Re: Should those with a income of more than 80k pay for scho : Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:48 pm  

The Video Ref wrote: While we are at is let's restrict car sales to one type of car. It can be state-produced and called the Trabant. Have a 1988 Trabi for nearly £2,500.

The Video Ref wrote: While we are at is let's restrict car sales to one type of car. It can be state-produced and called the Trabant. Have a 1988 Trabi for nearly £2,500.

Re: Should those with a income of more than 80k pay for scho : Tue Jan 21, 2014 8:25 pm  

i always believe that you should be shown what percent of your many taxations goes towards your children's schooling and it should be up to you if you pay it or put them through private education.

Re: Should those with a income of more than 80k pay for scho : Tue Jan 21, 2014 9:16 pm  

dubairl wrote:

i always believe that you should be shown what percent of your many taxations goes towards your children's schooling and it should be up to you if you pay it or put them through private education.

Goodbye to state education if that were ever to happen - why on earth would anyone who doesn't have children of school age ever opt to pay the education part of their tax bill ?

Taxation and state provision of certain services isn't optional.

Re: Should those with a income of more than 80k pay for scho : Tue Jan 21, 2014 9:27 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

Goodbye to state education if that were ever to happen - why on earth would anyone who doesn't have children of school age ever opt to pay the education part of their tax bill ?

Taxation and state provision of certain services isn't optional.

well then it would be a tax break if you have a child isn't that what would appeal to mass of this generation? You pay your normal tax rate until you have a child

Re: Should those with a income of more than 80k pay for scho : Tue Jan 21, 2014 9:28 pm  

I would add private health insurance to that as well.

Re: Should those with a income of more than 80k pay for scho : Tue Jan 21, 2014 9:59 pm  

Where are you going to stop though - I don't use public transport, should I not pay the portion of my income tax that subsidises the buses and railways ?

My children have left school now, should I stop paying for other kids education ?

I don't drink alcohol, should I deduct that part of my tax that goes towards providing police officers to pick up drunks and for hospitals to treat durnks or while we're at it I've never smoked in my life, thats another bit of tax I don't have to pay towards the NHS...

And the big one - I've been paying for someone elses pensions for the last 40 years of my working life, I should get a refund for that and only pay pension provision income tax when I retire, by which time I won't be earning so won't have to pay income tax.

See how your idea won't work ?

Re: Should those with a income of more than 80k pay for scho : Wed Jan 22, 2014 5:13 am  

it would be impossible to regulate small things such as Alcohol, smoking, transport (you would technically be counted as a problem of congestion so i would still expect to be charged for transport). Even if your not a regular smoker/drinker who's to say you won't do it occasionally? Even tho the amount of tax payable on such items should cover any future costs.

And yes you have paid your way why should you expect to pay for some one else's child?

as i said the pension idea it is impossible to predict your future circumstances so i would still expect to pay your part for that and if you don't need a state pension then at least you had a safety net.

Re: Should those with a income of more than 80k pay for scho : Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:05 am  

dubairl wrote:

it would be impossible to regulate small things such as Alcohol, smoking, transport ...

We do this anyway, in a number of ways. As you mention yourself, through taxes, but also through road laws (which regulate how fast you can drive, for instance) and through rules on things like contraband tobacco and alcohol, which are enforced by trading standards and which can protect not only your health but your pocket (some of the stuff they find and confiscate are not just dangerous, but they also work to stop landlords watering drinks or replacing brand names with inferior – and cheaper – products while charging you the same). That's all regulation.

Indeed, if regulatory powers and resources had not been diminished in recent years, the horse meat fiasco might not have happened or might have been detected earlier.

dubairl wrote:

And yes you have paid your way why should you expect to pay for some one else's child?

Partly because someone else has paid in so that you have been able to benefit on health, education etc.

Re: Should those with a income of more than 80k pay for scho : Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:06 am  

dubairl wrote:

it would be impossible to regulate small things such as Alcohol, smoking, transport (you would technically be counted as a problem of congestion so i would still expect to be charged for transport). Even if your not a regular smoker/drinker who's to say you won't do it occasionally? Even tho the amount of tax payable on such items should cover any future costs.

And yes you have paid your way why should you expect to pay for some one else's child?

as i said the pension idea it is impossible to predict your future circumstances so i would still expect to pay your part for that and if you don't need a state pension then at least you had a safety net.

So basically its the idea that part of your UK tax bill (do you pay UK tax ?) goes to educate someone else's child that you don't like ?

The only thing you're missing here is that educating children is beneficial to all of us, childless or not, because an educated workforce is a valuable workforce and a valuable workforce paying lots of tax is going to support me in my dotage soon.

Thats why I'm happy now to pay for someone else's child to be educated especially as mine went through the system unbilled (and during that time I would have been one of the ones asked to contribute, maybe not now, but those were the good times).

Re: Should those with a income of more than 80k pay for scho : Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:06 am  

JerryChicken wrote:

So basically its the idea that part of your UK tax bill (do you pay UK tax ?) goes to educate someone else's child that you don't like ?

The only thing you're missing here is that educating children is beneficial to all of us, childless or not, because an educated workforce is a valuable workforce and a valuable workforce paying lots of tax is going to support me in my dotage soon.

Thats why I'm happy now to pay for someone else's child to be educated especially as mine went through the system unbilled (and during that time I would have been one of the ones asked to contribute, maybe not now, but those were the good times).

It's rather like large companies saying they shouldn't pay corporation tax but then moaning about lack of publicly funded infra-structure. If they legitimately don't pay corporation tax here despite making large profits here then they should pay for their own infra-structure!

The way to deal with the likes of Amazon is two-fold:

1. Make them pay "business rates" based on a percentage of turnover (already being talked about) as they have an unfair advantage over high street retailers due to market distortions caused by tax and they are not as socially useful; AND
2. Given the millions of delivery journey's that they generate (bad for the environment, clogging up our roads, etc) add a levy of at least £1 per delivery onto them - to help offset their detrimental activity.