Benefits and tax: astounding graphic

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

How many people on here have paid a tradesman cash to get around paying VAT. Tax evasion. The tradesman will not declare the income. Tax evasion. It's not all about the "rich".

 

[The Merry Prankster]

I'm assuming you voluntarily pay the tax on your pension contributions then ? Or pay the tax on your duty free as you come through customs ? Or don't take out ISAs ?

Actually I'm not guilty of any of those but I'm not offering myself as a paragon of virtue, I'm just pointing out that there are wrongs other than legal.

 

[BLOCK F]

You are aware that the country's finances were far worse in 1945-51 when Labour introduced the NHS. Government debt was over 200% of GDP then. It's also been higher than it is at present for about 200 of the last 250 years. So I'm interested in why you're so concerned about the country's finances. I think this is because you expose yourself to too much of our dire media, but you might have a different answer.

I am no historian,but yes,the post war period was an extrordinarily tough time for the country and now at the age of 65,I can remember a very different world in the 50's and early 60's to the one we now live in.
My concerns over the country's finances if the Eds get in is that they will do what all Labour Governments do.......spend too much,tax too much,interfere too much,grow the State too much and eventually run out of taxpayers money.I also fear that they have little or no understanding of business and without a flourishing enterprise culture in this country,the growth that we need will be hampered along with all those taxes that pay for every Government's pet schemes.
P.S.I try not to expose myself to too much of our dire media.............rather like NSC,one can only take so much!!

 

[BLOCK F]

How many people on here have paid a tradesman cash to get around paying VAT. Tax evasion. The tradesman will not declare the income. Tax evasion. It's not all about the "rich".

Surely none of the righteous brigade that inhabit bits of NSC?
How could you think such a thing?!!

 

[Bold Seagull]

I am no historian,but yes,the post war period was an extrordinarily tough time for the country and now at the age of 65,I can remember a very different world in the 50's and early 60's to the one we now live in.
My concerns over the country's finances if the Eds get in is that they will do what all Labour Governments do.......spend too much,tax too much,interfere too much,grow the State too much and eventually run out of taxpayers money.I also fear that they have little or no understanding of business and without a flourishing enterprise culture in this country,the growth that we need will be hampered along with all those taxes that pay for every Government's pet schemes.
P.S.I try not to expose myself to too much of our dire media.............rather like NSC,one can only take so much!!

You can look at it several ways. One of my first roles was within a nationwide examination of schools and the huge number of temporary classrooms and decrepid building stock around 1995. This was when the Tories realised they had neglected much of the countries infrastructure since 1979, and a huge amount of spending was needed, not just in education. The deficit in 1995 was £2bn more than labour had it in 2007.

So again we are on the same cycle. The current government supposedly rescues the economy with massive cuts, and yet our population grows, and our infrastructure is another 5 years older. We'll be at another point where whichever government gets in, spending will have to happen.

I'd rather see us borrow a bit and pump that back into the economy with the continued improvement to school and hospital buildings, with contractors and tradesman all benefitting from the spending, creating work and in turn getting some of that back in tax revenues, than just ignoring the fact we do actually have a state to run. We appear at the moment to want to run away from that fact.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Actually I'm not guilty of any of those but I'm not offering myself as a paragon of virtue, I'm just pointing out that there are wrongs other than legal.

Then a small financial tip - you need to get a pension unless you're lucky enough to have wads of cash.

 

[dingodan]

Shame they didn't draw a distinction between tax evasion, and tax avoidance.

 

[Machiavelli]

I am no historian,but yes,the post war period was an extrordinarily tough time for the country and now at the age of 65,I can remember a very different world in the 50's and early 60's to the one we now live in.
My concerns over the country's finances if the Eds get in is that they will do what all Labour Governments do.......spend too much,tax too much,interfere too much,grow the State too much and eventually run out of taxpayers money.I also fear that they have little or no understanding of business and without a flourishing enterprise culture in this country,the growth that we need will be hampered along with all those taxes that pay for every Government's pet schemes.
P.S.I try not to expose myself to too much of our dire media.............rather like NSC,one can only take so much!!

Well done on not exposing yourself too much to our dire media. I probably need to do likewise with NSC.
I think Bold Seagull has answered most points in his response to this post. I will point out that it's somewhat of a myth that Labour don't understand business. Businesses have done as well under Labour as the Tories, post-war. Miliband's distinction between predators and producers was a useful intervention, and certain better than New Labour's celebration of business (look where that left us). The growth will come from small and emergent businesses in the future, so they need to be encouraged, but -- it's the subject of this thread, no less -- multi-nationals, etc need to be cracked down on their tax avoidance. This will only happen at a post-national level, however.
I do think you're right that Labour needs to try and fashion a politics for the future that is less reliant on the state, although it has a clear role to play. There's a fantastic economist at Sussex University, Marianna Mazzucato, who is a leading figure in these debates.

 

[Triggaaar]

Semantics aside, the message is quite clear.

I completely missed the message. I saw a chart that's inaccurate in order to suit an agenda, so I switched off. I may have agreed with the message, but if that's how it's being shown I'm not interested.

I do wish our governments would make the likes of Jimmy Car and Amazon pay their share of tax though.

 

[drew]

I completely missed the message. I saw a chart that's inaccurate in order to suit an agenda, so I switched off. I may have agreed with the message, but if that's how it's being shown I'm not interested.

I do wish our governments would make the likes of Jimmy Car and Amazon pay their share of tax though.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Then a small financial tip - you need to get a pension unless you're lucky enough to have wads of cash.

Thank you but provision for old age can take other forms and I've found pensions not to be a particularly rewarding one.

 

[BLOCK F]

You can look at it several ways. One of my first roles was within a nationwide examination of schools and the huge number of temporary classrooms and decrepid building stock around 1995. This was when the Tories realised they had neglected much of the countries infrastructure since 1979, and a huge amount of spending was needed, not just in education. The deficit in 1995 was £2bn more than labour had it in 2007.

So again we are on the same cycle. The current government supposedly rescues the economy with massive cuts, and yet our population grows, and our infrastructure is another 5 years older. We'll be at another point where whichever government gets in, spending will have to happen.

I'd rather see us borrow a bit and pump that back into the economy with the continued improvement to school and hospital buildings, with contractors and tradesman all benefitting from the spending, creating work and in turn getting some of that back in tax revenues, than just ignoring the fact we do actually have a state to run. We appear at the moment to want to run away from that fact.

WE can argue/discuss the rights of what we believe in forever.However,one thing I don't get is why we need to spend zillions on a project like HS2,which I believe is backed by Cameron and Milliband when,perhaps to my naive eye,there are rather more important things that require our attention!!

 

[BLOCK F]

Well done on not exposing yourself too much to our dire media. I probably need to do likewise with NSC.
I think Bold Seagull has answered most points in his response to this post. I will point out that it's somewhat of a myth that Labour don't understand business. Businesses have done as well under Labour as the Tories, post-war. Miliband's distinction between predators and producers was a useful intervention, and certain better than New Labour's celebration of business (look where that left us). The growth will come from small and emergent businesses in the future, so they need to be encouraged, but -- it's the subject of this thread, no less -- multi-nationals, etc need to be cracked down on their tax avoidance. This will only happen at a post-national level, however.
I do think you're right that Labour needs to try and fashion a politics for the future that is less reliant on the state, although it has a clear role to play. There's a fantastic economist at Sussex University, Marianna Mazzucato, who is a leading figure in these debates.

Thanks for the info re M.M. the economist,but I am not that keen on the subject.Not sure I could take the excitement at my age!Nevertheless,I am doing my bit for small business in this country having just received and accepted the estimate from our local garage to get my daughter's car serviced and through the MOT!!

 

[Gangsta]

Though I agree with the need to start getting the big corporations to cough up, you are mixing up two different things here.

Your graphic is highlighting missing tax revenues. This week's story is about how the current gov. (and anyone else who will get in) is now having to deal with the structural deficit inherited from previous lot. Our debt now is 4 X GDP but really 9 X if factor in hidden liabilities.

They have 4 options: (stuff like scrap Trident etc wont bring in enough money so forget this diversion)

1) Raise taxes. Unlikely to actually produce more than 35% of GDP even if you bring in supertaxes of 85% to send rich abroad - all tried before and don't work - you wont get in more than 35% GDP
2) Cut long-term liabilities. IE Pensions. Unfortunately the oldies are not dying quick enough and also they are the ones that vote, so stupidly the gov. have just agreed triple-lock without pushing the pension age up to 80 which is what it needs to be.
3) Cut other services: This is what is now being proposed as the only other option is:
4) What all prior govs since 1909 have done which is to promise more and more social services/pension etc with no way of paying for them and instead creating a pack of lies when faced with the facts to keep the proles happy and leave the mess for someone else to clear up. China are now building air-craft carriers as they have looked in their history books and found the meaning of the English phrase "Gun-boat diplomacy"

This government has the bravery to try to put this right. We are in serious trouble and cannot afford one more wrong move to the left. If anyone out there still believes the fantasy world of Ed Balls etc they need their heads looking at. This is nothing to do with the Banking Crisis - it is to do with us spending more than we earn and has gone on since WW1.

If any of you have grandchildren and want them living in some Mad Max style world then please vote Labour.

 

[Giraffe]

I would focus on all of them, as indeed he is.

 

[Bold Seagull]

This government has the bravery to try to put this right.

If only they did. However it's clear year on year Osbourne is having to radically revise his projected deficit reduction - why? Because there is only so much he can reduce from the benefit system and state spending. Ultimately it's taxation revenues that will clear the deficit.

So we continue to spend more than we earn - how exactly is this brave current government tackling this? Restraining the banks? Taxing the wealthy? Closing tax loop holes?

I don't disagree with you about voting Labour, however another term under the this government is just as unpalatable.

What we need is a completely hung election, no significant majorities and an appalling turn out. We need our own Glorious Revolution. Bring them all down to their knees and make everybody rethink how our country is governed.

Returning back to one of the great election advertisements: Labour, The Tories, The Lib Dems Aren't Working!!!!

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

I don't disagree with you about voting Labour, however another term under the this government is just as unpalatable.

Any change of Government still means they have to clear up the mess left behind , it is a vicious circle.

 

[Govinda Tim]

Though I agree with the need to start getting the big corporations to cough up, you are mixing up two different things here.

Your graphic is highlighting missing tax revenues. This week's story is about how the current gov. (and anyone else who will get in) is now having to deal with the structural deficit inherited from previous lot. Our debt now is 4 X GDP but really 9 X if factor in hidden liabilities.

They have 4 options: (stuff like scrap Trident etc wont bring in enough money so forget this diversion)

1) Raise taxes. Unlikely to actually produce more than 35% of GDP even if you bring in supertaxes of 85% to send rich abroad - all tried before and don't work - you wont get in more than 35% GDP
2) Cut long-term liabilities. IE Pensions. Unfortunately the oldies are not dying quick enough and also they are the ones that vote, so stupidly the gov. have just agreed triple-lock without pushing the pension age up to 80 which is what it needs to be.
3) Cut other services: This is what is now being proposed as the only other option is:
4) What all prior govs since 1909 have done which is to promise more and more social services/pension etc with no way of paying for them and instead creating a pack of lies when faced with the facts to keep the proles happy and leave the mess for someone else to clear up. China are now building air-craft carriers as they have looked in their history books and found the meaning of the English phrase "Gun-boat diplomacy"

This government has the bravery to try to put this right. We are in serious trouble and cannot afford one more wrong move to the left. If anyone out there still believes the fantasy world of Ed Balls etc they need their heads looking at. This is nothing to do with the Banking Crisis - it is to do with us spending more than we earn and has gone on since WW1.

If any of you have grandchildren and want them living in some Mad Max style world then please vote Labour.

Why do you Imagine that there are only 4 options??

 

[Dick Head]

Surface areas of circles are notoriously hard to compare visually.

Personally I think that the EU should ban them from infographics.

Here's the same chart but accurately drawn with squares.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Here's the same chart but accurately drawn with squares.

View attachment 50056

View attachment 50055

Helps out the trypophobics who needed counselling after opening this thread