Gotta say I was about to give a like even though I donāt fully agree and say why the flagging until the last paragraph 
Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
3 Likes
Hear what you are saying but isnāt it your choice to have a family to feed?
A single person who has chosen not to have children (or perhaps is unfortunately unable to have children) but who is earning the same amount might be aggrieved at having to pay more tax?
I donāt know what the solution is but there is never going to be something which will help everyone.
2 Likes
Tax the rich normally means a wealth tax.
London is difficult because housing is so expensive.
Paying a 60% marginal tax rate for Ā£100k to Ā£120k is sort of a choice, you can choose to pay into a pension pot instead. Of course that means you lose out on the other 40%. Choices.
Without the NHS weād probably end up paying more for healthcare, especially the seriously ill, who would be less able to afford it at that time.
Your last paragraph makes no sense, there is no special tax treatment for people depending on their background, so all tax paying people pay to promote inclusivity.
1 Like
I thought with an ISA you are restricted on what you can pay in per year, but from a UK taxation perspective whether it grows or shrinks, whether you derive your gains through dividends or through capital growth, is irrelevant, itās exempt from UK taxation? Obviously certain non-UK taxation may apply.
Why would a serious amount of stocks paying out be relevant?
1 Like
You are correct but missed my point, that was if you use an ISA, that means each year you can put 20k in that is ringfenced from tax. This means that if you donāt/canāt lock away your dividends in an ISA then you must
Hope that makes more sense. 
1 Like
True, and your last sentence is the most important one - impossible to satisfy everyone, but Iāll still give you two arguments in defense of my position:
-
Fairness of taxation is the idea which is generally advertised by governments and means that people who can pay more tax, should pay more tax, and people who canāt pay much tax, shouldnāt pay much tax. I clearly can pay less in tax then single person with the same salary.
-
Many things depend on choices. In the same way say we can say that person who decided to be an NHS nurse instead of becoming high paid lawyer did it because of his/her choice, so it doesnāt make sense that he/she pays less tax - should be paying the same (at least percentage wise), as this were his her choices and effort.
It is possible to turn this arguments around.
And there is also huge pile of arguments about children in society, social care system based on solidarity (my children in the future will be paying to support that single person, so why shouldnāt he contribute to my costs now?), etc.
I agree this is far away from topic of this dicussion.
2 Likes
I must admit there are some people making a lot of money in roles to promote equality in whatever forms.
1 Like
Wow, Ā£100k to preach the good news about diversity and inclusivity. Sign me up for a Bachelorās in Woke!
2 Likes
This thread is on a really good way to fulfil Godwinās law.
6 Likes
Near on Ā£45k seems a lot of wasted money TBH. I 100% agree with the cause but sooo many of these things are token gestures and donāt get results. The worrying thing I find is that a business thinks, our diversity is so bad we need to pay someone Ā£45k a year to fix it.
1 Like
Itās a very relevant discussion for this thread since both the dividend tax increase and NI increase are ostensibly going to the NHS. Unfortunately itās likely the money will go to things like the armies of diversity officers discussed above rather than the extra capacity needed to clear the operations backlog.
3 Likes
I was correcting a factual inaccuracy in @zholnin ās post. I donāt begin to understand what one of these officers does and if that is indeed needed.
2 Likes
No worries The 100k was probably just 1 role like a āchief officerā but was in the media recently. It was in, I think, a Guardian article about the Stonewall charity and companies pulling out due to the costs etc.
An example of money going on these things is quote from the Lesbian and Gay news "NHS and related bodies gave Stonewall Ā£466,065 over 2018-21. In total, 58 health service organisations paid for membership of the Diversity Champions scheme. Last week there was an outcry when a Telegraph investigation revealed that, thanks to the implementation of transgender inclusive policies, many hospitals in England can no longer guarantee single-sex wards. This is in-line with Stonewallās approach, whereby an individualās professed gender identity trumps their biological sex. The Telegraph found some NHS trusts tell their staff to call the police and report a hate crime if a patient does not accept another personās gender identity.
Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust policy states āJust as the Trust will not adapt practice in light of Racist concerns expressed as discomfort, so the Trust will not adapt practice in light of Transphobic concerns expressed as discomfort.ā
The Nottinghamshire Trust has paid a total of Ā£11,148 to Stonewall, including for a Leadership Programme, Open Models Programme and Network Group Masterclass."
This is BEFORE paying for the officers employed. Again the cause is bang on important but not being dealt with efficiently and as mentioned above the dividend tax will go on things like this. I thought the unions were supposed to push for these kinds of things TBH.
TO BE CLEAR - Any company/boss found to be racist should be dealt with properly/severely but some, not all, of these roles are wasted money. It worries me a place like the NHS with limited money needs to employ someone to essentially tell them how to be a decent human being/employer full time and on more money then the nurses.
2 Likes
If this conversation want to be a inclusion and diversity AND how that relates to investable companies it should jump to a different thread. This is in territory that requires a lot on nuance and thought just be aware of offending user who have come here to read and share about nee 1.25% dividend tax.
5 Likes
I just wish I got enough dividends to be worried about this tax 
5 Likes
I think people are just flagging it as off topic. You raised some interesting points earlier
Exactly.
Bit extreme. Canāt they put up a curtain/screen surrounding this gender unaccepting person? Then they see nobody in the ward 
1 Like