Only 34 per cent of Brits think the Government should redistribute income

[KeyboardJockey]

I never understood why they don't say have zero tax for those on minimum wage and reorganise the tax brackets, aren't ALL earners over 30k lumped in together or something? That's like the slightly above average and multibillionaires all in the same tax bracket.

Weird.

Yeah I'd like to see much more of a progressive taxation system as well. I'd also like to see a local income tax instead of the council tax as well.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

You need not redistribute wealth to improve the life of the poor. In fact tax cuts, such as zero tax rate for anyone under £15kpa, would do more to alleviate poverty than government redistributing wealth. A zero rate tax on <£15k would give the working poor an immediate increase in wealth directly to their pockets.

It wouldn't help the non working poor though; also the revenue lost would need to be recovered. You could do this with taxes on consumption but as these disproportionately hit the poor, then progressive higher rates of income tax would be a way to go. redistribuion isn't such a nightmare once you get your head around the fact that we're all in this together.

Edited to add: I'm all in favour of raising the tax threshold, but it would need to be done in conjunction with increases in guaranteed incomes to the non-working poor and commitments to a much greater degree of redistribution e.g. via the reintroduction of progressively differentiated income tax bands...as it happens I also prefer local income taxes to either head taxes or property taxes.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

You need not redistribute wealth to improve the life of the poor. In fact tax cuts, such as zero tax rate for anyone under £15kpa, would do more to alleviate poverty than government redistributing wealth. A zero rate tax on <£15k would give the working poor an immediate increase in wealth directly to their pockets.

You'd think this would be a no-brainer for government wouldn't you, given the massive savings in bureaucracy and administration that could be made from having to take tax off low-paid workers and then give it them back in tax credits. Would also reduce burdens on employers which they always seem to be keen on doing.

 

[audiotech]

You need not redistribute wealth to improve the life of the poor. In fact tax cuts, such as zero tax rate for anyone under £15kpa, would do more to alleviate poverty than government redistributing wealth. A zero rate tax on <£15k would give the working poor an immediate increase in wealth directly to their pockets.

Yep, being on that level of pay I declare an interest. Although, I favour the idea of expropriating the expropriators meself.

However, at the moment I claim tax credits, which for most of the previous years I have not been granted any This year I was awarded £26, but they have refused to pay me this figure because of a rule that says any award that low is not payable.

With the propensity to spend greater amongst the poor, I can't see why this is not being seriously considered by those wanting to get capitalism out of the financial mess it is in right now?

 

[mentalchik]

You'd think this would be a no-brainer for government wouldn't you, given the massive savings in bureaucracy and administration that could be made from having to take tax off low-paid workers and then give it them back in tax credits. Would also reduce burdens on employers which they always seem to be keen on doing.

I'm in that low income bracket but just putting me on zero tax wouldn't help as my tax credit payments are higher than the tax and NI i currently pay...iyswim........it would make me worse off !

 

[becky p]

Why should someone who works hard and is successful give up their money to someone who doesn't? It seems like a perfectly normal attitude to have.

There are millions of reasons why,not least self interest.

We survive and prosper in this world, thanks to the efforts of millions of people we will never meet.

 

[nino_savatte]

If you ever get round to reading any of his economics papers, you won't just be calling him an evil shit, you'll be calling him an evidence-manipulating, fatuous and second-rate evil shit.

It's no wonder politicians and capital bought into his theories!

Yup.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

I'm in that low income bracket but just putting me on zero tax wouldn't help as my tax credit payments are higher than the tax and NI i currently pay...iyswim........it would make me worse off !

Yes i do see what you mean - the argument against tax credits is that they are essentially wage subsidies from government to employers, that allow employers to keep wages low and profits high. On a simple comparison between your TC's in and Tax/NI out, there has to be a disparity, otherwise the fundamental nature of TC subsidies wouldn't work in increasing your overall income and "making work pay" as the government would have it.

There is a counter argument to say that by implementing zero tax rates (or only collecting tax from a higher starting point in gross income terms), there could be cost savings which would mean that employers spend less on adminstration and bureaucracy and pay their workers more (well, you can dream can't you?). The problem is that the lost revenue would need to come from somewhere which would mean taking slightly more from those people better able to afford such contributions i.e. those people who don't need to rely on wage subsidies - unfortunately, these are also the people who have the greatest political sway and are unlikely to give up a bean of their cash if they can help it.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I think you need to blame Thatcher for privatising dentistry, not councils for their taxes.

KBJ seems to have forgotten the legislative changes that Thatch put through that eventually left us with a nigh-on unworkable funding formula for councils to operate under, and all so that central govt could de-autonomise local govt.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

As the ex-chair of the LGA would have it, local authorities have now become local administrations - they have no real authority in what they do or how they do it, but instead are simply required to administer central government policy.

 

[ViolentPanda]

As the ex-chair of the LGA would have it, local authorities have now become local administrations - they have no real authority in what they do or how they do it, but instead are simply required to administer central government policy.

That is pretty much the long and short of it. It used to be that the ratepayer could, to a certain extent, manipulate or guide local policy. Now everything is undertaken in conformity to central diktat.

 

[Cobbles]

Yes you do, of course you do, you (hopefully) recieve the material benefit of treatment that improves or maintains your health, which is paid for and provided from common financial contributions of everyone, so that everyone can enjoy a certain basic standard of health and lifestyle, which in turn provides benefits for the whole of society by reducing the prevalence of impairment, ill-health and incapacity.

Then why's it called National Insurance - if it was anything like insurance, then you'd pay in relation to the risk that you represent rather than simply you've got more so gimme more. The contributions aren't common, the more you earn (and therefore probably the less you'll use the system), the more you pay - there isn't a standard payment for all.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Citizens Wage.

Everybody gets - say - £100 per week regardless of income, paid for out of genreal taxation. It would enable people who find it difficult to hold down ft work to do a bit of part time work (at the mo its automatically deducted form their benefits), it would also some people to work a few days less per week - meaning they could spend more time with families, or doing positive stuff in their communities or (shock horror!) just chilling at home.

It would probably pay for itself out the huge savings from doing away with the massive bueracracy, capital and staffing costs of the benefits system - most of which is concerned with tackling 'fraud' or thinking up ever more hurdles to stop people getting any money.

This would mean that only a small number of people - i.e those with serious disability/health issues would have to cliam benefits and the 'benfits trap' would be a thing of the past. Couple that with rasing the tax threshold to £15k p/a and rasing the minimum wage and you would have a heathier and happier society.

 

[mentalchik]

Yes i do see what you mean - the argument against tax credits is that they are essentially wage subsidies from government to employers, that allow employers to keep wages low and profits high.

Yup, it's effectively allowed employers to pay less.........i find it intensely irritating that the job centre, for instance, has at the bottom of job adverts a piece that tell you you can claim tax credits to top up the meagre salary !


Trouble is now it's become a vital part of my income (and for people like me i should imagine) I literally couldn't manange without it !

 

[brasicritique]

Only 34 per cent of Brits think the Government should redistribute income

thats what happens when you do surveys in Kensington and chelsea or was it the city anyway those asked were not representative of the general public opinion polls no longer reflect opinion they reflect profits

 

[KeyboardJockey]

KBJ seems to have forgotten the legislative changes that Thatch put through that eventually left us with a nigh-on unworkable funding formula for councils to operate under, and all so that central govt could de-autonomise local govt.

'fraid you are so right there.

 

[kyser_soze]

Citizens Wage.

Everybody gets - say - £100 per week regardless of income, paid for out of genreal taxation. It would enable people who find it difficult to hold down ft work to do a bit of part time work (at the mo its automatically deducted form their benefits), it would also some people to work a few days less per week - meaning they could spend more time with families, or doing positive stuff in their communities or (shock horror!) just chilling at home.

I'm quite a fan of this idea - altho I think it could be expanded and instead of having separate benefits, there's a sliding scale of cit wage that could include stuff like child benefit, housing etc - should take even more of the resources now used out of the loop, while returning (and therefore empowering) people in their own lives.

 

[Steven Gill]

Doesn't suprise me that one of the few non means-tested benefits left (child benefit) commands the most public support.

 

[becky p]

Doesn't suprise me that one of the few non means-tested benefits left (child benefit) commands the most public support.

One of the unfortunate effects of child benefit is that it can influence poorer women to have more children. And that exacerbates poverty levels.
IMO it should be refrormed. Better off families really don't need it. And if it encourages poorer women to have more and more children,that is just building up more and more social poblems for the future.

 

[Steven Gill]

One of the unfortunate effects of child benefit is that it can influence poorer women to have more children. And that exacerbates poverty levels.
IMO it should be refrormed. Better off families really don't need it. And if it encourages poorer women to have more and more children,that is just building up more and more social poblems for the future.

Don't agree with you there, means-testing is actually self defeating, this quote says it better than me 'As means-testing becomes the predominant source of benefits, the more affluent members of society no longer have a stake in the system, and political support for it is eroded.'

 

[weltweit]

It seems ridiculous to me that many lower earners are paying the government tax and then getting some or all of it back with benefits such as child benefits or tax credits or the like.

There is a massive burocracy involved in taking these people's money from them in the first place and a massive burocracy also involved in giving them their money back again.

Such people would be better off (and so would the rest of us) if they just kept their money in the first place.

 

[A Dashing Blade]

Citizens Wage.

Everybody gets - say - £100 per week regardless of income, paid for out of genreal taxation. . . .

It's an argument seriously mooted in Germany a couple of years back. Was droppped for many reasons, one of which being the increadibly inflationary effect it would have (ie peeps are gonna go out and buy something on credit on an interest-only repayment basis for which the repayment is £100 p/w).

Bottom line . . . . non-starter.

 

[A Dashing Blade]

I have to say that Friedman chap really was an evil shit....

"Framing the question in terms of a cost on one (deserving) section of society being paid out as a benefit to another (undeserving) section of society is how Friedman in Free to Choose wanted debates on government spending to be conducted."

In terms of the (non-attributed) quote that you use, I genuinely don't get your conclusion (ie Friedman = "evil little shit"). Contextual definitions of "deserving" and "undeserving" are clearly required.

Perhaps you could provide Friedman's definitions? (note : defininitions rather than your personal inferences)

(serious question)

 

[Das Uberdog]

Gotta say, pretty flabbergasted at the number of R-tards on this board who seem to think they'll never get ill.

Also, I'd say anyone earning under £30,000 a year should be exempt from tax, tbh. With kids, that should be raised to £40K.

Above that threshold you're still better off than most, but - tbh - you're still not 'rich' by any stretch of the imagination...

 

[_angel_]

Gotta say, pretty flabbergasted at the number of R-tards on this board who seem to think they'll never get ill.

Also, I'd say anyone earning under £30,000 a year should be exempt from tax, tbh. With kids, that should be raised to £40K.

Above that threshold you're still better off than most, but - tbh - you're still not 'rich' by any stretch of the imagination...

Sounds like a good idea but that would mean they would have to tax the really rich properly and the super-rich more effectively (ie at all) There would be wails of 'you can't do that we'll leave'.

 

[_angel_]

One of the unfortunate effects of child benefit is that it can influence poorer women to have more children. And that exacerbates poverty levels.
IMO it should be refrormed. Better off families really don't need it. And if it encourages poorer women to have more and more children,that is just building up more and more social poblems for the future.

I don't think I've heard of anyone say 'I'm going to have an extra child to get another tenner (or so) a week in child benefit'

No way does child benefit make women decide to have more babies If you are already on benefits, child benefit makes no difference to you are it is deducted from the amount of income support/ jsa paid out to you anyway.

 

[Das Uberdog]

So then you nationalise their shit ;P

 

[brasicritique]

WTF? That can't be right can it?

I saw it in this article:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/britain-in-2008-a-nation-in-thrall-to-thatcherism-772335.html

That Britain is in thrall to Thatcherism isn't a surprise obviously, but that particular statistic I find quite shocking - and not entirely believable. Did people fail to understand the question or something? I can't really believe that the remaning 66% really want to scrap child benefit, JSA, income support, incapacity benefit and all other welfare. Perhaps they see that as an individual's reciprocal arrangement with the state, rather than as redistribution? But a lot of it *is* outright redistribution (as is much of NHS spending) and I really hope it is supported by more than 34% of people.

no the article is not right its all about opinion polls anyone get get a a poll to say anything they want as long as they ask those who will reflect the desired outcome

 

[dennisr]

no the article is not right its all about opinion polls anyone get get a a poll to say anything they want as long as they ask those who will reflect the desired outcome

*makes note to self 'brainaddict' is not same person as 'brasicattack'*

 

[pdxm]

I would raise child benefit considerably, I would double the old age pension, I would increase incapacity benefit, and I would pay for it by scraping JSA totally after raising the minimum wage by about 15%.