Ok, this one is designed to stir people up a bit.

Why are we made to pay for stuff we don't use?

Why, when it comes to election time, are we told loads of our hard earned cash is going to be poured into education and the health service? If I've not been in hospital when their term in office ends, will they give me a refund? If not, why not?

Why am I paying for schools? It would be nice if some sex-crazed movie star were to walk into my life and we spent the next few years in bed making babies. But untill that happens why should I be paying to educate someone else's kids? When the time comes I'm sure Jenniffer Aniston and I will be more than happy to pay in advance for our children's schooling!:D

Which brings me to my big idea. Pay-as-you-live cards!

Yes, they work like phone top ups. Just like for your mobile, you can't do certain things untill you have paid for enough credits on your card. Using the example of kids again, how about not being allowed to have one untill you've paid in advance the many thousands of pounds that childs schooling is going to cost? Not to mention their estimated care costs after retirement!

Lets pay if we want our bins emptied, but not if we're willing to take rubbish to the tip ourselves. Lets have points deducted from our card when we actually USE a hospital or call a doctor. Let's subsidise the bus we actually get on and not the one that runs out in the middle of nowhere for one man and his dog!!!!

It may not be popular, but at least it would be fair!
:heyhey:

Now I've lit the blue touch-paper, I'll stand well back:thumbsup:

yes, and pay to view BBC ... then we wouldn't have to pay them for watching ITV and Sky! :thumbsup:

this leads directly to a society where the rich can afford the best of everything and the poor struggle for the basics. Which immediately leads to the government being voted out because there are far more poor people than rich, taxation is necessary because the high earners (and idle rich) subsidise everyone else to some extent, and this is made more pronounced by a higher bracket of taxation about an income of 32k/year.

Andy,

Do you use the services provided by educated and skilled people? I assume that somewhere along the way you were schooled? Do you have any state benefits?

I'm a higher rate tax payer and I don't particularly enjoy the experience but I've earned the money and so I don't object to paying tax on it. I've no children, but I'd like to see kids educated to a reasonable standard. I've been reasonably fortunate with my health so have not had too much recourse to the NHS.

In many ways I would be better off under a system in which I paid next to no income tax and paid when I spent. I'd see more of my money every week, but, I'm a member of a society that provides (albeit badly on many occasions) certain advantages such as the rule of law, roads, defence, NHS, whatever....so I view it as my part of the 'social contract' to pay.

Going the 'I'm alright Jack, sod you' way sounds great for individuals, but where do you stop?

Joe

So I take it you're quite happy for Miss Shell-Suit to sit on her bum watching Trisha and giving birth to a kid every 9 months which you're slaving away at work to pay for?

Yes, the rich do subsidise everyone else. But why should they? They have earned their money, they should be allowed to keep it.

Meanwhile, what percentage of Sheffield's tax-payers have been for a swim in Ponds Forge or jumped the hurdles at the Don Valley Stadium? Did anyone ask shoppers in the city if they minded their cash being spent on some over-sized greenhouse?

A friend of mine runs a bus company. He's just been given 2.5 MILLION pounds by his local council (not Sheffield for once) to provide a park & ride service for 5 years. Why the first 2.5 million people parking their cars can't give him a quid each escapes me!

:confused:

I may be wrong, but I thought the Winter Gardens were paid for out of Lottery funds. And it appears that people do like it, as there are always loads of people there whenever I walk through. Ponds Forge always seems pretty full too.

Originally posted by andy1702
So I take it you're quite happy for Miss Shell-Suit to sit on her bum watching Trisha and giving birth to a kid every 9 months which you're slaving away at work to pay for?

<SNIP>

:confused:

Of course I'm not happy about it - I wasn't suggesting that you shouldn't apply conditions to state benefits when they're given out. I'm just commenting that at the point of financial provision, it makes sense for collective contributions to be made that can then be disbursed in a sensible manner. The latter does occasionally leave much to be desired.

As for the Winter Gardens, yup, been there, liked it.
Ponds Forge / Swimming - been there, enjoyed it.

The thing is I can choose to go there if I want to. If I had my 'Pay as I go' card or whatever it might take me a bloody long time to save up for a swimming pool....

As for the rich subsidising, well.....the very rich can afford lots of accountants to minimise their tax burden. The people who usually pay a larger percentage of their income in tax than anyone else are skilled and professional workers.

In the 19th Century two improvements to the streets of cities came about through enlightenmed self-interest on the parts of the rich - street lighting and piped water. Cholera was no great respecter of money, and if you were out and about it was safer for you and your purse if there was a reliable form of street lighting. The wealthy set up businesses to provide these services and effectively sold them to the councils of the cities as time passed. There are just some things that your private pocket can't handle, and that's where we need some sort of social funcing to do works for the greater good.

People will exploit those benefits when they can, but that doesn't mean that the provision of services to a community by funds taken from taxes is wrong - it just means that some care needs to be taken on how those funds get disbursed.

Joe

So if your roof hasn't blown off this year, you still want a payout? The whole point of any insurance system, wether it be health insurance, income insurance, old age insurance, is that the greater the pool of participants the more effective the cover. Consequently, the most effective system is one where the whole population is covered.

--
JGH

abuse of the welfare system is an entirely different issue and not the one that you brought up in your initial post.

The provision of the health service can be looked at as a compulsory form of health insurance, and one that you'll be very happy to use I expect if you become ill or are injured.

Taxation is done as a proportion of income. How would you reorganise that to make it fairer? A flat rate tax levied on everyone. So the poor suffer and the rich don't, doesn't sound like the majority would consider it fair and the government is there to represent them as well as the rich.

Your last paragraph is arguing for what, a reduction in taxes and no more spending on any leisure facilities/civic amenities? Just because you don't choose to make use of something you'd deny everyone the benefit?
And finally, I expect that the council funded the set up of the park and ride because there was some benefit to the people they represent and it wouldn't have been set up otherwise. It doesn't even have to be the people using the facility that benefit, everyone benefits from reduced pollution, less cars, etc...

Originally posted by andy1702
So I take it you're quite happy for Miss Shell-Suit to sit on her bum watching Trisha and giving birth to a kid every 9 months which you're slaving away at work to pay for?

Yes, the rich do subsidise everyone else. But why should they? They have earned their money, they should be allowed to keep it.

Meanwhile, what percentage of Sheffield's tax-payers have been for a swim in Ponds Forge or jumped the hurdles at the Don Valley Stadium? Did anyone ask shoppers in the city if they minded their cash being spent on some over-sized greenhouse?

A friend of mine runs a bus company. He's just been given 2.5 MILLION pounds by his local council (not Sheffield for once) to provide a park & ride service for 5 years. Why the first 2.5 million people parking their cars can't give him a quid each escapes me!

:confused:

Here here!!! I agree with everything that Joe has stated.

I for one pay higher tax and have not enjoyed what has been built or paid for by our taxes.....

The education for others ....I do not mind paying for if those that get the education accept it and do well instead of skivving off and learning nothing!!!! costing the tax payer for no results.

If we all had the attitude of why should we pay taxes or this and that!! where would we be..
No benefits for those lazy Ba....tards that sit on their asses and claim that they don't get enough benefits.
No NHS for the people that fly here from all over the world to be treated at the tax payers expence.
Jeeesh..looking at what I just posted.......Why the hell am I paying tax??? not for my benefit thats for sure!!!

The point of my post is why should I pay for something I don't use?

Let's take an imaginary building as an example. Say a leisure centre. For arguments sake, let's say this leisure centre costs 2 million to build and lets also say there are 2 million people in it's catchment area.

But if only a quarter of those people want to use it, why should 2 million people pay a quid each to build it? Surely the 500,000 users should each pay £4.

because everyone pays for some services that they don't want and so it balances out.
And any other way is idiocy as the admin cost would be astranomical and what's to stop you then taking advantage and using the facility?
You keep bringing up Ponds forge, you do realise that they charge right, so presumably it runs at a profit and will eventually (if not already) recoup the cost of building it.
Not to mention that you indirectly benefit from it as it brought the student games to Sheffield and generally helps to set the image of the city which helps bring in business and thus work/money for you.

Originally posted by Cyclone
You keep bringing up Ponds forge, you do realise that they charge right, so presumably it runs at a profit and will eventually (if not already) recoup the cost of building it.
Not to mention that you indirectly benefit from it as it brought the student games to Sheffield

Might have been better if it hadn't!!!!!!:confused:

Perhaps not the best example t use?

The natural progression of this line of thinking (the users pay for what they want) is that also any profits made go to the users who bankrolled the whole thing.

This argument is easy to make for 'voluntary usage' services, but like I said earlier - where do you stop? Do I need to buy shares in an X Ray machine when I break my leg? The whole advantage of people forming a society is to provide a whole that is greater than the sum of it's parts.

I think I'd benefit enormously from having everything about my life broken down in to a bill that I pay for, arther than Council Tax or Income Tax. But I still prefer to live in an imperfect society where, to quote John Donne (almost certainly badly) 'No man is an island, complete unto himself'.

Joe

Originally posted by JoePritchard
Do I need to buy shares in an X Ray machine when I break my leg?
Exactly! How long must I save up before I can afford to get run over?

--
JGH

Originally posted by Patchy
I may be wrong, but I thought the Winter Gardens were paid for out of Lottery funds. And it appears that people do like it, as there are always loads of people there whenever I walk through. Ponds Forge always seems pretty full too.

The Winter Gardens and the Botanical Gardens were both paid for mostly by lotery money I think. I wouldn't have had a problem with my taxes being spent on either project though, even if I never went to them.

My cousin here pays full taxes, yet her children go to private school, they have private garbage colletion, never uses the bus service, yet has to pay the same as the people do that use all these city services.

Originally posted by poppins
My cousin here pays full taxes, yet her children go to private school, they have private garbage colletion, never uses the bus service, yet has to pay the same as the people do that use all these city services.

Are you saying this is a good or bad thing?