Quote:
Originally Posted by PAUL SARGISSON
So the fact that I own a 16 year old car that is worth pea nuts signifies I must be wealthy ? probably in most cases the reverse is true. I dont want to get personal but I think you are viewing this through rose tinted glasses.
|
I do not take that as personal - just debating alternative viewpoints.
I did not use the term wealthy, but tax on wealth. In my view, anyone who can afford to own a car, has sufficient wealth to pay associated tax.
I don't have rose tinted glasses - in fact I am about as cynical and questioning as a man can get. But, I tend to look at the basic principles and the broad picture rather than point issues.
The question is, just because a person drives a 16-year old car, will he/she be happy to accept a lower level of education for his/her children or a lower level of service from the NHS than another who drives something newer? These are the types of services that consume the revenue from your taxes.
With tax and a few other things, it really is important that one looks at the basic principles and the broad picture. The simple fact is that the cuntry needs so many £billion per week to keep running. That has to be collected as tax revenue if we are not to continue/increase borrowing. We all have to contribute and, as long as the overall picture is broadly proportionate amongst the population, localised differences are of no consequence or importance.
The question I would ask is, "ignore localised or point issues such as VED - what you be your alternative system be for keeping the coutry running that is fairer to all".