Poll Tax riots
Discussion
It replaced rates, based on the value of a home.
With Poll tax each person paid the same amount, so the people in big houses saw a reduction in what they paid whilst those at the lower end of the wealth scale saw an increase.
The resentment amongst those who were then expected to pay more was widespread and led to the protests.
With Poll tax each person paid the same amount, so the people in big houses saw a reduction in what they paid whilst those at the lower end of the wealth scale saw an increase.
The resentment amongst those who were then expected to pay more was widespread and led to the protests.
It was a form of local Income Tax - except there was no accurate system put in place to assess the individual's income levels before charging the tax. A person earning £50,000 (a large salary in 1990) per annum paid the same as someone earning £25,000 per annum.
Many saw this as unfair.
Many saw this as unfair.
I went on that march. The Scots were particularly peed off as the idea was to trial it in Scotland.
As is often the case with otherwise peaceful mass demos, the rent-a-mob lot got going later in the afternoon. They climbed up scaffolding at one corner of the square and started lobbing stuff on the cops below. Cue police horse charges, the whole nine yards. I legged it, pissed off that the idiots were handing the narrative back to the govt but in the end the govt backed down.
I got caught up in another load of this on a Stephen Lawrence march a couple of years later. I hadn't noticed that were two that day - an official one in the centre of London and this other one in East London. The one I went on turned into a mass scrap between SWP-types lobbing bricks at the riot police and the police responding accordingly. Everyone got kettled and we only got out of danger by climbing over some very high spiked railings and into a park. It's amazing what adrenaline can do. There were rumours that BNP folks were picking off protesters in sid streets but we got back to the tube OK and headed back to the safety of West London ASAP :-)
As is often the case with otherwise peaceful mass demos, the rent-a-mob lot got going later in the afternoon. They climbed up scaffolding at one corner of the square and started lobbing stuff on the cops below. Cue police horse charges, the whole nine yards. I legged it, pissed off that the idiots were handing the narrative back to the govt but in the end the govt backed down.
I got caught up in another load of this on a Stephen Lawrence march a couple of years later. I hadn't noticed that were two that day - an official one in the centre of London and this other one in East London. The one I went on turned into a mass scrap between SWP-types lobbing bricks at the riot police and the police responding accordingly. Everyone got kettled and we only got out of danger by climbing over some very high spiked railings and into a park. It's amazing what adrenaline can do. There were rumours that BNP folks were picking off protesters in sid streets but we got back to the tube OK and headed back to the safety of West London ASAP :-)
I'd just started secondary school at the time, so don't remember too much, but industrial action and mass protest was a lot more of a political "thing" that it is now.
However, since then I have 25 years experience in public sector finances, and this comment caught my eye.
Why would it "stick in your craw"? You're not buying a service, you're supporting civil infrastructure.
But public goods are where the market doesn't work: social care to protect children, social care to care for adults, work to prevent and address homelessness, regulation and enforcement of safety standards, maintenance (to varying degrees) of public assets we don't pay for via a charge. No one is going to "choose" to buy these in the market place, so a taxation system becomes necessary.
I always try to remind people of all the things they get from local authorities that they don't notice: ie when you go for a takeaway, someone has checked they follow proper food hygiene practices, and when you buy a pint, there is a system to check you're getting the right volume and volume of product. Yes roads have potholes, but try living on a street where you maintain it yourself. People quite quickly want the council to take them on.
And if that doesn't work, I point out given most councils spend on social "failures", people should consider themselves fortunate they have not had to be on the receiving end of council expenditure (sister in law is a child social worker, and I think if you heard so.e of the situations she encounters you wouldn't mind funding their prevention).
And if that doesn't work: in "real" terms council tax has gone up by well below inflation in recent years, and once demand increases are factored in, funding is well below where it needs to be.
30 councils have had to ask the government to live off borrowing in 25-26, and many more are gobbling up irreplaceable savings just to get buy with the cap at 5%. And that's before high needs overspends of £3bn has to come back into council finances at the end of next year.
https://www.room151.co.uk/151-news/nearly-half-of-...
I appreciate this sort of information is not widely talked about in the press, but it is easily locatable if people want to get more of an understanding about what council tax is used for.
Ian
However, since then I have 25 years experience in public sector finances, and this comment caught my eye.
Why would it "stick in your craw"? You're not buying a service, you're supporting civil infrastructure.
nuyorican said:
As a single chap, the amount I pay for council tax really sticks in my craw.
So if you buy a car, it's yours: it's a private good, and the market generally works ok.But public goods are where the market doesn't work: social care to protect children, social care to care for adults, work to prevent and address homelessness, regulation and enforcement of safety standards, maintenance (to varying degrees) of public assets we don't pay for via a charge. No one is going to "choose" to buy these in the market place, so a taxation system becomes necessary.
I always try to remind people of all the things they get from local authorities that they don't notice: ie when you go for a takeaway, someone has checked they follow proper food hygiene practices, and when you buy a pint, there is a system to check you're getting the right volume and volume of product. Yes roads have potholes, but try living on a street where you maintain it yourself. People quite quickly want the council to take them on.
And if that doesn't work, I point out given most councils spend on social "failures", people should consider themselves fortunate they have not had to be on the receiving end of council expenditure (sister in law is a child social worker, and I think if you heard so.e of the situations she encounters you wouldn't mind funding their prevention).
And if that doesn't work: in "real" terms council tax has gone up by well below inflation in recent years, and once demand increases are factored in, funding is well below where it needs to be.
30 councils have had to ask the government to live off borrowing in 25-26, and many more are gobbling up irreplaceable savings just to get buy with the cap at 5%. And that's before high needs overspends of £3bn has to come back into council finances at the end of next year.
https://www.room151.co.uk/151-news/nearly-half-of-...
I appreciate this sort of information is not widely talked about in the press, but it is easily locatable if people want to get more of an understanding about what council tax is used for.
Ian
Ian Geary said:
I'd just started secondary school at the time, so don't remember too much, but industrial action and mass protest was a lot more of a political "thing" that it is now.
I dunno - we've seen mass marches for political causes since then. The one against the second Iraq war was, I think, the largest march ever (however they count that sort of thing).And there have been loads of people on the streets recently pro/anti Palestine/Israel; oeople still seem to come out in numbers if they feel strongly enough about any given issue.
I was brought up to take politics seriously and going on the odd march was part of the process. Seems like it still is.
Ian Geary said:
I'd just started secondary school at the time, so don't remember too much, but industrial action and mass protest was a lot more of a political "thing" that it is now.
However, since then I have 25 years experience in public sector finances, and this comment caught my eye.
Why would it "stick in your craw"? You're not buying a service, you're supporting civil infrastructure.
But public goods are where the market doesn't work: social care to protect children, social care to care for adults, work to prevent and address homelessness, regulation and enforcement of safety standards, maintenance (to varying degrees) of public assets we don't pay for via a charge. No one is going to "choose" to buy these in the market place, so a taxation system becomes necessary.
I always try to remind people of all the things they get from local authorities that they don't notice: ie when you go for a takeaway, someone has checked they follow proper food hygiene practices, and when you buy a pint, there is a system to check you're getting the right volume and volume of product. Yes roads have potholes, but try living on a street where you maintain it yourself. People quite quickly want the council to take them on.
And if that doesn't work, I point out given most councils spend on social "failures", people should consider themselves fortunate they have not had to be on the receiving end of council expenditure (sister in law is a child social worker, and I think if you heard so.e of the situations she encounters you wouldn't mind funding their prevention).
And if that doesn't work: in "real" terms council tax has gone up by well below inflation in recent years, and once demand increases are factored in, funding is well below where it needs to be.
30 councils have had to ask the government to live off borrowing in 25-26, and many more are gobbling up irreplaceable savings just to get buy with the cap at 5%. And that's before high needs overspends of £3bn has to come back into council finances at the end of next year.
https://www.room151.co.uk/151-news/nearly-half-of-...
I appreciate this sort of information is not widely talked about in the press, but it is easily locatable if people want to get more of an understanding about what council tax is used for.
Ian
However, since then I have 25 years experience in public sector finances, and this comment caught my eye.
Why would it "stick in your craw"? You're not buying a service, you're supporting civil infrastructure.
nuyorican said:
As a single chap, the amount I pay for council tax really sticks in my craw.
So if you buy a car, it's yours: it's a private good, and the market generally works ok.But public goods are where the market doesn't work: social care to protect children, social care to care for adults, work to prevent and address homelessness, regulation and enforcement of safety standards, maintenance (to varying degrees) of public assets we don't pay for via a charge. No one is going to "choose" to buy these in the market place, so a taxation system becomes necessary.
I always try to remind people of all the things they get from local authorities that they don't notice: ie when you go for a takeaway, someone has checked they follow proper food hygiene practices, and when you buy a pint, there is a system to check you're getting the right volume and volume of product. Yes roads have potholes, but try living on a street where you maintain it yourself. People quite quickly want the council to take them on.
And if that doesn't work, I point out given most councils spend on social "failures", people should consider themselves fortunate they have not had to be on the receiving end of council expenditure (sister in law is a child social worker, and I think if you heard so.e of the situations she encounters you wouldn't mind funding their prevention).
And if that doesn't work: in "real" terms council tax has gone up by well below inflation in recent years, and once demand increases are factored in, funding is well below where it needs to be.
30 councils have had to ask the government to live off borrowing in 25-26, and many more are gobbling up irreplaceable savings just to get buy with the cap at 5%. And that's before high needs overspends of £3bn has to come back into council finances at the end of next year.
https://www.room151.co.uk/151-news/nearly-half-of-...
I appreciate this sort of information is not widely talked about in the press, but it is easily locatable if people want to get more of an understanding about what council tax is used for.
Ian
AC43 said:
As is often the case with otherwise peaceful mass demos, the rent-a-mob lot got going later in the afternoon. They climbed up scaffolding at one corner of the square and started lobbing stuff on the cops below. Cue police horse charges, the whole nine yards. I legged it, pissed off that the idiots were handing the narrative back to the govt but in the end the govt backed down.
Observing it from a distance it felt a bit more than just a rent a mob, I'm sure they instrigated it but it looked like many other were happy to get involved and I think this was the catalyst for change.The government knows the type of people who are likely to riot and generally that doesn't include those with jobs, mortgages and a general lifestyle that they'd rather not lose with a criminal record. Therefore when those are the very people lobbing bricks at the police then the government knows they need to have a think about what they are doing.Scrump said:
It replaced rates, based on the value of a home.
With Poll tax each person paid the same amount, so the people in big houses saw a reduction in what they paid whilst those at the lower end of the wealth scale saw an increase.
The resentment amongst those who were then expected to pay more was widespread and led to the protests.
I must admit that I personally would have preferred the Poll Tax. It seemed fairer to me, but I didn't have any kids. With Poll tax each person paid the same amount, so the people in big houses saw a reduction in what they paid whilst those at the lower end of the wealth scale saw an increase.
The resentment amongst those who were then expected to pay more was widespread and led to the protests.
Plus those with large adult families, (I seem to remember it only applied to those 18 and over) who would be paying more, would most likely be the biggest users of the services.
In the 17th century, under King Charles ll, a hearth tax was introduced. This was a tax on the number of fireplaces in a building. It was not popular, especially because it involved a government agent having to snoop round inside homes counting peoples’ fireplaces.
King William lll replaced it with the Window Tax, which can be calculated by inspection of properties from the outside. So people bricked up their windows. Bricked up windows even became quite fashionable as an architectural feature. It was abolished in 1851.
Meanwhile, the government had hit upon the idea of a brick tax, thinking there was no escaping that. New bricks were initially taxed at a rate of two shillings and six pence per thousand. People responded by making bigger bricks, and the government had to step in to limit the maximum size of bricks before it all got silly. It was abolished about the same time as the Window tax, and was unpopular because posh people escaped it on account of living in big houses made of stone.
Local rates had been collected since the start of the 17th century by parishes to pay for individual expenditures, like poor relief or the upkeep of the roads. In 1739 these charges were consolidated into a single locally collected rate, intended for use within the county. Rates were calculated from the nominal rental value of a property.
In 1990, Rates were replaced by the Poll Tax, which took assessment away from bricks and mortar and taxed individuals instead. Rich people paid as much as the poor, so it was very unpopular, and there were riots.
It was immediately replaced by the Council Tax, which is similar to the old rates, but now rateable value is calculated by the estimated market value of a property, rather than its rental value.
King William lll replaced it with the Window Tax, which can be calculated by inspection of properties from the outside. So people bricked up their windows. Bricked up windows even became quite fashionable as an architectural feature. It was abolished in 1851.
Meanwhile, the government had hit upon the idea of a brick tax, thinking there was no escaping that. New bricks were initially taxed at a rate of two shillings and six pence per thousand. People responded by making bigger bricks, and the government had to step in to limit the maximum size of bricks before it all got silly. It was abolished about the same time as the Window tax, and was unpopular because posh people escaped it on account of living in big houses made of stone.
Local rates had been collected since the start of the 17th century by parishes to pay for individual expenditures, like poor relief or the upkeep of the roads. In 1739 these charges were consolidated into a single locally collected rate, intended for use within the county. Rates were calculated from the nominal rental value of a property.
In 1990, Rates were replaced by the Poll Tax, which took assessment away from bricks and mortar and taxed individuals instead. Rich people paid as much as the poor, so it was very unpopular, and there were riots.
It was immediately replaced by the Council Tax, which is similar to the old rates, but now rateable value is calculated by the estimated market value of a property, rather than its rental value.
Edited by Roofless Toothless on Sunday 9th March 14:05
CoolHands said:
It will never happen again, the population is too compliant. Which is good for them, as they will surely be rebanding properties shortly imo
Not sure of that myself. It was not the riots that did for the poll tax, they were in 1990 they did not announce its scrapping tax until 1991. It was the up to 30% of people liable to pay it who refused to do so. We then clogged up the courts with non-payment cases until the whole system broke down and they had no other option. I was one of those, I got the court order paid the first payment then stopped which meant they had to take me back to court. Fun times.
Ian Geary said:
I'd just started secondary school at the time, so don't remember too much, but industrial action and mass protest was a lot more of a political "thing" that it is now.
However, since then I have 25 years experience in public sector finances, and this comment caught my eye.
Why would it "stick in your craw"? You're not buying a service, you're supporting civil infrastructure.
But public goods are where the market doesn't work: social care to protect children, social care to care for adults, work to prevent and address homelessness, regulation and enforcement of safety standards, maintenance (to varying degrees) of public assets we don't pay for via a charge. No one is going to "choose" to buy these in the market place, so a taxation system becomes necessary.
I always try to remind people of all the things they get from local authorities that they don't notice: ie when you go for a takeaway, someone has checked they follow proper food hygiene practices, and when you buy a pint, there is a system to check you're getting the right volume and volume of product. Yes roads have potholes, but try living on a street where you maintain it yourself. People quite quickly want the council to take them on.
And if that doesn't work, I point out given most councils spend on social "failures", people should consider themselves fortunate they have not had to be on the receiving end of council expenditure (sister in law is a child social worker, and I think if you heard so.e of the situations she encounters you wouldn't mind funding their prevention).
And if that doesn't work: in "real" terms council tax has gone up by well below inflation in recent years, and once demand increases are factored in, funding is well below where it needs to be.
30 councils have had to ask the government to live off borrowing in 25-26, and many more are gobbling up irreplaceable savings just to get buy with the cap at 5%. And that's before high needs overspends of £3bn has to come back into council finances at the end of next year.
https://www.room151.co.uk/151-news/nearly-half-of-...
I appreciate this sort of information is not widely talked about in the press, but it is easily locatable if people want to get more of an understanding about what council tax is used for.
Ian
That doesn't explain why a single person should pay more (per head) than a large household though. Basing a tax on the value of a property is wrong IMO. Poll tax was fairer in principal.However, since then I have 25 years experience in public sector finances, and this comment caught my eye.
Why would it "stick in your craw"? You're not buying a service, you're supporting civil infrastructure.
nuyorican said:
As a single chap, the amount I pay for council tax really sticks in my craw.
So if you buy a car, it's yours: it's a private good, and the market generally works ok.But public goods are where the market doesn't work: social care to protect children, social care to care for adults, work to prevent and address homelessness, regulation and enforcement of safety standards, maintenance (to varying degrees) of public assets we don't pay for via a charge. No one is going to "choose" to buy these in the market place, so a taxation system becomes necessary.
I always try to remind people of all the things they get from local authorities that they don't notice: ie when you go for a takeaway, someone has checked they follow proper food hygiene practices, and when you buy a pint, there is a system to check you're getting the right volume and volume of product. Yes roads have potholes, but try living on a street where you maintain it yourself. People quite quickly want the council to take them on.
And if that doesn't work, I point out given most councils spend on social "failures", people should consider themselves fortunate they have not had to be on the receiving end of council expenditure (sister in law is a child social worker, and I think if you heard so.e of the situations she encounters you wouldn't mind funding their prevention).
And if that doesn't work: in "real" terms council tax has gone up by well below inflation in recent years, and once demand increases are factored in, funding is well below where it needs to be.
30 councils have had to ask the government to live off borrowing in 25-26, and many more are gobbling up irreplaceable savings just to get buy with the cap at 5%. And that's before high needs overspends of £3bn has to come back into council finances at the end of next year.
https://www.room151.co.uk/151-news/nearly-half-of-...
I appreciate this sort of information is not widely talked about in the press, but it is easily locatable if people want to get more of an understanding about what council tax is used for.
Ian
I as at Uni at the time so we all went along for the craic. The grievance was if paid per adult then houses with many adults would pay extortionate amounts whilst those living in "castles" would pay very little. Tax on the poor.
TX.
Edit - riots can't really happen anymore after the Govt started sending rioters to prison for stealing water etc.
TX.
Edit - riots can't really happen anymore after the Govt started sending rioters to prison for stealing water etc.
98elise said:
That doesn't explain why a single person should pay more (per head) than a large household though. Basing a tax on the value of a property is wrong IMO. Poll tax was fairer in principal.
The “fairest” way would be based on usage. Any tax which uses an arbitrary method for calculating the amount due is unfair. There’s no fair reason why some people pay 45% income tax and why others pay zero.Take elderly social care for example- many people will never need it but we’re all forced to pay for those that do.
Terminator X said:
I as at Uni at the time so we all went along for the craic. The grievance was if paid per adult then houses with many adults would pay extortionate amounts whilst those living in "castles" would pay very little. Tax on the poor.
TX.
Edit - riots can't really happen anymore after the Govt started sending rioters to prison for stealing water etc.
Why doesn't the same grievance apply to other things. If a large family buys food at Tescos they pay more then someone living in a "castle". The value of your house has no link to how much you use the council services, or your ability to pay.TX.
Edit - riots can't really happen anymore after the Govt started sending rioters to prison for stealing water etc.
A house with many adults in it will have many incomes. Until recently my house had 4 (sometimes 5) working adults living here. My neighbour is retired and it's just him and his wife. We pay the same council tax yet we produce more rubbish, use the roads more etc.
98elise said:
That doesn't explain why a single person should pay more (per head) than a large household though. Basing a tax on the value of a property is wrong IMO. Poll tax was fairer in principal.
I agree. For example 4 people(18yo +) in a house use more of the local resources than just one so should pay more. nuyorican said:
Most protests these days are of the student-politics virtue-signalling type, Palestine etc. I was at uni for the Iraq war one. I went because that’s what everyone else was doing and I thought it would be a wag. Didn’t have a clue about Iraq.
But you don’t see the ordinary working class types protesting as they did over the poll tax. Indeed it took the murder of little girls last year for it to kick off.
I don't think they were ordinary working class rioters, they were right wing rent-a-mob thugs, stirred up my misinformation and hatred. From what I saw, the working class were entirely against the violence that followed and actually helped those targeted to clear up.But you don’t see the ordinary working class types protesting as they did over the poll tax. Indeed it took the murder of little girls last year for it to kick off.
I think it's coming. Maybe not in the UK but it definitely feels like something is brewing.
My buying power is a fraction of my parents buying power at the same age. Will my children's buying power be a fraction of mine?
At what point do we say enough is enough to the top say 5% who get disproportionately wealthier every year?
My buying power is a fraction of my parents buying power at the same age. Will my children's buying power be a fraction of mine?
At what point do we say enough is enough to the top say 5% who get disproportionately wealthier every year?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff