The Budget - Page 6

garinda · 28-03-2010, 12:32

As stated, we may be considered one of the poorest constituencies/boroughs in the country, but the people of Hyndburn are 'rich' in spirit, warmth, and most, in having a sense of humour.

We count our blessings, instead of of money, bungled together in wads of a hundreds of thousands.

DaveinGermany · 28-03-2010, 13:56

Not really sure it can be classed as relevant or not but German employees pay a % of their wages for Social security, Health, Pension & Tax. that way everyone is equal in so far as deductions from their pay packets, but the actual monetary value is relevant to their earnings.

So by default higher earners pay more to the system than low earners, but on balance all make equal contributions.

cashman · 28-03-2010, 14:17

far as i'm concerned i think equality on paying taxes sucks, reason being many are on peanuts, so why should they pay the same.

andrewb · 28-03-2010, 15:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

far as i'm concerned i think equality on paying taxes sucks, reason being many are on peanuts, so why should they pay the same.

Exactly cashy. Low income workers who have chosen to work rather than living on welfare, should not be punished by some silly 'equal' tax system. Equality is about fairness. The bottom 5th of earners pay 38.7% in tax, whilst it's 34.9% for the top 5th. It's not fair if we have a flat tax which will make the lowest earners pay an awful lot more than that as a percentage of their wage.

Obviously there has to be a balance, because often the rich bring skills and wealth into our economy which everyone benefits from, so we don't want to scare them off to other countries with high taxes.

garinda · 28-03-2010, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

far as i'm concerned i think equality on paying taxes sucks, reason being many are on peanuts, so why should they pay the same.

Sorry, another of those agree to disagree moments.

If you believe in total equality for all, that's got to be applicable to everyone in society, at either end of the spectrum, or it isn't fair or equal.

Should wealthier people pay more to post a letter?

Or if we still had state owned nationalised industries, should they pay more than a poorer person, for the same gas or electricity too?

As Dave points out with the case in Germany, the rich do pay more, because the same percentage of their income is more money than someone on less.

If people are paid 'peanuts' I'd rather be fighting to get that money increased for those at the lower end of the pay scale, rather than making the better off pay a bigger, and unequal percentage, and a larger amount of tax, than anyone else.

I mentioned the other week that my Labour supporting grandfather happily paid 95% tax.

To me when someone is paying that great a percentage of their income tax, it stunts the capitalist system we live in, and certainly doesn't encourage enterprise, and industry to flourish and prosper.

garinda · 28-03-2010, 16:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

Exactly cashy. Low income workers who have chosen to work rather than living on welfare, should not be punished by some silly 'equal' tax system. Equality is about fairness. The bottom 5th of earners pay 38.7% in tax, whilst it's 34.9% for the top 5th. It's not fair if we have a flat tax which will make the lowest earners pay an awful lot more than that as a percentage of their wage.

Obviously there has to be a balance, because often the rich bring skills and wealth into our economy which everyone benefits from, so we don't want to scare them off to other countries with high taxes.

I can't say I'm too suprised at your lack of understanding of the concept of fairness, and equality.

Equality for all.

For if it isn't applicable to all, by it's very definition, it isn't equal, and therfore can't be classed as equality.

cashman · 28-03-2010, 16:45

to me its all about striking a balance, not trying to drive folk outa the country,sounds very simple when typed, but know it aint,n since when has any government fought to give the lower paid a good deal? i sure don't count the minimum wage as any great help. was just slightly better n what was. aint talking about anyone paying a great %, just a fair balance, yes there will always be whingers if it was, but thats life.

garinda · 28-03-2010, 17:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

when has any government fought to give the lower paid a good deal? i

I'm defending no one, other than what I personally happen to think is right and fair, but this was the first government in history to legislate for a national minimum wage. Which certainly was put in place to benefit those at the lower end of the pay scale, rather than at the top.

garinda · 28-03-2010, 17:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany

Not really sure it can be classed as relevant or not but German employees pay a % of their wages for Social security, Health, Pension & Tax. that way everyone is equal in so far as deductions from their pay packets, but the actual monetary value is relevant to their earnings.

So by default higher earners pay more to the system than low earners, but on balance all make equal contributions.

Well, if it's already happening in Germany, at the very core of the United States of Europe, watch this space.....

cashman · 28-03-2010, 17:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

since when has any government fought to give the lower paid a good deal? i sure don't count the minimum wage as any great help. was just slightly better n what was..

ya convieniently missed the end bit off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

I'm defending no one, other than what I personally happen to think is right and fair, but this was the first government in history to legislate for a national minimum wage. Which certainly was put in place to benefit those at the lower end of the pay scale, rather than at the top.

see my above comment.

garinda · 28-03-2010, 17:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

ya convieniently missed the end bit off.

see my above comment.

I read what you'd posted, but think that having legislation that protects workers against being paid in actual peanuts, is an historic advance, in as much as there's never been anything like it before.

As stated, I'm not here to defend the government, but only my own thoughts on equality.

Personally I'd prefer to fight for fairer wages for those at the bottom of the pay scale. Which I happen to think has been helped, protected, and strengthened by the government bringing the minimum wage to the statute books, and which less well paid workers have benefited from.

cashman · 28-03-2010, 18:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

I read what you'd posted, but think that having legislation that protects workers against being paid in actual peanuts, is an historic advance, in as much as there's never been anything like it before.

As stated, I'm not here to defend the government, but only my own thoughts on equality.

Personally I'd prefer to fight for fairer wages for those at the bottom of the pay scale. Which I happen to think has been helped, protected, and strengthened by the government bringing the minimum wage to the statute books, and which less well paid workers have benefited from.

that we agree on, spent 20 odd yrs doing that, pity no government ever will.

andrewb · 28-03-2010, 18:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

I can't say I'm too suprised at your lack of understanding of the concept of fairness, and equality.

Equality for all.

For if it isn't applicable to all, by it's very definition, it isn't equal, and therfore can't be classed as equality.

If you want to be pedantic about meanings of words then feel free. My argument about what I think is a fair system stands.

garinda · 28-03-2010, 19:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

My argument about what I think is a fair system stands.

As does mine, when it comes to fairness and equality, and who actually understands the meaning of the concepts.