bankfeeder

I think that is completely wrong. The legislating machinery is indeed hapless. There has been no conspiracy of silence among politicians as you darkly imply. When you put together a bunch of socially zealous politicians and a cohort of self serving, self righteous officials, the result is not coordination or an effective statute. No one applies Occam's razor to the problem of how to get laminar flow of tax revenue. Instead, the turbulent nonsense we end up with is caused by the jumble of fuzzy, fairness-infused discordant complexity we laughingly are subjected to as tax law. You don't have to be Miss Marple to detect the loopholes as a tax payer, you just walk though them. It's not illegal in any way to do so, as the Chancellor himself admits, but bizarrely he then implies that it is wrong to follow the law. It just annoys me that he doesn't put the blame where it lies on himself and iterations of flat footed (as you put it) moralising idealists before him for failing utterly to manage.

6 foot long thread here... http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=177287

Nobody expects the spamish inquisition...

Very good!

Why would you find that in any way wrong?

Taxpayers follow the law to minimise their tax payments. Shock horror. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17661011 There do not seem to be any comments allowed, surprisingly. What a complete pillock!

As if doing otherwise is somehow wrong. Silly cow.

Are you suggesting illegality or are you saying that using loopholes is incorrect?

Agreed, but worth adding that believing that it'll all be OK in the future if you do save for your retirement is crazy.

They are for some.

According to the Chancellor, that's immoral. Barmy eh?

I suppose one advantage would be that we would all get over ourselves and others in terms of pay. It might not change much.

Are you saying that there is not a correct tax rate for those living in Guernsey?

Great idea for uni-dimensional fictional wage slaves. In the real world, everybody would simply spend their time arguing about the value of particular skills and knowledge instead of using them. It would stimulate the black economy, I suppose.

Is that you Harriet?

That would normally be the expected outcome. Why should a company not have a large balance sheet if it has done some extraordinarily good stuff. Everybody seems to use Amazon, so I guess they have something going for them.

Would it not have been cheaper and more energy efficient to use the GCH with just the one radiator turned on? I agree about the low use charge, by the way.

I can see that in the days before cheap control systems, 'sizing' radiators was a necessary evil. The problem is, the British plumber ALWAYS seems to get this wrong in a way that the Swedish laugh at. Today, it seems more appropriate to fit big radiators and a decent control system to go with it. They are available and are very cheap - a PID thermostat is cheaper than a radiator. Kurt - I wouldn't like to live in a house designed to your example. We do get temperatures way below -1. At -12, you would shiver indoors. The biggest problem, I agree is the User Interface. It's like cars with chokes. Now, it's been recognised that the average motorist just can't cope with such a thing. It's time that home heating systems were optimised with modern technology - it is cheap and readily available. When people cotton on to this, we really will save some energy! Stuff TV's on standby, this is actually significant. So is insulation, I agree.

I have a Honeywell one which I set to have a maximum temperature of 21 from the Engineer menu. That solved it and nobody noticed. Have you seen this one? http://www.lex18.com/news/former-apple-employee-invents-high-tech-thermostat

As it's you, Kurt, here is a serious question. I am amazed by how many homes still have the 3 or 4 degree hysteresis bi-metallic devices which people seem to use like on/off switches and forget that they left them on 28C. The number of times I have gone into places and said "Blimey it's hot in here" and been met with quizzical "Oh is it?" looks. Replacement to something which can cope with this a little more scientifically would save a huge amount of energy very easily. Non?

Well, quite right. As any fule kno, there is a beast you tackle as an exporter called Transfer Pricing. Companies like Amazon will be in this type of discussion with Tax Authorities all the time. I personally hope that they get away with as much as possible, because I regard the increasing tax take of European governments (including GB, of course) as sunk funds. The best outcomes will come from lower tax takes. And I like Amazon. I had spotted the thing on emails, and admit that I was being deliberately obtuse to make a point.

I would forget insulation and give financial incentives (not compulsion) for fitting timed electronic thermostats and zoning to central heating systems. Perhaps this could be paid for by a tax on customer call waiting time on the energy utilities, including time spent in phone menus and listening to robotic announcements. 33p per minute held would be good. Actually, all that is barmy. When and if the price of energy becomes really significant (as opposed to just a whinge point), people will find out for themselves. Nothing to do.

I feel better. Thanks!

Taxing things you don't personally like and cooking the figures sounds like a return to New Labour. Personally, I would vote for anybody who would just leave everybody alone.

Nope, getting this right is the money shot. Toffs in jets are dimes. It's a question of scale you see. Aren't numbers annoying!