So who wants a tax (insert own interpretation here)?

[Derek Hardballs]

Public services are failing to cope. 
Tax payers pay through the nose to private companies to deliver public services. 
Libraries, youth services, parks, galleries close or suffer huge cuts. 

We are being told that the current government want to cut taxes and there is a real appetite for this to happen. Is there? I think most people would like to see decent public services rather than tax cuts. The question is, ‘are enough people prepared to be bought off for their vote at the next election?

[Protheroe]

The only thing that matters Derek, is that after this budget we will all be paying more tax due to fiscal drag. Cuts in the headline rates of taxation mean absolutely nothing when tax allowances haven't been increased for years, and won't be increased for years. Fiscal drag has been robbing us blind, and no-one seems to want to talk about it.

And in answer to your question, no - I doubt anyone will be bought off by such a meaningless and desperate gesture.

And tax cuts will be inflationary, which is the last thing we need right now.

[CarlosCorbewrong]

It's just post election electioneering. They can blame Labour for raising taxes. Same old labour, tax and spend.

[Ted Maul]

I've never been fussed with the idea of paying more tax for proper public services. My issue is with the idiots in charge of spending the money.

[Protheroe]

The problem with every individual who wants to pay more tax, is that they want everyone else to pay more too.

[Derek Hardballs]

Nick Robinson (Tory and not even pretending to be impartial now it seems) on Radio 4 this morning desperately trying to get to the weather so the two economists he’s interviewing can be cut off as they are pointing out the folly of tax cuts being a priority rather than investment. How inconvenient for him to have to listen to experts.

[Ted Maul]

The problem with every individual who wants to pay more tax, is that they want everyone else to pay more too.

Why wouldn't you want public services that actually work? The big if as stated, is the clowns that are given the purse strings and decide what it gets spent on.

A big enough pot to help out those who need it and for those lucky enough to not need help, they can just enjoy properly funded public services that function as they are intended to.

Only dealing with issues inside your own four walls means that everything outside gets shitter and more unpleasant for when you do have to step outside and interact with it.

[Protheroe]

I want public services that work. However with the tax burden at its highest peacetime level it wouldn't appear that more tax = better services.

There needs to be a fundamental review of what the state should do and should not do. Particularly with the econo-demographic challenges we face (and which we're not alone in facing).

The chances of that happening of course, are negligible.

[Derek Hardballs]

I want public services that work. However with the tax burden at its highest peacetime level it wouldn't appear that more tax = better services.

There needs to be a fundamental review of what the state should do and should not do. Particularly with the econo-demographic challenges we face (and which we're not alone in facing).

The chances of that happening of course, are negligible.

What would you cut from government support? 

As an aside maybe it’s the useless numpties you helped put in power that are the reason public services are a mess? They were working pretty well before they got in.

[Protheroe]

What would you cut from government support? 

I'd ask those that can afford it to take responsibility for their own health and social care needs for a start, and incentivise them to do so.

Part of this would be asking a fundamental question of what we do with all the wealth tied up in property. Which of course, means it'll never happen.