Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Mr Prudence

Members
  • Content Count

    349
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mr Prudence

  • Rank
    HPC Regular
  1. Quite right. I would add that they take it from productive businesses and hence impair the ability of those business to create jobs and investment.
  2. Someone else who doesn't know the diffrence between spending wealth and creating it.
  3. How many people would even notice if the head of OFCOM never went to work again? In fact how many people would notice if Ofcom, Ofwat, Ofgen all closed down tomorrow. .They are completely useless, they are certainly not keeping utility prices down. Ditto Equal Opportunities, British potato Board etc etc and about 500 other nonsense quangos, no one would notice if they didn't exist. The third in charge of the finance department at the BBC and the 3 top executives at the quango which look after Britains canals all earn more than the Prime Minister. Saying all that George would do well do start his cuts in Westminster, then we would be in it together.
  4. A couple of points about the 38k. Firstly that job is going to cost an employer another £4803 in job tax so that the cost to that business is significantly more than 38k, nearer 43k in fact. And secondly I assume you need 38k because you need £28,100 take home to counterbalance your benefits of £2344 per month. This demonstrates how the effect of job taxes distorts the employment market. To produce a job that matches your requirement of 28100 take home, the economy has to produce a job that pays 43000. Common sense tells us that it is more difficult to create a job the more the cost of that job. As that job is harder to create, the taxpayer is forced to pick up the cost. The higher the cost to the taxpayer, the higher employment taxes need to be to finance that and the equation gets ever more perverse. The answer is obvious lower employment taxes helps to create employment.
  5. We are spending upwards of 200 billion per year on social costs (includes pensions) so for Cameron to be aspiring to save 1 billion over 5 years is about a tenth of 1% if he could do it which he won't. If this constitutes his flag ship policy god help us. Labour are quite correct in saying that what he is proposing is being done already. The government have a policy of increasing the tax on jobs. If a business were to create a £30k job they would be taxed for doing it by £3108.48 per year that will soon increase even further. By rewarding job creation and retention will ever higher taxes is frankly nuts. The low paid should be taken out of taxation completely. Employers should be incentised to create jobs and the jobless incentivised to take them.
  6. Yes that is part of it too. They need to take the low paid out of tax. The need to return to social benefits to what it is meant to be and that is a safety net for those between jobs. But thirdly a couple of posters have pointed out the lack of jobs. They have to address this by cutting the taxes on business especially the tax on jobs. I find it incomprehensible that a country with 5 million unemployment/incapacity claimants is planning to INCREASE the jobs tax.
  7. There has been a massive increase in business taxation over the past few years, this is just another example of it. Government has been passing social costs away from the taxpayer and onto business. For example maternity and paternity pay. Now if a governement want to pay maternity and paternity pay fine, it is an elected government that is their choice. But don't pass social benefits legislation and then make businesses pay for it. The result of that will be discrimination against the very people they are truing to support.. Business rates are about 46% of the rental value of the business premises. A modest office in a provincial town is going to costs at least £10k leading to a rates charge of £4600 per year. Quite a lot of money for what is in most cases zero services supplied. Again we have decided as a country that we want all the services that councils provide and then made businesses pay fot it. Trouble is that the more we tax business the more vulnerable they are to a downturn, the less they are able to invest and the less they are able to employ people.
  8. I wonder when Brown thought this up, has he been planning it for months or was it something to fill the speech and make an impact with. My guess based on the fact the Ed Milliband knew less that the square root of bugger all about it last night suggests that it is spin. Just imagine that a few people spend any time at all thinking this through they would ask questions like - 1. Is this compulsary 2. What if the mother says no thanks - are they going to make her go. 3. If they don't go are they going to stop benefits. 4. What about Dad - does he have visiting rights. 5. He is allowed to stay overnight. As the girls are legally minors and the state their guardians do they let them? 6. What about the existing 16/17 olds that have council flats - do they go into the hostel. 7. When do they leave - at 18? 8. Where do they go at 18 another council house? The fact that no government official has any idea what the answer to these questions is, you can be sure that this is a back of a fag packet job. What an appalling way to announce policy that will affect hundreds of thousands of people.
  9. It is for 10 hours a week to be brought in within 5 years. Complete and utterly cynical spin. For the mother to work only 10 hours a week she would be working for free because the marginal rate of tax for people on benefit is close to 100%. She would lose in benefit everything she earned.
  10. We give the FA 25 million a year, because football is obviously skint isn't it. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/...--paid-yet.html
  11. The man who claimed a kitchen for a flat he never lived in, and claimed it over two tax years to hide the cost is outraged at MPs expenses.
  12. Old age care for those that can not afford it. Why can't they afford it? Someone raided their pension fund.
  13. He is going to solve the ME and nuclear proliferation. Camera pans to Ehun Barak ( Who is under investigation for war crimes but not a problem for the Labour friends of Israel)
  14. Tribute to brave troops (they have to be brave with no equipment or helicopters)
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.