Victorias Empire

quote:

What makes me smile about peoples recolections of Mrs T, is it's alaways negative. No one has a good word for the old dear. If she was so hated could someone explain how the hell she won 3 general elections (2 land slide). Someone must have voted for her. When people reflect she is regarded as a loony a fringe element. We have to get real she was a very popular PM.

Well for me , at least she had the courage to introduce the Poll Tax....the only fair way of funding local Government, and better than the lunatic system we have now....which is effectively a tax on houses, (which don`t consume services)

Hopefully, in the not to distant future we will return to this form of Local Government funding...

laurie

"The Poll tax is a regressive tax."

Discuss!

ATB from Fredrik

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:
Chaps

Did anyone watch the final episode, here we are, 100 years after the death of Victoria and yet the influence of the Empire continues.

A truly evocative programme.

Regards

Mick

Mick,

I truly wish I could've seen it; maybe PBS will broadcast it here.

I love programs about the Empire; I have a bookcase full of Raj history, books about Churchill (to me, the greatest statesman of the 20th Century), the Middle Eastern campaign of 1914-18, T.E. Lawrence, Gens. Allenby, Montgomery, etc. My interest arose from growing up in Lahore, W. Pakistan not long after the trumpets of the Raj sounded their last retreat; my family read the same daily newspaper that Kipling wrote for in the 1880's. We lived for a brief season in an officer's bungalow in the old cantonment there, relics of the 11th Bengal Lancers still in evidence. My family took holidays in places like Simla, where we visited the old summer residence of the Viceroy. So, in an indirect way, I'm a child of the old Raj. India as presently constituted could not exist without the things of value Britain left behind: the school system, the civil service, the railway system, and the country's only universal language - English.

England controlled, at the zenith of Empire, 1/4 of the world's land mass, directly or indirectly; and no Empire has been so gracefully surrendered when it's time had passed (some barneys in Africa excepted).

I'm (re)visiting India next year, to (in part) retrace some Imperial history in Northern India.

One thing I've always thought a shame: Cecil Rhodes never got that Cape-to-Cairo railway built. That's a journey I'd have loved to have taken.

Cheers,
Bruce

quote:

The Poll tax is a regressive tax."

Discuss!

Yes...but the current community charge is even worse.

What is the logic of setting a tax level based on the notional value of the house you occupy?

laurie

laurie

LS Wrote: [Posted Thu 17 May 2007 17:43]

"Well for me , at least she [Margaret Thatcher] had the courage to introduce the Poll Tax....the only fair way of funding local Government, and better than the lunatic system we have now....which is effectively a tax on houses, (which don`t consume services)

"Hopefully, in the not to distant future we will return to this form of Local Government funding...

"laurie"

_____________

FF wrote:

"The Poll tax is a regressive tax. Discuss!"

_______________

LS replied:

"Yes...but the current community charge is even worse.

"What is the logic of setting a tax level based on the notional value of the house you occupy?

"laurie"

__________

Dear Laurie,

Two things. The Poll Tax finished Mrs Thatcher, because it was unfair. It cost her her job, because her own Party realised she had lost touch with the electorate and become an electoral liability if she could not see that such an unfair Tax was not going to get support. It was an unfair and regressive tax, and one which you applaud her attempt to introduce it! Naturally your approach in simply praising that Poll Tax is not going to readily pursuade me to aggree with you that the policy deserved applause. I believe it got the response it diserved - in other words having "passed her sell by date" she was deposed by the Party.

The Council Tax is less bad, but as you suggest not perfect. At least the value of the house you live in is likely to be at least "related" to how well off you are, and therefore it effects are on average better than a random approach to fixing tax levels... - though it can still be regressive in its effect. I would favour the application of a "Local Income Tax." This would be administered as an extension of National Income Tax, and based on the same accounts returns, or PAYE as the National Tax, with a supplementary aditional charge based on the Local Authority Area concerned. It would take work to administer it, but it would be fair, being based on an ability to pay, which is the mark of Taxtion in a civilised country - not the imposition of of partially or wholely "regressive" systems of Taxation.

I was truly shocked to see you advocating the imposition of such a nasty regressive tax as Mrs Thatcher's Poll Tax. It seemed so outrageous to me that I could hardly believe there was one person left in UK who thought it was a good and fair tax proposal!

Kindest regards from Fredrik

quote:

Originally posted by Laurie Saunders:

What is the logic of setting a tax level based on the notional value of the house you occupy?

laurie

laurie

I believe there is a positive relationship between income and the where you live. That's pretty easy for most people to understand I expect. Whether it's fair or not it specific situations is a little more problematic of course.

Although I can see the benefits of Fredrik's income tax idea, I can't help but "feel" that those with enough money use it to minimise their tax bill.....

Dear Jay,

I see we agree on the relative improvement of the Council Tax over the Poll Tax. Thanks.

No system of Taxation is perfect, especially when "Tax Evasion" is almost an institutionalised "national sport!" But I don't think that this should not be an excuse for failing to try to "improve" the system so it becomes at least fairer. With the whole system now being so well manned [in terms of HM Customs and Revenues], I don't think the proposal is beyond being workable, though as you say those who can afford a good Tax Accountant will undoubtedly find a way of paying relatively less in some cases.

Where I get perplexed is when the very poorest working people get into real Tax traps, and in reality would be "better off" taking dole and housing benefits rather than trying to stretch a minimal wage to cover everything, and have just nothing left for even decent quality food. Anyone fancy trying to survive on £200 per week, net? I do know of what I speak having just had two months "between jobs." Even with the very small allowance for unemployment benefits, I found it easier to survive out of work than in it. It certainly did not suit my mentality, and I would in any case rather be working, but I am not everyone...

Kindest regards from Fredrik

Hm, Fredrik...I live quite well on about £175 a week, here in a rather expensive urban area of the U.S. (I'm guessing about the exchange rate...I make about $350/week in my job as a van driver). Plus, I've no National Health or pension scheme (like most here, I have to try and fund my own retirement). Don't ask how I've afforded my Naim kit. Is England really that pricey these days??

Actually, I'd rather talk about that upon which the sun never sets! How I wish I'd been born a nabob with the East India Company, and set up in (say) Hyderabad circa 1770 with a retinue of servants and native courtesans! Or a diamond prospector in Kimberley, about to make a fortune and retire to Somerset or Tunbridge Wells with a vast estate.

But, I was born in America in 1953; and tried to become a rock star instead.

Dear bhazen,

Consider out of £200 in a week how much then goes first on the Rent for accomodation, the Water Rates, and the Council Tax? Even before buying fuel for heat and light, these three bills are not something that is adjusted according to usage, and are fixed. Of course some water is now metered these days, but if one is working hard it seems difficult to imagine that economising on personal hygiene is going to be welcomed by an employer...

Perhaps you could fill in what your fixed costs would be out of £175 per week. I suspect we have higher fixed costs in UK. The figure of £200 net is after National Insurance [for the NHS and Pension] and Income Tax is deducted from a 40 hour week on a wage just above the Minumum that is legal in UK Law...

Fredrik

Well, you're right really Fredrik: I'd forgotten one salient fact. I own my flat (or "condo" as we say here in the 'States) mortgage-free, so I'm not out £500/month for rent or mortgage payment. More like £100, for dues and taxes. So, I'm in slightly better shape than most working people of equivalent income. With private health insurance costs going up 20% per annum, I'll probably never be able to afford retirement; just as well really, as keeping actice and working is probably better for an older person than sitting around listening to music and reading books.

Wait...what am I saying?

Dear Bhazen,

Due to an unforseen move to an over expensive flat last Summer, because my previous landlord had to sell the flat I was renting, my Fixed Costs ran to 67 per cent of my net income. The minimum tenancy was six months. The choice was take the tenancy or face another, less comfortable option. There is a housing shortage in many parts of UK...

At the end of six months I have moved again, in a shared tenancy, and the economics are more reasonable, but it is no longer possible to live cheaply in UK. The Council Tax is probably Mrs Thatcher's most ruinous policy in term of its regressive nature for the working poor. Not everything she did was admirable, and she had completely lost the plot in trying to implement the Poll Tax, which caused her being sacked as Tory Leader [and hence as Prime Minister] by her own Party. The Council Tax is far from a fair tax, though less regressive than the Poll Tax would have been.

Above, in response to Jay, I proposed that a better system would be a Local Authority Income tax, which is Liberal Democrat policy [were they ever to be elected], but the value of this in terms of fairness is not likely to be appreciated by those who have never faced being financially crippled by regressive taxation, while trying to earn a decent, hard earned living...

To finance the excercise I sold the NAC 52 and Supercap which was paid for when I sold my beautiful [commissioned by myself] double bass, and the loss of the CDS2 sustained me through unemployment as I was far too proud to seek assistance with housing benefit and so forth. That is no comment on anyone who would do so for all that. That piece was given me by my late Norwegian grandmother, and parting with it was a bitter pill to take.

It was supposed to pay to a course which would have allowed me to take a good job abroad, and emigrate from UK, which is truly finished for the little man. Neither Tory [and I am basic a conservative minded man], nor Labour stand for the kind of fairness which treats the workers properly. Only the Lib Dems sound like they "might" be, but they are unlikely ever to form a gov't here, or even form a part of one given our archaic and fairly undemocratic "First Past The Post" system of electing MPs. I am finished with my country of birth in light of the way things are going and have gone over the last years, most especially under Blair, who is no advocate for the working man. Only his cronies...

However the US is not near the top of the places I would like to settle, but that is another story, and no disrespect is intended to the people of the US, but many aspects of its gov't and culture are indeed not my idea of what is admirable in my opinion.

Thanks for repling. Fredrik

Fredrik;

I am so sorry you had to sell all that lovely kit (particularly your double bass: I'm aware, based on past posts of yours, how you feel about music making and its means). In the U.S. taxation is falling increasingly heavily on those who can afford it least as well; no matter what party is in power. Most telling is the fact that something like 50% of the country's wealth is concentrated in the hands of 1% of the population (or something like that...and they want the remaining 50%). The game is rigged in favour of those who make the rules; democracy cannot survive long, I fear, under the current conditions.

quote:

I was truly shocked to see you advocating the imposition of such a nasty regressive tax as Mrs Thatcher's Poll Tax. It seemed so outrageous to me that I could hardly believe there was one person left in UK who thought it was a good and fair tax proposal!

Phew.....

Well if it is so shocking then I`ll say it again..."I wholeheartedly support the poll tax "


`cos I paid less than I do now...that`s reasonable isn`t it?


.....there.......


To hell with it being unfair

That word "unfair" is a con.......it is meant to sound objective....but really represents a selfish point of view...what was unfair about it???....to my mind it was blindingly fair...everyone pays the same...aka EQUALITY!!!

You`ll be advocating that the less well - off should get discounted Naim kit next....


One further point

we are almost at the point in this country where a majority of voters do not have to pay the taxes they vote for in elections...this is grossly unfair

I suggest that we take a leaf out of history....no representation without taxation
I`m sick of spongers who contribute nothing to the national kitty whingeing on about how the government (aka taxpayers) should pour increasing sums of money into subsidising them...


There..is that shocking enough for you?????



laurie

quote:

Originally posted by Laurie Saunders:
it was blindingly fair...everyone pays the same...aka EQUALITY!!!

Oh, I see what you mean. A teaching assisstant paid the same as a company director. Equality, nice one.

quote:

A teaching assisstant paid the same as a company director. Equality, nice one.

Well...let the teaching assistant do the same job as the director...

laurie

Hmmmm
Interesting debate. From a purely theoretical p.o.v., the Company Director probably makes far less call on the Council's services than the teaching assistant. His kids are probably in private education, he doesn't claim andy benefits, use the library or the sports centre. Maybe all the council does for him is empty his bins once a fortnight. Hmmmm.

I'm not sure how any tax system can be "fair" or where we define as the boundaries between needy,comfortable, well-off and obscenely rich. I guess it all depends where the judge happens to sit on that scale.

quote:

Well...let the teaching assistant do the same job as the director...

What a simple world you live in.

quote:

A lot of left wingers criticise the Empire but India was an excellent case in point. We never invaded, we got there by trade,
Yes the British have been a force for good and it is about time we started beating the drum.

Mick, you have an interestingly selective historical view. Brutal violence towards Indians was the hallmark of the British occupation of India. Indians were casually beaten and killed for perceived misdemeanours such as spilling their masters drinks or not shining their boots well enough. During the Great Rebellion of 1857, Indian prisoners were routinely executed by being shot from the mouths of cannons and sometimes burned alive.

You're right about religion though. The Indians hated the British enough for Muslim and Hindu to set aside long held differences and unite to fight against the British. A fact not lost on the British who, in 1947, created the Muslim state of Pakistan and stoked up some nice communal slaughter as a parting gift.

quote:

quote:
Well...let the teaching assistant do the same job as the director...

What a simple world you live in.

People get paid for the job they do
We already have a wealth redistribution system aka Income Tax/benefits..people who earn more pay more tax. What`s wrong with that?

Why do we need a tax on houses as well?

laurie

quote:

Hmmmm
Interesting debate. From a purely theoretical p.o.v., the Company Director probably makes far less call on the Council's services than the teaching assistant. His kids are probably in private education, he doesn't claim andy benefits, use the library or the sports centre. Maybe all the council does for him is empty his bins once a fortnight. Hmmmm.



I'm not sure how any tax system can be "fair" or where we define as the boundaries between needy,comfortable, well-off and obscenely rich. I guess it all depends where the judge happens to sit on that scale

You express my sentiments very eloquently

In addition I cannot understand why our tax system subsidised couples having children. The underlying issue , from which vitually all other problems stem, is that of overpopulation. Yet we continue to redistribute money from families with no children to those that do

Perhap it should be possible for me to claim claim tax relief for having to finance my Hi-Fi??

Laurie

Dear Laurie,

The great thing about "freedom of expression" is that it gives the "eccentric enough rope to hang himself!" Fortunately your "I'm alright Jack" attitude is not yet Universal in UK, though it is getting towards a majority. I am emigrating, because I don't care for it.

Dear bhazen,

I sold the big bass because of arthritis in the little finger in the left hand which spoiled my technique when it flaired up. In fact it always amused me that I could get as much for a concert as a week's work, considering the "fee" and "porterage." Happy days, those were. £20 per hour for teaching the instrument as well at the Elgar School of Music in [the Deansway] Worcester! Naturally I declared my musical income for taxation perposes. There was an irony in that music, in this case, subsidised capital!

ATB from Fredrik

Dear Fredrik,

Do I recall a'right that you've still got a CDX2, Nait 5i and SBL's? Or something similar? I hope so; anyway, having a very simple system consisting of musical playback kit of such pedigree is a blessing. (I have CD5X>Nait 5i>J.M. Reynaud Twins. Bliss.)

Cheers,
Bruce

Now: back to our regularly-scheduled programme on Radio Three: "Imperial Chat With Rudyard Kipling".

quote:

Dear Laurie,

The great thing about "freedom of expression" is that it gives the "eccentric enough rope to hang himself!"

I`ll take that as a compliment!!


Really....I am a very caring socially minded person ..it is just that I don`t like a gun held to my head by a Government that tells me that it knows better than me how my money should be spent

To quote Professor King recently....we are sick of being lectured (by mainly left wing) politicians who seem to have some sort of claim of greater insight into the human condition than we do..


Any Government that has John Prescott as Deputy Prime Minister must be treated with a great deal of suspicion!
laurie

Laurie
I am in total harmony with you on your last statement.

Dear Laurie,

I agree about patronising left wingers, and particularly about your comment concerning Mr Presott!

I think we have to remember that it was not the Labour Party that stopped the Poll Tax, but the Tories!

They lost faith in their leader when they saw that she had become an electoral liabilty! I do suspect that even at the height of Thatcherism, your view about the fairness of the Poll Tax was not widely held [Nicholas Ridley and Mrs thatcher seem to have been the main proponents, and I seem to remember that Sir Keith Joseph though it was a good idea], and English History teaches us that a great poular displeasure at this sort of Poll Taxation is nothing new...

Kindest regards from Fredrik