Will It Take a Second Revolution to Get The Wealthy to Pay Higher Taxes?

[charver]

Which is a bummer. If we want to see a different result, we'll need to do something differently.

I remember lots of talk about how the system was going to change after we made the banks feel a bit better by turning their private debt into public debt.

I imagine people might start saying it again shortly. Just saying it mind.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

Which is a bummer. If we want to see a different result, we'll need to do something differently. Clever people like you need to get into the exciting world of accountancy, you'd likely have ideas in a few minutes.

How many of those ideas would involve making out with a shotgun?

 

[charver]

How many of those ideas would involve making out with a shotgun?

I'm pinning my hopes on the new Watermark revolutionary regime.

I'm not sure what comes next, after the liquidation of the capitalist scum, but i'm looking forward to the journey.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

An idea may be to stop focussing on rich individuals and cast an eye to corporations.

For example, it's estimated that if the UK government were to receive the taxes which should be paid by corporations, who employ legions of accountants and tax lawyers in order to avoid paying their fair share, our national deficit would, pretty much, be paid off in a single year.

Why do you think corporations have successfully managed to divert their financial exposure onto the ordinary taxpayer? (clue - who has more money?)

Tell us... what is a corporation but a stack of papers?

The corporations are owned by individuals. Run by individuals. Tax their earnings, whether it be via wages, dividends or capital gains.

A corporate tax is a hidden tax on the consumer. It is highly regressive as a result. They just make good boogeymen for the left. That is all.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

That is the silliest thing I've ever read.

If a person receives little or no income then their "fair share" is little or nothing. A share is a portion of what a person has. The less they have the smaller their "fair share" to be paid.

Silly? It's actual statistics! Yeah, I guess "facts" might be the silliest thing you hear in any given day... I'll give ya that!

If a person makes little or no income, they don't pay taxes now, and no one has suggested they should. 50% of the country pays 3% of the taxes... is that fair? If the 10% of the country who made little to nothing, only paid 3%, I could understand, but I personally think a good portion of that 50% make enough money to pay something in tax... if we're all chipping in... if we're all having to sacrifice... if we're all 'paying our fair share' how can this stand?

I think before the old people and poor kids are starving and dying in the streets, we might try getting some of the lower 50% to pay some taxes... just a thought!

 

[Damocles]

How many of those ideas would involve making out with a shotgun?

Billy for President!

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Tell us... what is a corporation but a stack of papers?

The corporations are owned by individuals. Run by individuals. Tax their earnings, whether it be via wages, dividends or capital gains.

A corporate tax is a hidden tax on the consumer. It is highly regressive as a result. They just make good boogeymen for the left. That is all.

No No Nooooooozzz..... Don't you understand? Corporations are inhuman entities operating of their own volition! They lumber through society gobbling up smaller corporations and sucking the life out of the citizens! They are particularly fond of victimizing poor people and children! The only way these monsters are able to survive, is through republican enablers! The only hero who can stop them, is SuperLib!

 

[charver]

Tell us... what is a corporation but a stack of papers?

The corporations are owned by individuals. Run by individuals. Tax their earnings, whether it be via wages, dividends or capital gains.

A corporate tax is a hidden tax on the consumer. It is highly regressive as a result. They just make good boogeymen for the left. That is all.

I think what i was a little piqued about, on Saturday night, was the fact that despite being assured by our Chancellor that "we're all in it together" the tax burden seems to fall on the ordinary taxpayer. That and the price of a pint went up 20 bloody pence.

I think most people understand the need for rising taxes and spending cuts as an economic necessity. What people do tend to get a little wound up over is the huge scale of corporate tax evasion. You see our government has hit upon the wonderful wheeze of slashing the staff at Her Majesty's Customs and Revenue and has then sought to target small to medium sized businesses, at the same time as failing to impose fines for massive tax evasion by firms such as Vodafone, which run into many millions. I suppose it's just a fairness thing, really.

All people really want (here) is a system of taxation which is deemed 'fair'.

What we have at the minute clearly isn't fair in any way whatsoever.

I think that's what i was pissed off about, anyway. Although, to be honest, it was mainly about the 20 pence.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I think what i was a little piqued about, on Saturday night, was the fact that despite being assured by our Chancellor that "we're all in it together" the tax burden seems to fall on the ordinary taxpayer. That and the price of a pint went up 20 bloody pence.

It is indeed an outrage to see the costs of liquor increase due to taxation. A friggin 12 pack of miller lite costs over $10.... and that is essentially watered down piss in a can.

I think most people understand the need for rising taxes and spending cuts as an economic necessity. What people do tend to get a little wound up over is the huge scale of corporate tax evasion. You see our government has hit upon the wonderful wheeze of slashing the staff at Her Majesty's Customs and Revenue and has then sought to target small to medium sized businesses, at the same time as failing to impose fines for massive tax evasion by firms such as Vodafone, which run into many millions. I suppose it's just a fairness thing, really.

It comes down, as always, to the complexity of the tax code. The more complex it is, the more games people (and thus the companies they run) will play. The more complex the system, the easier it is to hide 'discrepancies' because no one truly understands the system in its entirety, thus the regulators are prone to being confused.

All people really want (here) is a system of taxation which is deemed 'fair'.

What we have at the minute clearly isn't fair in any way whatsoever.

Agreed. Take a look at my system and let me know what you think of it.

I think that's what i was pissed off about, anyway. Although, to be honest, it was mainly about the 20 pence.

the 20 pence would have sent me on a bloody rampage... so no worries.