Oh dear.
The 'pensioner living in a four bedroom house' is a myth that get's trundled out every time someone tries to argue for the Poll Tax.

In fact, such a beast is very rare. Generally, what happens is that the pensioner either downsizes or goes to live with relatives. Very few people like living alone in a big empty property.

The same was true of the reverse arguement IE, why should a homeowner with three grown kids of working age pay one set of rates (under the Poll Tax they all paid). Well, you see, this situation never lasts long either - the kids go off and become homeowners themsleves, thus continuing the tax take.


The problem with the Poll Tax was that it just wasn't based on ability to pay. It was a flat rate - regardless of income. And that is a fundamental flaw.

Taxation has to be progressive for it to be fair - the rich pay more because they have more, the poor pay less because they have less.
(El Fandango carved a big EF onto his nemesis' doublet on .., Fri 12 Nov 2010, 23:25, 2 replies)

Nevertheless
smashing up Trafalgar Square probably wasn't the answer
(stewiegriffin, Sat 13 Nov 2010, 9:43, closed)

It worked though

( sandettie light vessel automatic New Twitter - @bollocksreally, Sat 13 Nov 2010, 12:51, closed)

So, naturally, you think that "rich" people should pay more for everything than "poor" people; different prices in shops, and restaurants, and things? Otherwise it wouldn't be "fair", would it...


The idiocy of that arguement really depresses me...
(Katamarino, Thu 18 Nov 2010, 12:48, closed)