Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


SNP signals U-turn on local income tax

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 27 October 2008
THE Scottish Government has admitted for the first time local income tax rates could be varied locally – a major concession to get the proposal through the Scottish Parliament.


Until the weekend, the SNP administration had stuck hard and fast to its proposal to replace the council tax with a fixed, centrally set 3p income tax supplement.

But yesterday John Swinney, the finance secretary, said he was willing to consider allowing councils to vary the rate up to 3p, but not above.

He also confirmed the government was investigating how to tax unearned income. "We're certainly considering that as an option, I'm very happy to confirm that," he said.

The change of policy emerged in e-mails released under freedom of information legislation. Officials wrote to HM Revenue and Customs seeking information on how investment income would affect the proposed tax. In an e-mail dated 23 September, a Scottish Government official wrote: "You may remember that I got in touch with you over a year ago requesting information on Scotland for analysis we were carrying out re how much revenue we could raise from the local income tax.

"Following on from that we are now trying to assess how much money could be raised from investment income if a local income tax was applied to this."

The government previously decided it would be too costly and time-consuming to tax unearned income. That stance was criticised over concerns the rich would exploit the loophole by taking more dividends and pay less for local services.

Mr Swinney's indication that councils could vary the level is considered key to winning Liberal Democrat support.

The Liberal Democrats, who have been negotiating with the SNP on getting through a form of LIT acceptable to both parties, said the U-turns appeared to be an answer to the concerns they had raised.

Lib Dem finance spokesman Jeremy Purvis said: "We welcome the movement on dividend earnings and we will study their proposals on varying the rate."

Mr Swinney said he was simply reacting to the Scottish Government's consultation on LIT which had produced 500 responses. Although the Scottish Government is yet to publish full responses, most of those from organisations across Scotland oppose the proposal.

Mr Swinney said: "We have already indicated the possibility of exempting students, and we are also considering applying LIT to income from dividends. There was never an issue of principle here, merely one of practicality and cost-effectiveness

."

Scottish Labour leader Iain Gray, MSP, said: "This is a huge U-turn and a sign that the SNP's tax plans are in desperate trouble. The reality is that taxing unearned investment income is just tinkering with a bad policy.

"A local income tax would be bad for hard-working families who would have to pay more, such as a couple like a fireman and a nurse."


The full article contains 483 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 26 October 2008 9:06 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Council tax
 
1

muppetfinder,

27/10/2008 00:15:21
A local income tax would be bad for hard-working families who would have to pay more, such as a couple like a fireman and a nurse." what rubbish another set of Labour lies and MADdox promotes it.
2

,

27/10/2008 00:19:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

john z,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 00:25:00
The Local income tax will be great for the people of Scotland. Most poor households will really benefit.

Whu, oh why do Scottish Labour want to keep the outdated and hated council tax which charges a pensioner exactly the same amount as a millionaire. Who do labour actually represent??

It beggars belief that Labour oppose the Local income tax, which will tax people according to earnings. It's really simple if you earn loads of money - you pay more. If you don't earn very much money, then you pay less. It's brilliant. What on earth is Labour thinking. By opposing this, they will alienate even more of their 'traditional' voters.

The local income tax will be much fairer, and will make a big difference to many lower paid families in Scotland.
4

Resolutions,

27/10/2008 00:30:43
More lies from Liebour I see.

Local Income tax will benefit more as you pay according to your means. Income varies throughout life and this hated Council tax only seems to go up - taking more of your cash each year.

Honestly Liebour are so thick about this!
5

,

27/10/2008 00:37:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

,

27/10/2008 00:40:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
7

livilion,

livingston 27/10/2008 00:42:32
Good of Labour to elect a Leader with an eye tick every time he lies.
Now you don't have to see his lips move,
Nudge, nudge, know wot ah mean?:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=04AQe5AXxnU
8

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta CA for more WAR VOTE geriatric McCain 27/10/2008 04:55:23
So it looks like Salmond and the SNP are starting to come unglued.. and they want independence ..

In ur dreams dudes.

Gc
9

Richardinho,

27/10/2008 05:52:42
'A local income tax would be bad for hard-working families who would have to pay more, such as a couple like a fireman and a nurse.'
Firemen and nurses may be a typical new-labour media friendly example, but the fact is that these jobs are both within the £20-30,000 a year category. So you have a combined salary of perhaps £50,000 with the potential to be even higher.
These are not your typical workers, lets stop pretending that they are.
10

John Cameron,

St Andrews 27/10/2008 06:09:33
This sounds like a Brownian stealth tax. The whole idea is starting to come off the wall. If we are considering daft projects, how about another Darien Scheme? Such an enterprise would definitely land us in the "arc of prosperity" alongside Rockall, the Faeroes, and the Fair Isle.
11

,

27/10/2008 06:19:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

David Sim,

27/10/2008 06:44:15
The difficulty with a variable local income tax are the levels of tax which can be avoided by moving: the very highest earners can drop their income tax simply by moving into a neighbouring town in some cases. Presumably employers will have the burden of working out the level of taxation when they might have employees in all 32 council areas - yet more red tape being passed on.

A fixed rate was simple and straightforward (although it too could see wealth moving from Scotland to England, especially if unearned income is included).
13

Eckyboo,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 06:46:27
Under this new scheme we would be worse off by £300 per year. I don't see how this is going to help working families.
14

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 06:49:35
15

I agree the Lib Dums want to complicate a simple tax system that will work for the vast majority.
It will give their controlled council levarage to phuq around with this tax which is why the SNP where right to stipulate the 3p maximum which should take the wind out of their sails.
Its just another one of the set backs of being a minority government.
15

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 06:50:59
16

How can you possibly be worse off under the new scheme if its capped at a max of 3p?
16

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 06:54:06
13

The SNP tax proposal is simple and straight forward its the Lib Dums who are responsible for complicating it but the SNP are minimising the potential damage by limiting the max variation to 3p. So if the Lib Dum councils want to lower the local tax rates then thats up to them but then they will have to deal with the fact that they are taking in less revenue so I doubt any counci in Scotland will charge any less than the 3p maximum do you?
17

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 06:56:13
12

Prove it.

And dont forget to add the band review and the 4 to 8% annual increaces in council tax between now and the introduction of LIT.
18

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 06:57:24
12

Ignore 20 it should be directed at post 1.
19

albanman,

27/10/2008 07:12:42
To those rabbiting on about Labour: read the article. It's an SNP proposal you idiots.
20

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 07:14:58
22

No idiot its a consession to the Lib dums in order to get the legislation through parliament. Its called working as a minority government.
21

SouthernSkye,

27/10/2008 07:17:46
Whenever taxes are changed some people will be worse off, others better off. If we were all better off then it wouldn't be much of a tax. The point is, and this goes for any tax of this ilk, WHAT improvement in services will we see? Many countries have far higher "local taxes" but use the money wisely and provide good local transport and services.
22

The Tin Man,

27/10/2008 07:21:50
#23 superparcelofrogues

Do you think that a LIT sould be set nationallly, or locally?

And do you think that it should generate the same revenue as the CT?
23

Chatatara,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 07:24:04
Needless to say if the Councils are going to be given the chance to set their LIT rate up to 3p. I really cant see any of the Councils going under that. They will try to get as much money as possible.
24

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 07:25:29
25

I think LIT should be fixed at a set rate nationaly this Lib Dum proposal is stupid because no local council is going to charge less than the maximum allowable rate anyway so it will be 3p across the board. The SNP were wise to stipulate the max rate of 3p dont you think?

Why should it have to generate the same revenue as CT when nobody can say that CT was the correct amount of Local taxation relative to local spending?
25

Pat Scot,

Albernia 27/10/2008 07:25:36
Looks like someone went to the dictionary to check up the words "Local" & "Income".

There should be no loss of face in conceding to the Lib Dems on this, if that's what it takes. Labour and Tories seem to be opposing just for the hell off it. Labour in particular should welcome a progressive tax, based on ability to pay, unless they really have abandoned the interests of ordinary folk.
26

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 07:44:56
28
Doesn't it occur to you that the Labour Party WOULD support the tax if it was fair and workable? The SNP have been caught out in a nightmare scenario of having their bluff called on this without being able to blame Westminster (ie the English). If the SNP had thought for a minute that there was a chance of actually forming a government and having to implement this then this policy would have been nowhere near their manifesto. It is unworkable, the figures don't stack up and the SNP know it.
LIT is another SNP empty promise that is superficially attractive but the more it is scrutinised the more its inherent weaknesses are revealed.
27

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 07:56:04
29

"Doesn't it occur to you that the Labour Party WOULD support the tax if it was fair and workable?"

What do you base this presumtion on?
Liebours past record of being fair and honest with the electorate perhaps?
Or their unfailing fairness in introducing taxation methods perhaps?
Or their unfailing fairness in raising the taxation levels just enough to allow folk to afford to pay them without difficulty perhaps?

What do you base that statement on?
28

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 07:59:28
29

"The SNP have been caught out in a nightmare scenario of having their bluff called on this without being able to blame Westminster"

Are you claiming there is no LIT proposal at all and its all a bluff?

"If the SNP had thought for a minute that there was a chance of actually forming a government and having to implement this then this policy would have been nowhere near their manifesto"

Eh they have formed a Government and they have put forward the proposal and are now negotiating with the Lib Dems in order to make it Legislation.
Hellos Earth to troll Earth to troll come in.

"It is unworkable, the figures don't stack up and the SNP know it."

"LIT is another SNP empty promise that is superficially attractive but the more it is scrutinised the more its inherent weaknesses are revealed."

Show us.
29

The Tin Man,

27/10/2008 08:00:20
#27

So you are in favour of cutting local services?
30

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:00:50
29

Troll yer an idiot.
31

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:03:09
32

Where and when did I say that?
Local services have been cut consistantly over the last 50 years in spite of massive increaces in Local taxation I dont see any proportional relationship in the level of local taxation to the level of services provided do you?
so what is the point your trying to make?
32

HughB,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 08:03:45
Doesn't sound like a U-turn to me.

A U turn is turning through 180 degrees and going in the opposite direction.

They will still bring in the local income tax, just with a slight modification.

So maybe it's 1/10th of a U-turn.

Get your interpretation right hootsman.
33

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 08:04:41
29
Liebour? Do you mean the Labour Party? Are you so bitter that you can't even bring yourself to show your political opponents just a bit of respect?
This is infantile and naive nonsense peddled by the nationalist cybernats. Unable to properly debate their case without recourse to abuse and smearing their opponents, everything comes down to the almost fascistic notion that anybody who opposes them are either corrupt or liars.
LIT is opposed because it is unfair and unworkable.
34

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 08:05:39
35
John Swinney described it as a U-turn yesterday on the telly.
35

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:07:27
36

And that is an example of a proper debate is it?
Looks more like the kind of post a sh*t stirring troll would put up just to annoy somebody.
You could of course prove me wrong and explain why you think LIT is unfair and unworkable why dont you give us the details and show us who its unfair to and how it wont work?
36

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:08:00
37

Yes of course he did but not in this universe.
37

The Tin Man,

27/10/2008 08:09:19
#31

"the figures don't stack up and the SNP know it."

Show us?

I suggest you read the exec's consultation paper - even the SNP say that a 3% rate is a significant tax-cut.

Whether the local component of LA funding is raised through CT, or LIT, the amout of LA funding provided by Westminster says pretty much the same, so under a 3% LIT rate, the councils will have less money, and so there will be service cuts.

Are you in favour of cutting services?

38

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:11:39
40

The who whats consultation paper produced by who again?
The only people objecting to the LIT proposal is the opposition nobody else.

Show me the relationship between local taxation levels and service cuts.
39

Phil C,

27/10/2008 08:12:16
The Scotsman and some of it's less intelligent (usually unionist inclined!) readership don't seem to be able to grasp that the SNP believes in common sense, flexibility and, by need, consensus. These are traits desperately lacking in anything coming from thick as mince, lying and conning, Liebour.

The 3p thing is an issue because of a Liebour imposed daftism anyway- a way of their retaining control.

It's time for Liebour to butt out of politics and quietly retire. They are dangerous, damaging tools who are bent on destroying the goodwill and hope that exists in Scotland (and England too!)
40

donald,

glasgow 27/10/2008 08:13:21
Yeah but. No but. Will the Lib Dums find another excuse to default?
41

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:13:43
40

The only reason the opposition is so afraid of the LIT is they dont want to see a disparity in local taxation between Scotland and England because then they will be forced to introduce LIT down South or risk further civil unrest and riots on the scale of the Poll tax rebellion.
42

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 08:14:23
39
Mr Swinney on Politics Show, BBC yesterday:
“.... I'll call it a U-turn. I'm not fussed about that.....”
43

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:16:31
45

Not even close troll certainly not in this universe anyway why dont you put the entire quote up?
44

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 08:18:11
44
The opposition isn't afraid of LIT they are opposed to it because it is unfair and unworkable. It penalises people in employment and allows the rich to avoid paying. Why do you think every European country (with two exceptions) considers a property tax as a crucial part of their taxation strategy?
45

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 08:18:56
Troll? Are you incapable of discussion without resorting to abuse?
46

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:19:14
47

You have yet to show us how its unfair and unworkable if you cant then just say so and we will leave it as just your personal opinion.
47

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:19:50
48

Obviously not are you incapable of debate without lying?
48

Son of Gramsci,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 08:20:10
#31 #40 #41

The proposal in the Scottish Government's conssultation paper did show a tax cut for most, however at the cost of raising much less in total than the council tax.

Rather easy to achieve tax cutting if you raise less money. This was more the effect of the lower revenues than the change in the basis of taxation.

However, this leaves a hole in finances, and would make even less locally spent money locally raised. This would mean that relatively small changes in budget would lead to large changes in the penny in pound rate.
49

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 08:22:38
50
With that I'll leave you to your abuse and fabrications. Our discussion is at an end.
50

Bigwull,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 08:24:02
how will a variable local income tax work, say in fyour a national company with workers all over scotland? Poll tax mark 2
51

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:24:56
51

The problem with that argument is you cant use CT as the correct level of local taxation.
It is a tax cut but that doesnt mean it isnt enough to cover local expenditure if CT raises more local taxation than is required.
If CT doesnt raise more local taxation than is required then why is there such a high level of rebate and benefit involved?
On top of that why are services still cut irrespective of how much taxation is raised and increaced?
52

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:25:43
53

It is irrelevant no council will charge less than the allowable amount so it will be 3% across the board.
53

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:26:31
52

So you cant back up a single statement you make not surprising. Go then troll you wont be missed.
54

tog,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 08:29:34
Local income tax, soon to be know as the hated local income tax. Local tax needs a big rethink but LIT is not it and tinkering with flawed proposals will not make them better. Lit was used as a populist policy at the last election but had not been though out then and has not been thought out now.
55

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:30:23
Will somebody explain to me what the relationship is between local taxation levels and local services?
Why are local services cut irrespective of how much local taxation levels are increaced and how does this point show LIT will cause service cuts relative to CT?
56

Son of Gramsci,

Edina 27/10/2008 08:31:05
#54

Council tax itself only raises a small proportion of local expenditure (I think about a quarter). Most local expenditure in Scotland is funded by large grants paid by the Scottish Government to local authorities. The Government also redistributes the nationally set business rates.

The high level of rebate and benefit is an attempt to offset the "unfairness" of the tax. Really poor households pay no council tax, because of the benefit.
57

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:31:12
57

If you cant stick to one logon to make the same idiotic argument without being able to back it up then why bother?
58

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:32:21
59

The unfairness being the High taxation level relative to expenditure costs?
59

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 08:34:23
Does the 3p apply to both rates of tax - the 20% and 40% levels?
60

Bigwull,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 08:34:26
55 then how would is it variable, and what would the criteria be based on to make it so?
61

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:35:39
62

Any reason why it wouldnt? I dont believe there is anything in the Scotland act that prevents a 3p raise in the 40% level.
62

Son of Gramsci,

27/10/2008 08:37:03
#58

See #59 for an attempt at part of an explanation of the relationship between Council tax and expenditures.

You ask "why are local services cut irrespective of how much local taxation levels are increased...?" Intersting question. In the years when Brown was UK Chancellor public expenditure in almost all areas was massively boosted, and the Scottish Executive (as was) and Scottish councils received big increases in cash. Yet, there is stil a perception of "cuts." In part, I think that this is because there is a far greater focus on the areas of loss than of those of gain (smaller primary class sizes, for example, are every expensive to achieve). But there is a deeper mistery about how the public sector can effortlessly swallow increased public expenditure.
63

LEAL,

27/10/2008 08:37:16
As John Swinney says,he doesnt care if the other parties call it a U turn or not.He is doing what is right in the prevailing circumstances for Scotland.All the other parties want to do is reduce Scottish politics to the same level as Westminster where Scotlands needs arent even considered in the pursuit of party political advantage.
64

Claire22,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 08:37:32
I'd like to see more accountability for where council tax money is spent.
Maybe we could see it on the side of bin lorries - "£xxx thousand spent this year in xxx collecting your rubbish", and on school gates "xxx pence spent this year in this school".

Politicians of all parties are guilty of nose in trough syndrome and until that changes, there does not seem to be any point in changing the way local government is funded.
65

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:37:53
63

The Lib dums want the local councils to set their own levels of local taxation under LIT the SNP may be forced to agree in order to get the Lib Dums on board to get the Legislation through but the SNP have stipulated that local councils cannot vary the tax above the 3p threshold.
I cant therefore see any local council setting their rates below the threshold can you?
66

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:39:05
67

I agree that is where the real problem with local taxation lie. It isnt the raising of the taxes its the spending of them.
67

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:41:25
66

Yes exactly Swinney said he doesnt care if the other parties call it a U turn.
68

Marian,

27/10/2008 08:41:36
Its not exactly a U-turn but more of a reality check fine tuning from the SNP government to ensure that they get this approved at Holyrood with the help of the Lib Dems.
69

Son of Gramsci,

Embra 27/10/2008 08:42:28
#61

No, I think people see the council tax as unfair as a more prosperous household pays the same as their struggling neighbours.

It's certainly not unfair in terms of what it buys, as most council services are paid for by central Government grants.

#64 The current proposal is limited to the 20% band, but that is just politics.
The Scotland Act gives the power to raise another 3p on the standard rate, collected with the rest of income tax (the "tartan tax")
The Scotland Act aslo gives the Scottish Parliament control over the system of local government taxation, which is the power that would be used for LIT.
70

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:42:42
65

If there is one thing all parties agree upon its the fact that local services are cut and that is irrespective of how much local taxation is increaced so to turn around and say LIT will "cause" local services to be cut is bullsh*t pure and simple.
71

Nevsky,

Moscow 27/10/2008 08:44:48
70 Joe#

'facist sheep's clothing'...i have never seen a facist sheep!

72

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:46:40
73

You are full of it all the calculations show that the less well off will benefit far more than those much better off. And that is using the present council tax figures. If you factor in the council tax reveiw and the annual increaces between now and the introduction of LIT then it shows it even more.
Stop lying out of your teeth that isnt debating.
73

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 27/10/2008 08:47:16
#29 "Doesn't it occur to you that the Labour Party WOULD support the tax if it was fair and workable?"

It is highly irresponsible of you to write such things. I almost gave myself heart failure before I stopped laughing.

Labour oppose this tax precisely BECAUSE it's fair and workable, you halfwit. Implementing it would be hugely popular, and the LAST thing in the world Labour want is for the public to credit the SNP with making a major change in taxation which makes it better and fairer.

Such an outcome would clearly be wonderful for the SNP's re-election prospects, and so Labour are TERRIFIED of any such thing happening, and have mustered all the forces at their disposal to prevent it from happening, because successful implementation of LIT would finally annihilate any hopes they might still harbour of winning Holyrood back in 2011. It's basic politics, you dolt - don't hand your opponents a gun to shoot you with.

If you honestly believe that Labour would let their deep concern for "hard working families" get in the way of getting themselves elected to power, I have the number of a psychiatrist you probably ought to get in touch with.
74

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 08:48:08
73

The Scotland act has nothing in it to prevent the Scottish Government from raising the 40% level by 3p there is nothing in the Scotland act that stipulates the 40% level at all.
75

pressure,

scotland 27/10/2008 08:56:39
what are we stoopid. A week before glenrothes byelection the nats know their tax plans are hugely unpopular - the opposition are successfully pointing out Salmond's rich banking mates will not have to pay it, and local authorities will no control over how much is raised - so an 'FOI request' no doubt sent in by a nat supporter, signed off by a nat minister and confirmed by a nat FM to say 'ohh don't worry we are looking at it all'

Political message is vote SNP - Don't split the grievance vote by voting Lib Dem. Don't listen to Labour's scaremongering about only taxing working people.
76

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 08:56:55
73 Son of Gramsci
Does that mean that the 3p is not the so called "tartan tax" but "local govt taxation" or as the article says an "income tax supplement" which applies only to the 20% band. If so, why does it not apply to the 40%?
77

watcher,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 08:58:10
What is the difference between a local income tax and the Tory poll tax. Nothing that I can see. You can imagine 3 or 4 working adults in the same house paying for the same bin to be emptied.
Do they count Pensions as un earned income? I hope not considering we have already earned Pensions through work.
78

Son of Gramsci,

Edina 27/10/2008 08:59:40
#76

I think on this one we were in fact saying the same thing - I said the the council tax was seen as unfair as a more prosperous household pays the same as their struggling neighbours. This is exactly the same as saying that the poorer household has more to gain from the LIT.

#78 True. One major problem, however, is the Westminister's Government obstructive attitude on Council Tax Benefit. So, although the Scottish Parliament has the powers, they can excercise them freely.
79

James, Edinburgh,

27/10/2008 09:00:04
I wonder if Swinney's proposals take account of the various Local Government Pension Funds? They are reliant on dividend income on the huge holdings they have in Stock Exchange Securities. These have already been plundered by 'Prudence's' abolition of Advanced Corporation Tax. Another 3% shaved off could leave the beneficiaries (possibly about 30% of the pensionable population) worse off. Presumably their pension payments would have another 3% taken off.
80

Son of Gramsci,

Edina 27/10/2008 09:01:33
#80

No, I think that the 3p LIT is not the "tartan tax", but a proposed reform of local taxation. As such, I think in principle it could apply to the 40% band, and the decision to limit it to the 20% is just political.
81

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 09:02:56
84

Who decided to limit it to the 20% rate? I havent seen any proposals to limit it to the 20% rate.
82

Son of Gramsci,

Embra 27/10/2008 09:05:56
#82

Yes, last line should be "..they can't exercise them freely."

Just think - if the Westminster Parliament were consdiering replacing the Council tax with an LIT, they could take account of the revenues from the taxes and the savings of council tax beneift were they to change to an LIT.

When the Scottish Parliament consider this, they are told by the UK Government that CTB savings from a change to the system will be kept by the UK Government.

This is already happening, as the CTB savings from our CT freeze are being pocketed by the UK Government.

83

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 09:06:16
80

The "Tartan tax" was the poll tax introduced into Scotland a year before it was introduced into the rest of the UK and those who voted for its introduction to Scotland reversed their vote when introducing it into England after the results of the civil unrest.

When the English see the Scots paying less in local taxation it will cause civil unrest on the same scale and force the UK government to implement the proposals in the rest of the UK hence the lies spin and deceit over the proposals.
84

Son of Gramsci,

Embra 27/10/2008 09:09:10
#85 suchaparcelofrougues

Appologies, I am simply wrong on that point, and you are right. The proposal is for both bands.
85

subrosa,

27/10/2008 09:09:12
# 37
'John Swinney described it as a U-turn yesterday on the telly.'

You know that's untrue. Glenn Campbell kept insisting it was a U-turn. John Swinney eventually said " if you want to call it that then it's fine with me, I'm not fussed about that."

Big difference isn't there?
86

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 09:11:37
88

You had me worried there for a minute I thought you were going to tell me Swinney had a senior moment.
87

noswod,

Honestas 27/10/2008 09:12:51
SNP introduces a poll tax, they must be mad. The missle and upper classes will soon work this one oot they pay more, considerably more and therefore no votes for the Nats. Slamond has been feeding on the same intellectual font as Thatcher, maybe the LIT has some justification but in political terms it is a no brainer don't do it unless you can get your timing exactly right. It is with some irony that as the introduction of the poll tax in Scotland lead to Thatchers decline and the SNP's rise. The introduction of the LIT will lead to the SNP's decline and the political resurrection of the Scottish Tories from the dead. "Funny old game politics" - as a North London Football manager was heard to say.
88

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 09:15:56
82

#78 True. One major problem, however, is the Westminister's Government obstructive attitude on Council Tax Benefit. So, although the Scottish Parliament has the powers, they can excercise them freely

Oh I have no doubt the Westminster government will pull out every dirty trick in the book and then reinvent some more to keep as much resources out of the hands of the Scottish government but its up to the SNP to show the Scottish electorate that thats exactly whats happening which is difficult because the press and media are unionist run by the UK establishment.
89

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 09:18:18
91

Well then isnt it lucky for the SNP and Scotland that the Scottish government is introducing LIT and not the poll tax?
90

bluehead,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 09:21:31
I could hardly believe my ears listening to snp swinney,now he says it might take in investment earnings,so now we will be saving money in order to pay taxes,instead of subsidizing our pensions,which are meagre ,to say the least I voted SNP because things needed to change,but they will lose many supporters if they persecute people in this manner and I will be the first to lead the retreat!!!!!!!!!
91

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 09:22:40
77
Typically of cybernattery you again fail to realise that opposition to the discredited LIT is based on reason rather than some kind of lunatic fringe conspiracy theory. The SNP's numbers don't stack up. Every professional body has stated this. The SNP's answer to these criticisms? All opposition is corrupt or lying. Aye, right.

89
You really don't care about the truth, do you? What did Glen Campbell do in your parnaoid wee world? I note you use the nats bete noir du jour, Mr Campbell, rather than the actual interviewer, Mr Sopel. The exact quote from Mr Swinney is:
“And if we decide to do this in due course and we all want to call it a U-turn, I'll call it a U-turn. I'm not fussed about that.”
Big difference, eh?
92

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 09:23:52
94

He says he may have to take investment earnings in order to get the proposal through parliament because the opposition parties are insisting on it as a price for their support.
What do you expect from unionists?
93

Montford's Jaicket,

Hanging around 27/10/2008 09:24:30
Loads of detail still to be ironed out. One key question is whether the 3% will be on all income or only on taxable income. This will make a dramatic difference to the lower paid - if your tax code is 550 and your income is 8,000 then you are only taxed on 2,500. If the LIT uses the same lower threshold then that would mean an extra £75 per year in Tax for that person but if it is on all income then his new tax bill would be £240.
At the end of the day, whether it is 3% of all or only taxable income it will not matter whether you are a 40% tax bracket earner or not. 3% of 2,000 or 3% of 200,000 is still 3%!
I'm sure that there will be a lot of negotiations yet before anything is decided but it does look as if the Scottish Government are making concessions - which they have to - while Labour and Tory parties are simply saying "it won't work" without putting any alternative proposals forward. It looks like the Council Tax is unloved by many so perhaps time for all parties to tell us how they propose to finance local services. These are essential for us so come on Labour and Tories; it you don't like LIT and we don't like CT give us an alternative. If you have one, I'm sure the consensual Scottish Government will consider and debate it and, if it is popular, there's no reason why they shouldn't adopt it! If you have no alternatives, then come out and say so - but please cease and desist from the "it won't work - we didn't think of it" mantra.
94

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 09:27:24
95

And yet you cant post a single reasonable post to support yer statement nor back it up with a shred of credible evidence. You cannot show why LIT is unreasonable or why the numbers dont stack up.

Swinney said if you want to call it that then it's fine with me, I'm not fussed about that."
Take yer lies elsewhere or back em up with real facts.
95

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 09:28:45
97

Hold on sunshine your first 5.5K plus is exempt from taxation at any level.
96

duelay no more,

Perth 27/10/2008 09:33:49
suchaparcelofrogues.

Has someone appointed you as the arbitrer of opinion on this subject, if so please explain your position in society and politics such that the rest of us can decide if we are going to pay any further attention.

My view is that most of the taxation that I pay to local government, and to some degree Central Government, is wasted on projects that I would not support as an individual.

Over the decades taxes have rarely reduced for me, yet I support an army of pencil pushers who spend their time stirring the pot trying to find ways to inconvenience me, and the productive sectors of the community.

If local government officers and politicians were to get paid their (pension)/superannuation benefits into the same quagmire that the rest of us must suffer, then I might have more sympathy. But what I see is government's expenditure, constantly being re-rated to cope with gold plated pension arrangements for council and civil servants. I read somewhere that something like 55% of the average "police budget" is needed to service existing police pensions. Extend this to social engineers, desk sitters and all manner of other local council employees and it is clear that without restraint, the RABBITS will control the lettuce patch, and tax us to whatever their current needs have become.

There just comes a time when one has to say "enough", that I don't trust government and councils to spend my money wisely. Why can't I spend it for myself, after all I was the one who earned it, or saved it up. Why do I have to share some of my taxed income with people who have only taken from our society, and who invariably retort to personal insults everytime an arguement goes against their collective (approved) thinking?

I am as usual suspicious of changes in taxes as past experience suggests that it will not be good for me, no-matter what the headlines say.
97

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 09:34:28
98
From the BBC website:
JOHN SWINNEY: Well we'll certainly, we're certainly considering that as an option Jon. I'm very happy to confirm that and if we decide to do this in due course and we all want to call it a U-turn, then I'll call it a U-turn, I'm not fussed about that.

This is the last time I'll respond to your abuse you pathetic little man.
98

livilion,

livingston 27/10/2008 09:45:07
13 John Cameron,St Andrews
The Darien Scheme was finally completed by the USA, unfettered by the attentions of HM Govt.

The final outcome was the Panama canal and the nation of the same name. As vital an economic artery as the Suez canal or the English Channel in their spheres.

Shame narrow Anglo-Dutch interests blinded them to the greater possibilities open to all of us if this proposed 50mile stretch of road had been permitted to be built.

The Union Dividend?
99

Ewan Oosami,

27/10/2008 09:45:08
Call it council tax or local income tax you will never get your moneys worth from councils while they are full of non-jobs and golden pension grabbing cretins. What's the first thing these people do when times are tight?.....they reduce services not they're own inflated pay packets and perks. 25% of our council tax goes towards these councillors pensions. Whatever the choice is we'll all be worse off.
100

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 27/10/2008 09:45:11
It is clear that LIT is a non starter. Of course those with little or no income would vote for it - and those with any income would leave for warmer climes. Net result would be less tax income to redistribute and an even more profound benefits dependency culture.
101

livilion,

livingston 27/10/2008 09:52:13
So how many manifesto pledges have Scottish Labour fulfilled lately?

Surely Iain Gray and Bella Goldie's parties have been U-turning all the way since they were elected?

Remember:
'Education Education Education'
'No more boom and bust?'
and whatever the Tories promised...

Oh they didn't win enough seats to be in a position to implement all of their manifesto committments?
102

Gedguy2,

London 27/10/2008 10:03:22
You do no justice to the cause of independence if you resort to using insults in your discussions with the Unionists; no matter how idiotic their statements seem to be. After all, in a democracy everybody has the right to put forward their ideas no matter how ridiculous their ideas seem at the time.
Personally I support the LIT as I see the CT as an unfair burden on local taxpayers no matter what their class. Suchaparcelofrougues is putting several well balanced points across but is ruining those points with unnecessary vitriol. Good manners cost nothing.
103

Miss H,

27/10/2008 10:13:50
Sooner or later political journalists in Scotland are going to have to change their lexicon to reflect the changed political climate in Scotland. The political culture in Scotland is completely different to the adversarial Westminster model where, if the Government responds to concerns raised, that is characterised as a u-turn or concession – in other words a sign of weakness. In reality it is not a sign of weakness to have responsive government which actually pays attention to the views of the people it consults. It’s a sign of good government.
104

Alan B,

27/10/2008 10:14:54
Cannot see how the headline has much relevence to the article.

When i read the headline i would expected the scotsman to be reporting that the government were dropping lit. However it just seems like they are proposing some admendments to it that they already supported in the longer term but wanted to delay for a while until the new tax had been implemented and settled down.
105

Miss H,

27/10/2008 10:16:29
15 That already is the case. Look at Glasgow where most of the high earners make sure they live in places like Eastwood and Bearsden so they don't have to pay council tax in Glasgow. LIT would actually rectify that situation.
106

Miss H,

27/10/2008 10:19:07
29 Labour won't support it because it is an SNP policy, pure and simple. And it is Labour who have had their bluff called because they assumed wrongly that the SNP was not going to try and get the LIT through Parliament. But they are.
107

G,

dundy 27/10/2008 10:20:42
The SNPItes are back to type....valid criticisms of an uncosted tax are met with accusations of anti-Scottish treachery and cowardice.....
108

livilion,

livingston 27/10/2008 10:22:15
From the headline anyone might be forgiven for thinking that John Swinney had committed to abandoning LIT, but when you read further it turns out that what he has said is he'll consider the findings of his government's own consultation when framing the LIT proposal to go before the Chamber in Holyrood.

Now it strikes me as quite reasonable that if he set up the consultation the very least he should do is take its advice, and if that advice says that the cost of collecting tax on investment income is not as prohibitive as he had assumed then morally the government is obliged to follow that advice.

Real politik in a minority administration: if you want to pass major legislation it follows that you may have to take on board the wishes of the junior members of the Chamber. An alien concept admittedly for those used to doing what they've been told from Whitehall.

Get over it.
109

Miss H,

27/10/2008 10:26:46
40 Yes it is a tax cut targeted at people on low and average wages - the kind of people who are being hit the hardest by the credit crunch and rising fuel bills. Councils will not have less money as the shortfall will be met centrally - but it would be true to say that they will not have more money.

That's the way it is. We are in a different position as regards funding. You must be aware that when Labour were in power the budget they were given at Holyrood increased massively so they could pass more on to local government. But they ring fenced most of that money for their own pet projects so arguably a lot of the extra funding was wasted. By radically reducing ring fencing the SNP has ensured that councils can spend according to locally, not nationally, set priorities. So while there will be (comparatively) less money in the pot I think people will see better and more responsive services because there is more local control.
110

Miss H,

27/10/2008 10:28:49
62 - yes
111

Miss H,

27/10/2008 10:31:46
81 No pensions and savings are exempt. Initially the SNP proposed to exempt all unearned income but Lthere was a big fuss about people who have unearned income from stocks and shares not paying LIT so they are looking at making that income taxable.
112

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 10:33:50
103

Youre a w*nker you know that troll the quote from your own source is
"we're certainly considering that as an option Jon. I'm very happy to confirm that and if we decide to do this in due course and "IF" we all want to call it a U-turn, then I'll call it a U-turn, I'm not fussed about that.

THAT IS ONE MIGHTY BIG IF WHICH YOU MANAGED TO LEAVE OUT OF YOUR QUOTE FROM YOUR OWN SOURCE.

But then the real quote and real context is
Swinney said "if you want to call it that then it's fine with me, I'm not fussed about that."

Stop lying and I will stop swearing at you w*nker.
113

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 10:36:05
109

If its so clear you wont have any difficulty in backing up your opinion with substanciated facts to prove it will you?
114

Publius,

London 27/10/2008 10:38:58
LIT is coming unstuck. The more it is tinkered with the worse it gets. Supporters of LIT please note:
(1) At 3 pence in the pound, LIT will raise less than the existing council tax. If some councils only charge 1 or 2 pence, LIT will raise even less.
(2) Unemployment is likely to rise soon so the take from all income tax, including LIT, will fall.
(3) Imposing on LIT on investment income will make LIT more complicated and more difficult to operate.

Swinney should give up before LIT destroys him and the SNP government.
115

Major General Puffin-Stuff,

27/10/2008 10:39:16
#11

Hi GC, dude! Nice to see that you still know about as much about politics here as I do about politics in California, Arizona, Utah or Nevada - places I've just been visiting...........and NOBODY there ever used the term dude, dude!
116

Lady Golightly,

27/10/2008 10:42:10
How refreshing to read Miss H's comments. She puts forward the case for LIT clearly and without resorting to rhetoric and abuse of other posters.

I will read her comments.

On the other hand the poster calling himself/herself 'suchaparcelofrogues' does the exact opposite.

I will not read his/her comments.

This poster is doing the cause of the SNP no good at all. Perhaps that is the intention?
117

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 10:45:10
123

I agree it shouldnt be tinkered with but then its the unionists who are tinkering with it not the Scottish government.

1. LIT is a tax cut that seems to be the general consensus all around glad we can agree on that.
I doubt a council exists on the planet which is prepared to raise less income than its entitled to so yer point is mute.

2.It will also make it more difficult of folk to pay ever increacing levels of council tax wont it?

3.I agree but here again its a unionist proposal and the SNP may be forced to implement it in order to get the legislation through.

It seems to me that its the oppositions tinkering which may rebound on them when LIT is introduced down south after the poll type tax rebellion over council tax levels relative to Scottish LIT levels.
118

Miss H,

27/10/2008 10:47:22
109 A LIT will make no difference to those who are on benefits – they don’t pay council tax now, they won’t pay local income tax. The only people who will pay it are those who pay income tax, which is actually a larger group than those who currently pay council tax. So you are increasing the tax base but, because it is an income based tax, the amount of tax paid relates directly to ability to pay. That is the main problem with council tax, it is not directly related to ability to pay. The unfairness of council tax was bad enough when the SNP initially produced the LIT proposals but in today’s economic climate there is a greater need than ever to cut some slack to low and middle earners who are really being hit by the credit crunch and rises in fuel prices. Rich people understand that as well as anybody else. Being wealthy does not automatically make people completely self-centred, as you appear to think.
119

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 10:48:48
125

So now that Miss H has convinced you of the LIT argument I suppose we shouldnt expect to see you on here posting in your various logons trying to rubbish the proposal with lies anymore is that right?
120

Miss H,

27/10/2008 10:49:20
123 You also need to get your head round the changed political climate in Scotland.

This is not Westminster. Different rules apply.
121

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 10:51:31
127

I do believe all of these points have been made at least a dozen times on these blogs already and to the same posters.
Its the same argument repeated over and over again every time an LIT story rears its head.
122

Numberonecynic,

Getting out as soon as I can! 27/10/2008 10:55:13
What a fantastic idea, why don't we make everything earnings related?
Let's see now, I earn more so it should cost me more to have my bin emptied (why). If it's such a fair system why don't the supermarkets start charging more to higher earners for essentials such as milk and bread etc?
The SNP will destroy this country, it's time to get out and leave it to the wasters that have never worked and have no intention of doing so.
123

Gedguy2,

London 27/10/2008 10:55:33
The headline on this article does suggest a u-turn on SNP policy until you read what was actually said by Swinney. I expect that the pro union media in Scotland and the rest of the UK will continue to use scare tactics as that is their belief by, not only the journalists but, the owners also. I would not expect the UK media to be any different. I just wonder what stance they will take when Scotland gets its independence; I suspect that it will not change. As to the labour government in Westminster, it is obvious that they are taking the pro union stance for they believe in the union and that is their right to do so. It would be naive of the nats to imagine that they will get to fight their corner on a level playing field. This is politics and the whole of the unionist and UK government will do all in its power to keep the status quo. This is a powerful country that we are fighting against (metaphorically) and we will have to depend on the belief that a democratic process will lead us to our desired goal. I think AS knows this and is playing his cards right. However, in the end it is up to the Scottish people to decide this and I, personally, will accept whatever the Scottish voters decide at the ballot box when a referendum is given to the Scottish people. I wish I was able to be there to give my vote.
124

daveserviceman,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 11:00:37
well if the LA's get less monies then the first cut will be refuse collection that will go to the wall everyone then will be responsible for taking their own refuse to the tip. as a bin lorry costs nearly £150,0000
the a massive savings in expenditure will be made
125

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:01:27
131

Everything already is earnings related its a phenomena called capitalism and it shows that the more you have the more you can spend be it on taxes goods luxuries or essentials.
Did you have a point?
126

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 11:01:33
132
This is about LIT, an incompetent method of local taxation which was laughed out of court by almost every independent organisation which was asked for an opinion. From tax professionals to the STUC to the CBI, all opposed it.
The SNP would have us believe these organisations opposed LIT because they are corrupt.
I don't share their jaundiced view of the wider Scottish society.
127

livilion,

livingston 27/10/2008 11:02:03
#81 watcher

The difference between Thatcher's Poll Tax and this proposed local income tax is that the poll tax was a property based tax, such as that now favoured by Iain Gray.
Everyone residing at an address and in employment was taxed depending on the value of the property they lived in.

The local income tax on the other hand is based on how much you earn and therefor your ability to pay.

A fundamental difference you must agree?

The student issue is a red herring, the vast majority of students will never earn enough to fall into the LIT net, and those that do will, by definition, be as well placed to afford to pay it as anyone else.

Personally I'd take students out of the tax loop altogether and let them get on with their studies and personal development, so that we get the best value when they come onto the jobs market and repay our investment in them.

I would however stipulate that students trained here at our expense undertake to remain in the country for a set period (3-5years perhaps)so that we are not training other nations' elite resources for no benefit to those who provided their training.
128

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:02:44
133

So maybe you can be the first one on here to show us what the relationship is between local taxation levels and service cuts?
129

Lady Golightly,

27/10/2008 11:03:28
Gedguy2,London
'I wish I was able to be there to give my vote.'

Move back then, unless you're in prison there's no reason why you can't.
130

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:04:28
135

So why dont you list the "objectors" alongside their political affiliations then?
131

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 11:08:05
Miss H,

Well done with your explanation of what the ramifications of the LIT will be. LIT is a wonderfull method of funding Local Council Services. The very idea is probably the fairest system that has been brought up ever. Quite a few of the negative comments on here are based on either self interest or silly loyalty to London Controlled Political Parties. Lets not forget the Council Tax rise over the previous term of the Labour Party. Rises of up to 60% were common for even the less well of in our society. Our Elderly will benefit enormously, from an Lit System. The Average Scottish Family will be much better off, especially knowing that Local Councils cannot just raise Council Tax to cover up inefficient management. The Centralise settings of subsidy, will balance Council Management Structures. After all look at the poor job former Councils left behind when they were ejected by the People. Aberdeen is still finding out many new and strange overspends. Edinburgh is having to work very hard, to put the Cities Finances in good order after New Labour years of mismangement. The list goes on.

I believe LIT is being opposed by New Labour because the London New Labour Party, are dependant on some of the highest tax rates of the less well off in the Entire World. When the other two Nations see Scotlands Local Tax Levels, that are founded on the priciple of efficent management there will be an almighty shout condemning New Labours High Taxes. England and Wales will put emormous pressure on Brown and his RagTag bunch of CROOKS.

The Scottish Liberals and their masters down south need this to happen if they are to survive. Poor Tavish is the least popular leader of a political party in Scotland. I certainly hope he gets back to core Liberal Poicies and joins the fight for full Independence.
132

Miss H,

27/10/2008 11:08:55
135 Actually it is about taking the responses to the consultation and incorporating them into the legislative proposals.

I understand that it is frustrating for Labour to realise that the SNP is going to succeed - but they are, so time to start engaging with the process instead of sniping from the sidelines.
133

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 11:12:05
141
Actually if the SNP was serious about responding to the consultation they would stop this cruel and cynical hoax on the Scottish people immediately. I'm not holding my breath.
134

HughB,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 11:13:42
Funny how the headline matches the labour spin on this.

Can Mr Gray define what a HUGE U-turn is. A U-turn is exactly 180 degrees, so if you go any more than that, you are likely to start heading towards a full circle, which in effect cancels out the HUGE U-turn.

What was Mr.Gray before he became the puppet "Labour Leader"? Obviously not any good at maths.
135

livilion,

livingston 27/10/2008 11:15:31
#133 daveserviceman
The point here is that the greatest proportion of local authority expenditure comes direct from central government.

Locally sourced income only accounts for less than a third of the total council spends.

Frankly I'm at odds with poorer councils having to shaft their residents in order to be able to compete with more affluent areas.
eg how much could a 'Pilton' town council raise against their needs in council tax compared with their neighbours next door in a Barnton or Crammond, to take a hypothetical example?

Aye, I know about ECC.
136

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 11:16:40
If the Scottish Parliament had more power over income tax rates would/should they keep the same scheme or would/should they alter it radically?
137

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:20:58
145

Well I am personally for any new tax schemes which will reduce my tax burden isnt everybody?
LIT is the only tax proposal which shows a tax reduction for most and particulary for those who need it most so until a better proposal comes along to reduce it further then I believe we should stick with this one how about you?
138

livilion,

livingston 27/10/2008 11:21:26
145 Ugly George
Half the monies raised by the Tax office is wasted in trying to collect it.

I'm sure if we concentrated on what we need here in Scotland we could come up with a more efficient machine to collect PAYE.
139

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 11:22:38
Gedguy2,

You must have family up here to register your ability to vote on Independence. Surely they could put you up for the Vote.

Remember we are in the biggest fight ever for our Peoples Nations freedom.

The SNP seeks Independence based on the Democratic Process. The GHANDI method of non violent action receives 100% support from the entire Scottish Race

I believe our cause and struggles will be applauded by the world one day. It will be seen as one of the most important political acts of the New Millenium and will be disussed in most centres of higher learning.

And guess what boys and girls, you will be part of it. Cant be bad.
140

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 11:23:11
147
'Half the monies raised by the Tax office is wasted in trying to collect it.'
Are you sure?
141

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 11:24:58
148.
'Remember we are in the biggest fight ever for our Peoples Nations freedom.'

Ever heard of WW2?

142

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:25:14
149

Are you prepared to back up any of yer useless opinions with facts yet?
143

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:26:37
150

Yes wasnt that the result of a single nation trying to build and empire?
144

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 11:27:08
HUGHB

If Grey did any more U TURNS we might be very lucky and he could disappear up his own ERKY.
145

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 11:30:50
Grahamski

Either he is correct or all your Unionist mates have been posting even more lies than we thought they had.

Go back through all the forums and you will find it lots and lots of time from your mates.
146

Nevsky,

Moscow 27/10/2008 11:36:22
Labour have just performed a u-turn and it's not good news for the unionists and their bunting:

Brown drops British Day plans
1 hour ago

LONDON (AFP) — Plans proposed by Prime Minister Gordon Brown in the wake of the 7/7 bombings for a "national day" to celebrate Britishness have been shelved by the government, it was revealed on Monday.

147

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 11:37:45
Grahamski,

Perhaps you can explain to us all exactly how fighting Germany was any worse than 300 years of subdugation.

Be very carefull, because we probably know your parties spin about how great it is for Scots to not be able to decide Scotlands Future, because they are pathetic and incapable. Remember what Brown said when he had to sneak into Glenrothes with his armed guards just like a NAZI Commander would have to do.
148

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 11:37:53
154
I have absolutely no idea who or what you are talking about.
149

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 11:38:28
148 A Better Way
"entire Scottish Race"

Are you saying that being Scottish is being part of an ethnic group?

Who does this "race" include and who does it not include. Does it include an individual born in Bangladesh but living in Glasgow. If so, does it also include someone born in Edinburgh but living in London?
150

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 11:38:41
154
wow
151

Grahamski,

Falkirk 27/10/2008 11:41:31
154
Perhaps it would be best if you reflected for a while before posting any more stupid and quite frankly vile opinions. Silly boy.
152

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 11:43:09
146 A Better Way
"I believe our cause and struggles will be applauded by the world one day. It will be seen as one of the most important political acts of the New Millenium and will be disussed in most centres of higher learning".

Do you really believe that the rest of the world would take much notice? Nations, countries or whatever have joined together, split apart countless times over the centuries. What would be so unique about this case?
153

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:43:26
155

I dont know about a "Scottish race" but here is a version of the "British race"

http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/25502

Dont see any reference to a Scottish factor in it though.
154

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:44:06
158

Be nice if you could practice what you preach.
155

Ugly George,

27/10/2008 11:46:12
154 A Better Way
"Remember what Brown said when he had to sneak into Glenrothes with his armed guards just like a NAZI Commander would have to do."

I am not a big fan of Gordon Brown but I have to say in his defence that I don't recall of him murdering 6 million Jews in gas chambers or sending children to be experimented on.
156

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:47:24
162

He still has a couple of years left in charge.
157

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 11:50:39
Sorry UGLY but Scottish Nats dont hound people because of their believes. We leave that up to the New Labour Party who have managed to isolate and vilified hundreds of thousands of the peope of the three nations who happen to pray to their own god, whilst living meaningfull lives as law abiding citizens.

I want to do a Grey here and apologise for using an incorrect term such as race. We SNP supporters are very lucky because we dont have to repeat the words by our leader if he is wrong. If Alex Salmond EVER advocated holding citizens for 42 days, then I would let him know that I would not vote for him. Can you say yhe same about Brown?.
158

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:54:12
159

If its not unique then what exactly is the case for the union again? isnt Scotland the only nation on the planet which is better off subjegated under a larger nation as opposed to being independent?
159

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 11:55:25
164

Ugly we hound you because you dont have any beliefs we hound you because you lie about what we believe in.
160

Davie from Irvine,

Auld Irvine Toun Ayrshire 27/10/2008 11:56:27
Local income tax has been SNP and Liberal policy for many years, probably more than 30 years, some posters are implying that the SNP made it up as an election bribe before the Scottish parliament elections, LIT has been a popular option for many years, until recent scaremongering lead by new Liebour.
161

Ugly George,

27/10/2008 11:57:17
164 A Better Way
"Can you say yhe same about Brown?"
As I said, on a previous post, I am not a fan of Gordon Brown. Indeed, just today on the Scotsman thread on pensions, I have been critical of him. I was just trying to get a proper level of perspective on the discussion. To go from talking about LIT to equating Gordon Brown to the Nazis is, I feel, not an appropriate level of perspective.
162

sonofhamish,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 11:59:02
Local income tax is much fairer for the large majority of people. Taxing someone on the value of a property - that based on the current sitatuation has probably fallen - is nonsense. There are MANY pensioners who live in a house they could never afford to buy. How can anyone think this makes any sense.

Once this is done, get rid of business rates and Scotland can have a much more dynamic, progressive and business friendly regime also.
163

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 12:00:09
I have No doubt you are genuine UGLY. You do on many occasions display common sense.

I ask you sincerely, do you really believe the illegal attack on Iraq was correct?.

Do you sincerely think that the death of one million people (UN estimates) is the act of a normal sane person?.

Do you condemn Browns Parties members of Parliament in London VOTE TO ATTACK Iraq?.

I certainly hope I have a better opinion of you from your participation on this forum, to think you are a person who has enough ethics to say NO to the three Points.
164

Nevsky,

Moscow 27/10/2008 12:00:16
168 George#

Just out of interest (and i would appreciate an honest answer) would you vote 'yes' in a referendum if the conservatives take hold of Westminster?

Are you one of the 27% who would switch?
165

GEORGE KING,

DUMFRIES SCOTLAND 27/10/2008 12:00:45
great news we need more taxes and the snp are the right people to introduce it.
166

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 12:00:50
166 parcel
Why do you feel the need to "hound" me. And why do you merely resort to your usual mantra of accusing me of lying - an accusation that you and you alone make against me.
167

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:02:20
168

Ugly the Third Reich was all about world domination by military means can you point out the difference between that and the creation of the "British" empire?
168

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:03:02
174

Eh because you lie constantly on these blogs.
169

Ugly George,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 12:04:06
172 Nevski
No to both questions.

Where did the 27% "switch" figure come from? If I remember correctly that figure was a description of those who felt they might be more likely to vote yes - not that they would switch.
170

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:04:58
173

Why is that? LIT is a tax substitution not a brand new seperate tax.
171

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 12:05:08
175 Parcel
Systematic genocide - will that do for starters.
172

Ugly George,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 12:06:39
176 Parcel
Only in terms of your accusations, inferences and perceptions. Who else has accused me of lying?
173

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:06:56
179

Ah nobody died during or because of the creation of the "British" empire is that right?
174

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:08:22
179

concentration camps for example where not first introduced to the world by the British is that right?
175

Nevsky,

Moscow 27/10/2008 12:08:35
177 George#

Interesting that you would even prefer to be goverenment by memners of the Burlington Club rather than Scotland go it's own way, no hope for you i am afraid!

The figure was 27% that would switch their vote from a no to a yes, not a more likely.

That makes 30% + 26% a clear majority in favour! Possibly the highest vote in favour i have ever seen.

Bit dissapointed that some Scots will even accept rule by the Burlington Club rather than have the self-respect to vote yes but c'est la vie en Ecosse.
176

Davie from Irvine,

Auld Irvine Toun Ayrshire. 27/10/2008 12:08:49
170 sonofhamish, i agree with you, i have been in sizeable houses where an old person lives, where they have been brought up , and the house in a very bad state of repair, for which they cannot afford to repair, so council tax based on the size of there property is hardly a fair tax, its time for LIT.
177

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 12:09:55
183 Nevski
"The figure was 27% that would switch their vote from a no to a yes, not a more likely."

Which poll was that?

178

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 12:11:14
182 Parcel
But they did not gas them all there.
179

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 12:15:04
183 Nevski
I am not familiar with the Burlington Club as I have never set foot in it. Have you?
180

Nevsky,

Moscow 27/10/2008 12:15:35
185 Ugly#

Times, here is the quote for you:

'Of those who said they would vote against independence, 26% said they would switch their vote in the event of a Tory government'
181

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 12:19:33
Your right UGLY, we are being diverted from the topic.

I will pay a lot more money in LIT than I pay at present. I fully understand the principle here and agree with it 100%. I can afford to pay more, but the amount is actually a lower percentage of what I could pay. I live in Scotland and as a person understand that local services arec essential to any well ordered society. If me paying a greater total sum means that a less well off Scot would pay less, then I dont have a problem with that. A family with a child with a disability, may need to have to struggle by with only one wage coming in. If me paying a proportionate higher amount helps them, then bloody well good for them. I know their income is down and they have enough worries as it is.

They are after all my fellow Scots. Thats what seperates us from the less caring societies like the USA. GOD forbid we ever end up being as selfish as them.
182

Nevsky,

Moscow 27/10/2008 12:19:36
187 George#

As i (amd i presume you) were not educated at Eton then we wouldn't get an invite i am afraid, Osborn, Cameron, Rothschild, Boris Johnson were all members together though..your soon to be rulers in one way or another.
183

pressure,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:19:55
grahamski

I think we agree with each other!

184

Nevsky,

Moscow 27/10/2008 12:21:02
189 Better Way#

I agree, i would be willing to pay more tax only IN Scotland and FOR Scots, no problem.
185

Davie from Irvine,

Auld Irvine Toun Ayrshire 27/10/2008 12:23:42
The Scotsman headline SNP u turn on LIT is hardly accurate, the SNP are a minority government and needs the support of other partys to get such legislation through, local income tax is common policy between SNP and LIB DEM with some differences on how it should be administered, so it is inevitable the government will have to make concessions to get the bill through, and John Swinney has maintained the lcal level can vary no futher than the original 3%.
186

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 12:26:08
188 Nevski
So you will be hoping for a Tory win. That could raise an interesting prospect. Should nationalists all vote Tory at the next General Election as a means of achieving their aim?
187

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 12:26:48
SUPER,

Just a few words about the British Concentration Camps.

SOUTH AFRICA = BOER WAR = BRITISH CONCENTRATION CAMPS. YES ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF BRITISH JUSTICE.
188

Davie from Irvine,

Auld Irvine Toun 27/10/2008 12:29:22
ugly george @194 Thats hardly likely george, you can be assured that i wont be voting Tory.
189

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:32:38
Lots of countries have things to be ashamed of, as does Scotland whose soldiers and coomanders played a full part in the British Empire which also brought a lot of good. The fact is the vast majority of Scots voted for parties supportive of the Iraq war, the only difference between Nats and other countries is you blame it all on the English.
190

James John,

Wishaw 27/10/2008 12:35:54
Having discovered this site only a few weeks ago I am amazed by the different shades of opinion. I have been looking to see the result of the war of words between SM753 and Brownlie but cannot seem to find it. Can anyone help?

Sorry that this is of topic.
191

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:37:01
186

Gas em shoot em stab em starve em it dont make any difference to the dead and the millions who were killed as a direct result of the British empires ambitions are no different to the millions killed because of the Third Reichs ambitions.
And the first victims of the "British" empire were Wales Ireland and Scotland.
192

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 12:37:38
NO UGLY the English will take care of that one themselves. The English naturally vote Tory and if thats the case it will be good for England. After all we Scots should let the English have a government they want.

Scotland should vote for Scottish Rights and Vote for a Political Party that cares about Scottish Peoples issues. Not a London Centric Party like the three we have up here fighting for pro English Policies.

It would make no sense whatsoever for Scotland denying the poor English Peoples right to an English Party.
193

Calum Crubag,

27/10/2008 12:39:47
Fireman and nurses?

Didn't Labour refer to striking firemen as 'fascists'??!

Good to see different parties working together to improve the lot of most of us instead of the usual bitter sniping and scaremongering from Labour.
194

57vintage,

Keith 27/10/2008 12:40:30
Whilst normally a cynical (wha, me?) critic of the major parties, I think the SNP have done the right thing in that their 'consultation' told them that there were anomalous issues which they are now trying to address. That this consultation seems largely toi have been with the LibDems to get their support in Parliament, it is nevertheless worthy of note that they may actually do something about the iniquities that were inherent in the original LIT proposals.

I just hope that they give credit to the SSP from whom this policy was taken, as was the Free School Meals proposal. Maybe that Sheridan boy wisna so bad after all, eh?
195

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:40:30
197

As I said the first victims of the "British" empire were Wales Ireland and Scotland.

The vast majority of people in the UK initially believed the governments claims of WMDs and the 40 minute window. I think there are still some people who cant quite believe the extent of the lie and the consequences even now.
196

Nevsky,

Moscow 27/10/2008 12:40:55
194 George#

I certainly won't be voting Tory. It would not matter if everyone in Scotland voted Labour, a Toy government will be voted in by the English full stop.

There is no dilemma for nationalists here but there is a huge one for Lib Dem and Labour voters; if you don't vote 'yes' in a referendum then you are wholeheartedly endorsing a Conservative government with perhaps 2 Scottish MPs?

Regardless of the Tories you think a UK parliament with 2 conservative MPs is a fair position in which the interests of Scotland can be served?
197

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 12:44:06
188 Davie/190 Nevski

Possible scenario:
The Times poll you quoted gave a clear majority for a no vote (presumably with a Labour govt)

One might then conclude that if Labour win the General Election a no vote in a future referendum is probable.

Labour might well have to rely on MPs from Scotland if it is to have more MPs than the Tories.

If the nationalists all vote Tory then the Tories will gain seats and Labour will lose some. This might tip the balance to make the Tories the biggest party.

In a future referendum a yes vote is more likely.
198

Toom,

27/10/2008 12:45:54
They will have to be careful how they define this 'investment income' and 'unearned income' that needs to be taxed. Is that the share dividends and income from investments that some ordinary folk choose to make with money that they've already paid income tax, and will pay LIT, on, and where they already pay dividend tax, stamp duty and capital gains.

Any further penalty doesn't square with the idea that we all need to work longer and save more for our old age? It will simply ensure that fewer do.

There will need to be reasonable thresholds so that modest 'unearned' income levels are not penalised. Those who take personal responsibility to make reasonable provision for themselves, and decrease the chances that they'll need, or qualify for, state support in old age, need more encouragement and not further penalties
199

union member,

Glasgow 27/10/2008 12:49:12
Whether it is set at 3p or capped at 3p nationally it is NOT a local tax. The LibDems would pay a high price if they allow this attack on working people to be introduced.

However they are already trying to out-Tory the SNP on tax so they may be tempted.
200

union member,

Glasgow 27/10/2008 12:49:27
Whether it is set at 3p or capped at 3p nationally it is NOT a local tax. The LibDems would pay a high price if they allow this attack on working people to be introduced.

However they are already trying to out-Tory the SNP on tax so they may be tempted.
201

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:49:35
209

However you cut it a UK government cannot be elected without at least over 200 English MPs closer to 212 I believe irrespective of how the 59 Scottish seats vote.
202

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:52:05
212

Oh dont start dragging up that cr*p again its been done to death on these blogs already.
A local tax is a tax spent locally not a tax raised locally.
203

57vintage,

Keith 27/10/2008 12:52:58
#94
"He says he may have to take investment earnings in order to get the proposal through parliament because the opposition parties are insisting on it as a price for their support.
What do you expect from unionists?"

So "unionists" are all tarred with the same brush in your black and white world?

Did you agree that income from dividends and other non PAYE (I suppose) sources should be exempt? That's some claim from a so-called left of centre party supporter. Then again when you have Brian Souter underwriting election expenses to the tune of half a million quid....

Take off your blinkers and learn some respect. Some of your generalised insulting posts are a disgrace and do you nor your party of choice any favours.
204

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:56:25
215

Dividends from company profits are taxed at corporation taxation level and dividend profits from shares are taxed at savings level when they are put into bank accounts so where is the tax loss?
205

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 12:58:46
215

Respect to a bunch of lying deceitful trolls who may very well only be one sick troll?
I am showing exactly the correct amount of respect they have earned.
206

Alan B,

27/10/2008 13:01:22
#suchaparcelofrogues

Apologies for this off topic post. But we previously had a discussion with regards to offshort tax avoidance. The scotsman article was very poor and badly researched.

However the sunday herald ran some excellent articles on this yesterday.

http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2463296.0.wish_you_were_here.php


"In the past decade or so, the big banks have all used their offshore tax havens to set up all manner of off-balance sheet vehicles under a plethora of confusing names to avoid regulation and create almost unlimited credit. In a real sense, this use of tax havens is what turned the sub-prime mess into the great banking crash of 2008, Here's how it works. Take Northern Rock. When the government nationalised the delinquent mortgage bank last year it discovered, to its horror, that the Rock didn't actually own most of its mortgages - it had sold £50 billion of them to a structured investment vehicle (SIV) called Granite, based in Jersey. Granite was registered as benefiting a charity for children with Down's Syndrome in the northeast of England. What generosity! Except that the children never saw a penny - it was all an exercise in financial engineering.

The Rock had "sold" its mortgages to itself in the form of this new company-come-charitable trust. Through legal chicanery it was able to use this SIV to conduct all sorts of financial activities without these appearing on the formal balance sheet of Northern Rock.

Basing these special-purpose vehicles off shore not only means they are able to avoid UK tax, they can also ignore UK banking regulations and capital requirements. This allows them to trade in all manner of derivatives financed by cheap credit on the wholesale money markets - activities which would be illegal under UK jurisdiction."

Just shows you what Browns regulatory regime was really doing.
207

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 13:03:44
All politicians are the same.

Sorry mate but we Scots Marched to let our politicians know we did not want the war. The SNP did not support the war.

After Independence Scotland will have their Constitutional rights back. The Government in Scotland will have no alternative except to put the matter of joining a war to the Sovereign Power in Scotland. That Power is held by The Scottish People.

Have a look at the Irish Referendum on the EU Constitution. The Irish Government tried everything they could to satisfy the EU bigwigs, but the People voted NO. You will have that power in a free Scotland and whaever government is in can only live with it.

Jus a quick fact for you. When Scotland is free, you will have a vote on the setup of the Country. You will havethe Power to force the resignation of the Scottish Government. You cant do that in the Westminster System because it doesnt have a Constitution for the People or anyone who decides they want to stay in government against the will of the People.

Brown would have been out by now, under the system here in Scotland.

I'll bet that will get rid of the apathy here in Scotland about Politicians who think they are more important than the People.

GOVERNMENT SHOULD FEAR THE WRATH OF THE PEOPLE, NOT THE PEOPLE FEAR THE WRATH OF A GOVERNMENT.

THATS WHAT YOU GET FROM A FREE SCOTLAND. AND THAT IS A FACT. ITS JUST ANOTHER REASON WHY WESTMINSTER LOATHS THE SNP. OUR FIGHT IS ABOUT GIVING ALL THE PEOPLE OF THE UK THEIR RIGHT TO FAIR GOVERNMENT. YOU KNOW WHAT THE EXISTING LONDON GOVERNMENTS ATTITUDE IS TO THE PEOPLE. AND WE CERTAINLY KNOW ABOUT THATCHER. NONE OF IT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED UNDER OUR CONSTITUTION.

CHECK OUT THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND UNDER WESTMINSTER at WIKPEDIA THEN CHECK OUT SCOTLANDS.
208

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 13:06:19
218

It explains why the government constantly likes to concentrate their efforts and those of the press in highlighting benefit fraud as opposed to tax fraud.
Even when Tax fraud costs the country billions and benefit fraud costs the country a couple of million at most.
209

brownlie,

27/10/2008 13:16:38
198 James John

Not really a war of words. I was pointing out that he was obviously a reader of this site for ages and yet only contributed as sm753 for a matter of months.

He objected to my sniping and not making a contribution. I believe if people make ridiculous postings then they can expect to be ridiculed.

When I put forward some of my beliefs he agreed with some of them. I'll get back to him on the rest.

Welcome to the site and don't forget to join in even if it is on the wrong side!!
210

vimto,

27/10/2008 13:18:48
Swinney,more like swindler,when are you all going to wake up and smell the coffee,the snp are out for their own ends,and to cause as much trouble between England and Scotland as they possible can.
211

A Better Way,

27/10/2008 13:19:52
#212 Union Member.

The tone of your post actually comes across as SPIN by a New Labour Troll.

If thats the case couldnt you pass over a few Brown envelopes to help the real battlers like our pensioners.

Maybe you and your New Labour Mates could go without that new car, you intended to use to give your daughter. Are your earnings up at the level of Marshalls. Do you have a nice big house care of the Scottish Peoples hard times.
212

vimto,

27/10/2008 13:21:01
219. CALM DOWN! and try and talk sense.
213

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 13:22:20
216 Parcel
"dividend profits from shares are taxed at savings level when they are put into bank accounts so where is the tax loss?"

Dividends from shares are paid to individuals net of 10% tax. If you are due £1000 in dividends from BP you receive £900 with a tax credit for £100 as a statement that you have paid the tax. Once you get that £900 you can spend it as you wish with no further tax to pay unless you are a higher rate tax payer.

Dividend payments on shares are usually sent out twice a year by the registrars of the company. To add the 3p LIT onto this the Scottish Govt would have to get the Inland Revenue and the registrars to agree to a scheme that would add 3% on all dividend payments to people resident in Scotland. Alternatively, they would have to get all recipients of dividends in Scotland to fill in a tax return and then request an additional payment from them.

214

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 13:22:28
222

If its attention yer after phone the samaritans they make their living dealing with folk like you.
215

brownlie,

27/10/2008 13:24:20
222 vimto

Good afternoon, your graciousness. I note what you say about the SNP being "out for their own ends" and wonder if you consider that their political opponents are not "out for their own ends" but are instead intent on government of the people for the people for altruistic reasons. Current evidence would suggest otherwise.
216

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 13:24:38
225

Dont forget the fee you have to pay to either the manager or managers of your portfolio.
217

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 13:27:33
225

Dividend payments on shares are usually sent out twice a year by the registrars of the company. To add the 3p LIT onto this the Scottish Govt would have to get the Inland Revenue and the registrars to agree to a scheme that would add 3% on all dividend payments to people resident in Scotland. Alternatively, they would have to get all recipients of dividends in Scotland to fill in a tax return and then request an additional payment from them

Something you should explain to the opposition parties who are trying to force the SNP to implement this consession onto the LIT proposal.
The same parties you yourself support on these blogs now if the SNP had won a majority then you wouldnt have been able to complain about this would you.
218

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 13:29:08
228 parcel
You don't have to pay a fee if you hold the share certificates yourself. Once you have paid the commission to the brokers for buying them, you can hold them for as lond as you want with no further charge.
219

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 13:30:27
229 Parcel
Who was complaining. I was merely pointing out what the situation is.
220

brownlie,

27/10/2008 13:35:27
231 George

As you seem not to favour LIT do you consider that most people in Scotland would be better off or worse off if the Council Tax was unfrozen and would be getting more onerous year on year.

You should also bear in mind that a revaluation, as in Wales, would mean a consequential substantial rise.
221

Davie from Irvine,

Auld Irvine Toun Ayrshire 27/10/2008 13:35:50
union member, would you care to explain why LIT is going to hurt hard working families ? and what is tory about it ?
222

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 27/10/2008 13:36:30
Vimto

Does the New Labour Party agree with Scotland reintroducing the Scottish Constitution.

Do the Unions fear the fact that they would be required to operate under the same system. For example the Union Elite would have to consult the members about political affiliations and the Members Contributions to The London Controlled New Labour Party.

Why would the unions fear open and regulated laws protecting the members. OF course they do because the Unions would be controlled by the members and subject to be thrown out if they upset the members.

No more freebie bottles of VIMTO or Brown Envelopes.
223

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 13:37:56
232

Ok so your not complaining about the LIT proposals anymore?
224

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 13:39:11
231

And if you want to invest further or change your investment as most people do with such a fluctuating income?
225

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 13:40:39
228

I should have added

Dont forget the fee you have to pay to either the manager or managers of your portfolio irrespective as to whether you make a profit or loss.
226

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 13:46:50
236 Parcel
Which comment of mine can be construed as a complaint about LIT? I can't see one. I merely asked some questions about it and gave some info.

Now I see why you continually accuse me of lying. You are obviously imagining comments that I have not made.
227

vimto,

27/10/2008 13:49:29
227, brownlie. The Labour Government seems to have the interests of the British people at heart (in a roundabout way) however, all the SNP seems to do is cause as much conflict with Westminster as they possibly can,this is not to benefit the scottish people but to make Salmond look more important than he actually is.
228

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 13:50:51
239

Are you referring only to this blog or all of the other blogs highlighting LIT as well?
and assuming of course you only post as Ugly George?
229

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 13:52:10
241

I think its all a plot in order to get you to post these wonderful not to be missed statements.
230

Green,

dUNDEE 27/10/2008 13:52:12
Duelay no more

Wow quote - Has someone appointed you as the arbitrer of opinion on this subject, if so please explain your position in society and politics such that the rest of us can decide if we are going to pay any further attention. - end quote

Wow wow. You are really telling us you don't listen to what people say or what reasoning they give, you just decide 'who they are' first?

How does this work in a democracy? We can run a democracy by dividing people up into groups and then decide which we will listen to and ignore the rest?

Like right religious/ wrong religious?

Male/female?

one skin colour/another skin colour?

Right nationality/ wrong nationality?
231

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 13:57:05
243 parcel
Anywhere.
232

Ugly George,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 13:59:57
245 Parcel
PS - No pasting a comment and saying I made it please. Anybody can paste anything.
233

GLW,

Tbilisi 27/10/2008 14:13:28
How is unearned income tax going to be collected? Is that the unearned income from drug dealers or is it interest from my Granny's post office savings.

Why not just leave an honesty box at the steps of the town hall....
234

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 14:22:06
246

How else am I going to produce yer own statement on here if I cannae paste it?
235

Miss H,

27/10/2008 14:32:16
143 If the Scottish Parliament had control of all taxation, benefits and pensions it is a safe bet that the systems would be radically simplified and integrated regardless of who was in power. I would also think that there would be a reduction in the number of councils and a rebalancing of tax raising powers between local and national government.
236

Alan B,

27/10/2008 14:35:38
#vimto

"The Labour Government seems to have the interests of the British people at heart"

You have got to be joking. Labour are in it for themselves and lining their own pockets.

Add to that they are a completely incompetent bunch.

And where are all these snp fights you talk about. If you actually look at the disputes it is labour actually in an immature and silly way. Look at some of the examples:

1)Brown withholds money from scottish parliament that should come to scotland in barnett consequentials when labour put addition money into english prisions.

How u can ridiculously consider the snp to be creating a fight by expecting that money to come to scotland as part of the rules brought in with the barnett formula in the 70s is beyond me. That is the problem with far too many unionists it does not matter how badly scotland gets treated.

2)Labour in london declare LIT as proposed by the snp illegal. That is the job of the preciding officer in the scottish parliament to decide if any piece of legisalation is within the competence of the scottish parliament. It is completely wrong for the treasurey to put pressure on what is a legal decision for petty party politics.

3)labour threaten to withhold council tax rebate money. All 3 of the other parties, tory, lib dems and snp believe scotland should get it share of the money. So labour is isolated and clearly wrong.

It was also in the labour governments own documentation saying the council tax rebate was part of the block grant.

Anyway at the end of the day it is silly to devolve powers to alter a method of council taxation and then threaten to withdraw money if an alternative political party in that devolved parliament chooses to use that power.

4)remember labour in london behaviour towards its own devolved labour exec. It refused to give info held by the social security dept to help implement free personal care. Why? Becuase labour in london did not want labour in scotland to implement t
237

Alan B,

27/10/2008 14:36:18
... Becuase labour in london did not want labour in scotland to implement the policy. Ridiculous.

5)Brown told the civil service in london not to cooperate with the civil service in scotland incase uncomfortable facts for labour in london were made public. And at the same time would not devolve civil service in scotland in the same way as NI.

6)Brown initial refused to set up the mean of communicating between westminster and the devolved parliaments that labour itself set up. Only when labour in wales and the snp and admin in NI joined together was Brown forsed into a humilating climbdown.

7)It was Brown who publicly said he would not work with scottish government and was mocked for it.

8)it was Brown who the scotsman reported would not return Salmonds calls.

9)it was brown that made a complete mess with calman and more powers for scottish parliament with so many uturns he was doing circles.


Can you given any serious areas where the snp are to blame for any dispute. We all know that both admins will have different views on policy but it is central governments job to support the devolved governments in devolved areas and not start interfering in devolved matters.
238

Alan B,

27/10/2008 14:38:04
#GLW

Unearned income is currently taxed. So if it were to be taxed it would make sense to tax it in a similar way.

It largely refers to income from investments and dividends.
239

Gedguy2,

London 27/10/2008 14:39:58
#136 lady Golightly
I would love to be able to return to my home town of Dundee but I have lived down here for nearly 35 years and all of my family are English. MY child has troubles and needs me here. As much as I love my country and will do all that I can to help my country; my family always comes first. I hope you understand that.

#146 A Better Way
I did not know that under the present rules of registering that I would be able to register to vote in Scotland as I am already on the voters register in London. I would not dream of doing anything that can be construed as being illegal. However, if I thought that I would be legally entitled to register to vote at any of my brother's or sister's addresses then I would most certainly take that option, but I don't think that would be legal.

#219 A Better Way
I have to support most of what you posted there.
240

Miss H,

27/10/2008 14:43:12
The SNP is 'in it' for independence. You could define that as our own ends but at least we have an end. If you were to ask me what Labour are in it for the answer would be I do not know because I do not know what Labour stand for any more. With the SNP you know exactly what you will get - an independent Scotland.

That's actually a pretty big difference. Having a defined goal means that the SNP is less susceptible to the intellectual corruption that seems to have overtaken Labour. Note I say intellectual corruption - I am not suggesting that all Labour members are corrupt, just that they have no shared vision and no clear values any more.
241

vimto,

27/10/2008 14:54:06
251. Deary me Alan you seem to be getting your knickers in a bit of a twist! As a loyal SNP supporter i would expect you to say nothing else, but hears the thing,it's fat boy salmond who goes around slagging off brown,it's fat boy salmond who will be the death of Scotland and it's fat boy salmond who said-“The prime minister has just fallen off the high wire.” No Mr Salmond,it is you that will very soon fall from grace, glenrothes will hail your death knell.
242

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 15:02:36
256

Couldnt get anybody at the Samaritans to talk to you eh? obviously a lost cause.
243

vimto,

27/10/2008 15:03:45
255.For now though, polls using the sort of wording that the SNP have suggested for a referendum show a lead for NO voters. From the UKPolling Report.
244

Davie from Irvine,

Auld Irvine Toun Ayrshire 27/10/2008 15:06:30
Alan B @251 252, Very well summned up Alan. The unionists will of course deny it, its all true folks, like it or not, congradualations on an excellent post Alan.
245

vimto,

27/10/2008 15:07:51
257. No my friend, it is you and the few who have saddly succumbed to the lies of salmond and co.
246

57vintage,

Keith 27/10/2008 15:09:16
#217

"215

Respect to a bunch of lying deceitful trolls who may very well only be one sick troll?
I am showing exactly the correct amount of respect they have earned"

This is getting no better.

It is possible for people to disagree, but it is usual for adults to respect the views of others without resorting to name-calling or insults.

That is called respect and you can sometimes seem to do a disservice to your own viewpoint and that of the political party whose ideology you follow.

All in all, pretty shameful really.
247

motherload,

merry England 27/10/2008 15:16:34
...loverly day. I've got me wee SNP umbrella out. Some utter bumber has been yelling all morning....'look round yer feet! The taxing water's rising. you numpties will drown in your total absolution of reality!' Yet my eyes see a mass of wee SNP umbrellas opening and all looking to the skies while the utter bumber is right. The tide rising about our feet, higher and higher till at our darkest hour the numbing effect is bliss with not a cloud in the sky ...all umbrellas dry...meohmy...loverly day!
248

vimto,

27/10/2008 15:18:15
259. Alan B is entitled to his point of view, but it is HIS personal view point, to congratulate him on that is quite stupid.
249

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 15:23:29
260

Funnily enough you silly little person I and many others like me believed in Scottish independence long before Alex Salmond came onto the scene.
250

Davie from Irvine,

Auld Irvine toun 27/10/2008 15:24:09
57vintage, there is a post above @ 263 by vimto that you may well wish to comment on the content.
251

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 15:25:16
261

So what are you the blog police? no let me guess another troll logon with nothing to offer.
252

Davie from Irvine,

Auld Irvine toun Ayrshire 27/10/2008 15:26:37
Hello kimba
253

vimto,

27/10/2008 15:34:58
264. Good for you,the point is Alex Salmond will do nothing to further the cause infact he may hamper it.
254

vimto,

27/10/2008 15:37:48
267. Nearly right,a bit older, a bit greyer, and a bit grumpier,and she calls me mum!
255

Gedguy2,

27/10/2008 15:38:21
#261 57Vintage
Amen to that.
256

brownlie,

27/10/2008 15:40:06
240 Glasgow East Family

Try Benylin - it's good - furra cough!
257

Alan B,

27/10/2008 15:47:04
#256 vimto

I notice you have not been able to come up with any tangible thing to back up you assertion that it is the snp picking fights. I notice you have not challenged any of the points I listed where labour have picked fights.

As for me being a loyal snp supporter, I support some of their policies and do not support others as you will have seen on these threads. The main draw for me obviously the fact I support independence for scotland and the advantages I perceive that would have for scotland.

As for labour. I think they are useless and incompetent. Anyone with a clue about economics will know that Browns economic incompetence is coming home to roost and we the public will suffer due to that incompetence. He has failed in regard to most of the pillars of good economic managment.

That is not about unionist/independence just labour mismanagment.

I also regard Brown as being vindictive rather than graciously accepting defeat in the last scottish election. The people of scotland should not have to suffer because Brown cannot deal with rejection at the ballot box.

Just remind yourself of Browns antics with Ming Campbell after labuor lost the election. Brown has still not forgiven Jack McConnell for accepting the democractic will of the people.
258

vimto,

27/10/2008 16:03:00
272. you always have to push it don't you. From Times Online
June 8, 2007
No 10 says SNP 'picking fight' over Lockerbie or
Westminster accuses SNP of move to ditch EU fishing policy.
259

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 16:11:34
268

Really? the signs are there that he intends to defect to Liebour then?
260

vimto,

27/10/2008 16:11:45
272. Or this is a beauty- Sunday Herald, The, Oct 5, 2008 by John Bynorth.
NEW Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy yesterday signalled his determination to be the prime minister's enforcer north of the Border, accusing the SNP government of suffering from an "ideological obsession" with independence which could destabilise the country during the current global economic crisis.Murphy, in his fi rst interview since replacing Des Browne, who quit the government after Gordon Brown refused to allow him to stay on as defence secretary in Friday's reshuffle, warned first minister Alex Salmond to stop "picking fights" with the UK Labour government when people feared for their jobs, their pensions, and how to pay off their mortgages and credit cards.
261

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 16:13:59
273

No 10 is that one of the poor souls trapped in the village with no 6?
262

Alan B,

27/10/2008 16:16:53
#vimto

The Lockerbie is another example of labour in londons contempt for the scottish parliament and the scottish government. So hardly a good example of the snp causing a fight when it was the other way round.

Remember what happened. Despite scotland having a separate legal system that is devolved to the scottish parliament, Blair had did not keep the scottish government in the loop about freeing the lockerbie bomber.

This was another embarrassing episode for labour. They simply did not know how to behave with a devolved administration.

If release of a prison within scotland is a devolved matter you simply do not keep the scottish government out the loop.

So thank for another example about labour picking fights with the scottish government.

Now can you come up with a few examples where the snp picked fights with labour.
263

vimto,

27/10/2008 16:18:02
276. SMART AR-SE!
264

Alan B,

27/10/2008 16:21:13
#275 vimto

Are you completely stupid. The snp wanting independence via a referendum is hardly picking a fight with labour.

The 2 parties have different options. That is democracy. This should be decided by referendum.

Picking a fight is not labour disagreeing with the snp or vice versa, but where onside over steps the lines of acceptable behaviour. like the list i spelt out for you above in 251/252.

Your post is simply ridiculous. A labour politician despite evidence to the contary claims it is the snp picking fights and you use that as evidence that it is the snp.

As i said come up with some proper examples. So far all the examples show that it is labour creating all the fights.
265

vimto,

27/10/2008 16:21:41
277.

* Comment is free

Salmond's game
The main reason for the first minister's blizzard of initiatives in Scotland is to seize the domestic political initiative before Gordon Brown becomes PM.
Comments (14)

* Iain Macwhirter
*
o Iain Macwhirter
o guardian.co.uk,
o Friday June 22 2007 11.03 BST
o Article history

There is a conventional wisdom in London media circles that, since he was elected first minister last month, Alex Salmond has been devoting every waking moment to picking fights with London - over things like Tony Blair's secret agreement with the Libyan dictator Muammar Gadafy over transferring the Lockerbie bomber. Worse than this, Salmond has been trying to foment an English backlash by scrapping tuition fees cutting class sizes, abolishing prescription charges and extending free personal care, none of which apply in England.
266

vimto,

27/10/2008 16:25:37
279.This SNP administration has no majority and no coalition partner in Holyrood. Salmond has to make as big an impact as early as possible because he can't be sure how long he will remain in office.
267

Gedguy2,

27/10/2008 16:35:48
#280 Vimto
'Worse than this, Salmond has been trying to foment an English backlash by scrapping tuition fees cutting class sizes, abolishing prescription charges and extending free personal care, none of which apply in England.'
Good on Alex then. But I thought that in a democracy of which the Scottish Parliment is that it has the right to decide those policies. How can this possibly be constued as picking a fight because it is different from what the UK government wants?
268

vimto,

27/10/2008 16:47:48
284. i DON'T KNOW, as the scottish people put the Labour pary into power you tell me!
269

vimto,

27/10/2008 16:51:09
286. Well tough luck,not unless England gets a vote on tampons for the highland dancers!
270

vimto,

27/10/2008 16:55:34
If you are ever curious as to how the SNP Government in Scotland prefers to do its business, then the recent SportScotland debate is a good insight.



In case you are not familiar with the story, the SNP pledged in their manifesto to have a 'bonfire of the quangos' with SportScotland one of the key targets. However, when the SNP started investigating the issue, they found that SportScotland is widely respected and considered a key part of the development of Scotland's sport and the successful Commonwealth Games bid. In the face of this expert opinion, the SNP backed down, performed a U-Turn and saved the agency.

Now, this was an ideal opportunity for the SNP. Afterall, the Scottish public is quickly becoming used to the fact that SNP promises are, shall we say, flexible. Therefore the U-Turn was hardly going to be a disaster. Rather they could use it to demostrate that they listened to the right people, and were humble enough to admit that there was a better way forward.

Of course, this is nothing like what happened. Instead of the balanced approach, the SNP went after some of the very experts in a pathetic revenge bid. Following the merger of SportScotland and the Scottish Institute of Sport, both the Chairs have been sacked. Dougie Donnelly (Sports presenter and Chair, sorry former Chair of SportScotland) and Julia Bracewell (a former fencer and his counterpart at the Institute) are both well respected. However they made the cardinal mistake of criticising the Government.

And unfortunately for them, Our Beloved Leader Alex Salmond does not take criticism lightly. Or at all. So in a move that is blatantly obvious to everyone in Scotland, he has thrown his rattle out of the pram and dealt a blow to Scottish sport.
271

Ugly George,

27/10/2008 17:03:07
249 parcel
All you have to do is quote date and thread. easy enough if you have evidence to substantiate your latest claim against me.
272

Alan B,

27/10/2008 17:05:27
#280 vimto

You still have not come up with any examples. Unlike my self that listed where labour picked fights.

"Alex Salmond has been devoting every waking moment to picking fights with London - over things like Tony Blair's secret agreement with the Libyan dictator Muammar Gadafy over transferring the Lockerbie bomber. "

Releasing a prision is a devolved matter. Blair did not inform the scottish government and had secret discussion to move the prisioner. As such this is a good example of Blairs contempt for devolution and the scottish governmet.

Remeber blair would not even phone and congratulate the Salmond on winning the election. A complete disgrace for a disgrace of a man.


"Worse than this, Salmond has been trying to foment an English backlash by scrapping tuition fees cutting class sizes, abolishing prescription charges and extending free personal care, none of which apply in England."

That is complete bonkers. Why should a scottish government not scrap tution fees which it does not believe in. The lib dems a unionist party supported the scrapping of tution fees.

That example is not fighting that is devolution. A scottish parlaiment free to spend its share of the cash on its priorities.

If the scottish parliament was to blindly follow westminsters policies there would be not point in having a scottish parliament. The sp is due to different priorities in scotland via the scottish electrate.

Further more labour in scotland were alway against tution fees until Blair and did sort of abolish them with the graduate endowment. Atlhough that was more a deferment rather than abolishin as labour in scotland would have lead us to believe.

Free personal care was brought in by labour and the lib dems not the snp.

So you post is wrong.
273

vimto,

27/10/2008 17:09:45
292. LOL! not so funny when it's back at yer, wise guy!
274

vimto,

27/10/2008 17:11:24
Oh dear, the natz are getting rattled.
275

vimto,

27/10/2008 17:13:51
296. Do we care,Blair was PM of the whole of the UK thats 60 milliom people,not a poxy 5 million!
276

vimto,

27/10/2008 17:20:33
309. As you are the thickest person on this thread i'll spell this out. k-i-m-b-a. i-s. m-y. d-a-u-g-h-t-e-r,got it!
277

vimto,

27/10/2008 17:22:31
As i said the Natz are running scared,keep up the good work joe.
278

,

27/10/2008 17:24:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
279

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 17:24:47
294

So you expect me to troll all the threads on LIT to find the ones where you put down LIT? in spite of the fact that this blog is full of posters who have argued with you on the very subject and who you posted to when you put down LIT.

So who would I be posting it for?
280

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 17:26:42
294

When I posted evidence of your posting the Rhetoric governments use to post dodgy stats you still denied it and that was a direct cut and paste with dates times and a reference to the blog.
281

vimto,

27/10/2008 17:28:37
321. What would you like me to explain!
282

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 17:28:40
311

And still we will be better off than we are with the status quo at least the jack boot will be Scottish and hopefully leather I have a thing for leather.
283

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 17:29:14
326

How about the view from your cell?
284

Ugly George,

27/10/2008 17:29:50
I as an unaligned floating voter am opposed to LIT because it is unfair and unworkable. It penalises poor people in employment and allows the rich to avoid paying.

It is no more than - the hated Tory Poll tax wraped in a twee tartan ribbon.
285

Ugly George,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 17:33:05
320 Parcel
"when you put down LIT."

Once again you make an assertion with no evidence to back it up. Please point to any post on this thread or any other (with date and thread please) where I have put down LIT.

Once again you have been found out. You simply spurt out accusations and assertions on no basis whatsoever. Then, when your obvious error is pointed out, rather than accepting it gracefully, you merely resort to yet more aggression in a futile attempt to defend your untenable position.
286

vimto,

27/10/2008 17:37:31
321. You seem to have forgotten about her sister, yep,i had two daughters,kim and lesley,but hey, as you are a thickazoid! apart from that i will not justify myself or my family to the likes of you,you are nothing but a little sh-t stirrer,who can't or won't debat. And hears a thought, if salmond is so good why are the polls still showing that 54% of scots want to stay in the union.
287

,

27/10/2008 17:40:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
288

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 17:41:30
329

And yet in spite of being asked several times to prove your case you havent even made an effort. so how about now can you prove LIT in unfair and unworkable show us how it penalises the poor and helps the rich avoid paying taxes?
Several posters including myself have posted LIT variables relative to the CT levels to prove your wrong and thats without taking a CT level review and annual increaces into consideration.
Now put up or shut up.
289

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 17:42:25
330

Why even when I produce the evidence you still deny it.
290

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 17:43:35
330

Ugly yer a multi logon troll that is not even doubted by anybody on these blogs why pretend otherwise.
291

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 17:43:43
329
You are not the same person as me. So this is how low the argument has become. You have to try to impersonate me and ascribe to me comments.

Has it occurred to you that I would hardly post such a comment at 17:29 and say at 17:03 and 17:33 that I have not made such a comment. a fact that is patently obvious to anybody.

Your attempted tactic is thus blatantly obvious for all to see. If you have to resort to this you must be really desperate. Also, the word for covering something in paper or other material is wrapped with two ps. You falsify my identity and can't even get the spelling right. How pathetic.
292

vimto,

27/10/2008 17:50:19
336. No Hoots FACT,something you seem to be in denial over.
293

Ugly George,

27/10/2008 17:51:07
335 Parcel
Do you really expect anybody to believe that I posted comment 329. You are asking people to believe that in between two comments less than half an hour apart saying that I have not complained about LIT, I would suddenly produce this comment. Even the attempt to impersonate my use of the symbol - is ludicrous. this is used by me as a conjunction between two statements -not as is used in post 329 between two words in the same statement.

What is going on anyway. Do you feel that this is some kind of victory when everybody can see that this is a total fabrication and anybody who has to resort to this sort of deception must feel that they have a very week case.
294

Ugly George,

edinburgh 27/10/2008 17:52:46
33 mcKellarator
there is not much point in addressing a comment to an impersonator.
295

vimto,

27/10/2008 17:54:49
339. None of your bloody business,we are hear to dedate,but as i said that is not in your capabilities.
296

vimto,

27/10/2008 17:57:36
339. As old as her tongue but a little bit older than her teeth!
297

Ugly George,

27/10/2008 18:00:19
334 parcel
Why should I answer points that I did not make - points that somebody else has put up and falsely ascribed to me.

As I said earlier on, you argue points that exist only in your imagination. You have proved the point perfectly.

One can only feel sorrow for somebody who has to resort to these tactics. It would appear that you feel a deep psychological scar from previous encounters. May I suggest, that for your own benefit, you seek therapy as soon as possible.
298

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 18:01:31
341

How the hell am I supposed to know its not you? Its the sort of banal idiotic statement you known for.
299

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 18:03:49
348

I didnt post 329 I wouldnt know how to put up somebody elses logon thats your trick youre the cybertroll not me.
300

vimto,

27/10/2008 18:03:51
347. If there is a god in heaven,you will surely go to hell.
301

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 18:05:22
344

I am glad you didnt post your here to debate the laughter would probably hospitalise me.
302

Steve 'The Nugget' Davis,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 18:06:25
It seems to me that the argument that many put forward in support of a LIT is that it is based upon the ability to pay. The logical extension of this is that you base every single personal tax on people's income - i.e. scrap VAT, stamp duty, council tax, fuel duty, etc and replace them all with income taxes.

But this removes the idea that there should be a varied tax system which: does not disincentivise people from seeking work; has an element of tax that is based upon people's use of public services; has a reasonable element of progressive tax (based on ability to pay); encourages people to invest in the economy by starting/investing in businesses, etc; and encourages people to remain in the area in which the tax system applies.

There is a chance that, if you strike the wrong balance in taxing income, that you end up driving away some of the people who would invest in Scotland, employing people and creating further wealth through a multiplier effect. The questions is, of course, where does that balance lie?
303

vimto,

27/10/2008 18:08:19
350. Remember this when you go to bed tonight. You are hated and despised, you are a sick twisted little sh-t,who is all that is evil in Scotland.
304

Ugly George,

27/10/2008 18:10:28
351 parcel
"thats your trick youre the cybertroll not me."

False, fabricate and inaccurate statement again I'm afraid. yet you are the one who accuses me of lying on a ritual basis. You really should follow the advice I gave you in post 348. It really will be in your own best interests.
305

Steve 'The Nugget' Davis,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 18:15:34
Perhaps we could consider having a reasoned debate on the issues raised in the article (and the wider issues that that will inevitably drag up)?

Perhaps we could all do that whilst accepting that others may have different opinions to our - and that there is the smallest chance that our individual opinions may actually turn out to be wrong.

Even more ridiculously, we could agree that we might reach a point where we have to agree to disagree - without resorting to insulting each other.

No there's a Scotland that I'd like to live in!
306

Steve 'The Nugget' Davis,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 18:24:30
#363 - I understand the argument, and agree with the sentiment to a degree, but just wonder where you draw the line on deriving tax revenues on income. Are there any other taxes (like VAT, fuel duty, etc) that you'd also like to see replaced by a form of income tax?
307

vimto,

27/10/2008 18:24:49
363. Boll--ks.
308

Ewan Oosami,

27/10/2008 18:26:51
Don't forget there are millions of pounds of council tax that's never been collected - the rest of us who do pay are supporting these spongers. How will they ensure all the amount of LIT is payed and if the system is changed will those owing money still be chased for it or will it be written off. If it's the latter then we should all stop paying council tax now.
Poll tax was a great idea but badly implimented
309

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 18:27:28
362

Chance would be a fine thing.
310

Ewan Oosami,

27/10/2008 18:29:05
#363 the council tax isn't based on the ability to pay either - get your blinkers off!
311

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 18:30:29
364

I dont see why we should have VAT at all its a rip off tax and isnt actually earmarked for any purpose.
Fuel duty is just another form of VAT and is also a rip off and tax on products and goods is a rip off.
You should pay for services and infrastructure not luxuries and necessities.
312

Michael N,

H/burgh 27/10/2008 18:37:48
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but do we not already pay something called income tax ?
313

Steve 'The Nugget' Davis,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 18:38:34
#371 - How would you propose to charge people for using these services and the infrastructure?

Say, the NHS, roads, libraries, refuse collection. Would you try to find out how much of each utility people use?
314

Steve 'The Nugget' Davis,

Edinburgh 27/10/2008 18:41:01
#373 - I think that the point is that the will be a minimum level of taxation required to continue things that we take for granted (hospitals, roads, refuse collection, etc). The question is whether you raise taxes for these based on income or some other measures.
315

Ugly George,

27/10/2008 18:46:41
351 parcel
I don't know if you are familiar with the works and teachings of Carl Jung. Apart from Sigmund Freud, he is probably the most famous and eminent individual in developing modern understanding of psychiatric traits.

He was the one who first detailed a disturbing trait in many individuals that is now widely recognised and accepted. He pointed out that those whoo are most assertive in their condemnation of a particular trait in others are invariably those who have a suppressed level of guilt and anxiety about harbouring that trait themselves.

One of the most common manifestations is that those who are most aggressive in their condemnation of homosexuals are invariably those who have suppressed homosexual tendencies themselves and their aggressive approach towards homosexuals is a means of attempting to deny the latent feelings within themselves.

The reason I mention this is that you do appear to have a particular proclivity for accusing others in a rather assertive way of being lying trolls etc. far be it from me to make any judgement over the internet (unlike yourself) but it does raise the possibility of this being a classic case of the trait recognised by Jung. This is supported by your other trait of answering imagined or false fabrications attributed to me. This might indicate an associated o0bsessive psychosis.

As I said, I do not want to pass judgement but any rational observer would identify worrying signs. For this reason it is probably, as I said, in your own interests to seek therapy.
316

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 18:48:33
371

Income tax and local taxation how else? taxation income levels arent the problem the problem is dealing with expenditure and the proper allocation of the taxation.
317

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 18:49:10
377 is answer to 374 not 371.
318

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 18:56:06
376

Troll I am getting too tired to respond to youre banality its bad enough having to deal with your dishonesty stupidity and logon changes without having to find a response to the unbelievably banal as well.
Why anybody with one head would want to troll the web for a statement like that defies human logic.
You are nothing more than a sad sad ar*e of a human being.
319

Ugly George,

27/10/2008 19:01:12
379 parcel
Still exhibiting those traits of assertive name calling and answering imaginary points I see.
320

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 27/10/2008 19:05:28
380

Ah Ugly still displaying those traits only found in a multi logon cybertroll only interested in sh*t stirring lying and posting the banal.
321

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 27/10/2008 21:04:41
You might find that the underlying message behind this and other local authority stories, is that the Government is telling the Cooncils to get themselves in order.

Geez. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that any unearned income which is taxable can be postcode adjusted to include LIT. Anyone with Excel For Dummies could adjust the spreadsheets on that.

The original proposal for LIT was for local authorities to set their own percentage. Then the SNP said it would set centrally until it was working.

Sinse they came to power, the SNP has been coming down on oor cooncils to make them more cost efficient. Now, as we are all tightening our belts, this strategy is becoming more easily regarded as the correct one.

I think oor Government has been playing this LIT thing correctly along the political line.

Headline smells though as unrealistic journalism.
322

vimto,

27/10/2008 21:07:04
370. Thought i'd bring myself down to your level,sorry to here about your prostate problem. Good night,hope the bed bugs bite.
323

Scimitar1,

27/10/2008 21:09:55
That headline seems to be a daily occurance these days.
324

Conan the Librarian™,

27/10/2008 23:20:24
390
Mcdonald Road canteen

http://www.geocities.com/cajachinaperu/cuy.JPG
325

Conan the Librarian™,

27/10/2008 23:58:13
393
Can you enlighten me to the discordance?
326

Conan the Librarian™,

28/10/2008 00:32:55
395
Yes, I speak English.

Big words can be looked up, you know.

If you know how.

396

Thanks, I am quite happy thank you.
327

Conan the Librarian™,

28/10/2008 00:40:26
Jeez.

I'm not going to get 400.

328

Conan the Librarian™,

28/10/2008 00:41:31
It's like kicking an empty goal
329

Conan the Librarian™,

28/10/2008 00:44:15
400

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.