medsec222 wrote:If they don't do something soon to tackle the situation they are almost certainly a busted flush.
Yes but those who actually pay the taxes which pay for these initiatives don't want to pay for it.
Reality on the latest government figures.
Distribution of income and Income Tax liabilities
the top 50% of Income Tax payers received 74.6% of total income in 2018 to 2019, or £834bn out of a total £1,120 billion. This resulted in a 49.2 percentage point income inequality between the top and bottom 50% of Income Tax payers (where 0 percentage points is completely equal)
however, the top 50% of Income Tax payers were liable for 90.5% of total Income Tax in 2018 to 2019, or £168 billion out of a total £187 billion, indicating the progressive nature of the Income Tax system
the top 1% of Income Tax payers make up the majority of additional rate Income Tax payers and received 12.5% of total income in 2018 to 2019
in addition, the top 1% of Income Tax payers were liable for 28.9% of total Income Tax in 2018 to 2019. This is projected to decrease to a 28.0% share of total Income Tax by 2021 to 2022
This is reality. So who is going to pay for it? The only easy area left to tax which could net significant gains is a very low (say 1%) tax on the lower earners. From which they could then distribute money as needed.
This is an oxymoron as it is taking with one hand to give with the other.
The top 1% already pay 28% of the taxes on 12.5% of the income. The top 50% pay 90.5% of the taxes on 74.6% of the income.
Where is the money to come from?
There is a salient educational tale about a group of people who met for lunch every week. The richest paid the most and those with moderate incomes paid the rest. The poorest person paid nothing, every time. When the restaurant decided to give a discount on meal for good custom, everyone who paid got some money back. Except the poorest. "Hang on a minute said the poorest, everyone got something but me". Offended the richest person decided to stop coming to lunch, the moderate incomes couldn't afford to fund themselves and the poorest. So the poorest person lost the free lunch and the lunch sessions were lost for everyone.
I fully understand that there are people who will be suffering in this squeeze. However not all of them will be obvious. In fact the very poorest may be the least hit as they will already be on benefits designed to level them up to where they can afford to live. Those benefits will rise more than average wages as this crisis bites.
It will be the people one above, those just off benefits, just making ends meet, proud to be in control of their own lives. Plus those who are extended as far as they can go but cannot extend further and have debt which will rise in price to service.
But those who are extended and struggling to cope with the debt will be those who pay a chunk of this 90.5% tax and will be considered delinquent if they don't pay more for those who are struggling.
Takes all kinds.