Tax

[John52]

pelmetman - 2016-08-14 9:53 PM

 

, who have no intention of getting a job :-| ........

 

 

You may be right about some.

Benefits for women and children have to cover housing costs, wheras wages do not.

Government policies to force up housing costs above the basic wage, have inevitably left some people better off on benefits than working.

But lets not tar all benefit claimants with the same brush. Many if not most housing benefit claimants are working, but their wages don't cover the rent.

[Guest pelmetman]

John52 - 2016-08-15 7:13 AM

 

 

But lets not tar all benefit claimants with the same brush. Many if not most housing benefit claimants are working, but their wages don't cover the rent.

 

Agreed IDS benefit cap at 26k is forcing some to do some work ;-) .........

 

Tax credits should be his next target, quite how our government has managed to allow Gordon Brown stupid idea, to balloon from 1 billion in 1999 to 30 billion now, is a perfect example of how socialism is the biggest drain on our economy :-| .........

 

Make everyone self employed is my answer.... work you get paid.....don't work and you don't.......simples >:-) ........

 

 

[StuartO]

John52 - 2016-08-15 7:13 AM ... Government policies to force up housing costs above the basic wage, have inevitably left some people better off on benefits than working.

 

So the ones who end up better off on benefits (and stay on benefits indefinitely, not trying to make their own way in life) should be seem as victims of deliberately damaging government housing (and other) policies rather than lazy exploiters? 

 

Why would a government want to apply policies which deliberately drive up housing costs if this was also going to ramp up benefits costs (which they will then have to meet) I wonder?

 

[John52]

StuartO - 2016-08-15 8:43 AM

 

Why would a government want to apply policies which deliberately drive up housing costs

Truly successful economies like Germany can't understand the English obsession with house prices either.

But it suits Osborne's supporters in Tatton who are obsessed with their house prices.

(And the Duke of Westminster etc who saw his inherited wealth increase from about £4bn to £10bn)

 

[John52]

pelmetman - 2016-08-15 8:35 AM

 

Make everyone self employed is my answer.... work you get paid.....don't work and you don't.......simples >:-) ........

 

 

Including Sheila Holt who was found 'fit for work' whilst she was in a coma in the final stages of a terminal illness?

In case you think thats an isolated mistake, ATOS’ own figures showing that 10,600 people have died during or within six weeks of their benefit claim ending. And thats only one of the private companies the Government are paying to take the blame for their benefit cuts.

(google her name, Daily Mirror)

[John52]

pelmetman - 2016-08-15 8:35 AM

 

benefit cap

 

 

Why only a cap on benefits? Why not a cap on housing costs instead of Government intervention in the housing market to pump up house prices with taxpayer funded subsidies like 'Help to Buy'?

[malc d]

pelmetman - 2016-08-15 8:35 AM

 

 

Make everyone self employed is my answer....

 

 

 

But how would the country continue to operate without anyone paying tax ?

 

 

;-)

[antony1969]

John52 - 2016-08-15 9:40 AM

 

pelmetman - 2016-08-15 8:35 AM

 

Make everyone self employed is my answer.... work you get paid.....don't work and you don't.......simples >:-) ........

 

 

Including Sheila Holt who was found 'fit for work' whilst she was in a coma in the final stages of a terminal illness?

In case you think thats an isolated mistake, ATOS’ own figures showing that 10,600 people have died during or within six weeks of their benefit claim ending. And thats only one of the private companies the Government are paying to take the blame for their benefit cuts.

(google her name, Daily Mirror)

 

The same ATOS that got a kicking from MPs for poor quality of work this year ??

[John52]

pelmetman - 2016-08-14 9:53 PM

 

 

Every penny they receive in benefits in my view is a penny wasted *-) ........as you can see I don't do tea and sympathy

 

:D ...........

 

 

Does that include disabled ex-servicemen on benefits?

Can I ask a reasonable question without getting shouted down and silenced by the militarists who say they are fighting for my freedom of speech.

If they are living the life of Riley on benefits, and they get extra help from the armed forces that disabled working men don't get, why do we have collections for them like British Legion, Help the Heroes etc?

[StuartO]

John52 - 2016-08-17 11:48 AM

pelmetman - 2016-08-14 9:53 PMEvery penny they receive in benefits in my view is a penny wasted *-) ........as you can see I don't do tea and sympathy :D ...........

Does that include disabled ex-servicemen on benefits?Can I ask a reasonable question without getting shouted down and silenced by the militarists who say they are fighting for my freedom of speech.If they are living the life of Riley on benefits, and they get extra help from the armed forces that disabled working men don't get, why do we have collections for them like British Legion, Help the Heroes etc?

 

Historically ex-servicemen who have suffered a disabling injury whilst serving are often eligible for extra financial benefits such as a war pension, so are policemen and firefighters who are injured on duty.  (But ex-servicemen were not allowed to sue their employer for compensation, like civilians can.) 

 

It's a system which is subject to validation of the disability and although there will doubtless be the odd case of fraud committed because no system is perfect, I don't see anything wrong with compensating people fairly for their injuries.

 

Ex-servicemen may do better than others for charitable support, I don't know, but if people give freely to provide additional support for ex-servicemen because they think they deserve it why not?

 

[soarer]

back to the duke does anyone know how much tax he and his holdings paid

during his lifetime?

[StuartO]

A record of how much an individual has payed is known only to HMRC which is obliged by law to keep it secret.  The individual concerned will have known about each tax return as it was made and may have kept records too.  The information is not released to the public unless the individual chooses to do so. 

 

Some policiticians have chosen to release their tax returns when they was to run for office but by no means all of them and by no means for all their tax returns throughout their lives.  Few of us will have kept records of how much income tax we have paid in our lifetime and I suspect that HMRC would have to do quite a bit of digging to go back more than just a few years.

 

The Duke of Westminster is not an exception to this rule of privacy just because he was wealthy.

 

[soarer]

that is the point i was trying to make we dont know,

and i suspect we will only know what is leaked about death duties etc.

 

[StuartO]

But HMRC knows and they are our elected government's agency for tax administration.

 

You feel that everyone's income details should be in the public domain or just people you think might be richer then you?

 

[antony1969]

StuartO - 2016-08-17 5:39 PMBut HMRC knows and they are our elected government's agency for tax administration.

 

You feel that everyone's income details should be in the public domain or just people you think might be richer then you?

Wheres the like button ... You know bitterness and envy comes through in certain posts from certain members ... keep it up young Stuart

[StuartO]

My sister used to work in a bank and told me that the people who strut their stuff as is they had lots of money were the people who came in on the day the account was credited to make sure they got some before it all went again until next month.  Conversely quiet and meek types were often the ones with a big credit balance.

 

I suppose it would be fun, for a short while, to peep into people's financial affairs if you wanted to, like you can find out how much people paid for their house these days. But I suspect allowing everyone to keep their personal financial secrets is a much better arrangement - imagine all the robberies and kidnappings!

 

[malc d]

StuartO - 2016-08-17 6:49 PM I suppose it would be fun, for a short while, to peep into people's financial affairs if you wanted to, like you can find out how much people paid for their house these days. But I suspect allowing everyone to keep their personal financial secrets is a much better arrangement - imagine all the robberies and kidnappings!

I believe that in Scandinavian countries peoples income and taxes are available on line for everyone to see.I don't know if that affects their crime rate. ;-)

[antony1969]

malc d - 2016-08-17 7:14 PM

StuartO - 2016-08-17 6:49 PM I suppose it would be fun, for a short while, to peep into people's financial affairs if you wanted to, like you can find out how much people paid for their house these days. But I suspect allowing everyone to keep their personal financial secrets is a much better arrangement - imagine all the robberies and kidnappings!

I believe that in Scandinavian countries peoples income and taxes are available on line for everyone to see.I don't know if that affects their crime rate. ;-)

Don't think so .... Migrants defo do though

[John52]

antony1969 - 2016-08-17 5:50 PM

 

.. You know bitterness and envy comes through in certain posts from certain members ..

Have you considered they might just care about others and want to see fair play?

Or do you just find bitterness and envy easier to understand?

[John52]

StuartO - 2016-08-17 12:57 PM

John52 - 2016-08-17 11:48 AM

pelmetman - 2016-08-14 9:53 PMEvery penny they receive in benefits in my view is a penny wasted *-) ........as you can see I don't do tea and sympathy :D ...........

Does that include disabled ex-servicemen on benefits?Can I ask a reasonable question without getting shouted down and silenced by the militarists who say they are fighting for my freedom of speech.If they are living the life of Riley on benefits, and they get extra help from the armed forces that disabled working men don't get, why do we have collections for them like British Legion, Help the Heroes etc?

 

Historically ex-servicemen who have suffered a disabling injury whilst serving are often eligible for extra financial benefits such as a war pension, so are policemen and firefighters who are injured on duty.  (But ex-servicemen were not allowed to sue their employer for compensation, like civilians can.) 

 

It's a system which is subject to validation of the disability and although there will doubtless be the odd case of fraud committed because no system is perfect, I don't see anything wrong with compensating people fairly for their injuries.

 

Ex-servicemen may do better than others for charitable support, I don't know, but if people give freely to provide additional support for ex-servicemen because they think they deserve it why not?

I am not saying there shouldn't be collections. Just that they wouldn't be necessary if benefits were really as generous as some people say.I remember reading of a Tommy who was destitute because the disability he received whilst serving in WW1 made it impossible to for him to find work. There were no benefits in those days and he apparently got nothing from the Army. My Grandad started collecting for the Britsh Legion, his daughter and her son have carried it on - all voluntarily. But with the current British Legion manager on £150k-£160k, plus pension, plus expenses (and he is about as forthcoming over his expenses as a Member of Parliament) I wonder what my Grandad would make of that :-( (link to British Legion Accounts see page 58: http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends79/0000219279_AC_20150930_E_C.pdf )

[antony1969]

John52 - 2016-08-17 9:43 PM

 

antony1969 - 2016-08-17 5:50 PM

 

.. You know bitterness and envy comes through in certain posts from certain members ..

Have you considered they might just care about others and want to see fair play?

Or do you just find bitterness and envy easier to understand?

 

 

Depends what your definition of fair play is ... Your posts certainly seem to champion those on benefits and the rich you resent ... Not really much to understand , even for me

[StuartO]

John52 - 2016-08-17 9:43 PM

antony1969 - 2016-08-17 5:50 PM.. You know bitterness and envy comes through in certain posts from certain members ..

Have you considered they might just care about others and want to see fair play?Or do you just find bitterness and envy easier to understand?

 

It bothers me that these do-gooders always want other people to pay for their schemes for the so-called disadvantaged, simply because they have more, which probably means they have been more successful in life and paid a great deal more taxes already. 

 

What gives anyone who pays less taxes the right to demand more money from others instead of contributing more themselves?

 

There's an elderly lady who lives in my town who runs a charity to sell recycled furniture etc to the needy.  I gave her some furniture we didn't need and transported it for her - and she helped me carry it into her store, clearly struggling to do so.  Those are the sort of do-gooders I respect.

 

Incidentally she was adamant that the needy had to buy the stuff; she never gave it to them.  If they don't pay anything for it they don't respect what they are getting, she said.

 

[Guest pelmetman]

John52 - 2016-08-17 9:43 PM

 

antony1969 - 2016-08-17 5:50 PM

 

.. You know bitterness and envy comes through in certain posts from certain members ..

Have you considered they might just care about others and want to see fair play?

Or do you just find bitterness and envy easier to understand?

 

Have not noticed how you excuse merchants are turning everyone into a victim? :-| .........

 

ie It's not my fault I'm (Append which is applicable).......

 

Poor, Fat, Skinny, Workshy, Drug addict, Alcoholic, etc etc

 

Hows this for a radical thought....perhaps it might be their own fault *-) .......

 

 

[antony1969]

pelmetman - 2016-08-18 8:53 AM

 

John52 - 2016-08-17 9:43 PM

 

antony1969 - 2016-08-17 5:50 PM

 

.. You know bitterness and envy comes through in certain posts from certain members ..

Have you considered they might just care about others and want to see fair play?

Or do you just find bitterness and envy easier to understand?

 

Have not noticed how you excuse merchants are turning everyone into a victim? :-| .........

 

ie It's not my fault I'm (Append which is applicable).......

 

Poor, Fat, Skinny, Workshy, Drug addict, Alcoholic, etc etc

 

Hows this for a radical thought....perhaps it might be their own fault *-) .......

 

 

 

The it's not my fault culture had a cracking 5live phone in this morning titled " Who's responsible for my child's weight " ... Unbelievably and as hard as it is to grasp , shock and horror could it be the parents responsibility ? .... It's as cheap now to buy fruit and veg as it's ever been ... You see it in the supermarket , pizza , burgers , chicken strips , chips , gallons of fizzy drinks in folks shopping ... Laziness , not a lack of money or education just pure laziness

[StuartO]

John52 - 2016-08-17 10:04 PM I am not saying there shouldn't be collections. Just that they wouldn't be necessary if benefits were really as generous as some people say.I remember reading of a Tommy who was destitute because the disability he received whilst serving in WW1 made it impossible to for him to find work. There were no benefits in those days and he apparently got nothing from the Army. My Grandad started collecting for the Britsh Legion, his daughter and her son have carried it on - all voluntarily. But with the current British Legion manager on £150k-£160k, plus pension, plus expenses (and he is about as forthcoming over his expenses as a Member of Parliament) I wonder what my Grandad would make of that :-( (link to British Legion Accounts see page 58: http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends79/0000219279_AC_20150930_E_C.pdf )

 

The continuance of charitable collections doesn't show that state benefits are inadequate at all, that's a no-sense connection; charitable effort continues for all sorts of reasons.

 

Ex-servicemen were treated badly in the old days and once conflicts were over they were cast aside and neglected.  It's really only since the public got behind the idea of the Military Covenant that better provision followed.  War pensions came earlier but that still left big holes and there are still big holes.  Well done to your Grandad and your sister and her son - why don't you do it too?

 

I have concerns about chief executives of charities being paid big salaries too - and even about calling them chief executive just because its a trendy thing to do.  But the British legion is a big, big outfit and it doubtless needs a management and administration system to match - and the British legion has always had senior ex-service people in senior volunteer positions to keep things straight.  If they think a big salary is necessary for their Chief Exec that's OK by me.  It's charities like the one run by that woman who dresses in colourful curtains that worry me; they seem much more likely to turn out to be wasteful and crooked.