Scottish Parliamentary Elections Sweepstake

[campbell]

Fair enough! I just read "dispute" and wanted to help

[thinfourth]

Ironically the only people who keep bringing it up are the press and no voters. The vote is done, move on people. If everyone keeps on about it the the press will never let it go and we will be having the same arguments in 10 years time.

Those tory scum bringing up indyref2 to distract from the hard work the SNP are doing

http://www.scotsman.com/news/nicola-stu ... ments-area

[campbell]

Prob with 0% up to say £40k then, bang, 40% on everything above, is that the step is so pronounced. Our system makes the take a bit more gradual, no?

[Mikie711]

Thinforth, for crying out load let it go dude, it really isn't worth it.

It does Campbell but maybe not so sever a step might work. Say Above £30k then 30% which isn't that much different from the 20-40% hike we have now and you take an awful lot of people out of income tax all together. If the numbers add up then surely it has to be a better system.

[campbell]

Yup, has potential. Need a maths whizz to model it into real numbers then

[campbell]

Can I also say Paul. I'm with you on a lot. But stop baiting the Nats, eh!

[BigD]

Are we just talking a flat rate of income tax or are you including NI in that?

[Mikie711]

No, NI is a separate issue but could be combined but there are exclusions for NI if you work out of the country, different rate applies or zero if you have a fully paid stamp so that would have to be factored in. Perhaps reductions for private medical cover etc.

[BigD]

No, NI is a separate issue but could be combined but there are exclusions for NI if you work out of the country, different rate applies or zero if you have a fully paid stamp so that would have to be factored in. Perhaps reductions for private medical cover etc.

Starting to sound like a complex tax system to me.

[pete]

If we were starting from scratch, what tax rules might we set which would be fair to all?

That would never be possible! One man's "fair" is not the same as another man's "fair".

I was about to type that, pretty much word for word.

[thinfourth]

The fairest way to run tax would be a flat rate of tax PLUS a citizens income

It will remove HUGE amounts of pointless sh*t

No more of folk not wanting to work an extra hour incase it removes all their benefits

But i doubt if anyone is brave enough to bring that in

The loony left love the idea of a citizens income but done correctly it can be a very right wing way if thinking also if you remove a shedload of other benefits and tax stupidity

[Mikie711]

The fairest way to run tax would be a flat rate of tax PLUS a citizens income

It will remove HUGE amounts of pointless sh*t

No more of folk not wanting to work an extra hour incase it removes all their benefits

But i doubt if anyone is brave enough to bring that in

The loony left love the idea of a citizens income but done correctly it can be a very right wing way if thinking also if you remove a shedload of other benefits and tax stupidity

It's the paid regardless if you work or not that I don't agree with, surely you would have to have done some work to at least trigger what amounts to a super benefit.

[thinfourth]

The fairest way to run tax would be a flat rate of tax PLUS a citizens income

It will remove HUGE amounts of pointless sh*t

No more of folk not wanting to work an extra hour incase it removes all their benefits

But i doubt if anyone is brave enough to bring that in

The loony left love the idea of a citizens income but done correctly it can be a very right wing way if thinking also if you remove a shedload of other benefits and tax stupidity

It's the paid regardless if you work or not that I don't agree with, surely you would have to have done some work to at least trigger what amounts to a super benefit.

The unemployables will never work under the current system

Why waste time and money trying to get an unemployable into a job?

Even if you do force them into a job they will be a nightmare for any employer and will soon loose the job anyway

Just give them their citizen wage and nothing more.


And by unemployable i don't mean disabled. I mean the feckless articles who have the time and effort to steal your car but can't be arsed to move the rotting sofa out of their overgrown garden

[campbell]

Surely if you reduce the incentive to work for someone like that, the practice will only spread to others on the margins? Creating an even bigger base for the working population to support?

Unemployment benefits need to help prevent utter destitution but they should not be made attractive or a goal in their own right. IMHO.

[Corranga]

Prob with 0% up to say £40k then, bang, 40% on everything above, is that the step is so pronounced. Our system makes the take a bit more gradual, no?

The problem with 0 below and 40%@40k is that the maths don't work out surely?

Currently, every penny earned over ~32k pays 40% (and 45% at 150k)

Surely it would have to be an even bigger step to work out, say 50% at above 40k.

At the top end of the 0%, that nearly 6k more in the pocket of someone earning 40k.
Then someone earning 50k would still be better off, paying 5k tax rather than 9.2k in the current system.
75k = 17.5k tax rather than a current 19.2
100k = 30k tax (currently 29.2k)
150k = 55k tax (currently 53.6k)
200k = 80k tax (currently 76.1k)
500k = 230k tax (currently 211k)

So, 50% tax on anything about 40k benefits pretty much everyone who earns less than 100k a year, and doesn't make much of a difference to those earning a little over that.
Looks like a better plan to me than the current system - all assuming it can raise enough tax to match or better the current system (or can be tweaked to do so).
At the 500k point I don't think it'd add up as the 19k extra would only cover 3 and a bit <40k earners, and I very much doubt Scotland (or even the UK) has that sort of ratio.
Still, the idea of raising the tax free allowance and applying a higher percentage further up the scale looks to me to be a decent way to help lower earners, and still raise enough cash without starting to look at luxury goods and how to raise more money from highly complex systems...

As for the unemployed (but able to work) there has to be some sort of incentive to get them into work. Perhaps a system where they start off with a fairly liveable level of benefit which reduces unless they contribute somehow, or pay them mainly in shopping vouchers locked to the person or something. I'd have less of an issue with people living off the state if, for example, it meant we had cleaner streets and usable public toilets or something, even if they only did 3 hours, 3 days a week..

Chris