herald : "The SNP will seek to put tax at the centre of its ''big push'' for a Holyrood majority this week, with new figures showing nurses, teachers, and council workers will foot the bill for the Labour's ''penny for Scotland''. A detailed breakdown of the tax's impact reveals how public-sector workers would be forced to bear the brunt of a measure that would affect more than two million workers. An analysis prepared by the Inland Revenue and passed to The Herald confirms SNP claims that the Labour's flagship policy, intended to raise £690m extra for health and education, will fall disproportionately on those on low and middle incomes. Gordon Brown said last night: ''There is hardly a nurse, teacher, policeman, or council worker in Scotland who won't be paying this tax increase. These are the very people Labour claimed it wanted to help and instead they will be hit the hardest. ''They simply haven't considered that their policy will hit hardest the 1.3 million Scots earning less than the average wage.'' According to the Inland Revenue's statistical breakdown, three-quarters of Scotland's 1.7 million workers earning below-average wages will have to pay something towards Labour's plan." https://archive.is/pJjcl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 For Hector to swan off with 40% of what someone earns (above the current threshold) isn't right - it's far too big a chunk - it's not as if someone earning say £50k a year is mega weathy (especially if they have a mortgage and dependants to support).I disagree. Someone earning £42k +is pretty well off. To be paying 40% on earnings over and above that is pretty light IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mariokempes56 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 (edited) Milk and honey anyone? Edited February 2, 2016 by mariokempes56 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Posted February 2, 2016 Author Share Posted February 2, 2016 Love the SNP line. We are all Thatcher's children. The political axis in Scotland is realigning with England & Wales. Northern Ireland still lacking connection between spends and tax but more power will bring more scrutiny. No tax rises for me in next 5 years from Holyrood or Westminster. My daily coffee is safe. Phew. I'm expecting Sean Clerkin to be protesting SNP events with his Scottish Resistance mob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irnbruman Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 The simple fact is that if the Westminster govt put the same effort into preventing tax evasion and avoidance as they do in destroying the welfare state -then there would be no deficit - why not instill a trading tax on companies that are paying no corporation tax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McExpat Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 It should be a set rate for all. A % based system sees to it that higher earners pay more than lower earners. 20% of 100k is a lot more than 20% of 20k. To then have a higher % bracket for higher earners is robbery but accepted and the norm and therefore acceptable. Benefits Britain sees to it that those that put nothing in to the system take the most out and at the same time those who put the most in take the least out, this is fundamentally wrong but again accepted as the norm and therefore again acceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lamia Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Love the SNP line. We are all Thatcher's children. The political axis in Scotland is realigning with England & Wales. Northern Ireland still lacking connection between spends and tax but more power will bring more scrutiny. No tax rises for me in next 5 years from Holyrood or Westminster. My daily coffee is safe. Phew. I'm expecting Sean Clerkin to be protesting SNP events with his Scottish Resistance mob. D minus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McExpat Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 It's also tiring and frustrating continually hearing about big companies paying low taxes in the UK. All too often people neglect to consider the vat and national insurance contributions, business rates etc paid in the UK by the big corporations, as they do the amount of tax thats collected via the jobs they have created. Starbucks is a good example! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lamia Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 It should be a set rate for all. 20% of 100k is a lot more than 20% of 20k. But a lot more affordable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lamia Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 It's also tiring and frustrating continually hearing about big companies paying low taxes in the UK. All too often people neglect to consider the vat and national insurance contributions, business rates etc paid in the UK by the big corporations, as they do the amount of tax thats collected via the jobs they have created. Starbucks is a good example! Hurrah for the big companies and the rich getting richer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Posted February 2, 2016 Author Share Posted February 2, 2016 #bairnsnotbombs v #kidsnotcuts v #lamiaweeklylatte Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McExpat Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Hurrah for the big companies and the rich getting richer! Yes for sure after all the bigger they are the more jobs they create and therefore the more they help society as a whole! I often find looking for the positive in all situations often highlights many benefits! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mariokempes56 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 #bairnsnotbombs v #kidsnotcuts v #lamiaweeklylatte #erse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lamia Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Yes for sure after all the bigger they are the more jobs they create and therefore the more they help society as a whole! I often find looking for the positive in all situations often highlights many benefits! I often find being blind to the negatives serves the purpose of those reaping the substantial rewards. 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.