Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

How does collecting a 20yo debt improve lives? No doubt you'll come up with some clichéd story along the lines of "nurses, schools" etc, but pursuing an elderly man/woman for a couple of thousand pounds after the worst recession since the South Sea Bubble, where most people are still feeling the pinch, will probably cost more to pursue than what the initial debt is worth. Needless to say, that not pursuing a debt generated by the most unpopular tax since 'window tax' would be popular with most people.

 

As for my father-in-law. There are no principles when it comes to surviving. He, like a large percentage of his peers, couldn't afford to pay the charge, so he slipped off into the black economy, came off the electoral register and done his taxi driver for 20 years or so, paying next to zero tax. Notwithstanding his contribution to the treasury via fuel duty, VAT, as well as being a borderline alcoholic and 40 smokes a day which as you'll appreciate generated a large amount of tax, which would've went some way to contributing to his pension which he claims as will his peers.

 

I must applaud Salmond - and Cameron for that matter as both have indicated that they'd like to see tax cuts. Letting the people spend the money they've earned is entirely fair and should be encouraged in 21st century Britain. The socialist experiment hasn't worked, time to consign it to history.

 

Ah, so the legislation is merely a vote grabber. Fair enough, as they are all at that.

 

Your father in law took the decision to enjoy the services which the tax paid for, but left it to others to make the contributions. Forgive me if I don't feel sorry for someone so selfish. I have no doubts that he will also take any required medical treatment from a health service that he also made no contribution to in his black market taxi days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How does collecting a 20yo debt improve lives? No doubt you'll come up with some clichéd story along the lines of "nurses, schools" etc, but pursuing an elderly man/woman for a couple of thousand pounds after the worst recession since the South Sea Bubble, where most people are still feeling the pinch, will probably cost more to pursue than what the initial debt is worth. Needless to say, that not pursuing a debt generated by the most unpopular tax since 'window tax' would be popular with most people.

 

As for my father-in-law. There are no principles when it comes to surviving. He, like a large percentage of his peers, couldn't afford to pay the charge, so he slipped off into the black economy, came off the electoral register and done his taxi driver for 20 years or so, paying next to zero tax. Notwithstanding his contribution to the treasury via fuel duty, VAT, as well as being a borderline alcoholic and 40 smokes a day which as you'll appreciate generated a large amount of tax, which would've went some way to contributing to his pension which he claims as will his peers.

 

I must applaud Salmond - and Cameron for that matter as both have indicated that they'd like to see tax cuts. Letting the people spend the money they've earned is entirely fair and should be encouraged in 21st century Britain. The socialist experiment hasn't worked, time to consign it to history.

 

Do you mean the "Socialist experiment" of the NHS? Or free higher education (in Scotland)? Or free personal care for old people (in Scotland)? Or child benefit? Is it time to consign those to history?

 

Will your father in law not be needing the NHS or personal care in the future? And who is it that pays for the upkeep and construction of the roads he uses to drive his taxi? Who pays for the training of the engineers who build the roads? Who pays for the NHS that he will be relying on when his lifestyle catches up with him? Who pays for the employment of the doctors and nurses who work in it? How about his state pension, who's paying for that?

 

Me? I've been paying taxes these 20 years past - but maybe, according the Scott7's logic I should be asking for a refund.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the poll tax should have been based on your ability to pay , it was one of the most unbalanced half witted ideas ever and it was stuck up Scotland first

 

quite. I just do not understand why the local tax is not based on income, just like the national tax is. It seems bizarre to tax people more because they choose to spend their money on a nice house in a good area, rather than on booze and fags or foreign holidays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, so the legislation is merely a vote grabber. Fair enough, as they are all at that.

 

Your father in law took the decision to enjoy the services which the tax paid for, but left it to others to make the contributions. Forgive me if I don't feel sorry for someone so selfish. I have no doubts that he will also take any required medical treatment from a health service that he also made no contribution to in his black market taxi days.

 

Vote grabbing.... from a politician.... before an election....? Don't think that'll catch on my dear fellow...

 

Regarding my father-in-law, such is life... I'm sure if you were ever in such a position, then you'd do the morally right thing like fund the state.

 

Governments, taxes and morals? Where have I heard that before?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you mean the "Socialist experiment" of the NHS? Or free higher education (in Scotland)? Or free personal care for old people (in Scotland)? Or child benefit? Is it time to consign those to history?

 

Will your father in law not be needing the NHS or personal care in the future? And who is it that pays for the upkeep and construction of the roads he uses to drive his taxi? Who pays for the training of the engineers who build the roads? Who pays for the NHS that he will be relying on when his lifestyle catches up with him? Who pays for the employment of the doctors and nurses who work in it? How about his state pension, who's paying for that?

 

Me? I've been paying taxes these 20 years past - but maybe, according the Scott7's logic I should be asking for a refund.

 

It's time, in my opinion of course, to shrink the large antiquated and inefficient state.

 

I'd abolish the NHS in its current format as it's no longer fit for purpose, is hugely inefficient, corrupt and abused. I'd use the savings to reduce taxes for everyone and let people spend their money how they see fit. But that's an argument for another day which will no doubt rouse the passions...

 

I have my own opinions on tax, welfare, the state and workers and corporations, but for the sake of the thread, let sleeping dogs lie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's time, in my opinion of course, to shrink the large antiquated and inefficient state.

 

I'd abolish the NHS in its current format as it's no longer fit for purpose, is hugely inefficient, corrupt and abused. I'd use the savings to reduce taxes for everyone and let people spend their money how they see fit. But that's an argument for another day which will no doubt rouse the passions...

 

I have my own opinions on tax, welfare, the state and workers and corporations, but for the sake of the thread, let sleeping dogs lie.

 

yet, oddly an article in Forbes magazine - hardly the Morning Star - placed the NHS as the world's best healthcare system:

 

1. United Kingdom

2. Switzerland

3. Sweden

4. Australia

5. Germany & Netherlands (tied)

7. New Zealand & Norway (tied)

9. France

10. Canada

11. United States

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror

 

The countries with health care systems based on your "failed socialist experiment" all turn out to be the best, whereas the one which uses the system you advocate, doesn't even make the top ten.

 

The thread is about tax, so don't feel you have to hide your opinions. I take it you're all for paying for health care, higher education, nursing homes etc? Every man for himself?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who could not pay wouldn't have paid anyway and nothing much would have happened to them but there was a lot of chancers jumping on the ludicrous "can pay, won't pay" bandwagon rolled out by Labour but adopted with wild enthusiasm by the SNP.

 

Many of the payers were a lot worse off than the dodgers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.