British Tax:Families with one bread-winner pay highest tax in developed world of - 73 PER CENT

page: 4
34
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by TFCJay
 


I am not saying Obama has anything to do with you, I am just trying to make the point that any kind of head of state, be that a Royal Family or a Presidency, brings a cost. Thus getting rid of the Royal Family may not necessarily save us any money as a tax payer. In fact it might cost us more as the Royals do bring in a lot of tourism directed solely at them.


But surely the UK's equivalent to Obama is Cameron (and whats his name - the liberal!), not the Queen - The Royals are an extra we pay for on top of the Government (not withstanding the 'tourism pays for itself argument, but i'm sure the UK would have plenty of visitors without the Royals around)




posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by Bearack

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


It has long been known that the British taxation system has been of the higher variety when compared with the rest of the world, but this is just ridiculous. I can barely afford to feed myself but the government still takes its 73% cut. I hope the system crashes, so that when my kids grow up there will be something different in place. Nothing can be worse than this version of "capitalism".


This has ZERO to do with capitalism. This is 100% socialism at it's finest. Redistribute the wealth from the productive to the non-productive.... Hasn't worked in the past and still hasn't worked to date.


Redistribution of wealth has nothing to do with socialism.



Not sure what dictionary you're using, but this one is correct.

Marriam Webster

Definition of SOCIALISM

1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by michael1983l
Yes thats right, your read it right, single earner families in the UK with 2 adults and 2 children pay a whopping 73% in tax.

No they don't. But if you will go reading the Daily Fail, you will end up believing all sorts of stupid crap. As has been pointed out: 73% is the marginal rate, and tells us nothing about how much they pay in tax.

The UK pays 39% of it's GPD in tax. Perhaps the Daily Fail would like us to be more like France (44.6%) or Germany (40.6%)? Or even some socialist hell hole like Denmark (49%).

If you fancy living somewhere with almost no tax, perhaps Angola (5.7%) or Nigeria (6.1%) would be more to your suiting. They don't mess around with stuff like schools, hospitals and roads - but hey, no tax!



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by BearackMarriam Webster

Definition of SOCIALISM

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done


That is not a very good definition of socialism.

The term socialism in it's original definition meant 'the workers ownership of the means of production'. Whether there is a government, or not, if the workers do not own the means of production in common then it's not socialism.

Government/state ownership is not socialism. Government/state ownership on behalf of the people is Nationalism. Government/state ownership by party members is State-Capitalism, as they had in the USSR, China etc.


Nationalization (British English spelling nationalisation) is the process of taking a private industry or private assets into public ownership by a national government or state.


Nationalization

Socialism isn't the step between capitalism and communism, that is a misunderstanding. Socialism and communism mean the same thing, the stage between capitalism and communism/socialism in Marxist theory is called the 'transition period'.

“Between capitalist and communist society lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. There corresponds to this also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat” K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 19, p. 27.


Marx and Engels used the terms Communism and Socialism to mean precisely the same thing. They used “Communism” in the early years up to about 1875, and after that date mainly used the term “Socialism.” There was a reason for this. In the early days, about 1847-1850, Marx and Engels chose the name “Communism” in order to distinguish their ideas from Utopian, reactionary or disreputable movements then in existence, which called themselves “Socialist.” Later on, when these movements disappeared or went into obscurity, and when, from 1870 onwards, parties were being formed in many countries under the name Social-Democratic Party or Socialist Party, Marx and Engels reverted to the words Socialist and Socialism....


Socialists Do Stand for Equality

That list of definitions does not take into account the fact that Anarchism is a form of socialism...

"Anarchism is stateless socialism" - Mikhail Bakunin

How can you explain that dictionary definition in the context of Anarchism? How can it be some form of state ownership if it can be anarchist?

The dictionary also says capitalism is 'free-market', but in reality it isn't at all.


The word “capitalism” was coined by the socialists, often used as a pejorative, and has historically described a system of state-granted privilege and plutocracy. This is the definition to which most people subscribe, and which I would argue prevails today. A contrary definition is one that is synonymous, or nearly synonymous with “free markets”. My best guess is that this “definition” is a the result of a revisionist attempt to hijack the term “free markets”.


“Free Markets” Are Not “Capitalism”

In a true free market people could voluntary exchange goods and services, and not be limited by the private ownership of capital. Capital, the means to produce, needs be owned by all who work to be a truly free market. Otherwise it's nothing but the right of a minority to exploit the majority. The dictatorship of the capitalist class.

You will never understand what it actually is from dictionary definitions, as those definitions have been twisted to fit the modern misunderstanding of them. There is a reason for that, to keep you a wage slave for capitalist owners.

edit on 12/3/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 


Hi what hurts the most is. What they do with the money. Every time we hold an election. The Returning officer,usually the CEO of the local council on 138k a year pays themselves 4 k bonus just for staying late to supervise. Ask your local council how much they pay. For one council. In the north of England it was 20k for one nights work. The cabinet office are. Aware of this but do nothing.. Every time we vote it is bonus time for the CEO and his cronies. There is an old Nordic saying. If a vote could change anything it would be forbidden.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


It has long been known that the British taxation system has been of the higher variety when compared with the rest of the world, but this is just ridiculous. I can barely afford to feed myself but the government still takes its 73% cut. I hope the system crashes, so that when my kids grow up there will be something different in place. Nothing can be worse than this version of "capitalism".


A better word to describe what is going on in the UK isn't capitalism, but rather post industrial feudalism.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by korathin
A better word to describe what is going on in the UK isn't capitalism, but rather post industrial feudalism.


Capitalism is post industrial feudalism. The only difference is the land owners made new laws, inclosure laws, forcing the people off "their" land. The land owners then took advantage of that by providing "jobs" in their mills and factories. What they did was create an economic system of exploitation, using the law to give themselves the right to use private property for economic gain, and deny anyone else the use.

They took people who were self-sufficient and skilled, and made them reliant on the capitalist for "jobs", and exploited them for personal gain.

During feudalism people were exploited by force, under capitalism people are exploited by consent of state law.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Little Imogen will have to give up her ballet lesson! How dare this government remove benefits from the middle class... this is an outrage!

Seriously, listening to people earning a minimum of £50k moan about money sickens me. For a start a good deal of these people are going to have accountants who only remit is to pay the absolute minimum in tax. If they can't live without child benefit, they are doing something wrong. You know, cancel the golf membership... maybe take a skiing trip every other year. Take ownership, and buckle down like the rest of us.

Plus, as a lot have people have pointed out, calculating the loss of child benefit as a tax if about the dumbest feat of maths I think I've come across. I would say it pretty much verges on the side of lying.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by zigguratvertigo
Little Imogen will have to give up her ballet lesson! How dare this government remove benefits from the middle class... this is an outrage!

Seriously, listening to people earning a minimum of £50k moan about money sickens me. For a start a good deal of these people are going to have accountants who only remit is to pay the absolute minimum in tax. If they can't live without child benefit, they are doing something wrong. You know, cancel the golf membership... maybe take a skiing trip every other year. Take ownership, and buckle down like the rest of us.

Plus, as a lot have people have pointed out, calculating the loss of child benefit as a tax if about the dumbest feat of maths I think I've come across. I would say it pretty much verges on the side of lying.


Enjoy your slavery



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 02:06 AM
link   
There is no government in this world that serves a purpose but that of its masters and enablers.


All men are created equal and there are certain unalienable rights that governments should never violate. These rights include the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When a government fails to protect those rights, it is not only the right, but also the duty of the people to overthrow that government. In its place, the people should establish a government that is designed to protect those rights.


The Declaration of Independence, July 1776.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 06:25 AM
link   
Funny that no, how you have to pay to live on the land you were born on.


But considering all the other crap people pay taxes on to have the luxury of believing they have something, well this is somewhere down on the bottom of the list. I think they should eliminate what they seriously don't need from there taxes, you know cut expenses, first on the list would be the whole bureaucracy thing, I mean who really needs all that #, especially when one computer can probably do all the work millions of paper pushers do. Second they should remove themselves from all parasites such as governments, corporations, and the elites, I mean really other then constantly look for ways to screw over the working class they have no other definite use other then siphoning energy off the others, so like you know cut expenses people if it does not work then why keep it around, its nuking stupid. This planet is so ass backwards it would be best to get rid of everything and start all over, its like a total epic failure and its way past time for people to realize that.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
Funny that no, how you have to pay to live on the land you were born on.


But considering all the other crap people pay taxes on to have the luxury of believing they have something, well this is somewhere down on the bottom of the list. I think they should eliminate what they seriously don't need from there taxes, you know cut expenses, first on the list would be the whole bureaucracy thing, I mean who really needs all that #, especially when one computer can probably do all the work millions of paper pushers do. Second they should remove themselves from all parasites such as governments, corporations, and the elites, I mean really other then constantly look for ways to screw over the working class they have no other definite use other then siphoning energy off the others, so like you know cut expenses people if it does not work then why keep it around, its nuking stupid. This planet is so ass backwards it would be best to get rid of everything and start all over, its like a total epic failure and its way past time for people to realize that.


Rich people constantly look for a way to screw the working class? Really?? YOU WOULD HAVE NOTHING if it weren't for the wealthy businessman. You galk at a persons success as if ANY wealthy person only achieved that success by screwing other people.. That's a sad mentality and an ignorant outlook. Many of those people you trash create far more wealth for the people around them than they receive for themselves. You are just a miserable person screaming wo's me jealous of other people's hard work and success.

Also, how about admitting there is personal responsibility. Nobody forces people to take low paying jobs. YOU make that decision so YOU solely are to blame for allowing yourself to be exploited. If the job screws over the working class guess what? Don't take the job.. As long as they are able to continue filling these positions I find it hard to believe the working conditions are bad.
edit on 4-12-2012 by libertytoall because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by michael1983l
Yes thats right, your read it right, single earner families in the UK with 2 adults and 2 children pay a whopping 73% in tax.

www.dailymail.co.uk...


Further in the article they say that it is "based on a married couple, with two children, where one parent stays at home while the other earns 75 per cent of the average wage". So let's do some maths...

Average wage in UK is approx GBP £26,000. 75% of that is approx GBP £19,500.

If you take away the personal allowance of £8,105 you are left with taxable income of GBP £11,395.

This all falls within the basic tax band of 20%, so tax paid would be GBP £2,279 leaving GBP £9,116 to which we can add back the personal allowance.

National Insurance is 12% of gross weekly income between £146 and £817 per week. £19,500 / 52 weeks brings us to GBP £375 per week gross income. As the first £145 is disregarded, this leaves £229 per week on which 12% is owed, or £27.48 owed per week. Multiply this by 52 to bring us back to GBP £1,428.96 paid out of annual gross income for NI.

Edited to add: and the family would also be receiving £33.70 a week in Child Benefit, more than cancelling out the National Insurance contribution!

So, out of annual income of £19,500 we would pay income tax of £2,279 and NI of £1,428.96, leaving nett income of GBP £15,792.04 - or roughly 81% of the gross income, so roughly 19% was paid in tax and national insurance...

...yet the article claims that 73% of that gross income is paid in tax, which equates to GBP £14,235 tax leaving £5,265 nett income.

There are more taxes than just this, of course, but they all start to depend on area, vehicle type (if driving) etc. There is even 20% VAT on the majority of purchases. Even if we take the highly artificial (and inaccurate) steps of knocking £2,000 off the nett for council+road tax and then take 20% off the remainder to represent tax that would paid by purchases, we still end up left with £11,000+ which is nearly twice what the article claims would be left.

Not very convinced by the article. The Daily Fail is the idiot's read of choice and they tend to shape their articles around their readership.
edit on 4-12-2012 by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 


I would be interested to see how this breaks down in services rendered, and what components mKe up that 73%. I'd also be interested to see if that's *actually* the tax rate. In the US, people see the 40% witholding on their paycheck for commission and think their tax rate is 40%. In reality, the first $10-20K (or something like that) has a federal rate of 25%, the next bracket goes up from there, etc. Your full income is not taxed at the same rate as the highest portion of your income.

With an income around $100k in 2012, I payed an adjusted federal rate of around 25% last year. I also paid over $10,000 in health insurance through a private insurance company, plus around $1,000 in co-pays amd deductibles. I paid around $6,000 in property tax. I paid about $5,000 in state tax, and another $1,000 in vehicle stickers and gasoline taxes. I also paid another $6500-ish in social security, and my employer matched about the same. Not including Social Security (because technically its not a tax, just a forced investment with terribly low returns), that's a total of about $48,000. With Social Security and Medicare deductions figured in, it left me with about $43,000 in take-home pay to work with. Out of that money, I would have to estimate at least another $1000 is pulled out to my municipal tax and utility taxes.

Of the $42,000 remaining, about $16,000 goes to the mortgage.leaving $26,000. Almost all of that goes to good, gas, baby goods (diapers, clothes, etc.) and car repairs. Figure an average sales tax rate of 6% on that for an additional $1560 in sales tax.

Comes to around 50%. If you figure in the social security (including employer match, which represents lower pay to the employee in exchange), and Medicare, we're talking closer to 58% tax rate. So on $100k, $42k is what i'm left with - after providing for modest housing, $26k is what myself, my wife, and baby have to live on each year, more like $20,000 after gasoline for food, utilities, car repairs,clothing, and (yeah right) entertainment.

So that's what a 6-figure salary gets you in the Chicago area: food, shelter, heating & air conditioning, cable tv, and occasionally replacing a badly worn pair of jeans.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Ok, I haven't read every post - I got tired after seeing so many moaning about the Royals when clearly they haven't got a clue what they're talking about. The Royals cost us nothing, they derive their income as a percentage of the profits made off the Royal estate and the remainder goes to the Treasury. End of discussion as far as I am concerned, but feel free to prove me wrong...

As for the OP - 73% tax? Bollocks. I am having a hard time trying to see how they managed to work that out. I'm on something close to that £50k marker and I pay out around 30% of my income in Income Tax and NI. I have 3 kids as well. Even if you factor in Council Tax, that's only another few % of my income gone.

Are they including VAT as well? Even if they are, I fail to see how that could equate to 3/4's of my income going on tax, as I already have 40% of my income going out on rent whether the taxman takes his cut or not.....



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by EvillerBob
 


That's some good mathing there, matey


I thought about doing the same, but in the end I cam to the conclusion I really couldn't be arsed to go to such lengths to debunk an obviously biased and deliberately provocative article.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 07:50 PM
link   



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by michael1983l
Yes thats right, your read it right, single earner families in the UK with 2 adults and 2 children pay a whopping 73% in tax.





A new study shows households with two children and two adults, but only one bread-winner, pay about 73 per cent in tax - made up largely from income tax, national insurance contributions and the removal of some benefits.

It means these families take home just 27p in every £1 earned - up to three times less than families in comparative countries.
In Germany, families pay about 40 per cent tax while the figure in France is only 20 per cent.




www.dailymail.co.uk...


And Dave is busy sat in number 10 wondering why the UK economy is faltering, that is because we have no spare cash to spend in the shops after we have finished paying you. Families in the UK are really struggling, Children are not eating properly and they are going without basic sanitation and clothing. But it is all right, Starbucks and Google don't have to pay any tax because we as a nation are loaded due to the amount of tax I and others pay.

It is time for a REVOLT against this government, a vote of no confidence and the election of UKIP. We need to leave the leech that is the EU and we need to stop filling the trough's so that fat pig politicians can get them self fat off.

This is plainly unacceptable and needs to change NOW.


This is complete and utter Hogwash!!!

This applied to me until I had my third child and I pay around 20% tax. Not including the council tax that everyone has to pay anyway.

So this is stupid liberal propaganda , plain and simple.

Korg.

edit on 4-12-2012 by Korg Trinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by libertytoall
 

Relax cojak I was merely deliberating on some things. I sort of agree on some of what you said, but still offcourse things are forced. And no why the hell would you think I owe anything to anybody much less these so called rich business people, really go preach to the sheeple about there gods, to me that # means as much as if you were to say that I owe everything to the government, or to god, or buddha, or some long dead rotting famous cadaver in history, or to whatever other half ass'd retarded ideas you got in your head.

The whole things is like a total duh, and yes things are forced, what freaking planet do you life on use the two brain cells you have in your head and look around a bit, in fact the whole premise of life is force, by the very fact that you live on this planet that means you have no choice but to be at the mercy of its nature, and nature must be eradicated eventually. So um ya, off course the elites try to force things to there way, what the hell do you think there job is, what do you think they hold meeting about, what the funk do yo think human management is all about, I mean really are you like some 5yr old that got there hands on there parents computer or something?

And by force I mean none conventional means but still forced, and no not by rich people though they got there ways to keep there spots at the higher echelons of the pyramid that they must constantly enforce and restructure, but in all they are about as significant as those bellow them in fact there is little difference between them as above and so bellow. And oh I am admitting personal responsibility, in fact I think its almost time to stop supporting this puppet show as its long has served its purpose, srry bro but it served its time and there will come a time when it and you and them all will have become obsolete and completely useless. I have have been withdrawing from the whole thing for a long long time. But like all things its one step at a time over a long long process, and you start with the core and once that is gone the rest will follow. Whats that saying, free your mind and the rest will follow.


And more so In fact in some ways the hierarchy's they are less significant, I think humanity has breed itself into a week and pathetic species and the so called elite more so because there dependent on those bellow them and the whole makeup of this pyramid society which was implanted and like all the other ones it was implanted because it is a known failure, its practically and for all intensive purposes made to crumble to dust like everything in this consumer society is made to break down so you can keep buying more soon to be garbage crap. And arguing about tax which again is anybody take on its both a functional thing and a scam, and our societies are even more so pathetic then the people its made up off everywhere I look I see this, and at the first real test its all going to come down like a house a cards.

In fact look at history and it all fell over many times before at even the hint of a wind coming its way, so what the funk do you think is going to happen when things actually start heating up for real, and not this silly pathetic illusory made up bullspit that has been going on for oh I dont know as long as societies have been around, so far all it has been is just advantages taken by one group of hairless monkeys on another groups disadvantages, and back and forth it went till we get what we have today, our society. And you know what else I see, I see walking talking meat popsicles, in fact to quote a popular movie. Quite frankly, I see dead people. I suppose I got to cut back on my crazy other worldly meanderings, but you know just calling it like I see it. But hey by all means do not let that disparage you, and please return to your daily scheduled programing and the continues circle jerk with the meaningless jabber and all that jive...Don't mind me bro, I am just passing through. And this is the wrong thread anyways.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 


I am sorry you have to work so hard for so little! 73% taxation is not just unfair it's downright criminal! I feel it's not just a revenue problem but a spending problem as well! I would think the reasons for the government taking so much of your money is because there are less and less jobs & someone has to pay for an ever increasing government! The same thing is happening here in the US! though it's not nearly so severe! Though there is no national healthcare here and when the Obamacare does start I expect many companies to downsize if they can, to avoide paying for insurance!

I feel the whole world going into the Crapper! People are afraid to do anything about it, especially considering the kind of change that needs to happen! Our priorities are skewed! Our politicians are corrupt! The world is on the verge of collapse! Our children are learning the wrong values!I'm sorry but I don't think a revolution will fix anything because they usually don't! Some other corrupt faction will just end up taking their place! I feel we are better off fixing the system we have now! We need an electoral system not based on money! An edjucation system not based on control! A corporate system that puts integrity before the bottom line! So much needs to be done but it seems the most important stuff is on the back burner! Until we wake up from this nightmare where money is more important then people, there will always be someone taking from those that need it and giving it to them who don't!





new topics
top topics
 
34
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join


Off The Grid with Jesse Ventura and AboveTopSecret.com Partner Up to Stay Vigilant
read more: Ora.TV's Off The Grid with Jesse Ventura and AboveTopSecret.com Partner Up to Stay Vigilant