How would YOU decrease the national debt?

bazaarboy said:
very insightful :p but can you provide more context to your thoughts?
Click to expand...

Of course.

Look at the % of tax the financial sector provides to the Government. I can tell you now that it's something like 70% of all Corporation Tax returns. If the tax regime is excessively punitive, the banks, hedge funds etc. will all move overseas. The tax will be lost.

Or in more simple terms, you don't kill the goose that lays golden eggs.
 
Last edited:
The Mad Rapper said:
Of course.

Look at the % of tax the financial sector provides to the Government. I can tell you know that it's something like 70% of all Corporation Tax returns. If the tax regime is excessively punitive, the banks, hedge funds etc. will all move overseas. The tax will be lost.

Or in more simple terms, you don't kill the goose that lays golden eggs.
Click to expand...

Following from the egg metaphor, it then seems that all our eggs are in one basket - if we're truly so reliant on tax revenues from the finance sector, then we're in trouble
financial services are fickle and intangible, and many of their "products" are just puffs of air - fabrications of the mind! eg off-balance sheet transactions...

shouldn't we develop real industries such as science / environment / healthcare technologies more? rather than rely so much on an industry that does not actually create anything?
 
bazaarboy said:
very true - sorry, it's not a good idea to generalise :)
Click to expand...

which is exactly what all your comments are based on. very few parts of the banking system where making losses, just those losses where high. So you want to punish the incredibly profitable sections of the banks. Especially when it is so easy for companys to migrate to other countrys, just look what has happened to manufacturing and customer service sectors.
It is a very silly attitude that has spread like wild fire over the last decade and not just with the banks.
 
AcidHell2 said:
which is exactly what all your comments are based on. very few parts of the banking system where making losses, just those losses where high. So you want to punish the incredibly profitable sections of the banks. Especially when it is so easy for companys to migrate to other countrys, just look what has happened to manufacturing and customer service sectors.
It is a very silly attitude that has spread like wild fire over the last decade and not just with the banks.
Click to expand...

manufacturing and customer service industries didnt "leave" the UK because the government was over taxing them - they left becuase their respective managements found it more profitable to relocate, rather than invest in the uk
 
Forde said:
I'm no environmentalist, but I would start with taxing the Hell out of those stupid 4x4s (the ones driven by posh ****s) and high-performance cars that do sod all MPG. Apart from the extra wear & tear on our already pot-holed roads they are using up the finite amount of petrol quicker.

I would also put heavy taxes on second homes in places that have very limited housing (Cornwall etc). Bloody Location Location Location always seems to feature some Londonite looking for a second home on the coast...

I'm sure my ideas are riddled with problems but it would make me feel better!



Where would you start?
Click to expand...

So, you would tax people just because you are jealous of them......

Personally, I would massively reduce / take away benefits from people who can't be bothered to work.

I would reduce spending on public transport, there are far too many buses choking up our roads.

Increase tax on bank profits until all their bail outs are paid back.

Reduce small business corporation tax rate.

Remove tax loopholes for those earning millions.
 
Withdraw from Afghanistan and Iraq. That's literally billions saved. Iraq and Afghanistan has **** all to do with us and our presence there only incenses fundamentalists to attack us, not the other way around.
 
bazaarboy said:
manufacturing and customer service industries didnt "leave" the UK because the government was over taxing them - they left becuase their respective managements found it more profitable to relocate, rather than invest in the uk
Click to expand...

It all comes down to cost and tax is one aspect of that. Which is why governments can and do give tax incentives.

KNiVES said:
Withdraw from Afghanistan and Iraq. That's literally billions saved. Iraq and Afghanistan has **** all to do with us and our presence there only incenses fundamentalists to attack us, not the other way around.
Click to expand...


we are out of Iraq (apart from thing like training iraq army) and Afghanistan is very much to do with us, seeing as we invaded. It would be utterly irresponsible to leave now and let it full into civil war.
 
Put a cap on how many children people can claim benefits for, none of this have 16 kids nonsense and be getting shedloads and a free big house. Why should I be paying taxes fr some lazy git to have loads of kids who'll end up robbing their neighbours anyway
 
AcidHell2 said:
It all comes down to cost and tax is one aspect of that. Which is why governments can and do give tax incentives.
Click to expand...

i'm all in favour of successful enterprise - the point I'm making is: A) we should not be so reliant on the service industry (china's the world's biggest manufacturer and they have been less affected than most countries), and B) let's call the big-wigs' bluff when they threaten to leave - to see what actually happens
 
banking has nothing to do with our lack of manufacturing, that is down to goverment not supporting the sector.

we need the banking sector and we don't need to pursue punitive punishment. It doesn't help anyone or achieve anything, it is counter productive as it breeds this sort of attitude. If you want to help banking not make the same mistakes change legislation. Not do some stupid tax.
 
Make everyone work for benefits...

4 days a week, they work cleaning the streets carrrying out manual work for the state. On day 5 they use centers with facilities dedicated to help them find work. Provide access to phones, computers, newspapers and help with CV's and applying for jobs. When employment is found, we help for the first month with expenses and then they are on their own supporting themselves again.... simple!!

The benefit system should benefit everyone. In getting these people to work and carry out tasks that are now done by the council, this extra labour could help reduce the cost of council tax... and improve the quality of life for everyone as we would have an extra 2 million people keeping britain tidy and on the road to a better future.
 
Surely we can do it entirely without affecting anyone in the private sector or the service provided by the public sector by simply 'making the public sector more efficient in a way that is to be kept 'super-secret-squirrel from the public until after the election'? haha hoho

:)

I remember before the election people like Dolph actually believed the tories when they said this (Yup, I'm not joking). Funny enough now they're in, it has .. er .. 'stopped being true accidentally and there has to be a massive reduction in the service provided by the public sector' and the tories 'secret way of doing it' has turned out to be -- er -- so secret it's almost like it didn't exist ever!! :)

Well, made be lol! I wonder if Dolph/Mad Hatter has realised yet just how absurdly wrong they were with their 'we can cut spending to the public sector and not hamr any service at all' thoughts ? :) Funny really .. bet they're still persuading themselves they were right :) And of course ANYTHING the tories do wrong .. er .. 'it was Labours fault from when they were in power'. Marvellous.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom