Thanks for that Al - nice to see it wasn't completely wasted. I agree wholeheartedly. Hell and a fucking handcart.
Where's your Dunkirk spirit then Arquebus? Throwing the towel in? That's not a very British trait! When our backs are against the wall is when we are supposed to show our true spirit, no? Our finest hour etc etc?
The Beatles and the Rolling Stones left Britain due to 98% tax, would you do the same if you were taxed at 98% ? Would you agree to working overtime if tax on that extra earning was 98% ? If the answer is yes to either question then you have agreed with the principle that increasing taxation reduces incentive to work.
Pete. I suspect that you are either comfortably retired or soon to be retired on an index linked government pension guaranteed by the taxpayer on which you are no doubt happy to pay tax; in your position I would be too. And it isn't about the choices we made it is about the goalposts that were changed. Government spending is out of control. Successive governments have bought power and influence by making ever larger unsustainable promises to voters. The growth of the second part of the 20th Century was fueled by cheap energy and debt, the party is over.
If I was mobile and could earn my money abroad, yes. No, but then no one earning "overtime" is going to be in that tax bracket. Overtime is for the lower paid, generally speaking, and is also useful for employers who want to cut the cost of staffing by employing fewer staff. However, you can substitute "overtime" with "working all hours for additional bonuses". I see now that I was insufficiently clear in putting my question across. For clarity: At the current tax rates, I don't understand how anyway can feel that working harder for more money is disincentivising. I have more sympathy with the idea that the 83% top rate of tax for "earned income" together with an investment income surcharge of 15% on top of that removes the desire for "extra effort for extra money" and will drive folks abroad if they can do so. However, with the effects of globalisation, you won't see those levels of direct taxation again, not this side of the next stone age. I cannot say that your argument is a straw man, it actually happened after all, but it doesn't answer my question, which I hope is now clear.
Did you not see those graphs I posted earlier in this thread? When we had an empire we had wars that ate up a lot of the benefits from said empire and blew the profits from our industrial revolution. If we're on a guilt trip over having been a colonial power get over it. The 3rd world is immensely better off where the European powers have previously been in control, until the local thugs take over as in Zimbabwe & others.
There was a link to a body calling itself the "British Constitution Group" and those are the swivel-eyed lunatics I was referring to, obviously. I can't be bothered to refute their ravings one at a time, but I didn't want their nonsense to go uncontradicted. In several threads now, you and some others are fond of making generalised assertions about topics like levels of taxation, government debt, and expenditure, assertions which are wholly unsupported by facts or figures. Then the actual relevant facts and figures are supplied by me or others posting in the thread. What happens next? The facts are ignored, and the unsupported, erroneous assertions are repeated as before. It really is quite hilarious. Do feel free to carry on. By the way, my personal position, whatever it is, has nothing to do with these issues - the economic facts, figures and history of the UK and of the EU are what they are. My own circumstances or yours cannot change the facts one way or another.
My back has been against the wall too many times for me to not be cynical about the people at the top that have contributed to the decline of the UK / Britain....... ......if it came to defend the country against an invasion, my back would no doubt be one of the first against the wall; providing that is, the people at the top had not and were not giving it all away. .......I see no point in 'fighting' an 'enemy' that I know I can't beat. What the UK really needs is a proper revolution.......against those that are causing the damage. AL
Well that would be the former 3rd world where people are prepared to work longer and harder for less in the premium industries we used to think insulated us leaving the scraps for them. The enemies of our economy reside within our borders, we think we are owed a living standard that we can no longer afford.
Welcome to Great Britain That bit is right We could still have had a high living standard if certain people hadn't allowed it to go to the wall
Blimey...this thread has got everything going for it....despair/humour/anger/disbelief/futility/lateral thinking/accusations...with a bit of dramatic flouncing and now the whiff of revolution thrown in...phew,it's heady stuff...
No need for names really, is there? Unless a complete t*t, everyone should know who has caused it over the years; suffice to say 'politicians'. When I think of what my grandfather and great uncle did in WW1; what my parents and their siblings did in WW2; plus how they contributed to the UK after the wars had ended, I consider it is disgraceful how the UK has been let down by idiots at the top. Quite a few years ago, I was asked by a potential employer what I thought of the UK as a whole.....I reckoned that as a hole, it ought to be filled in...........I got the job. AL
I'm just pissed that it's costing a sodding fortune in TAX to put fuel in my tanks - robbing robbing bastards - I'm now purposely ignoring the sustainability bit because no-one else gives a shit about that bit either. :smile:
