Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

leicestersq

New Members
  • Posts

    5,414
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by leicestersq

  1. The reason that the costs are so high is that the state has to pay huge amounts of money for those not working, which means diverting money from those that are to those that are not. The explosion in the pensioner population is a particularly large burden, one that looks unsustainable to me.
  2. I cant help but think that the industrial revolution needed some stuff that the Romans didnt have, particularly the Scientific Principle, and a more modern banking system. The free thinking ideals encouraged by Protestantism (I'm not religious by the way) were key to this development.
  3. Banks will charge as much interest as they can. If there is a tight market for the supply of credit, and high demand for it, rates will go up. Bank of England is happy enough with that. They dont want banks to park money with them, hence the 0.5% base rate.
  4. It is one thing for private companies to do this, quite another for banks under control of the taxpayer. Pensions linked to basic as well, no wonder Rbs has little chance of returning to profit.
  5. Sadly true. The fact that the current policy of no land value tax effectively screws over a different group of people doesnt get voted against because people dont realise it is happening. Well I did double the rate, so revenue would be reduced on properties from 1 - 2 million, but increased for properties above that value. Not sure what the figure would be for overall revenue. What it does do is take away that silly unfairness that occurs when a property increases in value by £1 from £999,999 to one million, and getting a tax of £10 grand a year applied to it. I never understood why they dont use this method of tax for stamp duty.
  6. A decent idea. I would tweak it by saying it should be 2% over the value of £1 million. A better idea would be to have a progressive land value tax, based on the total amount of property you own.
  7. Ah the emotive little old lady argument. No sympathy for young people that cant buy anywhere decent and who are the ones slogging away at work providing for said little old lady? Those working middle classes will gain. I suggest a progressive land value tax, with penal rates for non UK citizens. Most working middle class UK families will gain as a result. Did you factor in the reductions in their income tax in those calulations? What is your definition of communist? Those who wish to move the burden of taxation onto the land rich? I havent heard that one before.
  8. That is what a land value tax should do. It is all about redistributing the land by taxing those that hog it all for themselves. If they want to have a lot of valuable land at the expense of others, then they should pay. The whole point of it is to make those equity rich people start paying their share. What is so bad about selling up and moving to somewhere cheaper anyway? If they get on with it they will be glad they did. The families that get to move out of the flats and into a family home will be better off too.
  9. Greg, whilst I have some sympathy with your argument, the truth is that there is always a choice as to where you place the burden of taxation. If they did levy this land, then taxes elsewhere would either be reduced elsewhere, or there would be more government spending. We always get people on these debates that seem to be saying that you cant readjust where the burden falls. It seems like a defeatist argument to me, I believe that it can be done. If you believe it cant then you are saying that whoever is in power will just raise more and more tax when they see the opportunity to do so. If that is the case, then why have the debate? There wouldnt be any point even organising a protest, as the best you could do would be to replace one set of perpetual tax raisers with another set. In reality though, you can have the debate and governments do have to decide where the burden of tax will fall, and the people can influence that decision. The Tories were quite keen on a Poll tax, the people said no and instead we had more VAT instead. Same here, should we tax land or income? Well I reckon you need to do both. There ought to be a PROGRESSIVE land value tax on residential land (commercial and agricultural land needs to be treated slightly differently) with discounts for UK citizens, and penal rates for non-UK citizens. You can then use the money raised to help introduce a citizens income to replace all other benefits, and put an incentive in front of everyone to go and work with a marginal rate of tax well below 100%. Such a policy though needs withdrawal from the EU, and the establishment of a citizens database.
  10. I think I would get out of the pound. In general though, I think the BofE has done a good job. It warned about the crash in advance, and has tried to pick up the pieces. On the other hand they are paid too much and are doing nothing to prosecute the fraudsters.
  11. Does anyone know if there is an investigation going on at all? I had heard that Peter Cummings was under investigation, but I havent heard of a trial. Trouble is that juries dont understand fraud of this nature very easily, and just one slip up by the prosecutors and judges rule a mis-trial. The chance of getting any justice out of this seems very slim.
  12. One of the things I am convinced of is that the Bank of England knew all about it, but did little than make obscure comments about it in Speeches by the governor. They were smarting over having the power of oversight taken away from them by Gordon Brown. I dont know if he deliberately allowed these Scottish banks to go out and commit massive crime, but one wonders. More likely he was influenced into doing so by the banking criminals themselves. Once they had managed to give oversight to the FSA, they could then pretty much do what they pleased. The B of E bided its time, and were sort of hoping for this disaster to unfold, as that was the only way it could get its powers back. If the FSA had done its job, locked up the crooked bankers and removed the banking licence from the Scots banks, they would still have that power today. I think that the BofE judged it right. If they had made a fuss, they would have been squashed by Brown. As Clare Short said at the Iraq inquiry, sometimes there is only so much you can do. At least the BofE have their powers back and they seem to be gradually reigning the banks back in. Certainly the obscene lending of the past by banks doesnt appear to be happening anymore, despite some crooked politicians trying to get the taxpayer to pay for indemnity schemes introduced to crank up lending ratios again.
  13. Green technology needs taxpayers money to make it profitable. Therefore you need to grease the palms of corrupt politicians.
  14. How do you enact that rule? Does the state impose it? Shareholders can't because their votes are stolen from then.
  15. Are you sure it is deliberate social engineering? Why attribute this to anything other than a result of globalisation and unintended consequence? To say that this was all part of some deliberate well thought out plan is giving someone a lot of credit for coming up with a plan, and seeing it through to fruition. I havent yet met that sort of competence from Government.
  16. If you increased the wages at Tesco, profits would fall, meaning less money for all those pension funds through dividends. Transferring money from the uber wealthy is a good goal to aim for though. I read that 300k would be what a director would be earning for a ftse company if their pay had stayed in line with the norm from about 1980. How to achieve that though? Where are all the Quakers who used to lead our companies?
  17. Lets not forget that when money is transferred in this way, there is an administrative cost which eliminates some of the income in the process of being transferred.
  18. I guess your place isn't in the south east? I guess where we live changes our perception. I was trying to talk about the market generally of course, but as you point out, some prices are quite a ways down.
  19. -30% real is at odds with the reality I see. I guess your are talking about wrt to general prices rather than the general wage level, and definitely not wrt the after tax wage level? Even then, I cannot see prices having dropped in any meaningful way.
  20. If someone sells their rupees to buy pounds, so they can buy a pad here, then yes. Currency traders don't drop their prices when they see a buyer.
  21. Yes, it is true. Taxes on smoking for example, have discouraged people from smoking and extended the lives of many people. Likewise a tax on parking will encourage people to live closer to where they work, and to walk and cycle, making them fitter and healthier. On the other side of the equation, tax pays for things like schools and roads and hospitals, which we are all glad of.
  22. Just another thought. I was musing on how much money was coming in to the UK as we gradually sell of our land and property. What is the affect of this? Well it must force the value of the pound up. And that in turn makes it more expensive to produce here. Which results in jobs being lost in the UK. We definitely need to make all foreign owners of land pay a penal rate of tax.
  23. What happened on the occasions when they came home early, or left late? Thats bound to happen sooner or later. Of if they move and dont tell you?
×
×
  • 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.