Brand v Paxman

gillywibble said:
Enough corruption, enough government spending, enough illegal war mongering, enough failure of domestic caring, enough bailing out the already wealthy bankers. It's time for change.
Click to expand...

How are you going to improve the lot of the poor with less government spending?
 
The problem, in a nutshell, is taxation. It could be massively reduced as an incentive for the average Joe to get off his backside and work.

Imagine paying 10% of all your earnings in tax, no hidden extras such as VAT, fuel duty etc. How much better off would you be? What would you do with that additional wealth? Save some and spend the rest into a booming economy to the benefit of everyone.

How could this be achieved? By reducing the interest on borrowing at source.
 
gillywibble said:
The problem, in a nutshell, is taxation. It could be massively reduced as an incentive for the average Joe to get off his backside and work.

Imagine paying 10% of all your earnings in tax, no hidden extras such as VAT, fuel duty etc. How much better off would you be? What would you do with that additional wealth? Save some and spend the rest into a booming economy to the benefit of everyone.

How could this be achieved? By reducing the interest on borrowing at source.
Click to expand...

So with everyone just paying 10% and nothing more, how are you going to pay pensions, benefits for those not working, the NHS, education and all the other things government provides?
 
It's funny how that jobs involving the care of others are paid naff all in comparison with jobs involving making/managing money. Shows how much we value our fellow humans.
 
Edinho said:
Russell Brand intelligent? lol

The guy is a colossal moron. I'll rant about a political system that doesn't work having never voted in it. Well done there fella.
Click to expand...
Do you need to have voted, to understand the political system? :confused:
 
gillywibble said:
I would remove the interest on borrowing at source.
Click to expand...

what does that mean exactly?


as that seems like "I'll just give out free money" :/

what is the "source"

also just because there's no interest doesn't mean you donmt have to pay it back, you're basically just saying I'll pay for everything by borrowing, but because there's no interest it'll be fine for ever

plus if there's no interest why would ANYONE lend money?
 
I used to hate Brand, mainly due to his stand-up, but after seeing him in numerous interviews, I really quite like the chap. Still dislike his stand-up though, much like how I like Will.I.Am as a person, but abhor his "music".
 
gillywibble said:
The Bank of England creates money into existence at interest. I would remove their right to charge interest.
Click to expand...

so basicaly your solution is just to make free money?

Also if the bank is not making interest, why would it take the risk of lending money?
 
smelly_legend said:
If my mate lent me money and asked for interest, I would laugh in his face and vice versa.
Click to expand...
I think Tefal is referring to the financial institutions.

It's a bit different borrowing £20 from a mate, than it is to borrow £100,000 from Barclays over 25 years.
 
EVH said:
I think Tefal is referring to the financial institutions.

It's a bit different borrowing £20 from a mate, than it is to borrow £100,000 from Barclays over 25 years.
Click to expand...

well, he did say "anyone" - which is what I think is wrong in the first place.

Maybe I'm being naive about the economy and the way it works, but I'm not sure why an institution can make up money, loan it to rich institutions for hardly anything then when your average joe bloggs wants a house which he has to pay 50% more for it than it's worth
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom