Rangersitis 0 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 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. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 The proposed CC amnesty is fine by me. I'm assuming that those who did pay will be given a refund from Party funds. why would you expect a refund? Did you not receive the services you paid for? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 why would you expect a refund? Did you not receive the services you paid for? Those will be the same services that were also received by the scummy bastards who chose to dodge the payments. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 5,952 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 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 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 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. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 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. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chibmark 15 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 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? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chibmark 15 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 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. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 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? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7 5,009 Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 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. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.