« Nick Clegg: 70% are on a more expensive tariff than they should be - new Government plans will help end that | Main | Lembit Opik is flung around a wrestling ring in front of a baying crowd by a spandex-clad wrestler »

April 15, 2012


Public Sector Worker

Rather misleading headline and the argument put forward by businesswoman Marcelle Speller is just as misleading. She argues that she will have to donate less due to the tax relief changes but argues that it means more when given directly to charity as she doesn't believe that Government spending pound for pound is very cost effective. Sorry, but I'm pretty sure that that argument has been raised against charities as well.

The only argument here is whether we agree that paying our full share of tax is the way to go or whether we allow a segment of our population to essentially choose where their money goes. I agree with the Big Society in concept but the deficit is the priority and the cuts are big on the agenda. More tax revenues makes the problem shrink and also should stop the likes of UK Uncut et al in their tracks, especially when we start to see the big corporations pay more tax than they have been.

I don't get to choose how much I pay, why should anyone else?

oron premium

Put tax on church and banks!

The comments to this entry are closed.



Most Updated

Other Pages


  • Extreme Tracking