Comments on: On tax http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/ The idle musings of John B Mon, 02 Jan 2012 17:27:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v= hourly 1 By: Richard J http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-237 Richard J Fri, 26 May 2006 12:28:54 +0000 http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/#comment-237 Schedule A is very much still around. Of course, the real problem with John's idea is defining what exactly 'income' is... Schedule A is very much still around. Of course, the real problem with John’s idea is defining what exactly ‘income’ is…

]]> By: dearieme http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-215 dearieme Tue, 23 May 2006 10:58:34 +0000 http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/#comment-215 I take it that you'd want people to pay tax when they sell their houses? And on the "income" or just the "gain"? And shall we restore Schedule A while we're about it? I take it that you’d want people to pay tax when they sell their houses? And on the “income” or just the “gain”?
And shall we restore Schedule A while we’re about it?

]]> By: Matthew http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-195 Matthew Thu, 18 May 2006 19:55:31 +0000 http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/#comment-195 What about gifts - say someone's parents give them the money for a deposit? Or buy them a car? What about gifts – say someone’s parents give them the money for a deposit? Or buy them a car?

]]> By: N.I.B. http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-192 N.I.B. Thu, 18 May 2006 13:54:48 +0000 http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/#comment-192 Sorry, an 'old labour' will be 120% - don't mention 'new labour', that's 150%. Oh nads, I just did. Sorry, an ‘old labour’ will be 120% – don’t mention ‘new labour’, that’s 150%. Oh nads, I just did.

]]> By: dearieme http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-191 dearieme Thu, 18 May 2006 13:01:21 +0000 http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/#comment-191 Oh well, an Old Labour 105% on "pips squeak". Oh well, an Old Labour 105% on “pips squeak”.

]]> By: N.I.B. http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-190 N.I.B. Thu, 18 May 2006 09:53:29 +0000 http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/#comment-190 ...and a punitive 98% rate for mentioning 'flat tax'. That'd make their pips squeak. …and a punitive 98% rate for mentioning ‘flat tax’. That’d make their pips squeak.

]]> By: dearieme http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-189 dearieme Thu, 18 May 2006 09:45:20 +0000 http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/#comment-189 If we moved to a "flat tax" it would be a deal easier to introduce your scheme. If we moved to a “flat tax” it would be a deal easier to introduce your scheme.

]]> By: N.I.B. http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-186 N.I.B. Wed, 17 May 2006 08:08:00 +0000 http://www.johnband.org/blog/2006/05/17/on-tax/#comment-186 I propose a tax on complaining about taxation, with a higher rate on the use of the word 'coercion'. It would be entirely fair, in that it would piss off exactly the right people. I propose a tax on complaining about taxation, with a higher rate on the use of the word ‘coercion’.

It would be entirely fair, in that it would piss off exactly the right people.

]]>