"Council" Tip policy?

Page 6 of 6  
"PoP" wrote | However, those without children will have an expectation that when | they grow old the state will provide either/both services and/or | pension in their old age.
I can assure you that I have very little expectation on that front :-(
Owain
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Mitchell wrote:

But that of course is patently unfair. Capital assets and no income? High council tax.
Low occupancy rate in large house? High tax.
4 kids in council semi, each one generating skads of shit, all being run here there and everywhere in the family cars, all using schools, hospitals, and just about every other council privided facility. bugger all tax.
Poll tax was far fairer. If it had been introduced gradually, it would have been a huge success.
There comes a pont where taxing people who appear to be wealthy (but have no income) and use virtually no resources, whilst letting those who abuse the free systems available for all they are worth, totally skews the market system in favour of....
...you've guessed it. A typical Labah Votah.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

That may well be true. We shall never know. The Government could just have shot poll tax rioters on sight, of course, to prevent London from being razed to the ground. Then they might have gained some wriggle room.

Which is why I am voting Liberal Democrat, as all sensible people will do at the next election.
MM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mitchell wrote:

But the LD idea of local income tax may well introduce its own problems. If you are a finance-aware Councillor on the Planning Committee you may decide that you'd much rather see a handful of seriously expensive executive houses built rather than lots of affordable flats for those on modest incomes. And as for sheltered housing for pensioners, no way! If mega-entrepreneur William Doors lets it be known that he'll move out of your Borough if PP for x is granted will you perhaps be influenced?
--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 12:21:16 +0000, Mike Mitchell

Hmm, this forum could get seriously derailed on this particular topic.
LD isn't on my consideration list for casting votes I'm afraid. They tend to talk too much common sense for them to be politically effective if they held office. Plus they seem to be a party which sees a political opportunity and bases policy on that, rather than have some fundamental urge to impose a political will.
Labour have confused many people with their adoption of the Tory mantle in many areas (...but still tax and spend). Tories have lost the plot entirely since 97, I guess they have found it difficult to oppose many ideas that they themselves would have been proud of. Perhaps Howard will make a difference to that - I certainly hope so!
PoP
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And this is good, why, exactly?

Blimey, a false assumption followed by a non sequitur.

And that's specious, too.
--
"The road to Paradise is through Intercourse."
The uk.transport FAQ; http://www.huge.org.uk/transport/FAQ.html
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2 Dec 2003 18:33:57 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@ukmisc.org.uk (Huge) wrote:

I didn't say it was good, but I recognise that it is better than nothing. It's no use using hindsight to suggest better ways way back then. We now have now to contend with (if that doesn't sound a bit too much like a Rumsfeld competition entry). The council tax has now become a problem because the increases have been excessive. If council tax rises over the past few years had been at or below inflation (below to indicate how successful authorities had been in getting value for money), then most people would have simply paid up and the general grumbling would have remained at a fairly low hum. However, the current crisis was brought to a head because a number of pensioners quite rightly decided to take a stand and complain about the huge increase in 2002/3, which followed other quite large increases in previous years. Thus the crisis is almost wholly of the Government's making, as are all the other problems it has failed to get to grips with since Blair came to power (and I willingly, though no longer proudly, admit to having been a Labour voter in 1997).

No, it not a false assumption GENERALLY speaking. Taken across the board, you have three choices for deciding how to levy council tax. (1) Everyone pays exactly the same. (2) Smaller properties pay a larger proportion. (3) Larger properties pay a larger proportion. Now, which of those do you think the public at large would be most content with, given that there was no time for any other alternative solution?
The decision taken, number 3, was unfair to some. But both (1) and (2) would have been unfairer to more. In a situation where you have to have both legs amputated, it's not ideal, but you're still better off than the guy next to you who had to have both arms removed as well and could thereafter only feature as a knight in a Monty Python movie.

And why is this? I'm sure you will be dying to tell me!
MM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Mitchell wrote:

I have to disagree.
Income is NOT related to asset value. What the council tax is, currently, is an asset tax.
Lets say you collect fine art. Your whole life is dedicated to it. Yiu have a million quids worth of pictures. The government decides that you should pay 3 grand a year in 'tax' on it.
Lets take the revrse. You are a 'traveller'. You use the roads, you dump rubbish where it pleases you. You use public toilets, and get free water from teh council. Your kids attend the local schools, you use the doctors and hospitals, You are constantly wasting police time, but you DON'T OWN A HOUSE. So you pay nothing towards any of it.
Provding a deep disconnect between those who pay and those who use, is a very dangerous ploy. Up to a point we accept a certain amount of it as a way of reducing the (equally socially dangerous) gap bteween rich and poor, but to extend it further to asset tax is to actually strike a blow at the heart of capitalism, the ability to acquire and hold without penalty capital assets.
We have seen this principle eroded, first by inheritance tax, that means that no one except the National Trust or a undying corportae body can own any of the great old houses. Then we had capital gains tax, that equated the selling of assets with private income. Except strangely in the case of ones own house...(too many votahs owner occupiers maybe?) ..and now council tax....based on someones estimate of what your house MIGHT be worth...but if you bought it 60 yars ago, and have no income at all, the government and council are going to force you to sell it because you can't afford the rates...
In an ageing population, asset rich and income poor, this is going to be as disastrous as the Poll Tax was.
Ofcourse, its all fitted in nicely with the Labour ideal of encouraging class consciousness, and taxcing anyone wioth any visible sign of having more dosh than the next man, ruinning it throgh teh government coffers, to both pay off tyeh votahs, and also to ensure that NOTHING gets dine EXCEPT bty the central government and its petty bureaucratic monions oin teh councils - and lest face it, which coubncils will NOT get extra funding, those in safe labour areas (bt low council tax rates) and those in tory strongholds who it will be argued can squeeze more from their constituents anyway. No, funds will go strictly to margiunal seats so as to buy the votes...and teh bandwagon of increase centralisation, incvreased bureacracy, and ever more of the (dominsihing, because no one will want to work for money anymore) GDP circulatimng through the central coffers.
In short, a countyry such as we almost had in teh 60's when anyone capable of contributing to anything buggered off to work in the states, helping it to become the No 1 economy in the world. Leaving this country to languish in strikes, whingeing, and quietly staggering downhill to the inevitable - Thatcherism.
Its about time teh voters woke up to the fact that neiher of the two major parties have ANY interest in the population of this country. One is trying to gain power to enforce a system of government that failed everywhere it has been tried, and the other is merely concerned with lining its own pockets and as many of the pockes of as few voters as is necessary to win the election.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I know I know I know I know I KNOW!!
But ! ! ! ! !
We are where we are. The reason why the public are up in arms about the council tax is PRIMARILY because of the huge increases.
Of course a fairer system would be possible, but that is not the main point at issue here right now. The main point is only that pensioners and other on low incomes cannot AFFORD to pay these excessive increases. Esoteric arguments about how the actual bands are calculated or allocated will not change this simple fact at all right now, though changes in future may well bring about a fairer system long term. The fact is, the council will be demanding a certain sum of money and if this is not paid, then the council tax payer is in default.
MM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Mitchell wrote:

Indeed.
Exactly. It is driving the elderly and retired straight into the tory vote.
Or lib dem vote.
Frankly I am not unhappy about that, as Labour seem nearly as corrupt and seriously more incompetent than the tories, and definitely more dangerous in their zeal to destroy anything that has worked for centuries, and replace it with yet more middle management office spik.
'The Office' bears a starling resemblance to the Labour party.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Even in corruption, Tories did tend to hold their hands up and say, fair cop, guv, when they'd been found out, whereas the Labour lot never do. They always weasel their way out of any accusation, viz that awful Margaret Hodge on Question Time last night. Look what it took to see of Stephen Byers!
This Government is nothing like I imagined a Labour government would be when I voted Labour in 1997. How the Blairites have totally changed (and lost) the ethos of the Labour movement. I voted Lib Dem last time and will do so next.
MM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

of non-taxpaying 16-year olds.
Get real - it was the SDP who kept Mrs T in power for so long (plus the political suicidal tendencies of Old Labour). If you don't like 'New' Labour then eat humble pie and vote for the Tories.

--
Andrew

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Shame you can't give them a negative vote, certainly preferable to having to vot4e for the opposition, and I'm sure the turnout would improve if 'none of the above' was an option.
--
Toby.

'One day son, all this will be finished'
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

[63 lines snipped]
Hear, hear. Well said, Sir.
--
"The road to Paradise is through Intercourse."
[email me at huge [at] huge [dot] org [dot] uk]
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.