Eat the Rich!Follow

So our Autistic Prime Minister Gorgon Brown is helping us out of this economic ****-shoot by trying to revitalise the retail sector (cutting sales tax).

To counter accusations of over-borrowing, he's expected to offset this by raising the income tax rate for higher earners.

At the moment, we pay on a sliding scale in UK:

Earsnings up to £2,230 ($3,300)taxed at 10%
Earnings between £2,230 and £34,600 ($51,670) taxed at 20%
Earnings over £34,600 are taxed at 40%

The word is that earnings over £150,000 ($224K) will be taxed at 45%

Given the benefits I and my family have received over the years in terms of family support, unemployment benefit and free education & healthcare, I really don't begrudge.

While I do feel a tad grumpy when I look at the £,000s the tax man takes off me each month, I have enough left over to live a debauched liefstyle.

So what do people think in principle?

Edited, Nov 23rd 2008 5:05pm by Nobby

I've always been a proponent of a flat tax rate. Cut out all the loopholes. People who make more...pay more. End of discussion.

10% of 100 = 10
10% of 1000 = 100
10% of 10000 = 1000

Is there some kind of tax math that I'm missing here?

That's a good point. I guess income is more like an exponential graph instead of a straight line.

Pretty much.

It's more complicated through 'disposable income'.

There's a level of income needed to support a family in basic accommodation and on an acceptable diet. A significant number of families in the UK are in very simple housing and have to scrabble for loose change to pay rent and feed the kids (and I know the same's true in USA).

Taking 10% off their income could be devastating.

For bourgeouis gits like me, they'd have to take 75% of my earnings before it impacted on my ability to keep the kids fed and under a warm roof.

In principle!

In practice our government, to plagerise Pratchett, couldn't run a whelk stall.

I can has £z plox?

Only if you're sitting on a rug by the ATM with a dog on a piece of string.

Many do, yep.

But that is unpopular with the middle class. which has been a growing section of society. They have recently had to raise inheritance tax in the UK. As a nations wealth increases and more people have a little money to pass on to their children, the idea of tax breaks increases. How do you propose breaking that cycle and truly enforcing inheritance tax on the Rothchilds?

I know I may be asking what you consider silly questions but really, I would like to know in real terms, how would you enact a policy which would appear to be very unpopular to the most powerful people in the country?

I know I may be asking what you consider silly questions but really, I would like to know in real terms, how would you enact a policy which would appear to be very unpopular to the most powerful people in the country?

Shot a few dozen in the face. I imagine that would be sufficient incentive for the rest. Is yours a serious question? There is no way to tax the wealthy, because they control everything. A violent uprising of the middle class would work, but they're the middle class. Lazy, disinterested, and easily bought off.

There's no *actual* solution to wealth disparity in modern society. Those being oppressed are easily convinced they're the oppressors. It's the genius of postmodern propaganda that has solved the revolution problem for the ruling class for all time.

Glad you asked?

impressed was probably funnier

Edited, Nov 23rd 2008 7:53pm by Smasharoo

Should that not be get out of my kitchen?

And there's me thinking I'm the most pompous, pretentious **** here.

You'll always be older, so there's that to cling to. Also, taller. Also, also, this isn't me being pretentious. Me being pretentious would involve me quoting Lyotard then feigning surprise when someone didn't recognize it.