The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

No, those earning £19k+ pa would pay more.

While I'm not trying to suggest £19k is a great wage, it's a long way above a low wage, and in Scotland it goes an awful lot further than it does in other parts of the country, too.

Can someone earning £20k a year find an extra tenner in taxes across that year? Yes they can.

And who would benefit from the extra taxes raised?

 

From what I've read that hugely over-stating things, and most based in "nerr nerr nerr we;re not listening cos you're SLab".

But I called it a dogs dinner when it was discussed here previously, and I stand by that. Within the *real* consequences of that rise (rather than the false 'low earners would pay more') I'm not entirely sure the rebate part is really worth doing, particularly with the extra powers less than a year later.

 

What's half baked are the claims of the SNP being the most progressive party when they're not.

Unless the personal allowance has been raised to £19k , those earning under that would most definitely pay more. 

SLab claim they would mitigate this by lobbing them some money without explaining how they would do this. Of course those most in need will be receiving some form of benefits which would no doubt be reduced to take account of the additional payment they are receiving.

If only we had the power to adjust the tax threshold, it would be all so simple.

[LJS]

10 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

No, those earning £19k+ pa would pay more.

While I'm not trying to suggest £19k is a great wage, it's a long way above a low wage, and in Scotland it goes an awful lot further than it does in other parts of the country, too.

Can someone earning £20k a year find an extra tenner in taxes across that year? Yes they can.

And who would benefit from the extra taxes raised?

 

From what I've read that hugely over-stating things, and most based in "nerr nerr nerr we;re not listening cos you're SLab".

But I called it a dogs dinner when it was discussed here previously, and I stand by that. Within the *real* consequences of that rise (rather than the false 'low earners would pay more') I'm not entirely sure the rebate part is really worth doing, particularly with the extra powers less than a year later.

 

What's half baked are the claims of the SNP being the most progressive party when they're not.

So it's a dog's dinner but not half baked....ok.

[eFestivals]

40 minutes ago, LJS said:

Unless the personal allowance has been raised to £19k , those earning under that would most definitely pay more. 

I see maths isn't your strong point.

The allowance is being raised, but not to 19k. It's the fact of that raise in allowance that means no one would be paying more until about £19k.

(PS: I'm taking the S-LibDems word with it being that as I've not done the calc myself - but I can do maths well enough to realise that the allowance doesn't have to rise to £19k for it to be true).

 

Quote

SLab claim they would mitigate this by lobbing them some money without explaining how they would do this.

No, they have explained how they'd do it.

You choice to remain ignorant of what they've said doesn't make you right.

(the fact that how they'd do is is a bit of a dogs dinner doesn't change the fact that they've explained how they'd do it).

 

40 minutes ago, LJS said:

Of course those most in need will be receiving some form of benefits which would no doubt be reduced to take account of the additional payment they are receiving.

That's possibly the case, tho I've not looked into it (tho I've very obviously looked more into it than you).

But even if it was the case those 'poor' people would end up with more money.

Given that you and every other snipper claim to want to help the poor, why are you against helping the poor?

 

40 minutes ago, LJS said:

If only we had the power to adjust the tax threshold, it would be all so simple.

It's all very well saying "if only we had everything we want the world would be perfect", but firstly you have to have everything you want available to you.

You know, like how you want the £8Bn extra a year that is sent from rUK to Scotland and how you don't want to give that up.

It's MUCH MORE than a fair exchange you've got, because having control of the tax threshold and everything else doesn't deliver Scotland the extra £8bn a year that Scotland is desperate to hang on to.

Edited March 3, 2016 by eFestivals

[Comfy Bean]

6 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Baby steps that you prefer to big steps with poorer folk protected.

I know you don't like that mentioned, but hey it's the truth.

The truth is that I would "prefer" a very big step, some would say leap, away from our political union as I thought you realised 

I don`t "prefer" baby steps( you made that up ) but recognise this as something where the rich who can afford to pay more will do so to help those who cannot. I hope we see an increase in the higher tax bands as well.

You claimed yesterday that I was celebrating but I have already corrected you on that. The Tories up here aren`t happy with this as our rich will be paying more than your rich etc.

This will hopefully be a common theme going forward but could have been delivered faster with Independence.....in my opinion of course. You may remember people talking about " fairer " on here before. " robbing the rich " were your words from memory  

 

[Comfy Bean]

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

It's all very well saying "if only we had everything we want the world would be perfect", but firstly you have to have everything you want available to you.

 

Was that the sound of a penny dropping..............

[Comfy Bean]

7 hours ago, eFestivals said:

the increase in council tax bands is to the benefit of the SG, not the councils.

The councils only get to keep any extra they raise via an increase in council tax by up-to 3%.

Just for clarity. On the first bit the SG, via current arrangements in place with local authorities, will collect the extra revenue from the larger houses but this extra revenue generated will be re-distributed across Scotland and ring fenced for education.

On the second bit your bang on.

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

The truth is that I would "prefer" a very big step, some would say leap, away from our political union as I thought you realised 

Yep, I do ... which has some attached consequences, such as the SG not being able to spend at anything like the current levels.

Cuts, much worse than tory cuts.

 

6 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I don`t "prefer" baby steps( you made that up ) but recognise this as something where the rich who can afford to pay more will do so to help those who cannot. I hope we see an increase in the higher tax bands as well.

You claimed yesterday that I was celebrating but I have already corrected you on that. The Tories up here aren`t happy with this as our rich will be paying more than your rich etc.

This will hopefully be a common theme going forward but could have been delivered faster with Independence.....in my opinion of course. You may remember people talking about " fairer " on here before. " robbing the rich " were your words from memory  

 

There's nothing fair about your plan to make the poor poorer.

'Robbing the rich' can't make up the shortfall.

 

[eFestivals]

10 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Was that the sound of a penny dropping..............

no, that was the sound of Scotland finding it doesn't have a penny to drop.

You can't have your dream without the money to fund it. Where's the missing £8Bn?

[Comfy Bean]

3 hours ago, eFestivals said:

" You can't have your dream without the money to fund it ". 

" May your choices reflect your hopes, not your fears. "

[eFestivals]

Just now, comfortablynumb1910 said:

" May your choices reflect your hopes, not your fears. "

The real world runs on neither. It runs on hard cash.

You can't vote yourself more.
You can't vote yourself other people's.

It will need to come from within Scotland, or Scotland will have to spend less.

That's the reality that hopes cannot wash away. You might be daft enough to vote yourself indy, but that just means that problem becomes very very real.

[LJS]

10 hours ago, eFestivals said:

 

Where no one earning under £19k would have paid more.

 

 

9 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I see maths isn't your strong point.

The allowance is being raised, but not to 19k. It's the fact of that raise in allowance that means no one would be paying more until about £19k.

(PS: I'm taking the S-LibDems word with it being that as I've not done the calc myself - but I can do maths well enough to realise that the allowance doesn't have to rise to £19k for it to be true).

 

 

Ah I see what you are doing so no one earning up to £19k would more than they do now

 

But they would pay more than people earning the same in England or Wales

 

And they would pay more than they would if SLab didn't increase the base rate by 1%

 

It's not my idea of progress if Scotland uses its new powers to ensure the lowest paid pay the highest tax in the UK.

 

I'm not totally opposed to an across the board rise in income tax - but I would need convinced that it will not disadvantage the lowest paid. 

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, LJS said:

 

Ah I see what you are doing so no one earning up to £19k would more than they do now

 

But they would pay more than people earning the same in England or Wales

And?

It's not England and Wales who gets any benefit of the money collected or the how the money is spent.

I thought you lot wanted to make your own choices? It appears that you're now taking the insular SNP line that anything the tories in England aren't doing must be a bad thing for Scotland.

 

11 hours ago, LJS said:

And they would pay more than they would if SLab didn't increase the base rate by 1%

And they would get more back via tax redistribution.

FFS.

It appears that social systems are a new thing to you. Incredible.

 

11 hours ago, LJS said:

It's not my idea of progress if Scotland uses its new powers to ensure the lowest paid pay the highest tax in the UK.

Why not, if they're also getting a better level of social support, which more than makes up the extra tax paid?

FFS.

It appears that social systems are a new thing to you. Incredible.

 

11 hours ago, LJS said:

I'm not totally opposed to an across the board rise in income tax - but I would need convinced that it will not disadvantage the lowest paid. 

Well, unless the SNP intend extra tax money raised to benefit the middle and rich classes, how could it not benefit the lowest paid?

You obviously expect the SNP to spend extra taxes on the middle classes. It's the only logical conclusion that can be drawn from your words here.

 

[eFestivals]

12 hours ago, LJS said:

But they would pay more than people earning the same in England or Wales

I remember claims that Scotland wanted to do things differently, Scotland's own way.

I also remember claims of how life in Scotland isn't compared to life in England and Wales.

I'm highly amused at how so many of the arguments put forwards in the past are being turned on their heads to argue the opposite.

It's almost like you know something you're not saying about Scotland.

[LJS]

Yup I want to do things differently - but not "taxing the poor" sort of different. 

And I know you are clearly struggling with this but am not against the principle of Labour's 1p tax rise. It is the practicality & effectiveness of their rebate thingy that troubles me.

 

Of course Labour don't really need to worry about practicality & effectiveness as hey have as much chance of forming the next Scottish Government as you me & Barry have of wining the Eurovision song contest 

[eFestivals]

14 hours ago, LJS said:

Yup I want to do things differently - but not "taxing the poor" sort of different. 

What's the purpose of taxing from a socialist angle?

It's only something to fear if your govt is not working to a socialist angle, but instead wants others than the poor to be the beneficiaries of any extra tax raised.

Remember, level of wage alone does not define poverty.

 

Quote

And I know you are clearly struggling with this but am not against the principle of Labour's 1p tax rise. It is the practicality & effectiveness of their rebate thingy that troubles me.

Of course Labour don't really need to worry about practicality & effectiveness as hey have as much chance of forming the next Scottish Government as you me & Barry have of wining the Eurovision song contest 

As I've pointed out the rebate could be scrapped and it's still not the poorest who pay more, so any flaws in the effectiveness of the rebate cease to be of much importance, and the operating timescale of such a system would be less than a year anyway (and then much better can be done).

Given that *actually* making the sorts of changes for a 'better Scotland that looks after its poor and has a smaller wealth gap' will require higher tax contributions from all levels of society (cos the SNP's extra £100M is pissing in the wind and is not money to benefit the poor anyway), you're simply finding excuses to protect yourself from contributing and nothing much that's worthwhile happens as a result.

Rather amusingly, it's as Blairite as it gets - lots of noise about doing different, but fuck all action because the middle classes have to be placated.

Edited March 5, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

And then, after finding 1% (with the poorest exempt) too much for your wallet to handle...

You're still full steam ahead with an idea that requires an extra 16%-ish in taxes (all taxes, not just I.Tax) just to replicate what you currently have.

You claim concern for the poor and say 1% is too much for the not-poorest to carry, and then want to lump them in a much much worse situation.

I'd love to know what sort of rational thinking you have where you think those two hugely opposing views are in any way compatible.

Edited March 5, 2016 by eFestivals

[LJS]

I would be perfectly happy to pay more tax. Please don't make things up.

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, LJS said:

I would be perfectly happy to pay more tax. Please don't make things up.

Then vote Labour, cos they're also the only party in Scotland who are committing to spend more on the poor - which you also claim to want.

What exactly is stopping what you say you want to happen, apart from YOU not being willing to support it?

It's not just tories who won't do anything to help the poor. It's YOU too.

Edited March 5, 2016 by eFestivals

[LJS]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

Then vote Labour, cos they're also the only party in Scotland who are committing to spend more on the poor - which you also claim to want.

What exactly is stopping what you say you want to happen, apart from YOU not being willing to support it?

I have explained very clearly my issues with Labour's proposal.

The SNP have yet to say what their tax plans are.

[eFestivals]

Just now, LJS said:

I have explained very clearly my issues with Labour's proposal.

You've demonstrated that you don't even understand what it is. FFS.

The only issue with that policy is that it helps those most in need ... which you're against.

 

Just now, LJS said:

The SNP have yet to say what their tax plans are.

They've said they'll tax the rich to NOT benefit the poorest, that much we know already.

And you find that more attractive than a policy that raises taxes to help the poorest.

What are you missing about your own stance?

[LJS]

40 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

You've demonstrated that you don't even understand what it is. FFS.

I understand exactly what Labour's plans are.

Quote

The only issue with that policy is that it helps those most in need ... which you're against.

The only issue with that policy is that it depends on a rebate scheme. A number of legitimate questions have been asked around that scheme. Despite 5 weeks having passed, I can find no trace of any answers.

Quote

 

They've said they'll tax the rich to NOT benefit the poorest, that much we know already.

Correction: they will tax the rich to fund local services predominantly education. Education benefits all sectors of society including  the poorest. Both parties will spend the money raised in the same way. The only specific help for the poorest in SLab's proposal is their £100 for low earners which is "iffy" to say the least.

Quote

And you find that more attractive than a policy that raises taxes to help the poorest.

I find the SNP's council tax tinkering more attractive than doing nothing. When I know their income tax proposals I shall be happy to tell you whether I think they are more "attractive" than SLab's proposals.

Quote

What are you missing about your own stance?

I am missing the bigotry & dishonesty that you exemplify.

Edited March 5, 2016 by LJS

[eFestivals]

45 minutes ago, LJS said:

I understand exactly what Labour's plans are.

In which case you must have done some reading up from the other day, when you demonstrated you knew little of them.

Hopefully you learnt something useful ... tho whether helping the poor is something you're prepared to do is another thing.

 

Quote

The only issue with that policy is that it depends on a rebate scheme.

But it doesn't.

Only people earning over £19k will pay extra - and any of those that might struggle will get extra help anyway.

£19k+ is not "the poor".

You want to help the doing alrights at the expense of the poor unless you back this rise.

 

Quote

A number of legitimate questions have been asked around that scheme. Despite 5 weeks having passed, I can find no trace of any answers.

You couldn't even find the initial announcements the other day, as you got to prove.

I'm guessing you've applied your intellect just as strongly here.

 

Quote

Correction: they will tax the rich to fund local services predominantly education. Education benefits all sectors of society including  the poorest.

It benefits everyone.

Which means it's nothing to do with helping the poor.

 

Quote

Both parties will spend the money raised in the same way.

100% lie.

Lying to prop-up the don't-help-the-poors? Why? If you want to help the poor?

 

Quote

The only specific help for the poorest in SLab's proposal is their £100 for low earners which is "iffy" to say the least.

Plus of course the other £300+m.

 

Quote

I find the SNP's council tax tinkering more attractive than doing nothing.

Yep, you prefer not helping the poor to helping the poor.

 

Quote

When I know their income tax proposals I shall be happy to tell you whether I think they are more "attractive" than SLab's proposals.

I am missing the bigotry & dishonesty that you exemplify.

Except you've been dishonest above.

But stand proud on that higher moral ground, cos one person is falling for the lies.

 

 

Edited March 5, 2016 by eFestivals

[LJS]

The lowest paid will pay more under Labour's plan than they would otherwise.

They will pay more than they would under the SNP.

They will pay more than they would if they lived in wales.

What part of this are you failing to get?

 

These are all facts. You are supposed to be keen on facts. 

I have always understood labour's plan. I was your definition of "paying extra" I struggled with.

I do need your help though with one thing. How will SLab's spending plans for their £450million specifically help the poor? They seem to mainly talk about education which as you agreed does not specifically help the poor

[eFestivals]

21 hours ago, LJS said:

The lowest paid will pay more under Labour's plan than they would otherwise.

They will pay more than they would under the SNP.

They will pay more than they would if they lived in wales.

What part of this are you failing to get?

Oh, I'm getting your theme strongly - that a Scotland doing its own thing *MUST* copy what England and Wales is doing else it's just not fair on Scotland.

180 degrees LJS.

If you'd done that on a skateboard you'd be chuffed with yourself.

As someone who once claimed to want to do things differently and better, and claims to support socialist principles, not so much. 

 

21 hours ago, LJS said:

These are all facts. You are supposed to be keen on facts. 

Yep, that's the facts.

Just as it's fact that wealth redistribution via the tax system is how the poor are helped.

Why is that only you are allowed to pick and choose which facts to reference, when some of us reference them all?

 

21 hours ago, LJS said:

I have always understood labour's plan. I was your definition of "paying extra" I struggled with.

Yeah, you've understood it so well you didn't know anything of how it works, or even that they'd said how it would work.

 

21 hours ago, LJS said:

I do need your help though with one thing. How will SLab's spending plans for their £450million specifically help the poor? They seem to mainly talk about education which as you agreed does not specifically help the poor

Slab haven't allocated all of the money raised to general 'everyone gets a part-benefit' spending as the SNP and LibDems have with the extra they'd said they'll raise.

Leaving hundreds of millions free for targeted help.

What was that you'd just said about you've "always understood labour's plan"?

 

[LJS]

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Oh, I'm getting your theme strongly - that a Scotland doing its own thing *MUST* copy what England and Wales is doing else it's just not fair on Scotland.

Rubbish. I said very clearly I want Scotland to do things differently but not by taxing the poor.

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

180 degrees LJS.

If you'd done that on a skateboard you'd be chuffed with yourself.

I'd be chuffed if I could travel 3feet in a straight line on a skateboard.

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

As someone who once claimed to want to do things differently and better, and claims to support socialist principles, not so much. 

Still do, thanks. 

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

Yep, that's the facts.

Just as it's fact that wealth redistribution via the tax system is how the poor are helped.

Which is why I am in favour of it. As I have tirelessly repeated if Labour can explain how their magic £100 will work, I might be in favour. They have made no attempt to do so.

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Why is that only you are allowed to pick and choose which facts to reference, when some of us reference them all?

Pish.

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

Yeah, you've understood it so well you didn't know anything of how it works, or even that they'd said how it would work.

They have not addressed the questions that have been asked about how it will work.

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Slab haven't allocated all of the money raised to general 'everyone gets a part-benefit' spending as the SNP and LibDems have with the extra they'd said they'll raise.

Leaving hundreds of millions free for targeted help.

I cannot find Labour committing to any targetted help. 

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

What was that you'd just said about you've "always understood labour's plan"?

 

Well, in fairness they don't seem to understand it, but I understand it about as well as they do.