I know I am probably going to regret this post, but was the whole pole tax riot not caused by people not wanting to be responsible for paying thier own rates? The rates system (as I understood it to be) was that you paid based on the size of your home rather than the people actually using the facilities? that is not a fair system surely? an old aged pensioner widow in a large house on her own, was paying more than 3x what a family of 5 were paying whilst living in their council house on the rates system. therefore the new poll tax system said that was not fair and made each person over 18 responsible for thier own share of the 'rates' that basic premise is surely a much more fair system.
My recollection of the rioters was two fold. There were the people who, for legitimate reasons wanted to peacefully protest to register thier disagreement with the government at the time and then there were the lazy skanking w#####s who fancied a bit of a ruck (and many of whom were unemployed so wouldnt have to pay anyway)
I will now leave this post as I will not be held responsible for appearing to support the complete cock up that virtually every council in the country made of the system- providing uneven and below standard facilities etc etc. It didnt work out as far as I can see and now it seems that same old aged pensioner widow is now paying through the nose once more, the only difference is that so is everyone else too.....

the poll tax might have been a better deal for a few old ladies in big houses, but for the other 99.999% of the population....not so much

The ultimate aim was the end of milk-snatcher's prime ministerial career. And on that level - job done.

It's funny that now long before the introduction of the poll tax I read Asimov's Forward the Foundation which suggests poll tax as a great way of bringing a government down.

But equally if the five people were living in a small house because they had low paid jobs, couldn't afford to live in their own place, so were sharing a house to save money, it doesn't seem fair for them to be paying as much as an affluent pensioner living in a large house.

I remember there were 5 of us sharing a house and we drew names out of a hat for 2 people who would have to register on the form as we weren't all going to do it, I don't recall any of us actually paying any poll tax though, I think the demands were just ignored in the end.

dont recall mentioning the pensioner being affluent

everyone has struggles but surely everyone should pay thier way too?

The point was that it was a poll tax, Register to vote and you have to pay! She wasn't stupid old Thatch....just evil....

Are you a Communist????To suggest that every one struggles surely implies that we are all equal.

I never regestered but it was done on my behalf,letting agencey landlord never found out but got demands for payment followed much later by a summons to appear in court.
Did not comply and as the system was so clogged up with non payers was gone before hearing any more.

Does it matter???It is the implication and that is correct.

That comment barely warrants a reply

You said pensioner in a large house, implies more affluent than the 5 people living in a slum

I suppose yes there are some services which are a cost per person. But, I would have thought overall it costs a council less to service 5 people in one property than 5 people spread out in separate houses.

Quite simple it was not fair but when has fairness ever got in the way of the right wing ,conservative side of politics from implementing their agenda?