Interesting to see on QT last night that both Will Young and Will Self had no problem with paying a 50p top rate of tax, as they said: they'd already earned £150k before the 50p rate kicked in.

Then on This Week, we were treated to that well-known political sage Peter Stringfellow, whingeing & moaning about "HIS" conservative party not having the balls to abolish the 50p tax rate, despite the "fact" that it was obviously stifling enterprise, investment and entrepreneurship.

A few facts:

7,800,000 - the number of people in the UK who earn less than £15,000 a year.

£15,000 - the average amount of tax breaks claimed by those earning £150,000 or more.

31% - the proportion of the working population who earn less in a year than the richest 1% annually claim in tax breaks.

From: @TUCnews

As you are into facts, what exactly are the "tax breaks" of which you speak?

[url=http://www.tuc.org.uk/tucfiles/243/50percenttax.pdfRead the report yourself.[/url (34 pages, but no pictures)

I like that idea, except that people who bought at the top of the market will get stung.

It would seem the Tories don't want their rich mates to pay a mansion tax and will veto it. As we are all in this together then there must be money available to veto public sector increases in pension contributions or veto the cuts in benefits etc...

People who can't afford to live in big houses can always downsize, you know like the poor people have to...

So old ladies are expected to move house? Bit of stressful thing to do / have the enegy to do.

It's odd when it is suggested that young people move to where the work is people bleat about being away from home and community but when it comes to old dears leaving their homes of 60 years, that's alright! Bizarre.

No more bizarre than this dog's breakfast of a government insisting that if you are on benefits, you should be forced to downsize or even let a spare room, to enable you to keep your benefits.

As I have stated on numerous occasions LVT is the only fair way to tax property and the land it sits upon.

Out of interest, and to get some perspective on different points of view, how much does one have to be earning before one is well off?

And is it as straightforward as that? Do we allow for regional variations and disposable incomes, i.e. the amount that is left after household living expenses are paid?

If you're wanting a property tax, how about removing principal private residence relief for top rate taxpayers?

That way any gains in the value of the property from the time it was bought to the time it is sold will be subject to CGT.

HMG always talk about low top income tax rates because of the need to look after those wealth creating entrepreneurs. As I see it a better way of looking after true entrepreneurs (rather than the professional classes, media types, etc - who won't go anywhere) if not to worry about income tax. Tax them highly on that score but let them benefit from a sliding scale of CGT on business disposals. At present they get an effective 10% tax charge on modest disposals. Much better IMO, if they paid say, 25% on small disposals sliding DOWN to say, zero % of disposals of 250M +. That creates an incentive to build the business and not sell out at say £25M to a big company who then lays off half the staff but to keep dynamic. growing companies running until they are much bigger - thus creating a vibrant growing economy and increasing employment.

Haven't we all seen enough of optimistically inflated company valuations, without offering direct encouragement to do so?

Rich people pay enough tax already as it is.

No they don't.

Yes they do.

No they don't.

Yes they do.

Without wanting to intrude on your yes/no lovers tiff, would you care to explain why you think they already pay enough tax??....

Kind of agree that they do already pay enough. Just cos they are in a profession that earns them a large salary, why should they have to pay more tax compared to your average joe who works in the local super market?? Just cos they earn more can't be anyone's argument that they have to pay more, surely?

What would your argument be that they should have to pay more? Why should an MP/judge/solicitor etc, earning £100k+ a year have to pay twice or three times more tax than your average joe on till at Asda earning £12k a year?? Do they not all work a similar amount of hours? Does the work involved necessitate them paying more?...

So who do you suggest we squeeze for the extra money?

We could raise the tax burden of the poor? - Oh sorry we've already done that by increasing VAT

Or maybe we could simply take the UK's trotal annual expenditure and then divide it by the working population and everyone then pays the same amount. The only problem with that is many will be working simply to pay tax

What is the problem with expecting those who earn more to pay more?

Last Thursday Peter Stringfellow argued that if HIS conservative party had the balls to abolish the 50p rate, he would possibly open more clubs. I can't think of a more compelling argument to keep or increase the top rate

Well I would have thought the answer is obvious. It's because they can and because the numbers would not stack up if they did not. If someone earns £12,000 at Asda even if they paid 100% income tax that would not pay for their share of the NHS, education, the armed forces, the police, care for their elderly parents, etc, etc. You either have a State and a welfare state or you don't. If you do then someone needs to pay for it. That has to be middle to high earners. It isn't going to be the poorest or the mega-rich. The former can't, the latter have no need to - they could relocate to somewhere warmer and nicer and pay for their own care.

Interesting observation from Titan on his move from supermarket shelf-stacking to professional life. He thinks it's odd that people in better paid jobs get extras as a matter of course - profitable expense claims, regular parties with free drink and food whereas in his lower paid supermarket job there were no extras and they had to pay for the Christmas party. Funny old world isn't it?

Quote ="airliebird9"Without wanting to intrude on your yes/no lovers tiff, would you care to explain why you think they already pay enough tax??....'" Nice article here news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm

Quote ="airliebird9"Without wanting to intrude on your yes/no lovers tiff, would you care to explain why you think they already pay enough tax??....'" Nice article here news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm

Quote ="Richie"Nice article here news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm'" Statistics hey, you can make them read what ever way you want them to...

Quote ="Richie"Nice article here news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm'" Statistics hey, you can make them read what ever way you want them to...

Quote ="Richie"Nice article here news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm'" An even better one [url=http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/10/27/most-millionaires-support-warren-buffetts-tax-on-the-rich/HERE[/url

Quote ="Richie"Nice article here news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm'" An even better one [url=http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/10/27/most-millionaires-support-warren-buffetts-tax-on-the-rich/HERE[/url