Off Topic Political Debate

Do those of us under BMI get an extra £20 a year?

 

Would you also have monstrously high taxes on meat? According to many environmentalists, the shear scale of the "meat industry" causes the largest impact on the environment (greenhouse gases, energy consumption, waste etc.). So if taxation should also be linked to environmental impact as you suggest, meat and dairy products should also be heavily taxed. Now this would have a massively disproportional impact on the poor.

 

People could be vegetarian. It doesn't impact your life in a negative way. I'm a lifelong veggie and you could never tell, I'm healthier than most meat eaters around.

 

Good budget, personal tax allowance raised, 40% level raised, capital gains tax reduced and ISA limit raised.

He had previously bashed the better off so this goes someway to redress that.

 

How can you even type that and pretend to be taken seriously

 

Why not, reward the responsible, tax the irresponsible seems a good incentive scheme - I am off down the gym!

 

I might be making assumptions here but i get the impression you are annoyed that poor people are having their disposable impacted by this sugar tax as a means to increase taxes on the poor whilst giving tax breaks to rich people in respect to corporation tax (not that big corporations pay any tax). What i'm trying to put across is that the sugar tax isn't about the tories being tories and taxing the poor because:

1. doesn't just affect poor people
2. is (well could be argued) not being used to tax the poor but is meant to stop people from living unhealthily (not sure i entirely agree with this concept as i think we are all responsible for our own health).

 

He had taken away child benefit for the better off, increased tax on dividends, increased tax on buy to let, reduced tax relief on pensions etc.

Good budget to incentivise the workers and investors especially the self employed.

 

Anyone stupid enough to consume sugar drinks deserves to be hit hard by tax rises to help pay for their diabetes treatment later.

 

Sugary drinks, as depressing as it is, are a luxury for some people. Of course rich people will have to pay the same, but it's a gimmick of a tax. My anger is the ISA stuff, tax breaks for the rich and other perks offered by Osborne to his pals, whereas the poor are going to have to pay (an albeit minimal amount) more for a simple yet enjoyable luxury.

I can't stand people like w_y saying 'oh but they could just drink something else'. People should have the right to a can of fizzy drink if they feel like it. In the meantime, the media have focused on this sugar tax bullshit rather than attacking the government for giving huge unjustifiable tax breaks to people that need it the least, whilst taking money from the disabled and increasing the cost of living (which is already exorbitantly high).

 

I think you said this in jest but i'm actually in favour of this. People should have benefits for maybe 1 or 2 kids. If you cannot afford to have kids you should not have them. Plus kids are massively polluting (humans are the biggest environmental problem the world has seen)

 

No, fat people should be forced to pay more. Sugary drinks don't automatically make you fat.

 

That's fair enough. It is very clearn Superhorns is the embodiment of a tory and w_y is not as far right and is probably more in line with my views.

I do think the tories are maybe going to far in term of cutting budget and i'm not sure i agree with cutting corporation tax. I don't think the ISA business is necessarily bad as for the super rich this will do nothing for them and it's probably more of a lower middle class policy who are normally squeezed who will be able to save.

I'm not in favour of the sugar tax but i'm not sure particularly against it either

 

I hate the fact that having kids in this country will soon be a privilege of the rich, but as you said, I'm more of an environmentalist than a humanist and we need to reduce the global population.

I'm all for child benefits for 1 kid, but to have a large family should not be subsidised, money should be spent on people that already exist, not helping people procreate more.

And as w_y suggested, a supertax on all meat products would do the world a massive favour

 

That's true no more meat and the world would be a better place. I do love my meat though so i don't think i would be voting on that!.

 

They're both as bad as each other, w_y is just a snake in the grass

 

Future generations will look back on us as being primitives for killing and eating animals, sadly there will hardly be any actual wildlife left...

 

Cutting corporation tax encourages investors and companies to the UK, it also gives firms the finances to reinvest and to pay the staff more. The UK's relatively low rates of corporation tax is why we enjoy so much inward investment compared to other European countries.

 

Whilst i don't totally disagree with this i'm not sure it was further necessary to reduce corporation tax further when we are already one of the better placed competitively as well as being in the ideal location alongside our use of English as a language. Helps my mum out who owns a business but as a whole i'm not sure i agree that we need to further reduce corporation tax

 

And he did nothing to 'bash' the poor? You sure about that?

Why do the 'better off' need help anyway?