Stop the Cuts - National Demonstration

My point is that it is the politicians fault for pandering to them - i put the blame squarely on the shoulders of the parliament at teh time for being infective in the duty to the people of the nation by prioritising the needs of big business over teh needs of the nation as a whole.

The reality is its a tax dressed up as a fee

They are different things. Apples and oranges. One is on profit, the other is not. One is a fee, the other is a tax.

they aren't all that different. the money is still taken from you and goes in to the kitty.

My point is that it is the politicians fault for pandering to them - i put the blame squarely on the shoulders of the parliament at teh time for being infective in the duty to the people of the nation by prioritising the needs of big business over teh needs of the nation as a whole.

But only Labour. The Conservatives are done with pandering to big business. That's why corporate taxes and tax loop holes are on the top of the agenda.

Oh, wait.

i wasn't saying they were poor but that they would be significantly poorer in a lump sum way under the new CGT proposals.

Students however will have 9k per annum fees which can be paid off over a lifetime and only after earning above a 21k threshold.

I was just making the comparison. You were the one making spurious claims that the CGT people could afford tax advisors to get round the tax. I am disputing it.

So, official goverment figures would suggest that 0.4% of lower rate taxpayers (which is surprising although research suggests that many of these are spouses of higher rate taxpayers who've had assets registered in their name) and 3.1% of higher rate taxpayers pay CGT.

Are you seriously telling me that this small, and very rich, group are going to struggle?

they aren't all that different. the money is still taken from you and goes in to the kitty.

Taxes are progressive (usually), so reflect the amount of money you have earned for doing something (be it work, or make money from your other piles of money). If you make 10k a year, you will not be asked for 15k in taxes.

Fees are not progressive, they are required equally from everyone. Just because you don't have to pay that fee right away, and the person you owe the money to is happy to wait for it at an interest rate slightly above inflation (which, at last check, is what was proposed?), doesn't mean it's not a fee.

I'd much rather see, as someone who is done with fee-paying education, but not tax-paying life, an education system paid out of taxes.

So, official goverment figures would suggest that 0.4% of lower rate taxpayers (which is surprising although research suggests that many of these are spouses of higher rate taxpayers who've had assets registered in their name) and 3.1% of higher rate taxpayers pay CGT.

Are you seriously telling me that this small, and very rich, group are going to struggle?

I never said they would struggle. I just gave an example of a group who have also been targetted with a tax rise by the coalition to deal with the defecit. I mentioned that they had not been on the streets behaving like twats.

I never said they would struggle. I just gave an example of a group who have also been targetted with a tax rise by the coalition to deal with the defecit. I mentioned that they had not been on the streets behaving like twats.

Are we talking about the police now? Or students?

A serious question - what proportion of the average student's income does £6k per annum equate to? Do we have the same figure for those who pay CGT?

I think if we had those figures to hand then it would be pretty obvious why one group is protesting.

As fees rise, the proposed system approximates a graduate tax (Source).

Paid through taxes, not a graduate tax.

To be 100% honest, I think the proposed system of repayment is pretty great. I wish I had something similar on my £60k Canadian student debt. Instead it's treated like any other bill. The moment I'm 6 months out of school, interest and repayments begin.

I am not happy with the cuts, however, and I'm not happy with the middle-class knee-jerk reactionism to students getting pissed off.

This ^^.

Paid through taxes, not a graduate tax.

To be 100% honest, I think the proposed system of repayment is pretty great. I wish I had something similar on my £60k Canadian student debt. Instead it's treated like any other bill. The moment I'm 6 months out of school, interest and repayments begin.

I am not happy with the cuts, however, and I'm not happy with the middle-class knee-jerk reactionism to students getting pissed off.

mmm.... yes. this. Am also eager to see the libdems get shafted now.

To be honest, I'd be more pissed off if the students didn't kick off about it.

Are we talking about the police now? Or students?

A serious question - what proportion of the average student's income does £6k per annum equate to? Do we have the same figure for those who pay CGT?

I think if we had those figures to hand then it would be pretty obvious why one group is protesting.

The 6k (or 18k) needs to be viewed over the period of repayment. There is no relevant 'per annum' here.

They are being asked to pay 18k for an education of that will - in most cases - see them in better / higher paid jobs, this is of course option, no one is making higher education / fee paying mandatory.

This sum will be paid back when and if the graduates can afford to do so, not immediately, perhaps not for many years, in some case never, and when or if they do cross the threshold of earnings the repayments will in no way be demanded in full, but rather paid off over time in smaller instalments.

Presumably you'd use the same arguement for charging someone for the cost of a (non fatal) operation that would increase their future earning potential? Make something up, an eye operation or something, that they didn't have to have but was provided on the NHS and which improves their lives (and "society's" by allowing them to do a better job, pay more taxes, claim less benefits etc).

Should they pay for that, and should I object to paying since I didn't get any immediate benefit from it?

Presumably you'd use the same arguement for charging someone for the cost of a (non fatal) operation that would increase their future earning potential? Make something up, an eye operation or something, that they didn't have to have but was provided on the NHS and which improves their lives (and "society's" by allowing them to do a better job, pay more taxes, claim less benefits etc).

Should they pay for that, and should I object to paying since I didn't get any immediate benefit from it?

I think you are being silly now

Are we talking about the police now? Or students?

I was talking about the students in that instance but I think Guerillaphoto summed it up best with his first hand account saying that there were bad eggs on both sides.

How about teeth whitening.

I could do with that actually.

I think you are being silly now

Really, I didn't mean to be. Ignore it if it's ott.

Presumably you'd use the same arguement for charging someone for the cost of a (non fatal) operation that would increase their future earning potential?

No, your presumption is wrong.

I could do with that actually.

You've got teeth !? I'd love teeth.

Apparently I have to pay for teeth whitening the F*cking Maggie C*nts

You've got teeth !? I'd love teeth.

I have a set but they aren't very white and one tooth is particularly dark. I want them whitened but the coalition won't whiten them for ideological reasons.

No, your presumption is wrong.

OK - A levels (or schooling beyond 16). Not mandatory, but currently provided 'free'

no me neither

first dibs on the straw man if Tynan doesn't buy it