Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Guest BoomBoomCrash

The Rich Must Be Reined In

Recommended Posts

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...dodging-failure

I'm really beginning to wonder if Cable is a double agent, working to protect the interests of the banking cartel. I mean what he is saying is that we must take action by doing absolutelt nothing of substance. Nice one Vince you clown.

tis not the rich that are the problem it is the fraudsters/bankers

and governments - they need culling

Edited by lowrentyieldmakessense(honest!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that socialists like Osborne and Cable are both going after the bankers while Darling remains silent.

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting that socialists like Osborne and Cable are both going after the bankers while Darling remains silent.

:rolleyes:

Why is that suprising? Darling and NuLabour have a pact with the very devil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Britain increasingly resembles one of those developing countries whose economy and society are dominated by internationally mobile business managers and a pampered local elite. Most of the natives, outside the prosperous enclaves, count themselves lucky to have a job.

It's called Globalisation, Vince.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Britain increasingly resembles one of those developing countries whose economy and society are dominated by internationally mobile business managers and a pampered local elite. Most of the natives, outside the prosperous enclaves, count themselves lucky to have a job.

It's called Globalisation, Vince.

An [international] Oligarchy by another name.

Then again, all you need is a little propaganda to keep the masses busy hating their neighbour because he has made a miserable few quid more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A 50% top rate is unlikely to gather more revenue than a 40% rate when there are gaping anomalies, such as the disparity between tax on earned income and personal capital gains (currently 18%). Britain taxes wealth, particularly property, lightly compared with income – particularly good news for the super-rich.

Is Vince calling for a land tax?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Britain increasingly resembles one of those developing countries whose economy and society are dominated by internationally mobile business managers and a pampered local elite. Most of the natives, outside the prosperous enclaves, count themselves lucky to have a job.

It's called Globalisation, Vince.

'They' announced themselves with a 'BANG' too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is Vince calling for a land tax?

I think land taxes (which they have in the USA) are very fair. It stops people sitting on unused property and if the taxes aren't paid charges can be made against the property until they reach the total value at which point the gubmint would own it. I can't see the super rich going for this though.

I also think VAT is fair; pay tax on what you buy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think land taxes (which they have in the USA) are very fair. It stops people sitting on unused property and if the taxes aren't paid charges can be made against the property until they reach the total value at which point the gubmint would own it. I can't see the super rich going for this though.

I also think VAT is fair; pay tax on what you buy.

taxes are theft

shrink the state - drastically

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is Vince calling for a land tax?

We already have a land tax in the form of higher prices.

A business pays more rent in London vs somewhere up north for the same premises as an example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We already have a land tax in the form of higher prices.

A business pays more rent in London vs somewhere up north for the same premises as an example.

No.

High prices could be seen as a tax on entry.

But a land tax would tax the holding* of land.

*or hoarding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We just have to keep the money out of food, heat and shelter.

Got no problem with rich people throwing their money about spending it and investing it in new businesses.

Its when the liquidity comes from the government and into property prices which is my issue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

shrink the State

at least one political party gets it

just a shame most of the sheeple dont

http://lpuk.org/

The Libertarian Party have always campaigned on the premise that Government is far too big and intrusive, in all areas of its activity. Now a new report from the Institute for Market Economics on the Optimum Size of Government validates our claims of oversized and inefficient government, using the latest OECD data, it finds that the government sectors in OECD (developed countries) are too large relative to their private sectors to maximize economic growth.

The new IME study, entitled The Optimum Size of Government, finds the government sector should be no larger than 25% of GDP (and perhaps considerably smaller) to maximize GDP growth. All major governments, including the U.S., Germany, U.K., France, and Italy greatly exceed that level. The average government sector for the OECD countries now exceeds 41% of GDP.

The results of the study indicate that policy makers who are enlarging their government sectors in the name of "economic stimulus" are likely to be retarding the renewal of economic growth and job creation rather than enhancing it

The Libertarian Party manifesto is geared towards smaller, more efficient and less intrusive government, and the report from the IME fully supports the changes to the structure of government that we stand for. Governments that do not adequately protect the people and their property and the rule of law may be too small, while governments whose size and inefficiencies cause a misallocation of resources are too large.

The LPUK believe that politicians, public sector employees, and special interest groups are using the power of the government for their own purposes. As distortions that arise from political decision making outweigh the benefits from government activities the government is no longer the solution but is the problem.

It is far too big and we want to see a full 50% reduction in the size, scope and spending of the UK Government along with a pro-rata reduction in overall taxation levels in order to maximise job creation and economic growth coupled with non intrusive liberty.

It is unfortunate that the Conservatives only want to tinker with 10% of government spending while at the same time replacing cuts with new taxation, and the LibDem's want to increase the size of government and levels of taxation even further, but neither can take any solace from the historical data presented in this report.

Bear in mind also that these figures only deal with on-book figures to mid 2007 and so do not include any extra spending measures, regulation and enforcement procured as a result of the credit crunch and recession. The off-book spending, including PFI, civil service pensions and funding of Unions, Quangos and Fake Charities which is so popular with the present government, and in the main is supported by Conservative actions, is not necessarily taken account of either and both these elements will compound the problems further.

The statistics include only transfers to lower levels of government, and thus ignore self-financed expenditures of local governments (while in themselves not a bad thing if they were a replacement for centralised taxation), which place an even larger burden on those paying the localised levies and taxes.

The Libertarian Party is the only party to openly argue that the state is far too big and that massive unforgiving cuts of over 50% must be made in the size of government, its spending and in the intrusiveness of the State in order to maximise job creation and economic growth coupled with non intrusive liberty. This IME report confirms our belief in such swathing cuts and goes a long way to support the view that the Libertarian Party manifesto has got the mix right, allowing new investment and job creation in the private sector.

Edited by lowrentyieldmakessense(honest!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think land taxes (which they have in the USA) are very fair. It stops people sitting on unused property and if the taxes aren't paid charges can be made against the property until they reach the total value at which point the gubmint would own it. I can't see the super rich going for this though.

I also think VAT is fair; pay tax on what you buy.

Land taxes (like council tax) prevent you from "opting out". Kicking back and living a low consumption lifestyle (small holding etc...) they are an excellent way of ensuring you have no choice but to remain economicaly "productive" to feed the state.

Not very nice in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting that socialists like Osborne and Cable are both going after the bankers while Darling remains silent.

:rolleyes:

Yeah - take this weekend's Guardian and Observer; the Tories setting the running on cutting City bonuses -

in the Guardian of all places.

Crazy times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Land taxes (like council tax) prevent you from "opting out". Kicking back and living a low consumption lifestyle (small holding etc...) they are an excellent way of ensuring you have no choice but to remain economicaly "productive" to feed the state.

Not very nice in my opinion.

Maybe there could be a tax free allowance, either sqare meterage or value. You could then pay a sliding scale of taxes above this. Does that sound fair? I fear I may be metamorphosing into some kind of communist (or cockroach).

I don't think council tax is a proper land tax as it is capped.

Edited by Moley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't you all noticed the 'trend'?

Over the last few decades business practices(trialled in USA first) have been constantly introduced into UK business under the heading -

The next great thing (more profit/productivity to squeeze out of your workers etc)

'MILESTONES' - The Romans marked out their advancing 'Empire' with these!

All these 'advances' lead to, was many millions of stressed out overworked UK slaves!

When 'they' can't squeeze any more profit - 'they' ship your jobs abroad!

Be Xtremely wary when 'they' decide to introduce USA YALE/Harvard 'Groupthink' stuff!

Yale is the 'witty' reference to the 'lock' manufacturer - ie chain you to a desk thru 'intelligent' revolution - just as Albert Pike pronounced!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah - take this weekend's Guardian and Observer; the Tories setting the running on cutting City bonuses -

in the Guardian of all places.

Crazy times.

forgive my cynicism, but Osbourne (literally the banker's best and life-long friend) is never going to reign in the bankers.

What he is doing is trying to get the 'angry at the banks' vote by lying to the gullible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If executive pay isn't reined in the economy will die completely.

To feed the greed firms are cutting jobs and increasing prices. The increasing number of unemployed won't have any spending power and high prices will mean less sales.

The number of shareholders voting against executive pay, bonuses and pensions is increasing but they don't have enough voting power to block them. C & W shareholders recently called the pay rises there "unbridled greed" but most shares are owned by the bosses who want the pay rises so they vote them in!

Article here from 2007, anyone got a more recent one?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/aug/29/executivepay2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
forgive my cynicism, but Osbourne (literally the banker's best and life-long friend) is never going to reign in the bankers.

What he is doing is trying to get the 'angry at the banks' vote by lying to the gullible.

I'm regularly told New Labour are seething with an ungovernable hatred at people who have more money than them.

What can I tell you, I thought they were a lame centrist party that had cuddled up to the City, but apparently thats just PC indoctrination talking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   291 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.