On Monday, 4 July 2016 18:54:57 UTC+1, Andrew wrote:
On 03/07/2016 10:54, dennis@home wrote:
On 02/07/2016 21:11, Rod Speed wrote:


"James Wilkinson" wrote in message


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of about
£58bn per year.

From what?

Their income stream, pensions investments etc.

I pay tax from my pension and none of that pension comes from the state
so I am a net contributor ATM.

The group that is imposing the heaviest burden on the NHS is the 83+
group. This group doesn't have the generous pensions that the baby
boomers are getting.

But they have been working (mostly) and paid taxes most of thier lives some may have even fought in the war.

The state pension is worth about £244,000 per
person.

What do you mean by worth ?

Only the top 25% of taxpayers ever paid in enough tax and NI
(after deducting all the 'free' education and NHS that they received
when their kids were younger) to cover this total.

How was all this free.

If you are 0ver 65 then the state pension does come from the state.


There are others that are not net contributors like all the public
service/state pensioners where the pensions are paid out of taxes.

They all spend money to make the economy go though.

Older people like me spend more on trades as we just don't want to hand
dig drives and stuff like that any more.

Not if you are retired, receive a public service unfunded pension
and you have chosen to live elsewhere in the EU and spend your
UK taxpayer-provided largesse on another countries GDP.

Which is part of teh reason why Spain benifits from expats.


Lots do.
Even those fools who live in Spain and have just the UK state pension
and winter heating allowance, are boosting the Spanish economy, even
if they only eat in 'British egg'n'chip parlours'.


But iof someone arrives in the UK tomorrow then how much have they contributed to the NHS or schools a in their own country and B in to the UK ?

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks' fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
The group that is imposing the heaviest burden on the NHS is the 83+
group. This group doesn't have the generous pensions that the baby
boomers are getting.

Any more generalizations you can pluck out of thin air?

The state pension is worth about £244,000 per
person. Only the top 25% of taxpayers ever paid in enough tax and NI
(after deducting all the 'free' education and NHS that they received
when their kids were younger) to cover this total.
If you are 0ver 65 then the state pension does come from the state.

Given it isn't funded, the state pension has always been paid by those in
work and paying taxes, etc.

--
*42.7% of statistics are made up. Sorry, that should read 47.2% *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

You need to tell your favourite party that. Successive governments have
done everything in their power to produce artificially low income tax
rates. Indirect taxation, or 'fixed amount' seems to appeal more to the
great unwashed.

--
*I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2016-07-04, bert wrote:

[25 lines snipped]

Well until it was raided by GB the NI Pension Fund had a surplus of some
£50bn and rising.

There is no "NI Pension Fund".

It's got pension in the name. Good enough for bert.



-

--
*Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are (usually) unnecessary *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 14:32:35 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Well until it was raided by GB the NI Pension Fund had a surplus of
some £50bn and rising.

There is no "NI Pension Fund".

It's got pension in the name. Good enough for bert.

Close enough, but still no banana.

There IS a National Insurance Fund.

But it doesn't have "pension" in the name, doesn't pay pensions, and has
run a mild deficit the last couple of financial years - £2.3bn deficit on
£93bn turnover, for FY2014-15. There's a balance of about £21bn, which is
down from a much higher balance largely due to 2012 accounting changes
refining previous assumptions, not "raids" by anybody.

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...tachment_data/
file/472142/
National_Insurance_Fund_Accounts_Great_Britain_201 4_to_2015.pdf

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.g...203407/http://
http://www.gad.gov.uk/Documents/Soci...eport_2012.pdf

On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:05:17 +0100, Andrew wrote:

On 03/07/2016 21:50, bert wrote:
In article , James Wilkinson
writes
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:24:50 +0100, bert wrote:


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of about
£58bn per year.

From what? They don't work.
http://www.goldagepensioners.com/research


Employers NI is no longer paid once you reach state pension age,
even if you keep on working. Since NI is just tax with a
cuddly name (and has been for decades), this loophole should be
shut.

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

Agreed. In fact ALL taxes should be in income tax. Apart from being fairer, there would be so much less paperwork for businesses and the tax office.

--
Microsoft: This company has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks' fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double negative, not nohow.

--
Confucius say man with hole in pocket feel cocky all day.

In article . com,
lid writes
On 04/07/2016 20:48, bert wrote:
In article , Andrew
writes
On 03/07/2016 10:54, dennis@home wrote:
On 02/07/2016 21:11, Rod Speed wrote:


"James Wilkinson" wrote in message


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of about
£58bn per year.

From what?

Their income stream, pensions investments etc.

I pay tax from my pension and none of that pension comes from the state
so I am a net contributor ATM.

The group that is imposing the heaviest burden on the NHS is the 83+
group. This group doesn't have the generous pensions that the baby
boomers are getting. The state pension is worth about £244,000 per
person. Only the top 25% of taxpayers ever paid in enough tax and NI
(after deducting all the 'free' education and NHS that they received
when their kids were younger) to cover this total.
If you are 0ver 65 then the state pension does come from the state.
Well until it was raided by GB the NI Pension Fund had a surplus of some
£50bn and rising.

There is no fund, NI is just a tax like income tax.



There are others that are not net contributors like all the public
service/state pensioners where the pensions are paid out of taxes.

They all spend money to make the economy go though.

Older people like me spend more on trades as we just don't want to hand
dig drives and stuff like that any more.

Not if you are retired, receive a public service unfunded pension
and you have chosen to live elsewhere in the EU and spend your
UK taxpayer-provided largesse on another countries GDP. Lots do.
Even those fools who live in Spain and have just the UK state pension
and winter heating allowance, are boosting the Spanish economy, even
if they only eat in 'British egg'n'chip parlours'.

The pension paid to state employees is totally different to the State
Pension.

Only in that it is more.
They both are paid out of tax and not from investments.


The state pension fund used to be invested in gilts on which it earned
interest and which it could sell in the open market as and when
conditions were right. However in order to steal it without technically
acting illegally GB transferred it to an account with the Commissioner
for national Debt which meant it effectively disappeared.
--
bert

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Andrew wrote

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with proper
bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

You need to tell your favourite party that. Successive governments have
done everything in their power to produce artificially low income tax
rates. Indirect taxation, or 'fixed amount' seems to appeal more to the
great unwashed.

The real reason high taxing govts like all of those in europe have
both is because there is no other way to raise enough tax revenue
and because other than income tax is harder to avoid.

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:05:17 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 03/07/2016 21:50, bert wrote:
In article , James Wilkinson
writes
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:24:50 +0100, bert wrote:


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of about
£58bn per year.

From what? They don't work.
http://www.goldagepensioners.com/research


Employers NI is no longer paid once you reach state pension age,
even if you keep on working. Since NI is just tax with a
cuddly name (and has been for decades), this loophole should be
shut.

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

Agreed. In fact ALL taxes should be in income tax.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Makes a lot more sense to pay for roads using a tax on the fuel etc.

Apart from being fairer,

Even sillier than you usually manage.

there would be so much less paperwork for businesses and the tax office.

But is trivially easy to avoid showing any income, particularly with
businesses.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 23:17:36 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:05:17 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 03/07/2016 21:50, bert wrote:
In article , James Wilkinson
writes
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:24:50 +0100, bert wrote:


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of about
£58bn per year.

From what? They don't work.
http://www.goldagepensioners.com/research


Employers NI is no longer paid once you reach state pension age,
even if you keep on working. Since NI is just tax with a
cuddly name (and has been for decades), this loophole should be
shut.

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

Agreed. In fact ALL taxes should be in income tax.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Makes a lot more sense to pay for roads using a tax on the fuel etc.

No, because that's twice as much trouble to collect. Those that are richer will also be spending more, so everyone pays more of every tax anyway.

Apart from being fairer,

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Why do you believe it's not fair? All tax based n the ability to pay.

there would be so much less paperwork for businesses and the tax office.

But is trivially easy to avoid showing any income, particularly with
businesses.

Most people aren't a business.

--
WinError: Unable to exit Windows. Try the door.

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 23:17:36 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:05:17 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 03/07/2016 21:50, bert wrote:
In article , James Wilkinson
writes
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:24:50 +0100, bert wrote:


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of
about
£58bn per year.

From what? They don't work.
http://www.goldagepensioners.com/research


Employers NI is no longer paid once you reach state pension age,
even if you keep on working. Since NI is just tax with a
cuddly name (and has been for decades), this loophole should be
shut.

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

Agreed. In fact ALL taxes should be in income tax.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Makes a lot more sense to pay for roads using a tax on the fuel etc.

No, because that's twice as much trouble to collect.

It costs **** all to collect when its done on at the wholesale/refinery
level.

Those that are richer will also be spending more,

But none of that spending will be taxed at all with just an income
tax and the richer wont be paying any income tax either because
it is so easy for them to avoid showing any income.

so everyone pays more of every tax anyway.

Not with JUST an income tax which so many can avoid paying completely.

Apart from being fairer,

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Why do you believe it's not fair?

Because it is so easy for the richer to avoid showing any income.

Much harder for the average wags slave to do that.

And it makes no sense for those whose entire income
is benefits to be paying income tax on what they receive
from the govt because that is in one pocket and straight
of the other.

All tax based n the ability to pay.

Not even possible with income tax.

there would be so much less paperwork for businesses and the tax office.

But is trivially easy to avoid showing any income, particularly with
businesses.

Most people aren't a business.

But you don't need to be a business to avoid showing any income.

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
**** snipped

If you put pasta shells to your ear, can you hear the soup?

On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks' fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo say it doesnlt exist ?



--
Confucius say man with hole in pocket feel cocky all day.

In article , Huge
writes
On 2016-07-05, bert wrote:
In article . com,
lid writes
On 04/07/2016 20:48, bert wrote:
In article , Andrew
writes
On 03/07/2016 10:54, dennis@home wrote:
On 02/07/2016 21:11, Rod Speed wrote:


"James Wilkinson" wrote in message


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of about
£58bn per year.

From what?

Their income stream, pensions investments etc.

I pay tax from my pension and none of that pension comes from the state
so I am a net contributor ATM.

The group that is imposing the heaviest burden on the NHS is the 83+
group. This group doesn't have the generous pensions that the baby
boomers are getting. The state pension is worth about £244,000 per
person. Only the top 25% of taxpayers ever paid in enough tax and NI
(after deducting all the 'free' education and NHS that they received
when their kids were younger) to cover this total.
If you are 0ver 65 then the state pension does come from the state.
Well until it was raided by GB the NI Pension Fund had a surplus of some
£50bn and rising.

There is no fund, NI is just a tax like income tax.



There are others that are not net contributors like all the public
service/state pensioners where the pensions are paid out of taxes.

They all spend money to make the economy go though.

Older people like me spend more on trades as we just don't want to hand
dig drives and stuff like that any more.

Not if you are retired, receive a public service unfunded pension
and you have chosen to live elsewhere in the EU and spend your
UK taxpayer-provided largesse on another countries GDP. Lots do.
Even those fools who live in Spain and have just the UK state pension
and winter heating allowance, are boosting the Spanish economy, even
if they only eat in 'British egg'n'chip parlours'.

The pension paid to state employees is totally different to the State
Pension.

Only in that it is more.
They both are paid out of tax and not from investments.


The state pension fund ...

... doesn't exist.


Whatever.
--
bert

On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 12:30:36 +0100, whisky-dave wrote:

On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks' fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo say it doesnlt exist ?

I can't, that's why you CAN disprove it.

--
I never wanted to believe that my Dad was stealing from his job as a road worker. But when I got home, all the signs were there.

On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 02:06:13 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 23:17:36 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:05:17 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 03/07/2016 21:50, bert wrote:
In article , James Wilkinson
writes
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:24:50 +0100, bert wrote:


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of
about
£58bn per year.

From what? They don't work.
http://www.goldagepensioners.com/research


Employers NI is no longer paid once you reach state pension age,
even if you keep on working. Since NI is just tax with a
cuddly name (and has been for decades), this loophole should be
shut.

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

Agreed. In fact ALL taxes should be in income tax.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Makes a lot more sense to pay for roads using a tax on the fuel etc.

No, because that's twice as much trouble to collect.

It costs **** all to collect when its done on at the wholesale/refinery
level.

********. Every single business in the UK is having to do paperwork. And the tax office is having to process it and check for cheating.

Those that are richer will also be spending more,

But none of that spending will be taxed at all with just an income tax

They already paid the tax when they earned the money.

and the richer wont be paying any income tax either because
it is so easy for them to avoid showing any income.

Then close the loopholes.

Apart from being fairer,

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Why do you believe it's not fair?

Because it is so easy for the richer to avoid showing any income.

Much harder for the average wags slave to do that.

And it makes no sense for those whose entire income
is benefits to be paying income tax on what they receive
from the govt because that is in one pocket and straight
of the other.

They'd be below the lowest income tax bracket, as they currently are. And with my scheme, they'd stop having to pay VAT on stuff (which is as you said, is in one pocket and straight off the other.")

All tax based n the ability to pay.

Not even possible with income tax.

It's the easiest way. How much do you earn? Then you pay x amount of tax.

there would be so much less paperwork for businesses and the tax office.

But is trivially easy to avoid showing any income, particularly with
businesses.

Most people aren't a business.

But you don't need to be a business to avoid showing any income.

Don't they have PAYE in Australia?

--
Is an infirmary a place for people who can't get it up?

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave
wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks' fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo say it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists that go on it.

On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave
wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks' fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo say it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists that go on it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints. So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff, because they'll be adult height in that country.

--
My younger sister was having one of her first gynecological appointments and she had some questions for the doctor.
"Doctor" she asked, "I can't ask my parents, They would kill me but my boyfriend wants to have anal sex. I don't know what to tell him, I mean I don't know anything about it. Can I get pregnant?"
The kindly old doctor smiled whimsically and replied "Of course, you can my dear. Where do you think lawyers come from?"

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 02:06:13 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 23:17:36 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:05:17 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 03/07/2016 21:50, bert wrote:
In article , James Wilkinson
writes
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:24:50 +0100, bert
wrote:


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of
about
£58bn per year.

From what? They don't work.
http://www.goldagepensioners.com/research


Employers NI is no longer paid once you reach state pension age,
even if you keep on working. Since NI is just tax with a
cuddly name (and has been for decades), this loophole should be
shut.

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

Agreed. In fact ALL taxes should be in income tax.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Makes a lot more sense to pay for roads using a tax on the fuel etc.

No, because that's twice as much trouble to collect.

It costs **** all to collect when its done on at the wholesale/refinery
level.

********. Every single business in the UK is having to do paperwork.

And wouldn't have to if it was charged at the wholesale/refinery level.

And the paperwork is completely automatic
anyway, that's what we have computers for.

And the tax office is having to process it and check for cheating.

Trivially easy to do that when done at the wholesale/refinery level.

Those that are richer will also be spending more,

But none of that spending will be taxed at all with just an income tax

They already paid the tax when they earned the money.

Not when they show no income they don't.

and the richer wont be paying any income tax either because
it is so easy for them to avoid showing any income.

Then close the loopholes.

Not even possible.

Apart from being fairer,

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Why do you believe it's not fair?

Because it is so easy for the richer to avoid showing any income.

Much harder for the average wags slave to do that.

And it makes no sense for those whose entire income
is benefits to be paying income tax on what they receive
from the govt because that is in one pocket and straight
of the other.

They'd be below the lowest income tax bracket, as they currently are.

So they pay no tax at all and use most of the services
that govt provides. What is fair about that. With the
current system they do pay tax on what they consume.

And with my scheme, they'd stop having to pay VAT on stuff (which is as
you said, is in one pocket and straight off the other.")

So they wouldn't pay a penny in tax but are main users of govt services.

What is fair about that ?

All tax based n the ability to pay.

Not even possible with income tax.

It's the easiest way. How much do you earn? Then you pay x amount of
tax.

But so easy to claim you don't earn anything and pay no tax at all with the
rich.

Nothing even remotely like fair about that.

there would be so much less paperwork for businesses and the tax
office.

But is trivially easy to avoid showing any income, particularly with
businesses.

Most people aren't a business.

But you don't need to be a business to avoid showing any income.

Don't they have PAYE in Australia?

Corse we do, but the rich don't pay it, just like there. You
seriously believe that Liz and Phil and Big Ears pay PAYE ?

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave
wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo say it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists that go on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff, because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:05:46 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave
wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo say it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists that go on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

Average Chinese height = 5 ft 7
Average British height = 5 ft 9
Average Australian height = 5 ft 9
Average American height = 5 ft 10

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff, because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

I'm British, not American.

--
Joey's teacher sent a note home to his Mother saying, "Joey seems to be a very bright boy, but spends too much of his time thinking about sex and girls."
The Mother wrote back the next day, "If you find a solution, please advise. I have the same problem with his Father."

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:05:46 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave

wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo say
it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists that go
on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

Average Chinese height = 5 ft 7
Average British height = 5 ft 9
Average Australian height = 5 ft 9
Average American height = 5 ft 10

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff,
because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

I'm British, not American.

Most british kids are obese.

In the stories of Jesus (Peace be upon him!) [we read], "When you see
a young man smitten with the search after God (Exalted is He!), then
that has engrossed him to the neglect of everything else."

On Thu, 07 Jul 2016 01:26:26 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:05:46 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave

wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo say
it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists that go
on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

Average Chinese height = 5 ft 7
Average British height = 5 ft 9
Average Australian height = 5 ft 9
Average American height = 5 ft 10

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff,
because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

I'm British, not American.

Most british kids are obese.

Around here I'd say about 1 in 100 are obese, 2 in 100 are podgy, and the rest are skinny.
For adults, perhaps 2 and 4 in 100.

--
Reality is for people who can't handle alcohol and joints.

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 07 Jul 2016 01:26:26 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:05:46 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave

wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo
say
it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists that go
on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

Average Chinese height = 5 ft 7
Average British height = 5 ft 9
Average Australian height = 5 ft 9
Average American height = 5 ft 10

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff,
because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

I'm British, not American.

Most british kids are obese.

Around here I'd say about 1 in 100 are obese,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

2 in 100 are podgy,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

and the rest are skinny.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

LMFAO

On Sat, 09 Jul 2016 01:50:05 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 07 Jul 2016 01:26:26 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:05:46 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave

wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back. Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo
say
it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists that go
on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

Average Chinese height = 5 ft 7
Average British height = 5 ft 9
Average Australian height = 5 ft 9
Average American height = 5 ft 10

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff,
because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

I'm British, not American.

Most british kids are obese.

Around here I'd say about 1 in 100 are obese,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

2 in 100 are podgy,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

and the rest are skinny.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

I'm here, you're not. You don't know what people are like here.

--
Police cordoned off Liverpool City Centre this morning when a suspicious object was discovered in a car.
It later turned out to be a tax disc.

On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:01:00 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 02:06:13 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 23:17:36 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:05:17 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 03/07/2016 21:50, bert wrote:
In article , James Wilkinson
writes
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:24:50 +0100, bert
wrote:


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of
about
£58bn per year.

From what? They don't work.
http://www.goldagepensioners.com/research


Employers NI is no longer paid once you reach state pension age,
even if you keep on working. Since NI is just tax with a
cuddly name (and has been for decades), this loophole should be
shut.

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

Agreed. In fact ALL taxes should be in income tax.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Makes a lot more sense to pay for roads using a tax on the fuel etc.

No, because that's twice as much trouble to collect.

It costs **** all to collect when its done on at the wholesale/refinery
level.

********. Every single business in the UK is having to do paperwork.

And wouldn't have to if it was charged at the wholesale/refinery level..

And the paperwork is completely automatic
anyway, that's what we have computers for.

Ask any business how much hassle VAT, wage taxes, etc, etc is.

And the tax office is having to process it and check for cheating.

Trivially easy to do that when done at the wholesale/refinery level.

Funny how VAT isn't done like that. The shop I buy a loaf of bread at has to deal with VAT.

Those that are richer will also be spending more,

But none of that spending will be taxed at all with just an income tax

They already paid the tax when they earned the money.

Not when they show no income they don't.

They must have got the money from somewhere. They earned that money when they were younger.

and the richer wont be paying any income tax either because
it is so easy for them to avoid showing any income.

Then close the loopholes.

Not even possible.

Very easy to find out how much someone is earning. And if they have a luxury yacht and claim they get minimum wage, they're lying, throw them in jail.

Apart from being fairer,

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Why do you believe it's not fair?

Because it is so easy for the richer to avoid showing any income.

Much harder for the average wags slave to do that.

And it makes no sense for those whose entire income
is benefits to be paying income tax on what they receive
from the govt because that is in one pocket and straight
of the other.

They'd be below the lowest income tax bracket, as they currently are.

So they pay no tax at all and use most of the services
that govt provides. What is fair about that. With the
current system they do pay tax on what they consume.

As you said that's pointless. If there was no VAT on what they consume, the government could give them less benefits. The government gives them extra so they can give it back in VAT.

there would be so much less paperwork for businesses and the tax
office.

But is trivially easy to avoid showing any income, particularly with
businesses.

Most people aren't a business.

But you don't need to be a business to avoid showing any income.

Don't they have PAYE in Australia?

Corse we do, but the rich don't pay it, just like there. You
seriously believe that Liz and Phil and Big Ears pay PAYE ?

You're talking about the minority. And a small number of people can be investigated easily.

--
Why isn;t the apostrophe next to the L? Who ever uses the semicolon???

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 09 Jul 2016 01:50:05 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 07 Jul 2016 01:26:26 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:05:46 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave

wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back.
Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled
by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own
double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo
say
it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists that
go
on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

Average Chinese height = 5 ft 7
Average British height = 5 ft 9
Average Australian height = 5 ft 9
Average American height = 5 ft 10

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff,
because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

I'm British, not American.

Most british kids are obese.

Around here I'd say about 1 in 100 are obese,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

2 in 100 are podgy,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

and the rest are skinny.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

I'm here, you're not.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that we do have these funky things called video
cameras and the net now and even can get real
radical and measure kids too.

You don't know what people are like here.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:01:00 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 02:06:13 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 23:17:36 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:05:17 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 03/07/2016 21:50, bert wrote:
In article , James Wilkinson
writes
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:24:50 +0100, bert
wrote:


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of
about
£58bn per year.

From what? They don't work.
http://www.goldagepensioners.com/research


Employers NI is no longer paid once you reach state pension age,
even if you keep on working. Since NI is just tax with a
cuddly name (and has been for decades), this loophole should be
shut.

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

Agreed. In fact ALL taxes should be in income tax.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Makes a lot more sense to pay for roads using a tax on the fuel etc.

No, because that's twice as much trouble to collect.

It costs **** all to collect when its done on at the wholesale/refinery
level.

********. Every single business in the UK is having to do paperwork.

And wouldn't have to if it was charged at the wholesale/refinery level.

And the paperwork is completely automatic
anyway, that's what we have computers for.

Ask any business how much hassle VAT, wage taxes, etc, etc is.

They just don't like paying the inland revenue what they owe.

And the tax office is having to process it and check for cheating.

Trivially easy to do that when done at the wholesale/refinery level.

Funny how VAT isn't done like that.

Because you lot are too stupid to do it that way.

The shop I buy a loaf of bread at has to deal with VAT.

Even you should have noticed that car engines don't
work too well when you use bread in the petrol tank.

Those that are richer will also be spending more,

But none of that spending will be taxed at all with just an income tax

They already paid the tax when they earned the money.

Not when they show no income they don't.

They must have got the money from somewhere. They earned that money when
they were younger.

Doesn't mean it was taxable income then either.

and the richer wont be paying any income tax either because
it is so easy for them to avoid showing any income.

Then close the loopholes.

Not even possible.

Very easy to find out how much someone is earning.

Then you can tell us how much Soros is earning.

And if they have a luxury yacht and claim they get minimum wage, they're
lying, throw them in jail.

Not possible to throw them in jail without proving
that that luxury yacht actually belongs to them and
that some foreigner hasn't just let them use it.

Apart from being fairer,

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Why do you believe it's not fair?

Because it is so easy for the richer to avoid showing any income.

Much harder for the average wags slave to do that.

And it makes no sense for those whose entire income
is benefits to be paying income tax on what they receive
from the govt because that is in one pocket and straight
of the other.

They'd be below the lowest income tax bracket, as they currently are.

So they pay no tax at all and use most of the services
that govt provides. What is fair about that. With the
current system they do pay tax on what they consume.

As you said that's pointless. If there was no VAT on what they consume,
the government could give them less benefits. The government gives them
extra so they can give it back in VAT.

But when most fresh food is VAT free, not even possible
to work out how much VAT they will be paying.

there would be so much less paperwork for businesses and the tax
office.

But is trivially easy to avoid showing any income, particularly with
businesses.

Most people aren't a business.

But you don't need to be a business to avoid showing any income.

Don't they have PAYE in Australia?

Corse we do, but the rich don't pay it, just like there. You
seriously believe that Liz and Phil and Big Ears pay PAYE ?

You're talking about the minority.

Still unfair that they pay no tax under your hare brained scheme.

And a small number of people can be investigated easily.

Fat lot of good investigating them is when they have no income.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 22:39:27 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:01:00 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 02:06:13 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 23:17:36 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:05:17 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 03/07/2016 21:50, bert wrote:
In article , James Wilkinson
writes
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:24:50 +0100, bert
wrote:


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of
about
£58bn per year.

From what? They don't work.
http://www.goldagepensioners.com/research


Employers NI is no longer paid once you reach state pension age,
even if you keep on working. Since NI is just tax with a
cuddly name (and has been for decades), this loophole should be
shut.

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

Agreed. In fact ALL taxes should be in income tax.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Makes a lot more sense to pay for roads using a tax on the fuel etc.

No, because that's twice as much trouble to collect.

It costs **** all to collect when its done on at the wholesale/refinery
level.

********. Every single business in the UK is having to do paperwork.

And wouldn't have to if it was charged at the wholesale/refinery level.

And the paperwork is completely automatic
anyway, that's what we have computers for.

Ask any business how much hassle VAT, wage taxes, etc, etc is.

They just don't like paying the inland revenue what they owe.

I'm talking about the time taken.

And the tax office is having to process it and check for cheating.

Trivially easy to do that when done at the wholesale/refinery level.

Funny how VAT isn't done like that.

Because you lot are too stupid to do it that way.

VAT is stupid done any way.

The shop I buy a loaf of bread at has to deal with VAT.

Even you should have noticed that car engines don't
work too well when you use bread in the petrol tank.

Where did I say car? VAT is on everything, not just fuel.

Those that are richer will also be spending more,

But none of that spending will be taxed at all with just an income tax

They already paid the tax when they earned the money.

Not when they show no income they don't.

They must have got the money from somewhere. They earned that money when
they were younger.

Doesn't mean it was taxable income then either.

And your point is?

and the richer wont be paying any income tax either because
it is so easy for them to avoid showing any income.

Then close the loopholes.

Not even possible.

Very easy to find out how much someone is earning.

Then you can tell us how much Soros is earning.

Very easy for someone in the tax department to find out.

And if they have a luxury yacht and claim they get minimum wage, they're
lying, throw them in jail.

Not possible to throw them in jail without proving
that that luxury yacht actually belongs to them and
that some foreigner hasn't just let them use it.

****ing obvious when someone is rich.

Apart from being fairer,

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Why do you believe it's not fair?

Because it is so easy for the richer to avoid showing any income.

Much harder for the average wags slave to do that.

And it makes no sense for those whose entire income
is benefits to be paying income tax on what they receive
from the govt because that is in one pocket and straight
of the other.

They'd be below the lowest income tax bracket, as they currently are.

So they pay no tax at all and use most of the services
that govt provides. What is fair about that. With the
current system they do pay tax on what they consume.

As you said that's pointless. If there was no VAT on what they consume,
the government could give them less benefits. The government gives them
extra so they can give it back in VAT.

But when most fresh food is VAT free, not even possible
to work out how much VAT they will be paying.

You don't need to. You give them enough to live on, and that can be calculated easily.

there would be so much less paperwork for businesses and the tax
office.

But is trivially easy to avoid showing any income, particularly with
businesses.

Most people aren't a business.

But you don't need to be a business to avoid showing any income.

Don't they have PAYE in Australia?

Corse we do, but the rich don't pay it, just like there. You
seriously believe that Liz and Phil and Big Ears pay PAYE ?

You're talking about the minority.

Still unfair that they pay no tax under your hare brained scheme.

If they already don't, then my scheme is no worse.

And a small number of people can be investigated easily.

Fat lot of good investigating them is when they have no income.

If someone has no income, they shouldn't be paying tax.

--
Love conquers all, except in tennis.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 22:28:07 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 09 Jul 2016 01:50:05 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Thu, 07 Jul 2016 01:26:26 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:05:46 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave

wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back.
Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading controlled
by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own
double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can yuo
say
it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists that
go
on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

Average Chinese height = 5 ft 7
Average British height = 5 ft 9
Average Australian height = 5 ft 9
Average American height = 5 ft 10

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff,
because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

I'm British, not American.

Most british kids are obese.

Around here I'd say about 1 in 100 are obese,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

2 in 100 are podgy,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

and the rest are skinny.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

I'm here, you're not.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that we do have these funky things called video
cameras and the net now and even can get real
radical and measure kids too.

But you can't measure ours as you're over there.

Anyway it's illegal to measure kids - as the police found out when they wanted to check people had the right child seats. Measuring them involves touching them which is apparently sexual assault.

You don't know what people are like here.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

I am here, you are there, I can see what people are like, you cannot.

--
It said, "Insert disk #3," but only two will fit!

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 22:39:27 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:01:00 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 02:06:13 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 23:17:36 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:05:17 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 03/07/2016 21:50, bert wrote:
In article , James Wilkinson
writes
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 23:24:50 +0100, bert
wrote:


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy
of
about
£58bn per year.

From what? They don't work.
http://www.goldagepensioners.com/research


Employers NI is no longer paid once you reach state pension age,
even if you keep on working. Since NI is just tax with a
cuddly name (and has been for decades), this loophole should be
shut.

It's high time that NI is merged with income tax, with
proper bands. THis would do away with all the nasty side-effects
of earning a bit more but ending up worse off. It would also
claw back some of the eye-wateringly excessive pensions that
14,000 retired civil servants are trousering. This group has
climbed the greasy pole and ended up with salaries of £100,000+
and in quite a few cases £200,000+ and are getting pensions of
£50,000+ per year. Many are still working yet once past 65 they
don't pay NI.

Agreed. In fact ALL taxes should be in income tax.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Makes a lot more sense to pay for roads using a tax on the fuel
etc.

No, because that's twice as much trouble to collect.

It costs **** all to collect when its done on at the
wholesale/refinery
level.

********. Every single business in the UK is having to do paperwork.

And wouldn't have to if it was charged at the wholesale/refinery level.

And the paperwork is completely automatic
anyway, that's what we have computers for.

Ask any business how much hassle VAT, wage taxes, etc, etc is.

They just don't like paying the inland revenue what they owe.

I'm talking about the time taken.

There is no time taken when its computerised.

And the tax office is having to process it and check for cheating.

Trivially easy to do that when done at the wholesale/refinery level.

Funny how VAT isn't done like that.

Because you lot are too stupid to do it that way.

VAT is stupid done any way.

Leaves income tax alone for dead.

The shop I buy a loaf of bread at has to deal with VAT.

Even you should have noticed that car engines don't
work too well when you use bread in the petrol tank.

Where did I say car? VAT is on everything,

Nope, plenty of stuff is VAT free.

not just fuel.

Those that are richer will also be spending more,

But none of that spending will be taxed at all with just an income
tax

They already paid the tax when they earned the money.

Not when they show no income they don't.

They must have got the money from somewhere. They earned that money
when
they were younger.

Doesn't mean it was taxable income then either.

And your point is?

That they don't pay any tax at all if there is just income tax.

Hardly fair that the richest pay no tax at all.

and the richer wont be paying any income tax either because
it is so easy for them to avoid showing any income.

Then close the loopholes.

Not even possible.

Very easy to find out how much someone is earning.

Then you can tell us how much Soros is earning.

Very easy for someone in the tax department to find out.

Nope, all they ever know is what he tells them, not what his real income is.

And if they have a luxury yacht and claim they get minimum wage, they're
lying, throw them in jail.

Not possible to throw them in jail without proving
that that luxury yacht actually belongs to them and
that some foreigner hasn't just let them use it.

****ing obvious when someone is rich.

Not with the worst of the scrooges it isnt.

Or even with someone like Buffet.

Apart from being fairer,

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Why do you believe it's not fair?

Because it is so easy for the richer to avoid showing any income.

Much harder for the average wags slave to do that.

And it makes no sense for those whose entire income
is benefits to be paying income tax on what they receive
from the govt because that is in one pocket and straight
of the other.

They'd be below the lowest income tax bracket, as they currently are.

So they pay no tax at all and use most of the services
that govt provides. What is fair about that. With the
current system they do pay tax on what they consume.

As you said that's pointless. If there was no VAT on what they consume,
the government could give them less benefits. The government gives them
extra so they can give it back in VAT.

But when most fresh food is VAT free, not even possible
to work out how much VAT they will be paying.

You don't need to. You give them enough to live on, and that can be
calculated easily.

Like hell it can when one of them cooks using
entirely VAT free ingredients and another only
ever eats fast food, currys, ready meals etc.

there would be so much less paperwork for businesses and the tax
office.

But is trivially easy to avoid showing any income, particularly
with
businesses.

Most people aren't a business.

But you don't need to be a business to avoid showing any income.

Don't they have PAYE in Australia?

Corse we do, but the rich don't pay it, just like there. You
seriously believe that Liz and Phil and Big Ears pay PAYE ?

You're talking about the minority.

Still unfair that they pay no tax under your hare brained scheme.

If they already don't, then my scheme is no worse.

With VAT and fuel taxes and grog excuse duty as
well as income tax, they are forced to pay some tax.

With your hare brained scheme they don't pay a penny.

And a small number of people can be investigated easily.

Fat lot of good investigating them is when they have no income.

If someone has no income, they shouldn't be paying tax.

When someone has a ****ing great swag of income like Soros has,
and pretends to have no income, he should be paying what he owes.

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 22:28:07 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 09 Jul 2016 01:50:05 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Thu, 07 Jul 2016 01:26:26 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:05:46 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave

wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson
wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back.
Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading
controlled
by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own
double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can
yuo
say
it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists
that
go
on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

Average Chinese height = 5 ft 7
Average British height = 5 ft 9
Average Australian height = 5 ft 9
Average American height = 5 ft 10

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff,
because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

I'm British, not American.

Most british kids are obese.

Around here I'd say about 1 in 100 are obese,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

2 in 100 are podgy,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

and the rest are skinny.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

I'm here, you're not.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that we do have these funky things called video
cameras and the net now and even can get real
radical and measure kids too.

But you can't measure ours as you're over there.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that someone does measure the kids over there.

Anyway it's illegal to measure kids

Must be why all those medical personnel are all in jail.

- as the police found out when they wanted to check people had the right
child seats. Measuring them involves touching them which is apparently
sexual assault.

Must be why all those medical personnel
and all the parents are all in jail.

You don't know what people are like here.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

I am here, you are there, I can see what people are like, you cannot.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that we do have these funky things called video
cameras and the net now and even can get real
radical and measure kids too.

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 20:34:26 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 22:28:07 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Sat, 09 Jul 2016 01:50:05 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Thu, 07 Jul 2016 01:26:26 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:05:46 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave

wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson
wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back.
Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading
controlled
by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own
double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can
yuo
say
it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists
that
go
on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

Average Chinese height = 5 ft 7
Average British height = 5 ft 9
Average Australian height = 5 ft 9
Average American height = 5 ft 10

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good stuff,
because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

I'm British, not American.

Most british kids are obese.

Around here I'd say about 1 in 100 are obese,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

2 in 100 are podgy,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

and the rest are skinny.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

I'm here, you're not.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that we do have these funky things called video
cameras and the net now and even can get real
radical and measure kids too.

But you can't measure ours as you're over there.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that someone does measure the kids over there.

You don't even have to measure them to notice that almost every single one around here isn't fat.

Anyway it's illegal to measure kids

Must be why all those medical personnel are all in jail.

Medicine lets you do anything. But our cops aren't immune to the law, which is quite funny.

- as the police found out when they wanted to check people had the right
child seats. Measuring them involves touching them which is apparently
sexual assault.

Must be why all those medical personnel
and all the parents are all in jail.

Parents aren't immune, they're jailing them all the time. Although it is funny when they take someone's kid away because they threw them out. Doh!

You don't know what people are like here.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

I am here, you are there, I can see what people are like, you cannot.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that we do have these funky things called video
cameras and the net now and even can get real
radical and measure kids too.

How many?

--
O'Hare Approach Control to a 747: "United 329 heavy, your traffic is a Fokker, one o'clock, three miles, Eastbound."
United 239: "Approach, I've always wanted to say this... I've got the little Fokker in sight."

"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 20:34:26 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 22:28:07 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Sat, 09 Jul 2016 01:50:05 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Thu, 07 Jul 2016 01:26:26 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:05:46 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:48:28 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 15:58:54 UTC+1, James Wilkinson
wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:40:24 +0100, whisky-dave

wrote:

On Monday, 4 July 2016 23:16:43 UTC+1, James Wilkinson
wrote:


Banks lent money to people who could never pay it back.
Banks'
fault.

At least that is true this is how the EU is heading
controlled
by
Germany.


Why is there no Disneyland China?
No one's tall enough to go on the good rides.

https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/

well at least this IS a factthat can't be disproved.

Maybe only the tourists go on it?

And you mean CAN be disproved. You got mixed up in your own
double
negative, not nohow.

How can you disprove it . The place exists. How as a fact can
yuo
say
it
doesnlt exist ?

It is trivial to disprove that it isn't just foreign tourists
that
go
on
it.

I guess they could have made the rides have smaller restraints.

Yeah, bet they did.

Average Chinese height = 5 ft 7
Average British height = 5 ft 9
Average Australian height = 5 ft 9
Average American height = 5 ft 10

So if we take kids over there, they can go on all the good
stuff,
because
they'll be adult height in that country.

Trouble is that they are so obese that they won't
be allowed on the good stuff for that reason.

I'm British, not American.

Most british kids are obese.

Around here I'd say about 1 in 100 are obese,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

2 in 100 are podgy,

More fool you, its much higher than that.

and the rest are skinny.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

I'm here, you're not.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that we do have these funky things called video
cameras and the net now and even can get real
radical and measure kids too.

But you can't measure ours as you're over there.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that someone does measure the kids over there.

You don't even have to measure them to notice that almost every single one
around here isn't fat.

https://www.google.com/search?q=fat+...tland&tbm=isch

Anyway it's illegal to measure kids

Must be why all those medical personnel are all in jail.

Medicine lets you do anything.

Must be why so many ended up in jail for
molesting the patients and killing them.

But our cops aren't immune to the law, which is quite funny.

I doubt too many are laughing in jail.

- as the police found out when they wanted to check people had the right
child seats. Measuring them involves touching them which is apparently
sexual assault.

Must be why all those medical personnel
and all the parents are all in jail.

Parents aren't immune, they're jailing them all the time.

Not every time they touch one of their kids when
putting them in the child seats in their cars they don't.

Although it is funny when they take someone's kid away because they threw
them out. Doh!

You don't know what people are like here.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

I am here, you are there, I can see what people are like, you cannot.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that we do have these funky things called video
cameras and the net now and even can get real
radical and measure kids too.

How many?

Almost all of them.

On 05/07/2016 12:35, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 4 July 2016 18:54:57 UTC+1, Andrew wrote:
On 03/07/2016 10:54, dennis@home wrote:
On 02/07/2016 21:11, Rod Speed wrote:


"James Wilkinson" wrote in message


Older people actually make a net contribution to the economy of about
£58bn per year.

From what?

Their income stream, pensions investments etc.

I pay tax from my pension and none of that pension comes from the state
so I am a net contributor ATM.

The group that is imposing the heaviest burden on the NHS is the 83+
group. This group doesn't have the generous pensions that the baby
boomers are getting.

But they have been working (mostly) and paid taxes most of thier lives some may have even fought in the war.

The state pension is worth about £244,000 per
person.

What do you mean by worth ?

Only the top 25% of taxpayers ever paid in enough tax and NI
(after deducting all the 'free' education and NHS that they received
when their kids were younger) to cover this total.

How was all this free.


Because the local authority never sent an invoice to the parents
showing what the cost of educating their kids was, and what the
individual parents contribution would be for the year ahead.
Ditto the NHS.