Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

It will be interesting to see what the Scotland government do in next years budget that might let us see what's working and what's a disaster , if I am honest I would say none of these people who call themselves politicians in this Edinburgh mad have any clue as to what's needed to improve the standards of the population .

Link to post
Share on other sites

All very good but it works the other way too. Those that get get taxed more tend (not exclusively) to be those who are more educated, entrepreneurial or have specialist skills. Tax them too much then, if there is a market for their attributes elsewhere, then you end up with a brain drain and those people leaving the country. I think it is getting a bit like that now.

 

Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on what way you look at it) those people on a higher wage are those who are providing most to the country from a GDP / tax point of view. Should they not deserve to live somewhere better? It’s a hard question to answer but with all things “capitalism”, why should someone work hard / apply their skill when they are not remunerated accordingly?

 

I somewhat agree and as I said, it's a tricky balance.

 

I do think most higher wages are calculated to take into account the tax it attracts - especially to compete with other countries with lower headline tax.

 

However, I'm not quite comfortable with your "work hard" assertion - I think a lot of people work hard and still get low to medium wage. Also I think many people are earning a lot of money more by luck and things like nepotism, cronyism and inheritance rather than skill or actually contributing a proportional amount to society.

 

And after what I've learned from the likes of Murray, Whyte, Ashley and Green, a lot of it is just the ability to scam people just about within the law, and to me a lot of normal stuff in business should be illegal.

 

There are massive amount of high tax paying people that would find it incredibly hard to convince your average working class person that they are worth so much more than them.

 

And remember the context here is one of a Tory run UK, and the complaint being that tax is too much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure my house is "very expensive" by Scottish standards, though at 365k I stand to be corrected. However, it also takes for me to have a tenant in the converted flat to help subsidise my mortgage.

 

Sorry haven't got any more time to reply to the rest just now...

 

But I have to say sorry, I must have misunderstood something here - in today's taxes, you'd need to pay £600k to attract £20k of stamp duty. I looked it up and today it said, £8250 for your price.

 

Last time I paid it a long time ago, I think it was 1.5% up to quite an above average house, then 3% on the full amount (stupidly) after that.

 

So I thought the house was 500k or more. :P

 

Still, it's a quite a high priced house in Scotland... And for my argument, you just need to replace yourself with someone with a more expensive house... The principle is the same. :)

Edited by calscot
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry haven't got any more time to reply to the rest just now...

 

But I have to say sorry, I must have misunderstood something here - in today's taxes, you'd need to pay £600k to attract £20k of stamp duty. I looked it up and today it said, £8250 for your price.

 

Is that the rates in England? You'd pay over £33K if the house was £600K, and £9850 on £365K.

 

You're forgetting that taxes are far higher in Scotland....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that the rates in England? You'd pay over £33K if the house was £600K, and £9850 on £365K.

 

You're forgetting that taxes are far higher in Scotland....

 

Sorry, I didn't know that. My excuse is that I live in England and so never looked for a difference for Scotland... :)

Edited by calscot
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry haven't got any more time to reply to the rest just now...

 

But I have to say sorry, I must have misunderstood something here - in today's taxes, you'd need to pay £600k to attract £20k of stamp duty. I looked it up and today it said, £8250 for your price.

 

Last time I paid it a long time ago, I think it was 1.5% up to quite an above average house, then 3% on the full amount (stupidly) after that.

 

So I thought the house was 500k or more. :P

 

Still, it's a quite a high priced house in Scotland... And for my argument, you just need to replace yourself with someone with a more expensive house... The principle is the same. :)

 

Being slightly pedantic here Cal,,,, we don't have stamp duty in Scotland. A few years ago they renamed it land and buildings transaction tax. :razz:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the annual GERS figures published by Scottish Government, they will factor in a percentage of the UK deficit (usually based on population share, I think). Case closed on that point, from my perspective.

 

The GERS figures make a lot of assumptions, but are intended to provide a picture of fiscal performance within the context of the UK.

 

The nats will argue that it doesn't necessarily represent the fiscal performance in an independent setting - which is fine, but its the best information we have right now and they are official statistics so they need to work harder if they're to persuade more people on any economic arguments.

Yet thats not a fair share of deficit now

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not the one saying there IS a difference between Scots and UK debt. We've a poster here who is flat out saying that Scotland has a deficit which is paid off by Westminster. It isn't. Scotlands deficit is part of the UK's annual deficit.

Hiding behind pedantry and indignation is an old and bad habit of ScotNats.

 

Scotland currently spends over £13bn more than it generates in revenues. That’s called a deficit. Whether it’s part of the overall UK deficit or not is irrelevant … it’s the operating deficit and the debt that would exist after one year of independence, subject only to a Scottish government increasing taxation, reducing spending and borrowing. Again, subject to increased taxation and reduced spending, after two years that would be a debt of £26bn … £39bn … £52bn … all inflated by borrowing costs of course.

 

As part of the UK, Scotland accumulates no attributable debt. So where does it go if not borne by the UK?

 

The argument that Scotland assumes responsibility for part of the UK debt is facile in the extreme since that debt would only ever be attributed to Scotland in the event of independence.

 

So the unavoidable prospects for an independent Scotland are higher taxation (far more than the political gestures in the recent SNP budget), decimated public services … decades of eyewatering austerity never seen before in this country.

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.