Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
I've carefully explained the rationale for removing the limits on bankers' bonuses. It's a matter of economics in our principal service industry, including the tax take.
https://obr.uk/box/tax-revenues-from...ancial-sector/
Attachment 30162
You, on the other hand (and one or two others), are taking the leftie's position of citing "wealth" and "greed" as reasons for not unshackling the economy.
|
I see no explanation, only support. You ignore the real risk of greed-based decision making in financial dealings. You are obviously not a student of history.
The fact that you equate making the wealthy wealthier to "unshackling the economy" says all you need to know about the current ERG-driven Conservative thinking.
---------- Post added at 15:06 ---------- Previous post was at 15:00 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
The theory, at textbook level, is sound. But in practice if they're at the roulette wheel knowing the taxpayer will fundamentally back their losses - "too big to fail" - the situation necessitates tighter regulation.
If they're genuinely at the roulette wheel with their own money (no laughing at the back, please) then fair enough. Good luck to them, so long as they pay the appropriate tax of course.
|
And there is the sleight of hand. The effective tax rate for these wealthy individuals, when compared with us P.A.Y.E schmucks, is the key here:
https://www.lse.ac.uk/research/resea...ich-really-pay
Quote:
|
Using anonymised data from personal tax returns, we show that in 2015-16 the average rate of tax paid by people who received one million pounds in taxable income and gains was just 35 per cent: the same as someone earning £100,000. But one in four of these paid 45 per cent – close to the top rate – whilst another quarter paid less than 30 per cent overall. One in ten paid just 11 per cent—the same as someone earning £15,000. The rich, it seems, are not all in it together.
|
As I have said, they are laughing at us ...