milo

no! u are assuming that EVERYONE is on average wages. you have neglected to consider that you will be losing a LOT on those wage earners over £40k/year. all your figures have done is multiply average wages out by the number of people - this is simply not accurate.

additionally £250/year IS a lot to people on £5k/year. some of those on £5k/year may NOT be in financial hardship so will not qualify for extra money.

milo

and in those 5/10 years you will no doubt get voted out of power. people will want to know why you've cut spending and held taxes. they will also want to know why you lied about your tax policy

bloke

Throw in free beer every day and you've got my vote

damian666

milo.

Can you give examples of someone who would earn £5000 a year and not be in financial hardship? You have contradicted yourself by saying that £250 is a lot of money to them.

I cannot say as a proportion of earners how many are in the higher tax band. By your theories they are saving the money however - this would as stated above be reclaimed as tax on interest earned or from inheretance tax.

Money does not disappear.

[Edited by damian666 - 1/14/2004 2:00:41 PM]

milo

some possible examples:

* parent who's living in someone else's property and earning 5k/year which is exactly what they need, no less. but they can't work any more hours because of their kids. they're living in a £500k property owned by whomever they live with (perhaps their partner, or more realistically their parents?).

* someone who is doing some kind of part-time work while funding some kind of educational course themselves. they dont have time to work more hours, but have exactly enough money saved to support themselves for the duration of the course as long as they keep getting in 5k/year. any less than that and they'll eat into their savings too fast. of course, they wouldn't qualify for hardship, because they have savings behind them.

* in fact, i'll broaden those to... anyone who can (for whatever reason - maybe illness) only work enough to get £5k/year. they previously earned more and have their own property and savings behind them. £5k is the minimum they need, but long-term they can't eat into their savings. because they have property and savings, they won't qualify.


aside from which, by not having an income free tax break at the lower level, you WILL be making all those people worse off. and at many levels, you will be causing people to be put into financial hardship who weren't previously.

also, taking money away from people in terms of income tax is VERY hard to do (in terms of popularity), especially if they're low income folks. the govt probably could afford to cut taxes, BUT that's easy to do. the hard part is realising that you MAY have to put them up again later - and if so, how can you do that? it's VERY hard to stay in power if you're making people (perceive themselves to be) worse off from an income point of view.

dsmith

Where I work lots of people's Wifes do part time work just to get them out of the house. Many prob earn about £5k - none would be anywhere near anything considered financial hardship with or without that money.

milo

a VERY small amount would be... IF they decide to save the money in this country.

they could easily buy offshore investments and totally screw you.

or purchase housing in their spouse's name even in this country. they rent it out, and the income goes to the spouse - only getting hit on the 5% tax rate.

or buy appreciating assets and put them in their spouse's name. the point is they're taking the money OUT of the economy.

even if they did save it in a bank, giving £100 to a low income person means that it will ALL be put back into the economy via consumer spending. giving £100 to a rich person means you'll be getting about £1/year back in tax on the interest they earn.

that's assuming they don't go and blow all their spare money on a japanese import car

damian666

In your first example, the person is experiencing financial hardship, as they cannot afford housing of their own. £96 a week is very difficult to survive on in the first place. It would be a short term hardship though, as the parent could eventually return to work (when the children reach school age?)

In your second example, why can't they eat into their savings? They wouldn't qualify for hardship if you like, beacause someone who has money in the bank (in whatever form) cannot be considered hard off, unless the money cannot be withdrawn. This example is unrealistic as the person has almost certainly chosen to partake in the educational course - why was this not planned for? You cannot just quit your job and claim benefits!

In your third example, illness - is this not a hardship?

In the long run, people will be better off.

In a way we are as bad as eachother at this - for every example you can give of someone who will be worse off, I can counter it with someone who is better off. Admittedly, change cannot come overnight - and I'm not the best person to decide every policy of a new political party.

In the property example you give, surely CGT comes into play? If not, then it is classed as income, and is taxed as previously mentioned.

We could all go to France and do the weekly shop to avoid VAT. This isn't done! Its a matter of practicality over financial gain.

bashful

D666 -

Getting back to your original point, I think you'll find that legally there's no such thing as a political party. You don't write off to apply!

Remember that the UK doesn't have a written constitution; the laws that control Parliament don't mention parties. It's all nod-and-a-wink stuff.

What you want to do is to get fifty or so like-minded people elected to Parliament; then you'll be taken seriously, and you can gang together and act like a political party.

milo

nope.. they are CHOOSING to live with their parents (or whomever). it's not a matter of them affording their own housing because they don't want it. they just want their 5k/year to live on.


because they then won't have enough money to finish their course.

it is totally realistic - people go back to further education all the time. they had PLANNED to survive on 5k/year - but you're taking some of this money away from them. it was all planned for.


not if they have savings.


correct - to make people better off, you've got to make others worse off. there are reasons why we have taxes at the rates they are - it's because it gives the govt the maximum amount of money without pissing off too many people. if you tax everyone who earns over £1m/year at 80%, you're not going to **** too many people off. but take 5% away from those earning below £12k (i.e. the vast majority of people), and you'll have riots.


no, cgt only comes into play if it's realised. if the house is never sold, then gains are never realised. therefore you can't tax them. you can hardly say "we need more money from you because we reckon the house you own and haven't sold is worth more".

with regards to it being classed as income - yes, it's income, but will only be taxed at 5% because it's in the spouse's name (the spouse doesn't earn). so the extra money you're giving to the rich will ultimately be making them more money at a lower tax rate.


it certainly used to be done! people living used to do this all the time or have you forgotten?! there WILL be a point when people will be prepared to go out of their way to save money. for instance - if interest rates were to rise to 20%, people WOULD start turning to european banks to borrow money.

damian666

milo, would you like to join the "UK Reform party" as economic policy adviser? You seem to have a good head on your shoulders. Admittedly, my economic policy leaves a lot to be desired, but I'm not an economist!

Remember folks, it started on Scoobynet

milo

depends what the pay is and how much i'll be taxed!

damian666

Those working for the UKRP will be paid what elected MPs are paid, until that point its a beer system.

In the future, it would be more than unwise to pay less tax than the public. Imagine the outcry!

Damian

Andy Tang

iTrader: (3)

Damian get on with some work, or else you'll have to rely on the exisiting govenment to support you and your wife!!

johnfelstead

It is illegal under EU legislation to reduce the VAT rate once set. It is also illegal under EU legislation to remove VAT from a product once it has been subject to the levy.

I disagree that you should dump all education standards in one school; it is bad for the smart and the not so smart children and holds both groups back. There should be schools designed specifically to cater for the realities of how human beings are born, not some idealistic claptrap that everyone is equal, because they are not.

V45DSM

So, what are you saying? Tis now a reserve of the dead?

scoobynutta555

You want to run the country yet you do not even know how to set up a political party

Would like to type up a long winded reply to the utter tosh that's been posted, but I simply cannot be bothered wasting my time, as this is just a pointless thread.

Whats this party to be called, The Morons?

And again, it's defence not defense.

scooby-tc

iTrader: (2)

You couldnt organise a jelly and ice cream party let alone a political party.Get a grip on reality first eh

scoobynutta555

TC since he's using American spellings:

Jelly: a sweet soft food made by cooking fruit with sugar to preserve it. It is eaten on bread or cakes:
a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

damian666

Once the revolution comes, I think we all know who will be first up against the wall

Lighten up guys. They are IDEAS! It was a QUESTION!

You are obviously too narrow minded to understand.

Thanks for your contribution.

Bye!

Damian

damian666

Just as a recap, I wanted to know how it was done, and posted some of my ideas.

Do you know how to form a political party? Didnt think so.

You don't have to vote you know. (Aren't mental patients exempt anyway?)

Damian

[Edited by damian666 - 1/14/2004 7:57:46 PM]

milo

not at all... just that it isnt as common by any means.

a few years ago, go to calais, even in the middle of the night, and all the hypermarkets would be full. now, even at peaks times, they never are.

why is this? because demand for french goods rose, pushing prices up. demand for uk goods fell, pushing prices down. eventually people can't be bothered to make the trip.

sure, lots of people still do it, but you hardly make a saving anymore.

scoobynutta555

your 'ideas' are the pipedream of a clueless ignoramus who has as much political know how as IDS's used toilet roll.

I suggest you actually learn about politics before you spout nonsense.

Once you form this 'party' and fight a constituency, i'll bet you come behind the 'one legged lesbians for a moonbase' party.

damian666

Insults abound, but no ideas.

Obviously a sign of advanced intelligence.

[Edited by damian666 - 1/15/2004 9:23:20 AM]

Crapaud62

'one legged lesbians for a moonbase' party

Didn't they beat the Conservatives in North London??

ProperCharlie

as has been mentioned before, i am not aware of any particular "process" for forming a political party - i don't think that there is a form to fill in like there is for road tax. you have to choose a candidate to fight a constituency. there are rules are regulations about this, must be nominated by x no. of people, must supply a deposit of £x, which you loose if you do not attract a certain %age of the vote in your chosen constituency. politics "a" level was a long time ago, but that's how i remember it.

[Edited by ProperCharlie - 1/15/2004 9:53:40 AM]

Leslie

I think it is a shame that some people feel they have to display their own shortcomings and lack of intelligence by resorting to unnecessary insults and ineffective sarcasm.

Les

ProperCharlie

Les - i wasn'r being sarcastic - i really did do politics A level.

Muffleman

At least Damian is thinking about trying to effect a change ! Most whinge about current govt. and do nothing. OR move their vote from one uselss party to another.

Anyone believing that current govt\parties are not massively inefficient as a direct result of redtape, overpaid bureaucrats and good old BS is living in a dream world. And WE are paying for this. FORTY Percent Taxes, VAT, CGT, NI, 'stealth' taxes, etc etc etc.

Sometimes it takes a simple approach to fix a complicated problem, so I'm not going to 'knock' Damians comments either. Currently, everytime there is an issue to be dealt with, govt. spend £m's on analysis, months on reports and then come up with an expensive yet often illogical and/or inefficient solution.

If Damian can make a change then I wish him all the luck in the world, and I will do this everytime I look at my monthly payslip !

All the best mate



Matt

damian666

For those who are interested on a more serious level, please feel free to join the Yahoo group, UK Reform Party.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UKreformParty/

Hopefully this will dispell a few naysayers.

My ideas are that only - ideas I am open to suggestion as to how we can effect change.

Damian
PS. With sufficient interest in the group, I will stump up the £150 needed to register the Party with the electoral comission. I am not dictatorial in any way, I am not the 'leader' of the party, it will be open to election when the party is formed.