Seil Chat

Well there we are - now two protagonists who disagree - I thought this thread might peter out, but although it has nothing to do with the original message it is a subject which still hangs about.
Bill mcD is quite correct in his assumption that I never had to worry about paying my bills, due to diligence and staying within my means - this was the tenet in the era which I grew up in - but which has unfortunately been superceeded by the "want it now -pay later " culture. But that is not really germane to the subject of the poll tax it is just a response to his remark about "eating cake".
Now we come to Nick B's assertions.
He thought it unfair that 5 people living in the one house should have to pay more than a single person.
Only one wheely bin, one streetlamp, and one car outside. They only consume the same amount of council services. Arrant nonsense.
Firstly they probably have multiple cars using the council roads, parking places, etc and if they are honest, pay tax and insurance on these multiple cars, but no contribution to the council provisions.
So just for the sake of argument we go along with the premise that one wheely bin, one street lamp, one car, and the other ancilliary services provided by the council, supplies both households in his example., with the same services. Why then should the size of the house have any bearing on the charge for these services, as the costs are the same?
I could have developed this argument further but in the interests of brevity, will conclude by hopefully asserting that both Nick B. and Bill mcD are in agreement with me that a local income tax would be a fairer solution to this current mess.

jimcee wrote:So just for the sake of argument we go along with the premise that one wheely bin, one street lamp, one car, and the other ancilliary services provided by the council, supplies both households in his example., with the same services.

Why then should the size of the house have any bearing on the charge for these services, as the costs are the same?

On the grounds that taxes should be levied with some regard to ability to pay?

The better off are naturally in favour of flat-rate taxes.

I think we are all in agreement (a first?) that a local income tax would be better.

There are also arguments in favour of a land tax (as distinct from a property tax),

That's it then - an agreement between diverse political views (at least by those active on this site) that a local income tax would be a fairer and more just way of spreading the cost of council services - except perhaps Bill mcD who seemed to accept the idea with some reluctance.
It is a peculiar thing about people's views of politicians - if their representatives are of the same political persuasion, they can do no wrong, and if perchance in the opposite camp, they can do no right. This is manifestly untrue. The political ladder like the corporate ladder, or even the social ladder is subject to manipulation by those with dreams of advancement at the expense, if necessary, of those who stand in their way. That said, those who rise to the top, politically anyway, have a huge power base, but it is dependent on patronage, which is a very unstable quality. Of the ones who have been in charge during my lifetime, they have all done some good things and also made some mistakes. Our British lot are certainly not above reproach. The only two who seem to have got it right and achieved fairly universal approval are Nelson Mandela and John F. Kennedy (but he didn't make it to the end).
Admittedly there are others who showed promise but were cut short by an assassin,
This long diatribe is mainly to try and put a perspective on politicians, because Bill McD considers that this country went to the dogs under Margaret Thatcher, and if she had never left her father's grocer shop, we would all now be in utopia.

Looking back on the readership of this particular thread - which was quite considerable- there is the option of letting sleeping dogs lie , or adding a fresh dimension to the discussion - which would bring it back to the top of the leaderboard.
Could I put forward a suggestion that the political players are currently all jockeying for position to secure our votes - come May.
This is the period of manifestos and promises all intended to cajole us into putting our x in the right place.
Promises, which will . although glibly given at the moment, probably be rescinded in the light of day, should the purveyors be in a position to fulfil - with all sorts of unforeseen developments making, their promises unfortunately not viable under the circumstances.
How much activists are influential in swinging opinion locally is a moot point - here on these web pages the SNP are the activists.
However their current campaign appears to be to ridicule and denigrate any of the opposition who dares to disagree with them.
Is this a good tactic? Personally I doubt it. To me it smacks of insecurity.

jimcee wrote:To me it smacks of insecurity.

Oh undoubtedly.

The opinion polls are all wrong and Scotland will score an own goal at the last minute.

Or - maybe not this time ?

Time will tell.