Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New ComRes poll for the Daily Mirror shows 82% of voters, acro

SystemSystem Posts: 11,684
edited June 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New ComRes poll for the Daily Mirror shows 82% of voters, across all the main parties, would support a 1p rise in National Insurance contributions to fund NHS

New @ComRes poll for the @DailyMirror on the NHS is very interesting. 81% of Conservative voters and 86% of Labour voters in support a 1% increase in National Insurance contributions to fund the NHS. pic.twitter.com/Zr2wIabzjL

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,855
    Evening all :)
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,355
    Wow. I’m clearly way to the libertarian right of the bulk of the population.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671

    Wow. I’m clearly way to the libertarian right of the bulk of the population.

    You sound surprised!?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,454
    ComRes haven't mentioned any VI figures in their email so I'm guessing that either they didn't do a full suite VI question or they are holding the VI figures for another day.
  • Options
    surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    I was first. Now I am not first.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Sod this. Let's abolish the HoL first And use the savings from that before we raise any taxes
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,311
    "This is the 'Ealth Preservation Society!"
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    Anyone know how much a 1p NI rise would raise? And how much it would raise if extended to pensioners and investment income?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,311
    Pulpstar said:

    Sod this. Let's abolish the HoL first And use the savings from that before we raise any taxes

    House of Unelected Has-Beens, I think you mean :lol:
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    Quite surprised by the Conservative figures myself...
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    The answer to your question is Yes.

    Other people paying is popular. Oneself paying, not so much.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307
    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    Anyone know how much a 1p NI rise would raise? And how much it would raise if extended to pensioners and investment income?

    Well quite. Work is astonishingly taxed already compared to dividend and investment income.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,625
    surby said:

    I was first. Now I am not first.

    We’ve all been there.

    Wouldn’t a 1% rise in NI raise about £5bn ?
    Less than a fifth of what the ‘long term settlement’ requires.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,454
    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    The Mirror said it would raise around £11 billion a year
  • Options
    surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    I take it the employees NIC 1% increase will be matched by a similar employers 1% NIC increase. Then we get 2%. It should apply to all classes of NIC.

    Why not 1% on dividend incomes too !
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    edited June 2018
    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    £4-5bn per year sounds like more than gesture politics tbf. If not that, then what?

    EDIT: I presume this will be on top of the £18bn (£350m per week) promised by the Leave camp?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Let's make the self employed pay as much total NI as the employed persons total first too
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    Maybe the Tories should take heart from the fact that Labour voters are much more willing to change their vote to a party that pledged additional funding to the NHS - they should outbid Labour's NHS pedges.
  • Options
    VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,435
    According to the Hmrc document on tax changes:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/700494/SS18_Direct_effects_of_illustrative_tax_changes_bulletinFinal.pdf

    A 1% rise in employees main rate of NIC would raise £4bn. To get to £11bn you need to raise all rates including the employers rate, thus increasing the effective tax and NIC rate of employment by around 2%.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Introduce NI for retired people first.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    Pulpstar said:

    Let's make the self employed pay as much total NI as the employed persons total first too


    +1 for that
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,650
    edited June 2018

    Quite surprised by the Conservative figures myself...

    older people are quite keen on the NHS, and especially if working people will be paying.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,311
    Foxy said:

    Quite surprised by the Conservative figures myself...

    older eople are quite keen on the NHS, and especially if working people will be paying.
    Didn't the older people pay while they were working?
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    Foxy said:

    Quite surprised by the Conservative figures myself...

    older eople are quite keen on the NHS, and especially if working people will be paying.
    They are also more likely to experience the sharp-end of NHS funding pressures.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    "1p in National Insurance" is such dishonest spin when it really means a 2% rise in employment tax.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2018
    I remember when spreadsheet Phil tried to put a similar amount on NI for self employed...the wailing was deafening.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307

    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    The Mirror said it would raise around £11 billion a year
    Well they’re lying. No way it would raise that much.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242
    edited June 2018

    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    The Mirror said it would raise around £11 billion a year
    Does a paper with a relatively sane and competent staff and no past history (or indeed present tendency) of supporting dangerous Fascists confirm this figure, or do we assume that it's an Abbott-style placing of the decimal point in the wrong place?
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,650

    Foxy said:

    Quite surprised by the Conservative figures myself...

    older eople are quite keen on the NHS, and especially if working people will be paying.
    Didn't the older people pay while they were working?
    Not as much as their children and grandchildren will.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    edited June 2018

    Foxy said:

    Quite surprised by the Conservative figures myself...

    older eople are quite keen on the NHS, and especially if working people will be paying.
    Didn't the older people pay while they were working?
    There are plenty of retired people whose income is above the UK average and yet pay no NI; I am one myself. I paid tax and NI all my working life (but not on my pension contributions) and now I am exempt from NI. Make no sense.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,617
    I hope the #Hunt4PM rampers have read this thread header.
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    FPT

    A mixture of nationalisation and concession is the future of the railways.

    Franchising has failed. Bin it.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    I remember when spreadsheet Phil tried to put a similar amount on NI for self employed...the wailing was deafening.

    The Tories should have gone ahead with that lot tbh. First up let's just roll up tax and NI. Employers have to pay so much tax on Labour compared to other investments
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Assume the 1p also has to be matched by employers.

    Would raise a few bil, not massive amounts.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307

    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    is possible toor mor


    £4-5bn per year sounds like more than gesture politics tbf. If not that, then what? generation l


    EDIT: I presume this will be on top of the £18bn (£350m per week) promised by the Leave camp?
    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2018
    Pulpstar said:

    I remember when spreadsheet Phil tried to put a similar amount on NI for self employed...the wailing was deafening.

    The Tories should have gone ahead with that lot tbh. First up let's just roll up tax and NI. Employers have to pay so much tax on Labour compared to other investments
    Squeaky Osborne had the chance to do this and he bottled it and kicked it into the long grass. Then spreadsheet Phil bottled it because so much of the media take advantage of the ability to be self employed and screamed and screamed and screamed. I said at the time I would have had to pay extra but didn’t think it was unfair.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    Can someone ask Boris why the bus isn't going to cover what the NHS needs?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307

    According to the Hmrc document on tax changes:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/700494/SS18_Direct_effects_of_illustrative_tax_changes_bulletinFinal.pdf

    A 1% rise in employees main rate of NIC would raise £4bn. To get to £11bn you need to raise all rates including the employers rate, thus increasing the effective tax and NIC rate of employment by around 2%.

    Not a bad guess on my part then.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,989
    Sean_F said:


    The answer to your question is Yes.

    Other people paying is popular. Oneself paying, not so much.

    As a pensioner, I am very much in favour of pensioners paying NI. I can't see the case against (except the political one).
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,943
    Anazina said:

    Assume the 1p also has to be matched by employers.

    Would raise a few bil, not massive amounts.

    Employers NI is already more than 1% above employees.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    Pulpstar said:

    I remember when spreadsheet Phil tried to put a similar amount on NI for self employed...the wailing was deafening.

    The Tories should have gone ahead with that lot tbh. First up let's just roll up tax and NI. Employers have to pay so much tax on Labour compared to other investments
    Squeaky Osborne had the chance to do this and he bottled it and kicked it into the long grass. Then spreadsheet Phil bottled it because so much of the media take advantage of the ability to be self employed and screamed and screamed and screamed. I said at the time I would have had to pay extra but didn’t think it was unfair.
    That screaming in the media was very annoying to listen to. Phil should have ignored it tbh
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    £4-5bn per year sounds like more than gesture politics tbf. If not that, then what?

    EDIT: I presume this will be on top of the £18bn (£350m per week) promised by the Leave camp?
    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.
    Agreed (even if you did rather butcher my post :smile:)
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,855
    What would people support paying extra tax for - anything, care for the elderly, Police, defence perhaps ?

    Would you vote for a party that says "2p extra on tax to fund the armed forces to keep Putin at bay" ?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,770
    This was a LD manifesto policy wasn't it?
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    Wow. I’m clearly way to the libertarian right of the bulk of the population.

    Is this news?
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,943
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    is possible toor mor


    £4-5bn per year sounds like more than gesture politics tbf. If not that, then what? generation l


    EDIT: I presume this will be on top of the £18bn (£350m per week) promised by the Leave camp?
    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.
    +1
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    £4-5bn per year sounds like more than gesture politics tbf. If not that, then what?

    EDIT: I presume this will be on top of the £18bn (£350m per week) promised by the Leave camp?
    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.
    Agreed (even if you did rather butcher my post :smile:)
    Apologies. Trying to do this on a phone.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,454
    And you've all ignored by AV reference.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    £4-5bn per year sounds like more than gesture politics tbf. If not that, then what?

    EDIT: I presume this will be on top of the £18bn (£350m per week) promised by the Leave camp?
    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.
    Agreed (even if you did rather butcher my post :smile:)
    Apologies. Trying to do this on a phone.
    Nae worries!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,770
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    is possible toor mor


    £4-5bn per year sounds like more than gesture politics tbf. If not that, then what? generation l


    EDIT: I presume this will be on top of the £18bn (£350m per week) promised by the Leave camp?
    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.
    That seems very doubtful, given how anyone in opposition would portray it. I assumed the only reason it every got raised in the first place was because of the assumption the Tories were looking at a big win, and thus could a) make such a suggestion which would upset he base (though it did so even more than they predicted) and still win, and b) get it through parliament later thanks to a big majority.

    Lacking a big majority, I should think other solutions, short term probably, will always be more popular.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    Anazina said:

    Wow. I’m clearly way to the libertarian right of the bulk of the population.

    Is this news?

    To no one but Casino, it seems.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,454
    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?
  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    Foxy said:

    Quite surprised by the Conservative figures myself...

    older people are quite keen on the NHS, and especially if working people will be paying.
    Presumably, for a portion though, that money would be freed up from other sources instead, like say leaving the EU, or instead of giving money to those who don't deserve it (for various reasons)

    Or I guess that is what I thought. I suppose it may not exactly be clear cut, you could possibly sell many of those conservatives in favour on the idea of increasing NHS spending by freeing up money from other things instead, I could be wrong on that as well though...

  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
    Presentational, income tax goes up to 27% or something like that.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2018
    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
    How to deal with oldies and there will be a band of pay that could easily get walloped with a big tax rise...also politically it can be spun that you have just raised someone’s tax from 20 to 30% etc and people are generally so financially ill informed they will believe it.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307
    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
    I think it largely turns on whether you want to win general elections or not.
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Assume the 1p also has to be matched by employers.

    Would raise a few bil, not massive amounts.

    Employers NI is already more than 1% above employees.

    Yes. But this story is about adding an increment of 1 percentage point. My assumption was it would also require a similar increment on employers.

    Wouldn’t raise much even with that.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,855
    DavidL said:


    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.

    It also challenges us on a cultural level. Most people, when young, don't want to think about growing old or dying as we are encouraged to "live". Having a plan for when you are old is as important as having one when you are young.

    Spending will always look more attractive than saving and we've been conditioned to believe happiness comes with the latest gadget, the most faraway place visited, the latest "thing". The notion all that is subsidiary to nursing care in your 80s and 90s isn't one that's going to be easy to embed.

  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,943
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Assume the 1p also has to be matched by employers.

    Would raise a few bil, not massive amounts.

    Employers NI is already more than 1% above employees.

    Yes. But this story is about adding an increment of 1 percentage point. My assumption was it would also require a similar increment on employers.

    Wouldn’t raise much even with that.
    Cutting tax credit and encouraging employers to make that up with wage increases would be far better than taxing more.
  • Options

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    Depends what you are looking for. The Balmoral for traditional grandeur I'd guess. The glasshouse for contemporary style would be my choice though.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    The Mirror said it would raise around £11 billion a year
    Well they’re lying. No way it would raise that much.
    Actually, sad man that I am, I downloaded the latest available National Statistics Income & Deductions spreadsheet (Table 3.5 2015-16) and looked at the tax take implications of adding %ges to different income ranges (a colleague at work talks about solving our tax problem if we add 10% to the top 5% of taxpayers - guess what, it only raises about £28bn from the 900k taxpayers who have mean earnings over £82k)

    Anyway, from that spreadsheet - adding 1p (1%) to everyone would raise about £10.3bn from c31m taxpayers.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    MaxPB said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
    Presentational, income tax goes up to 27% or something like that.
    32% for most I think.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,853
    NHS spending has to rise.
    It needs to rise because we are getting older (and therefore sicker) and because we’ve invented new and expensive ways of treating people.

    The only question is how to pay for it.

    The “one penny on NI” is a bit of a fraud because it sounds like very little, and there is a suggestion it solves the problem.

    We need much more than that.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Anazina said:

    FPT

    A mixture of nationalisation and concession is the future of the railways.

    Franchising has failed. Bin it.

    How can you say that when its the nationalised bit that is the root of the problems. Privatise Network Rail.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,454

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    Depends what you are looking for. The Balmoral for traditional grandeur I'd guess. The glasshouse for contemporary style would be my choice though.
    I want opulence.

    I want somewhere where there's no chavs or hen parties.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    Sod that. 1p on income tax I could just about support - the NHS does need more cash and it's fairest that it goes on the widest taxbase.

    I don't see why those who work should have to pay even more, compared to someone on an identical income, particularly to support a service used mainly by those not in work.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307
    stodge said:

    DavidL said:


    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.

    It also challenges us on a cultural level. Most people, when young, don't want to think about growing old or dying as we are encouraged to "live". Having a plan for when you are old is as important as having one when you are young.

    Spending will always look more attractive than saving and we've been conditioned to believe happiness comes with the latest gadget, the most faraway place visited, the latest "thing". The notion all that is subsidiary to nursing care in your 80s and 90s isn't one that's going to be easy to embed.

    I actually have less problem with the spend, spend, spend mindset (which has a number of economic advantages) than the hoard and save mindset which thinks the most important thing is passing some house intact to the next generation, even if it means poorer people picking up the tab for having your bum wiped.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,945
    What we need is a complete reform of the tax system. Obviously I am in favour of a low flat rate tax because of my political views but putting that to one side, whether one agrees with a low tax system or a high tax system I think everyone can agree that the current system for tax and NI is just ridiculous.

    We should look at merging Income tax, NI and any other sorts of personal taxes on unearned income and say that everyone whose earnings are in the same band should pay the same amount of overall tax whether they are employed, self employed or retired. To end the horrible idea of double taxation in inheritance, we should stop taxing the estate and tax the recipient on the same basis as any other income. So if your estate is left to one person they might end up paying quite a large amount of tax but if you have 5 kids and the estate is split amongst them then tax paid is based on their individual circumstances.

    As I say personally I would like to see such a system tied to a much smaller state but that is immaterial in this particular argument. What we really need at the moment is transparency and a much simplified tax system.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Assume the 1p also has to be matched by employers.

    Would raise a few bil, not massive amounts.

    Employers NI is already more than 1% above employees.

    Yes. But this story is about adding an increment of 1 percentage point. My assumption was it would also require a similar increment on employers.

    Wouldn’t raise much even with that.
    Cutting tax credit and encouraging employers to make that up with wage increases would be far better than taxing more.
    Bit of a fallacy.

    Tax credit is related to how many children you have not what job you do. Why should employers either ask how many children you have or pay you differently based upon your chosen number of children?
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    Depends what you are looking for. The Balmoral for traditional grandeur I'd guess. The glasshouse for contemporary style would be my choice though.
    I want opulence.

    I want somewhere where there's no chavs or hen parties.
    Avoid Edinburgh?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Tbh just freeze the tax thresholds for a couple of years and get a bit through fiscal drag.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,650

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    Depends what you are looking for. The Balmoral for traditional grandeur I'd guess. The glasshouse for contemporary style would be my choice though.
    I want opulence.

    I want somewhere where there's no chavs or hen parties.
    The Balmoral then, albeit stuffed with Septics.
  • Options

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    1p increase in NI? So not paid at all by those using the NHS most? Achieving what? Maybe £4-5bn a year? Like what is that going to solve?

    This is really gesture politics. It would be interesting to ascertain what those voting for this think we spend on the NHS already. My guess is that they would think less than half of what we actually spend.

    The Mirror said it would raise around £11 billion a year
    Well they’re lying. No way it would raise that much.
    Actually, sad man that I am, I downloaded the latest available National Statistics Income & Deductions spreadsheet (Table 3.5 2015-16) and looked at the tax take implications of adding %ges to different income ranges (a colleague at work talks about solving our tax problem if we add 10% to the top 5% of taxpayers - guess what, it only raises about £28bn from the 900k taxpayers who have mean earnings over £82k)

    Anyway, from that spreadsheet - adding 1p (1%) to everyone would raise about £10.3bn from c31m taxpayers.
    ... the 2015 base info is also interesting. For 31m Income Tax payers with mean income of £33.4k, the mean Income Tax paid is £5.7k - a rate of 17.2%
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,943

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    Depends what you are looking for. The Balmoral for traditional grandeur I'd guess. The glasshouse for contemporary style would be my choice though.
    I want opulence.

    I want somewhere where there's no chavs or hen parties.
    Edinburgh Residence and 24 Royal Terrace are my current favourites.

  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    edited June 2018

    MaxPB said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
    Presentational, income tax goes up to 27% or something like that.
    32% for most I think.
    Income tax rises are worth a lot more than NI rises, I think the new bands would be 27% and 45% or something along those lines to be revenue neutral.

    Either way, it won't happen because politicians like getting votes.

    This tax should either be applied to income tax or be funded by putting NI back onto retired people's income.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,989
    stodge said:

    DavidL said:


    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.

    It also challenges us on a cultural level. Most people, when young, don't want to think about growing old or dying as we are encouraged to "live". Having a plan for when you are old is as important as having one when you are young.

    Spending will always look more attractive than saving and we've been conditioned to believe happiness comes with the latest gadget, the most faraway place visited, the latest "thing". The notion all that is subsidiary to nursing care in your 80s and 90s isn't one that's going to be easy to embed.

    How sad it would be if young people gave up enjoying themselves and focused on providing nursing care for themselves in their 80s and 90s! What a dull and dismal life.

    They should have an exit strategy (high speed powerboat racing is a good one, or a heavy morphine habit) but they don't need to think about that until much later.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671

    Anazina said:

    FPT

    A mixture of nationalisation and concession is the future of the railways.

    Franchising has failed. Bin it.

    How can you say that when its the nationalised bit that is the root of the problems. Privatise Network Rail.
    Good idea. You'd have to come up with a catchy new name for the private company - how about Railtrack? Oh...
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    The NHS should be funded by taxes on stuff that causes a burden for the NHS.

    Tobacco already pays more than its fair share.

    Junk food needs taxing heavily.

    Booze should be taxed more (and I say this as a beer, wine, whisky and cocktail enthusiast)

    Legalise cannabis and tax the shit out of it.

    Heavy car taxes for short journeys - particularly where children are being ferried when they could walk. Congestion charges around schools.

  • Options

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    Depends what you are looking for. The Balmoral for traditional grandeur I'd guess. The glasshouse for contemporary style would be my choice though.
    I want opulence.

    I want somewhere where there's no chavs or hen parties.
    Either the Balmoral or the Waldorf (Caledonian) will fit the bill. The Sheraton is lovely aswell and has a cracking Spa with a rooftop pool overlooking the castle.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    I would probably say the G&V myself. Although I always stay at serviced apartments at what used to be called the Knight Residence. Hotel rooms are soulless on your own. An apartment to move around in is much nicer.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
    Presentational, income tax goes up to 27% or something like that.
    32% for most I think.
    Income tax rises are worth a lot more than NI rises
    Are they?

    The tax threshold is much higher for income taxes meaning many eg part time workers may be caught by NI but not Income Tax. Secondly "a penny in National Insurance" really means 2% of tax (1% for Employees and 1% for Employers" whereas income tax is simply income tax.

    I'd have thought the fact NI was a 2% rise not a 1% rise would more than make up for the exemptions that NI has. Which is why Gordon Brown was so keen on it.
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Assume the 1p also has to be matched by employers.

    Would raise a few bil, not massive amounts.

    Employers NI is already more than 1% above employees.

    Yes. But this story is about adding an increment of 1 percentage point. My assumption was it would also require a similar increment on employers.

    Wouldn’t raise much even with that.
    Cutting tax credit and encouraging employers to make that up with wage increases would be far better than taxing more.
    Tax credits are subsidising cheapskate employers. Trouble is, now we are in the system it’s hard to get out of it.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
    Presentational, income tax goes up to 27% or something like that.
    32% for most I think.
    Income tax rises are worth a lot more than NI rises, I think the new bands would be 27% and 45% or something along those lines to be revenue neutral.

    Either way, it won't happen because politicians like getting votes.

    This tax should either be applied to income tax or be funded by putting NI back onto retired people's income.
    The dishonest media would focus on Edna and Eric Brown who'll lose out on their pension though rather than John and Jane Two-kids who would see a take home pay increase.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Anazina said:

    FPT

    A mixture of nationalisation and concession is the future of the railways.

    Franchising has failed. Bin it.

    How can you say that when its the nationalised bit that is the root of the problems. Privatise Network Rail.
    Good idea. You'd have to come up with a catchy new name for the private company - how about Railtrack? Oh...
    Railtrack were getting a lot less subsidies from the taxpayer than Network Rail is.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,454
    edited June 2018

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    Depends what you are looking for. The Balmoral for traditional grandeur I'd guess. The glasshouse for contemporary style would be my choice though.
    I want opulence.

    I want somewhere where there's no chavs or hen parties.
    Either the Balmoral or the Waldorf (Caledonian) will fit the bill. The Sheraton is lovely aswell and has a cracking Spa with a rooftop pool overlooking the castle.
    DavidL said:

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    I would probably say the G&V myself. Although I always stay at serviced apartments at what used to be called the Knight Residence. Hotel rooms are soulless on your own. An apartment to move around in is much nicer.
    Thanks.

    Am planning next year's Valentine's Day weekend break.

    (Thanks also to everyone that replied)
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,671
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
    Presentational, income tax goes up to 27% or something like that.
    32% for most I think.
    Income tax rises are worth a lot more than NI rises, I think the new bands would be 27% and 45% or something along those lines to be revenue neutral.

    Either way, it won't happen because politicians like getting votes.

    This tax should either be applied to income tax or be funded by putting NI back onto retired people's income.
    Good point about income tax raising more than NI per p. What it does mean is that for most working people their marginal rate of tax (inc NI) would actually come down from 32% to circa 27%, which ought to be a good sell.

    This also shows how much could be raised if NI was applied equally to self-employed, investment and retirement income. Someone with better maths than me might like to have a stab at the figure.
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
    I think it largely turns on whether you want to win general elections or not.
    I struggle with this concept - are the electorate really so dumb that they haven’t clicked that NI is just another form of income tax?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Anazina said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Introduce NI for retired people first.

    What's the argument against abolishing NI and rolling it into income tax?
    I think it largely turns on whether you want to win general elections or not.
    I struggle with this concept - are the electorate really so dumb that they haven’t clicked that NI is just another form of income tax?
    Yes.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,617
    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    DavidL said:


    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.

    It also challenges us on a cultural level. Most people, when young, don't want to think about growing old or dying as we are encouraged to "live". Having a plan for when you are old is as important as having one when you are young.

    Spending will always look more attractive than saving and we've been conditioned to believe happiness comes with the latest gadget, the most faraway place visited, the latest "thing". The notion all that is subsidiary to nursing care in your 80s and 90s isn't one that's going to be easy to embed.

    How sad it would be if young people gave up enjoying themselves and focused on providing nursing care for themselves in their 80s and 90s! What a dull and dismal life.

    They should have an exit strategy (high speed powerboat racing is a good one, or a heavy morphine habit) but they don't need to think about that until much later.
    The government could give people the choice: either put money aside for social care in your 80s and 90s or hose it against the wall in your 20s and 30s but be euthanased on your 80th birthday.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,943
    DavidL said:

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    I would probably say the G&V myself. Although I always stay at serviced apartments at what used to be called the Knight Residence. Hotel rooms are soulless on your own. An apartment to move around in is much nicer.
    Is the G&V the old Missoni on George IV bridge? If so, that is lovely. Top cocktails too.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited June 2018
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Assume the 1p also has to be matched by employers.

    Would raise a few bil, not massive amounts.

    Employers NI is already more than 1% above employees.

    Yes. But this story is about adding an increment of 1 percentage point. My assumption was it would also require a similar increment on employers.

    Wouldn’t raise much even with that.
    Cutting tax credit and encouraging employers to make that up with wage increases would be far better than taxing more.
    Tax credits are subsidising cheapskate employers. Trouble is, now we are in the system it’s hard to get out of it.
    How are employers remotely responsible for how many children an employee has?

    Or the fact that an employee will only work 16 hours so they can maximise their benefits?
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,945
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Assume the 1p also has to be matched by employers.

    Would raise a few bil, not massive amounts.

    Employers NI is already more than 1% above employees.

    Yes. But this story is about adding an increment of 1 percentage point. My assumption was it would also require a similar increment on employers.

    Wouldn’t raise much even with that.
    Cutting tax credit and encouraging employers to make that up with wage increases would be far better than taxing more.
    Tax credits are subsidising cheapskate employers. Trouble is, now we are in the system it’s hard to get out of it.
    One could increase the minimum wage whilst at the same time proportionally reducing Tax credits. It would have to be done very slowly because otherwise there are bound to be all sorts of horrible anomalies that need to be worked through the system but the basic principle that the employer should not be subsidised by the state into paying lower wages seems a sound one to me.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I like the Bonham in Edinburgh. I was there at the weekend.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    Depends what you are looking for. The Balmoral for traditional grandeur I'd guess. The glasshouse for contemporary style would be my choice though.
    I want opulence.

    I want somewhere where there's no chavs or hen parties.
    Either the Balmoral or the Waldorf (Caledonian) will fit the bill. The Sheraton is lovely aswell and has a cracking Spa with a rooftop pool overlooking the castle.
    DavidL said:

    @DavidL (or anyone else)

    What's the best hotel in Edinburgh?

    Is it the Caley/Waldorf Astoria?

    I would probably say the G&V myself. Although I always stay at serviced apartments at what used to be called the Knight Residence. Hotel rooms are soulless on your own. An apartment to move around in is much nicer.
    Thanks.

    Am planning next year's Valentine's Day weekend break.

    (Thanks also to everyone that replied)
    Actually for romance the Prestonfield is pretty hard to beat. Foods good too.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    Anazina said:

    Assume the 1p also has to be matched by employers.

    Would raise a few bil, not massive amounts.

    Employers NI is already more than 1% above employees.

    Yes. But this story is about adding an increment of 1 percentage point. My assumption was it would also require a similar increment on employers.

    Wouldn’t raise much even with that.
    Cutting tax credit and encouraging employers to make that up with wage increases would be far better than taxing more.
    Tax credits are subsidising cheapskate employers. Trouble is, now we are in the system it’s hard to get out of it.
    One could increase the minimum wage whilst at the same time proportionally reducing Tax credits. It would have to be done very slowly because otherwise there are bound to be all sorts of horrible anomalies that need to be worked through the system but the basic principle that the employer should not be subsidised by the state into paying lower wages seems a sound one to me.
    How is the employer subsidised?

    Tax credits are maximised by people who have lots of children and refuse to work more than 16 hours - how does the employer benefit from that?
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,989

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    DavidL said:


    In my view health and the closely related issue of social care need something like an additional £40-50 bn a year. I just don’t think it possible or moral
    to ask those working for a living to pay that whilst our elderly rich pass on their estates to the next generation largely untaxed. Sooner or later we will need to return to the dementia tax. I hope it’s sooner.

    It also challenges us on a cultural level. Most people, when young, don't want to think about growing old or dying as we are encouraged to "live". Having a plan for when you are old is as important as having one when you are young.

    Spending will always look more attractive than saving and we've been conditioned to believe happiness comes with the latest gadget, the most faraway place visited, the latest "thing". The notion all that is subsidiary to nursing care in your 80s and 90s isn't one that's going to be easy to embed.

    How sad it would be if young people gave up enjoying themselves and focused on providing nursing care for themselves in their 80s and 90s! What a dull and dismal life.

    They should have an exit strategy (high speed powerboat racing is a good one, or a heavy morphine habit) but they don't need to think about that until much later.
    The government could give people the choice: either put money aside for social care in your 80s and 90s or hose it against the wall in your 20s and 30s but be euthanased on your 80th birthday.
    It doesn't need to be as brutal as that. Free hard drugs for the over eighties.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,943

    I like the Bonham in Edinburgh. I was there at the weekend.

    Also lovely. Edinburgh does have some smashing hotels. Out of season they’re also incredibly cheap. January-March and September-December a 5 star room rarely costs me more than £100 a night.
This discussion has been closed.