Time to tax wealth - Covid cost Solution

Cuddlesworth

salonfire wrote: »

Gates started his work with a single computer.

To get where he is today, I'd say he was very productive indeed.

In 1968, Bill Gates wrote his first computer program in lakeside prep school. In 1968, Bill Gates was in a school with a computer and teachers willing to teach students how to use it.

In 1994 my school received a donation of computers but the computer room was closed for 3 years, as no teachers in school knew how to use one.

I watched the documentary and I really don't think people got the level of privilege that Bill Gates was born into.

Wealth is taxed on death anyway, with generous allowances for direct descendants, except in the US. Until then, wealth is subjective and near impossible to tax.

LeinsterDub

Shefwedfan wrote: »

SO lets give an example. IBM have 4000 people hired in Ireland.

Lets say across the company we take an average of 100k per employee(some earn more, some earn less). That means the majority will pay circa 50k taxs(thsats include car tax, LPT etc).

You increase by 1%, IBM get pi**ed and move out,. You have just taken 200 million tax out of the economy plus 200 million of wages which are spent in Ireland or saved in Ireland.

Sorry but how does it make sense to hit the american companies?

Plus you hit one, you hit all of them

Lets say we you increase by 1% and build a working housing system, IBM sees their wage bill decrease and are happy out

LeinsterDub

Shefwedfan wrote: »

You posted the exact same thing yesterday, I answered it then so I aint going to bother now

As I said then it's your agruement it's not for me be to keep it consistent

astrofool

Shefwedfan wrote: »

SO lets give an example. IBM have 4000 people hired in Ireland.

Lets say across the company we take an average of 100k per employee(some earn more, some earn less). That means the majority will pay circa 50k taxs(thsats include car tax, LPT etc).

You increase by 1%, IBM get pi**ed and move out,. You have just taken 200 million tax out of the economy plus 200 million of wages which are spent in Ireland or saved in Ireland.

Sorry but how does it make sense to hit the american companies?

Plus you hit one, you hit all of them

Perfect example was Facebook in the UK in recent years, on paper, they made ~£50m, they decided to issue shares to all employees to the value of £100m, meaning they actually made a loss that year, that could be offset in future years. Reality is that by giving that amount to the employees directly, they paid much more tax (via income tax) than they would have paid otherwise as corporation tax, yet the papers framed it as a tax dodge, evil corporation.

*numbers may not be accurate

krissovo

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Every company knows that tax rates are changable , this agruement is complete nonsense.

You clearly do not understand that business runs on stability, there are plenty of countries who would offer low rates of tax but due to their stability no major international company would invest there. Eastern Europe, South America & Africa are all victims and incidentally suffer true poverty.

LeinsterDub

ELM327 wrote: »

It's the "JSA, Hap, etc" that we need to reduce.

Ok fine , what's your solution that doesn't cause more poverty or hurt others (children) indirectly. What about UBI for example?

Shefwedfan

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Lets say we you increase by 1% and build a working housing system, IBM sees their wage bill decrease and are happy out

This just goes to show your ignorance on the subject, so best to leave it, no point discussing anymore.

ELM327

LeinsterDub wrote: »

So we can cut from the poorest but never even consider asking the rich to pay more?

Make no mistake, the neuveau riche on the lifetime dole are not "the poorest" by any stretch

Shefwedfan

astrofool wrote: »

Perfect example was Facebook in the UK in recent years, on paper, they made ~£50m, they decided to issue shares to all employees to the value of £100m, meaning they actually made a loss that year, that could be offset in future years. Reality is that by giving that amount to the employees directly, they paid much more tax (via income tax) than they would have paid otherwise as corporation tax, yet the papers framed it as a tax dodge, evil corporation.

*numbers may not be accurate

The unknown toll of course is the companies that depend on these MNC. I think it was raised about Dellk manufacturing that 3000 eggs or something like that was supplied to the plant. That was gone. SO it wasnt just Dell that was hit, it was all the jobs that are created because of those jobs....

ELM327

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Ok fine , what's your solution that doesn't cause more poverty or hurt others (children) indirectly. What about UBI for example?

UBI is the stupidest idea ever.


My solution is as follows.
Implement a blanket ban starting 1/1/21.
No lone parents allowance (find the other parent)for new claimants
No child benefit for new claimants, use the money to nationalize preschool/creche.
No hap for new claimants
Increase contributory pension while reducing non contributory, for new claimants
Increase disability allowance while requiring more stringent qualifications for new claimants
Increase JSB and reduce JSA, introduce a time limit for new claimants of 5 years.


Within 10 years you've cleaned up the system while not penalizing anyone currently paid.

LeinsterDub

krissovo wrote: »

You clearly do not understand that business runs on stability, there are plenty of countries who would offer low rates of tax but due to their stability no major international company would invest there. Eastern Europe, South America & Africa are all victims and incidentally suffer true poverty.

So raising corperation tax by 1% is going to turn ireland into a fail democracy? Well that's certainly one take I've not seen before

deceit

ELM327 wrote: »

No, you're left with a population that is self responsible and not relying on the country to fund their procreation.


Even stop it now, allow legacy claimants to be grandfathered in - but no new claims. Over time it will save money.

As for your "pennies" comment, my effective tax rate is above 33% for the last few years so it's a fair bit more than a few pennies.

My sister is one of these claimants. She has three kids and has had no interest in working as its a much easier life to do this. She worked for about 6 months in her life, she is in her mid 30's now.
Her partner who worked was able to quit work a few years ago hassle free, I offered him a job which he turned down earning middle income wages. Both live a decent quality of life most middle income workers would struggle for. They received a house from the council a few days ago also. In a lot of ways they have a better quality of life than those that work, they don't have to worry about putting a roof over their head, you've done that for them and they can spend as much time at home as they want (my sisters partner is a friend and is on here, I'm curious if he reads this would he reply).

The rich are not what destroys this country, making it more profitable to stay on the dole rather than doing a hard days work does.
New house, 3 year old car, latest mobiles all paid for by others that work on here and with this being a common thing, the dole bill becomes very expensive.
I moved to Germany as it is less like this as they reduce your dole if you refuse to work or do community service. In Germany it actually feels like you get something for your taxes.
Considering I'm on 75k and small tax base relatively speaking and moved so easily, imagine how easily more companies would move to Poland and Romania if we up our taxes.

Geuze

Here are some reading on wealth taxes:

https://www.oecd.org/publications/the-role-and-design-of-net-wealth-taxes-in-the-oecd-9789264290303-en.htm


https://taxfoundation.org/elizabeth-warren-wealth-tax-oecd/

https://taxfoundation.org/wealth-tax/

ELM327

deceit wrote: »

My sister is one of these claimants. She has three kids and has had no interest in working as its a much easier life to do this. She worked for about 6 months in her life, she is in her mid 30's now.
Her partner who worked was able to quit work a few years ago hassle free, I offered him a job which he turned down earning middle income wages. Both live a decent quality of life most middle income workers would struggle for. They received a house from the council a few days ago also. In a lot of ways they have a better quality of life than those that work, they don't have to worry about putting a roof over their head, you've done that for them and they can spend as much time at home as they want (my sisters partner is a friend and is on here, I'm curious if he reads this would he reply).

The rich are not what destroys this country, making it more profitable to stay on the dole rather than doing a hard days work does.
New house, 3 year old car, latest mobiles all paid for by others that work on here and with this being a common thing, the dole bill becomes very expensive.
I moved to Germany as it is less like this as they reduce your dole if you refuse to work or do community service. In Germany it actually feels like you get something for your taxes.
Considering I'm on 75k and moved so easily, imagine how easily more companies would move to Poland and Romania if we up our taxes.

That's funny. All the left leaning posters on this thread and elsewhere would tell me your sister doesnt exist.

KyussB

ELM327 wrote: »

Incentives funded by those who work, often against their volition, by redistribution of tax.



No no, just those that presumes to take money earned and give it to those who are bone idle

It is. That was my point.

You don't even know what you're replying to now - my post was the exact opposite of giving the unemployed free money - read what you're replying to instead of spewing out childish nonsense.

Geuze

Current OECD Countries with a Net Wealth Tax
Source: EY, Worldwide Estate and Inheritance Tax Guide

Country Rate Base

Belgium 0.15 percent

Average value of securities holdings if the value is greater than €500,000 ($543,000) per account holder.

Italy

0.2 percent for financial assets, 0.76 percent for real estate properties

Financial assets and real estate properties held abroad by Italian taxpayers.

Netherlands

0.58 percent to 1.68 percent (effective)

Net wealth excluding primary residence and substantial interests in companies. Part of the income tax.

Norway

0.7 percent at the municipality level and 0.15 percent at the national level

Fair market value of assets minus debt. Tax applies to value of wealth above NOK1.5 million ($171,100).

Spain

0.2 percent to 2.5 percent depending on the region

May differ depending on the region, but generally value of assets minus value of liabilities.

Switzerland

Varies depending on the Canton

LeinsterDub

astrofool wrote: »

Perfect example was Facebook in the UK in recent years, on paper, they made ~£50m, they decided to issue shares to all employees to the value of £100m, meaning they actually made a loss that year, that could be offset in future years. Reality is that by giving that amount to the employees directly, they paid much more tax (via income tax) than they would have paid otherwise as corporation tax, yet the papers framed it as a tax dodge, evil corporation.

*numbers may not be accurate

Company Share Option Plan
This gives you the option to buy up to £30,000 worth of shares at a fixed price.

You won’t pay Income Tax or National Insurance contributions on the difference between what you pay for the shares and what they’re actually worth.

You may have to pay Capital Gains Tax if you sell the shares.

https://www.gov.uk/tax-employee-share-schemes/company-share-option-plan

Free shares
Your employer can give you up to £3,600 of free shares in any tax year.

https://www.gov.uk/tax-employee-share-schemes/share-incentive-plans-sips

Geuze

KyussB wrote: »

The only solution to unemployment is a Job Guarantee - government acting as employer of last resort. Nothing else can permanently end unemployment.

Employ them all, build all the social and for-profit affordable housing (to make it self-financing) that the country needs, and begin overhauling our infrastructure and buildings etc. to eliminate climate changing emissions.

Solves unemployment (and thus the stupid arguments about dole scroungers), solves the housing crisis, begins solving our contribution to climate change, and solves the economic downturn we're heading into, by keeping the economy at Full Employment and Full Output.

These are reasonable ideas.

Rather than handing out JSA/DA/OPF forever, without question, offer the long-term unemployed paid work.

Yes, I agree.

I sometimes think that a true socialist would not agree with many aspects of SF / PBP, who call for higher welfare rates and "don't hassle the unemployed".

A true socialist does not want to see people wallow on long-term welfare.

LeinsterDub

ELM327 wrote: »

Make no mistake, the neuveau riche on the lifetime dole are not "the poorest" by any stretch

Awh the it's a wonderful life arguement. So easily countered with the then why don't you join them arguement

LeinsterDub

Shefwedfan wrote: »

This just goes to show your ignorance on the subject, so best to leave it, no point discussing anymore.

Awh , so you've no counter to my agruement so you take your toys and leave?

ELM327

KyussB wrote: »

You don't even know what you're replying to now - my post was the exact opposite of giving the unemployed free money - read what you're replying to instead of spewing out childish nonsense.

I'll leave it there with you, thanks.

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Awh the it's a wonderful life arguement. So easily countered with the then why don't you join them arguement

Once you've joined the rat race you can't join them. Unfortunately.

ELM327

ELM327 wrote: »

UBI is the stupidest idea ever.


My solution is as follows.
Implement a blanket ban starting 1/1/21.
No lone parents allowance (find the other parent)for new claimants
No child benefit for new claimants, use the money to nationalize preschool/creche.
No hap for new claimants
Increase contributory pension while reducing non contributory, for new claimants
Increase disability allowance while requiring more stringent qualifications for new claimants
Increase JSB and reduce JSA, introduce a time limit for new claimants of 5 years.


Within 10 years you've cleaned up the system while not penalizing anyone currently paid.

Any one on the socialist left side care to address my suggestions?
We're often told "you dont propose anything other than killing the dolers", but yet when a workable solution is presented apparently it gets ignored. Can't hurl from the ditches anymore huh

LeinsterDub

ELM327 wrote: »

I'll leave it there with you, thanks.

Once you've joined the rat race you can't join them. Unfortunately.

Of course you can, quit your job , stop paying your mortage , start pumping out those kids, you'll be happy as larry appartently

LeinsterDub

ELM327 wrote: »

UBI is the stupidest idea ever.


My solution is as follows.
Implement a blanket ban starting 1/1/21.
No lone parents allowance (find the other parent)for new claimants
No child benefit for new claimants, use the money to nationalize preschool/creche.
No hap for new claimants
Increase contributory pension while reducing non contributory, for new claimants
Increase disability allowance while requiring more stringent qualifications for new claimants
Increase JSB and reduce JSA, introduce a time limit for new claimants of 5 years.


Within 10 years you've cleaned up the system while not penalizing anyone currently paid.

What is your issue with UBI?
So your solution is unbelievable cruelty and poverty.

a_squirrelman

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Of course you can, quit your job , stop paying your mortage , start pumping out those kids, you'll be happy as larry appartently

It's too late for us, you need to be raised in such a way as to know how to work all those loopholes.
And starting to have the kids in your early 20's while living in mammy's council house, then after kid 3 or 4 it's "overcrowded" and you get bumped up the list.

LeinsterDub

ELM327 wrote: »

That's funny. All the left leaning posters on this thread and elsewhere would tell me your sister doesnt exist.

Why would they? This is a cleary a case where the system has failed. A solution is required that elimiates this outcome without casting the children into horrible poverity.

LeinsterDub

a_squirrelman wrote: »

It's too late for us, you need to be raised in such a way as to know how to work all those loopholes.
And starting to have the kids in your early 20's while living in mammy's council house, then after kid 3 or 4 it's "overcrowded" and you get bumped up the list.

I'm sure a smart peson like yourselve could spend a little time figuring out how to enjoy the high live.

a_squirrelman

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I'm sure a smart peson like yourselve could spend a little time figuring out how to enjoy the high live.

So you are in denial about the reality? From my class in school there are a handful of girls who milked the system to bits and have their free house and everything that goes with it.

That's only the girls, I don't know how many of the lads are in the same flush situation.

While normal people slug it out with mortgages and maintenance costs of their houses.



I'm not against a safety net, I'm against total layabouts who never worked getting everything handed to them.

krissovo

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Awh the it's a wonderful life arguement. So easily countered with the then why don't you join them arguement

The issue is that those of us who have worked really hard, made sacrifices like long hours, working away, family separation that have had the benefit to place us in a steady financial position why should we be taxed again for those who choose a different lifestyle?

Junkyard Tom

markodaly wrote: »

Do you approve of military funding?

Just for defence. More Switzerland than America.

The point I was making was that 'LOL u just used technology created by capitalism 2 crittersize capitalism' is such a bad take.