General Business Forum Brought to you by Total Gas & Power

Why overtaxing the rich is wrong

Discussion in 'General Business Forum' started by Cornish Steve, Apr 21, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. hmmm

    hmmm UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1,722 127
    there are plenty bleeding this country in one way or another, the are plenty over charging for things, there are plenty of cash in hands lose the vat , there are plenty of back handers there are plenty of this and plenty of that.. i read some of the righteous nonsense on here of all the angels that law abide do no wrong and everything by the book..

    i smell banana boats ,i smell the sweet smell of country side bu115hit and the absolute stink of false holier than tho self proclaimed god like attitudes ..
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2011
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: hmmm Member since: Apr 14, 2011
  2. bdw

    bdw Banned

    6,568 1,269
    I see you made an edit to the above. It didn't work. I still have no idea where you are coming from.

    .
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: bdw Member since: Aug 13, 2008
  3. hmmm

    hmmm UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1,722 127
    nope me neither
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: hmmm Member since: Apr 14, 2011
  4. MASSEY

    MASSEY UKBF Legend Full Member

    10,328 1,783
    Ofcourse it is. You run things to avoid paying tax that is not necessary. It's a business. Tax avoidance is a completely different ball game to tax evading. Your scraping the barrel there.
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: MASSEY Member since: Nov 29, 2009
  5. Podge

    Podge UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1,154 367
    In you opinion.....

    In what way is a woman getting pregnant to manipulate a system that pays for her children, thereby taking tax out of the system, any different to a tax payer who manipulates the system to avoid paying the true taxes due thereby taking tax out of the system. Neither are doing anything illegal, just getting what they can.
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: Podge Member since: Jan 13, 2011
  6. hmmm

    hmmm UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1,722 127
    oh the power of the english language ..

    but is there really any difference when we apply logic
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: hmmm Member since: Apr 14, 2011
  7. Dawg

    Dawg UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    10,900 3,466
    "to avoid paying the true taxes due" would mean that the law is being broken.

    However comparing a woman who manipulates the system by getting pregnant and a business who uses legal tax avoidance:

    The woman is using other people's money, (she has earnt or created no money/value).
    The business is trying to keep it's own money, (money or profit it created as a business).

    Seems different to me.
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: Dawg Member since: Feb 12, 2006
  8. sirearl

    sirearl UKBF Legend Free Member

    29,807 6,643

    Your mum may have told you that.

    But the rest of us have a higher opinion of human beings.:p

    Earl
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: sirearl Member since: Apr 23, 2007
  9. Dawg

    Dawg UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    10,900 3,466
    Nice to know your Mum did suffer fools gladly...:)
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: Dawg Member since: Feb 12, 2006
  10. hmmm

    hmmm UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1,722 127
    depends if you count all tax/vat she has ever paid in things such as food fags clothes and many other items including all that was brought for her by the parents since birth :)
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2011
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: hmmm Member since: Apr 14, 2011
  11. Dawg

    Dawg UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    10,900 3,466
    What about her grandparents, and their inlaws? Why don't you count all the money they spent too?
    Ooops ...because they are probably all on benefits too. You know, Benefits, other peoples money.
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: Dawg Member since: Feb 12, 2006
  12. hmmm

    hmmm UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1,722 127
    hmmm

    so now i have to think what are the odds of the parent grand parent and all relations all claiming hmmmmm .
    i think just by stating that should give you some idea of what a nonsense statement you just made and your answer.
    yes lets count all the inlaws that ever spent money on her.indirectly she has contributed.......
    again we come to the subject as in many threads of a thing called worth

    benefits is not your money...you gave away your taxes for the big guys to do as they wish
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2011
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: hmmm Member since: Apr 14, 2011
  13. Matt1959

    Matt1959 UKBF Legend Free Member

    6,295 1,226
    theres a distinction between those claiming benefits that cant get work and those that could - I thought we were talking about the latter? If not, you can't lump all people claiming benefits in together. How did we get to the position whereby we're in support of scroungers just because they are claimants?
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: Matt1959 Member since: Sep 8, 2006
  14. hmmm

    hmmm UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1,722 127
    so if someone would like to do the math from birth every bit of vat/tax ever spent on the average child till 16 as lets face it this would not be there if she wasnt born..
    even workers get child benefit and tax credits and other benefits...whos money is that?
    but the amount of "scroungers " that actually full bore down dont want to work ,in the whole picture this is a minute amount that really shouldnt be effecting the out come
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2011
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: hmmm Member since: Apr 14, 2011
  15. Matt1959

    Matt1959 UKBF Legend Free Member

    6,295 1,226
    so tax paid on expenditure per child for 16 years exceeds the beneifit paid for that child? Like you said, we need some sums:)

    rough calculation - one child costs say £1800 pa in benefits. To get that back in say VAT, you'd have to be spending £9000 a year on the child:|

    sorry I'm making it sound like children are commodities - tis not meant that way.....
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: Matt1959 Member since: Sep 8, 2006
  16. hmmm

    hmmm UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1,722 127
    i dont think you sound that way as we are only chatting about things..
    when doing the math we have to deside how long someone is without work how someone is ever going to work. the woman may only be out of work a short time or have a partner at some stage. £1800 a yr then we take off that all vat as lets face it that £1800 is going back into the system or a good proportion is
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: hmmm Member since: Apr 14, 2011
  17. Matt1959

    Matt1959 UKBF Legend Free Member

    6,295 1,226
    its the first time I've seen it said that the benefit culture has advantages for the economy:)
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: Matt1959 Member since: Sep 8, 2006
  18. hmmm

    hmmm UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1,722 127
    maybe benefits are the governments way of losing "avoiding"some of the tax that they owe to the masters :)
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: hmmm Member since: Apr 14, 2011
  19. hmmm

    hmmm UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    1,722 127
    if we look at the country as one big company we can possibly see the benefit system as a way of keeping the people happy maybe happy is the wrong word but what i mean is when some companies take employees to the races or the pub or weekends away any social or "present giving" its a way to keep those in house happy and get team spirit...the benefit system is kind of like that if you like..just as some will drink 20 double vodkas and others will have 3 cokes on a company night out all paid for,some on benefits will take as much as they can and take advantage and some will just have what is given and not abuse it..its all swings and round abouts that we know are there but we can manage around to keep harmony
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: hmmm Member since: Apr 14, 2011
  20. Jeff FV

    Jeff FV UKBF Big Shot Staff Member

    3,623 1,705
    My bold in the above.

    But if the money was not spent on the child as they had not been born, it would have been spent on something else, thus still generating VAT income.

    I'm pretty sure that I've spent a huge sum of money on my two little darlings - if I hadn't of had children I wouldn't have saved all that money, I'd have just spent it on something else

    Jeff
     
    Posted: May 1, 2011 By: Jeff FV Member since: Jan 10, 2009
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.