Who says tax increases aren't acceptable? This is what the Guardian reported during yesterday:
The SNP has welcomed a YouGov poll in today's Times (paywall) suggesting that the tax increases proposed by the Scottish government at the end of last year are popular with voters. The tax increases have not come into force yet, but the approval rates in the poll are striking. Getting public support for tax increases is the holy grail of progressive politics.
Here are the figures.
That is two to one in favour.
Might other politicians please take note? Their constipated paranoia on this issue may be wholly inappropriate.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Well then, very intersting – and £26K is a pretty low threshold. I’d imagine that the higher you raise that, the more support you’ll get.
The best tax increase of all would grow our economy, save the planet, and establish the basis of a future basic income. And all without increasing government debt or spending by even a penny. Carbon Fee and Dividend.
I agree that a carbon tax is the only suitable basis for a UBI, but it would only provide a small dividend which could never cover basic needs.
A carbon tax if successful is self-eliminating. It encourages renewable, non-polluting alternatives and in doing so reduces its revenue base. For social and environmental purposes that’s great but I’m not sure what you mean by “establish the basis of a future basic income”.
If it achieves its aim it has no ongoing future as a source of revenue. Although, if its any consolation, the revenue aspect. may not be as important as you think.
I agree
It’s like a god FTT
The desired revenue is nothing
I think the public are broadly supportive of tax increases to improve public services, most of the time. The 2002 increases in NICs to increase NHS funding got a positive polling reception at the time. The possible exception was the 2010 election when polling showed a high degree of public support for spending cuts but this was largely due to 18 months of Tory and media propaganda, largely unchallenged by Gordon Brown’s Labour government of the time.
I’m one of those in Scotland who will pay a bit more tax. I regard it as an investment in Scotland!
Two thirds of people polled were on less than £26k probably – no increase for them. Another poll had high favour for the sugar tax, but there’s nothing stopping those who favour it voluntarily paying 24p per litre of pop to charity every time they make a purchase if they wish. What the pollsters should ask is why they think they should have the right to impose it on people who disagree.
Have you heard of democracy?
At the UK level, the difference between ABC1 and C2DE responses is quite small in the latest YouGov survey on “Having to pay substantially higher taxes in order to maintain the current levels of NHS services” –
https://yougov.co.uk/opi/surveys/results#/survey/6195cb23-f6c0-11e7-a903-b10b97da94c8/question/921087f4-f6c0-11e7-a903-b10b97da94c8/social
When you look at the results excluding Don’t Knows –
The overall UK result is 67% in favour.
The ABC1 result is 64% in favour.
The C2DE result is 70% in favour.
The Scotttish sub-sample shows 61% in favour.
The Scottish data quoted by Richard is the same as the overall UK result at 67% in favour.
I accept the Scottish question did not mention the NHS, although it is well publicised that the SNP are proposing to raise taxes to protect public services.
Duncan Thickett
“………the right to impose it on those who disagree.”
The EU referendum? Government cuts? Wage stagnation? etc. etc.
One of the possible factors behind this is that the improvement in governance since the SNP came to power in 2007 is palpable – for the first time in my adult life I actually began to feel that the government was being run with the benefit of its people as its main driving force. That is not something I had felt in previous ten years in Scotland, and have never felt from the UK government.
Of course, in general terms, that’s pretty unfair – the greater part of government is done for the benefit of us all, but I think that it only takes a small divergence of tone for the whole to feel like an imposition rather than a central part of society: it has felt like what services were being given were done so against better judgement, and more because they couldn’t escape providing them: and, where they could, services and benefits were always cut, few things got any better – or at least not noticeably so. What we get for our taxes in Scotland is often tangible, from free prescriptions to the Queensferry Crossing.
Strawman again Richard.
Tax rises are always acceptable and popular among those who won’t pay them. Nobody has ever claimed anything else. It proves nothing.
Have you heard of democracy Bill?
Apparently not .
Nor has he seen (or at least not comprehended) the more useful comment from George S Gordon above.
It would appear that the tax proposal also attracts the approval of those that would pay it.
So you would support a vote by 51% of the population to imprision the other 49% because “democracy”?
Is your view really that simplistic?
I suppose when it suits you it is.
But when the majority disagrees with you it is “populism”.
It is good that so many have seen through you.
With respect, it is you who is being simplistic
As you well know (or at least, as I hope you well know) democracy involves checks and balances to prevent abuse
Progressive taxation is not an abuse
It is what stops capitalism destroying itself