Students occupy University of Sheffield Auditorium

[two sheds]

The presence of that prat Kelvin McKenzie!

Seriously I still consider myself more left than right politically speaking, but I do think we need to balance the budget....

... and you don't think that collecting tax avoided and evaded by companies and rich people would do that with some spare?

 

[Pickman's model]

The presence of that prat Kelvin McKenzie!

Seriously I still consider myself more left than right politically speaking, but I do think we need to balance the budget....

i consider you more wrong than right politically speaking

 

[LeslieB]

By holding such an extreme, irrational economic belief

Wanting to balance the budget is extreme and irrational? Really?

 

[LeslieB]

... and you don't think that collecting tax avoided and evaded by companies and rich people would do that with some spare?

No. I think it would be a good start though

 

[brogdale]

Wanting to balance the budget is extreme and irrational? Really?

You obviously feel comfortable cheering on a process made necessary by capital's refusal to forgo profit to meet the social obligations of production and reproduction of labour. Reduced public debt = increased private debt...like my eldest son's near £50k debt resulting from his higher education.

 

[LeslieB]

like my eldest son's near £50k debt resulting from his higher education.

which he will only pay back once earning 21k, of course.

 

[brogdale]

which he will only pay back once earning 21k, of course.

You say that like that's in some way OK, or that it offers any justification for your tory (vermin) belief.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

which he will only pay back once earning 21k, of course.

Ooh £21k. As long as he doesn't also need to pay any rent he'll be quids in.

 

[LeslieB]

You say that like that's in some way OK, or that it offers any justification for your tory (vermin) belief.

It's 9% of his earnings over 21k, as I'm sure you know.

To do everything some people on the left want to do would mean jacking income tax to 30% or more anyway.....note the basic rate of income tax was 29% or higher until 1987

 

[LeslieB]

Ooh £21k. As long as he doesn't also need to pay any rent he'll be quids in.

21k is actually quite good money outside of the South East.

 

[Pickman's model]

21k is actually quite good money outside of the South East.

what's your gross wage?

 

[LeslieB]

what's your gross wage?

I don't see what that has to do with the price of cheese, but for the record I'm on £7.35 an hour and no guaranteed work. I'm gutted I didn't get the 13.5k perm job I went for the other day, especially since it cost me a days work elsewhere. 21k would be dreamland.

Since you've asked me, what about you?

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't see what that has to do with the price of cheese, but for the record I'm on £7.35 an hour and no guaranteed work. I'm gutted I didn't get the 13.5k perm job I went for the other day, especially since it cost me a days work elsewhere. 21k would be dreamland.

Since you've asked me, what about you?

round 22 from 3 jobs

 

[LeslieB]

round 22 from 3 jobs

For a man with 3 jobs you seem to spend enough time on here.....

 

[Pickman's model]

For a man with 3 jobs you seem to spend enough time on here.....

i spent as much time on here when i had four jobs

 

[brogdale]

It's 9% of his earnings over 21k, as I'm sure you know.

To do everything some people on the left want to do would mean jacking income tax to 30% or more anyway.....note the basic rate of income tax was 29% or higher until 1987

Your assertions rest on so many assumptions that it is difficult to see where your made-up figures have come from; did you just make these up out of thin air, or are they based on the working of some right-wing think-tank or party?
Whatever, they're patently nonsense; back in 2011/12 when the last cohort studied on the old fee structure basic income tax was not levied at 30%, was it? And why the constant attempt to construct revenue as merely derived from taxation of income.
There's so much wrong with your simplistic interpretations; have you thought about undertaking some reading around this topic, rather than relying on half-baked TV programmes?

 

[LeslieB]

back in 2011/12 when the last cohort studied on the old fee structure basic income tax was not levied at 30%, was it?

No, but the earnings cut off for repayment was just 16k. The fees have been raised, indeed raised sharply, but the cutoff for repayment has been raised too.

There is also the fact that in 2011 the annual national deficit was running higher than it is now. I'm certainly not just blaming HE for that, but it is a factor. Since reducing the size of the HE sector seems to be out of the question, something has got to give somewhere.

 

[brogdale]

No, but the earnings cut off for repayment was just 16k. The fees have been raised, indeed raised sharply, but the cutoff for repayment has been raised too.

There is also the fact that in 2011 the annual national deficit was running higher than it is now. I'm certainly not just blaming HE for that, but it is a factor. Since reducing the size of the HE sector seems to be out of the question, something has got to give somewhere.

You can't even do this well Leslie.

 

[Pickman's model]

No, but the earnings cut off for repayment was just 16k. The fees have been raised, indeed raised sharply, but the cutoff for repayment has been raised too.

There is also the fact that in 2011 the annual national deficit was running higher than it is now. I'm certainly not just blaming HE for that, but it is a factor. Since reducing the size of the HE sector seems to be out of the question, something has got to give somewhere.

you're looking at it from the wrong point of view

 

[LeslieB]

You can't even do this well Leslie.

It's time to agree to disagree, isn't it?

 

[Pickman's model]

It's time to agree to disagree, isn't it?

don't see why, you just can't do it well and on that point there's no argument.

 

[brogdale]

It's time to agree to disagree, isn't it?

The most charitable interpretation of your posting rests upon profound ignorance of the topic of public debt.

 

[Pickman's model]

The most charitable interpretation of your posting rests upon profound ignorance of the topic of public debt.

not to mention the other motivations for the imposition of the vast fees.

 

[brogdale]

not to mention the other motivations for the imposition of the vast fees.

Yes; as I said 'most charitable'.
Most probable = (piss-poor) trolling.

 

[LeslieB]

Yes; as I said 'most charitable'.
Most probable = (piss-poor) trolling.

I'm not a troll, unless you consider anyone who doesn't agree with you to be a troll.......

 

[chilango]

Again, it's not the "not agreeing" it's the lack of substance to support the disagreement.

 

[two sheds]

No. I think it would be a good start though

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Documents/PCSTaxGap2014Full.pdf

The report suggests that the UK‟s tax gap may now be £122 billion a year. This is an increase from 2010 when PCS last commissioned Richard Murphy to estimate the tax gap.

It was estimated at that time, that the loss each year was £95 billion with £25billion of tax being owed at any time.It is now estimated that the annual loss has increased to a total of £122 billion a year.

The tax gap matters because at £122 billion a year the tax gap is only a little less than the annual budget for the NHS. It is also
big enough to cover the entire UK education budget with more than £20 billion left over.

(my emphasis)

That's with no extra taxes at all - only collecting what is owed. I understand the annual cost of reinstating student grants and abolishing tuition charges is 10 billion.

Could you explain again how 10 billion is larger than 120 billion?

 

[BigTom]

It's 9% of his earnings over 21k, as I'm sure you know.

To do everything some people on the left want to do would mean jacking income tax to 30% or more anyway.....note the basic rate of income tax was 29% or higher until 1987

kabbes has already shown quite thoroughly that all we'd need to do is not cut corporation tax from (iirc) 20% to 18% and instead raise it to 24%, leaving us with one of the lowest corp tax rates in Europe and £14bn/yr better off, covering the £10bn cost of free HE and leaving us with £4bn to spunk on coke, booze and hookers.

 

[LeslieB]

Could you explain again how 10 billion is larger than 120 billion?

No, I can't, because in the words of Dragons Den..."I'm out".

Gawd this board is brutal, even by the standards of the political blogosphere.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

No, I can't, because in the words of Dragons Den..."I'm out".

Gawd this board is brutal, even by the standards of the political blogosphere.

I'm not sure that being asked to respond to evidence re. tax rates and revenues is being 'brutal'. So rather than doing a 'Dragons Den', why not respond to the substantive points raised; if it means you have to change your mind then that's at worst a temporary discomfort...you might even enjoy it.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice