Ced2: No argument about the lack of comprehension of the poll tax, it is your interpretation that suffers. "The rich paid a much less and the poor paid a lot more." This claim, together with your claim that "The rich" made up 10% of Bradford & "the poor" 90% cannot be made to tally.
The fact that the poll tax was scrapped is not an admission that it was "ill-concieved if not downright wrong", merely that it had been shown to be unpopular with a large percentage of the populace. This is not surprising if your claim that 90% were worse off because of it. But, it does not make the basis of the poll tax wrong.
Removal of the poll tax ( a fair and equitable charge upon each person as a share of commonly received services ) reduced the income of local councils. As a result we see local rates (the charge on houses based on size and locality) increasing, and support by central government requiring the raising of additional funds by other means.
Tony Blair promised 'no increase in basic rate taxation' and so has had to increase nearly every other form of fund raising available to him. This means that we are now taxed at a much higher percentage rate, whilst the 'basic rate income tax' has not increased.

Nigel