Posted by canvas on Saturday, 10 March 2007 11:27:01

I think a threshold of £8,000. for personal tax allowance sounds reasonable. This would certainly help some people avoid the poverty trap.

Posted by DaveGould on Saturday, 10 March 2007 14:23:29

£8000 sounds about right to me. Should encourage people to get off benefits.

Of course, everyone pays tax through VAT.

Posted by AndrewFarnden on Saturday, 10 March 2007 17:05:20

Shouldn't everyone pay a degree of tax so we all contribute?

Posted by canvas on Saturday, 10 March 2007 17:28:18

Andrew, it all depends. If you are on a low wage and trying to raise a family - then I imagine it's pretty hard to manage on £14,000. a year? If the threshold was raised to £8,000. then this would lift many people out of the poverty trap.

If this person was earning £14,000. a year then they would pay income tax on everything they earn above the £8,000. threshold. I think this sounds fair. There has to be an incentive for people to work. Everyone deserves to have a decent standard of living.

Posted by coolcatmillie on Sunday, 11 March 2007 11:28:22

Everyone should contribute to the Tax,if it were to be 8k for personal allowance you would then get 2 part timers working and then still claiming tax breaks and credits,allthough they are not having tax taken from them until they reach £8000.
What would be the purpose on raising the personal allowance?
What would it achive,really?

Posted by canvas on Sunday, 11 March 2007 11:36:58

It would help people on low wages make ends meet , improve their quality of life, give them an incentive to continue to work - and it would lift many people out of the poverty trap.

Posted by IAmNoOne on Sunday, 11 March 2007 11:43:13

All very reasonable, and you're right - it WOULD lift some people out of poverty. That's why it won't happen. For without poverty you can't have obscene riches, it really is that cynical. The elite know this, it's what our world is based upon. Why do you think they have no interest in sorting out 3rd World debt?

Posted by DeathbyDonut on Sunday, 11 March 2007 12:04:07

Err... Why not just halve benefits ?

That would then make it worth while going to work , wouldn't it?

DbD

Posted by canvas on Sunday, 11 March 2007 12:12:28

This isn't about benefits. It's about people on low pay. It's about poverty. It's about fairness. I imagine it's almost impossible to raise a family and make ends meet if you are earning minimum wage. Some redistribution is badly needed to ensure those on low wages have some quality of life.

Posted by Paine on Sunday, 11 March 2007 13:07:48

I'd like to second everything Canvas has said so far.

It's sometimes very difficult to empathise with the poorest in our society. I was glad to hear Greg Clarke talking about Polly Toynbee's fantastic book "Hard Work: Life in Low Pay Britain" a few months ago, and would recommend this short, easy to read piece to anyone interested in the topic.

Not only would I support (and campaign for) a higher threshold, I would want to see DC completely reforming job-seekers allowance. It seems barbaric that the benefit gets cut on the first day of work, regardless of when the first pay-slip is due, leading to huge debt and an unbearable burden for these people.

Posted by coolcatmillie on Sunday, 11 March 2007 13:22:12

Canvas your right its not about benifits, however if you pay any sort of Tax or have earning or at the moment no income, or low income you are entitled to some form of benefit’s those who wish to stay out of the Tax brackets would then use the higher personal allowance to still claim some form of benifit, there will always be an element of those still in what is considered as below poverty line.
There will always be poverty, there has to be.
You will never get equality when it comes to wealth and income, its impossible to do.

Posted by canvas on Sunday, 11 March 2007 13:32:14

This is more about 'relative poverty'. Why shouldn't a person be able to earn a decent living without having to rely on the state for assistance? Raising the income tax threshold to £8,000. would allow many people on low wages the diginty of being self sufficient.

 

Comment edited by canvas on Sunday, 11 March 2007 13:33:22

Posted by IAmNoOne on Sunday, 11 March 2007 13:43:59

But the effect of that would be that (so they'd claim, anyway!) inflation went up, so their money would be worth less anyway, so they'd be no better off!

There *IS* a solution to ALL poverty in our society, for there is more than enough money to go around, but it involves solutions so controversial that no-one wants to know. And yet, if people educated themselves to the inequities of the banking system they'd see how simple that solution was! Sadly, people THINK they know how our monetary system works, even to the point of arguing about it, when they know nothing at all.

Posted by kozmicstu on Sunday, 11 March 2007 13:46:21

Canvas have you read Nick Hornby's 'How To Be Good'?

I see you really enjoying it...

Anyway, anybody who's able to worry about the 'dignity' of being self-sufficient is going to be able to achieve a higher level of pay, when it comes down to it. Most people don't care where their money comes from, as long as it's enough to keep them on Special Brew and Sovereigns.

(permit me the OTT class stereotype for the purposes of this particular argument, please? :-D)

Posted by canvas on Sunday, 11 March 2007 14:19:48

Shocking shocking shocking thing for you to say Kozmic!!! And I know you don't really mean it - because I know you are a clever person. And clever people can have hard times too. :)

I like the author Nick Hornby. I also like the film adaptation of his book 'About a Boy' starring Hugh Grant. LoL :)

 

Comment edited by canvas on Sunday, 11 March 2007 14:20:12