pandora's box Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) Charities have called for bank bonuses to be taxed and the proceeds given straight to good causes to help protect them from Government spending cuts. Sir Stephen Bubb, chief executive of the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations which represents 2,000 charity leaders, wants a summit with the Chancellor. He claims cuts to local government grants this year will force thousands of charities to slash their services or close entirely. Sir Stephen suggested an extra bank levy would raise billions which could go straight into the coalition's Big Society Bank whose aim is to promote social enterprise. Charities could then bid for funding to help offset the estimated £1billion cuts due to hit local government grants in 2011, the charities' boss told The Times. Daily Mail Edited January 1, 2011 by pandora's box Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rxe Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 People employed by charities are VIs like the rest of us - they don't want to lose their jobs any more than the council workers do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radge Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I've got a better idea. Tax the Charity Sector fat cats creaming off over £40K a year from their charities at 100%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juvenal Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I see Boris is still ramping for the Bankers and their bonuses. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/boris-warns-over-bank-bonuses-2173359.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@contradevian Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I see Boris is still ramping for the Bankers and their bonuses. http://www.independe...es-2173359.html That guy is a f*cking idiot. Can't believe I voted for him. Vote Boris. Get Banksta, but then again voting Ken will most likely achieve the same result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pauly_Boy Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 No doubt Bono's charity are one of those wanting tax payer funds! There are a lot of wealthy charity bosses out there taking advantage of peoples generosity and volunteers hard work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyoto Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 That guy is a f*cking idiot. Can't believe I voted for him. Vote Boris. Get Banksta, but then again voting Ken will most likely achieve the same result. He is doing what he was elected for - representing the interests of London, with it's massive financial services sector. The banks we bailed out shouldn't be paying a penny in bonuses, but the rest can do and pay what they like as far as I'm concerned. More taxes collected, more jobs, more spending in the UK economy..... Bonuses all round! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinnamon Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 He claims cuts to local government grants this year will force thousands of charities to slash their services or close entirely. Those people could just start to work charitably (as in 'for free') instead of making easy money, and all is as it should be. But they demand money along with the threat to stop to work ,which proves they are a business and not a charity... None of those beggars ever ask for actual 'help' -- the only 'help' they ever want is with collecting free money! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@contradevian Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 He is doing what he was elected for - representing the interests of London, with it's massive financial services sector. The banks we bailed out shouldn't be paying a penny in bonuses, but the rest can do and pay what they like as far as I'm concerned. More taxes collected, more jobs, more spending in the UK economy..... Bonuses all round! Its more how London earns its money that concerns me. More money made by the "massive financial services sector" and another part of the real economy dies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrFlibble Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 No doubt Bono's charity are one of those wanting tax payer funds! There are a lot of wealthy charity bosses out there taking advantage of peoples generosity and volunteers hard work I was complaining to a guy at work before Christmas about having to de-ice the car each morning and got a reply back that he wouldn't buy a house without a garage. His wife is high up in one of these charities. She is always jetting off all over the world. They live in a detached on something like 10 acres of land and have numerous horses. Fooking incredible really. All the guy does at work is screw boxes together but yet he's telling me, a fully qualified engineer, that he wouldn't buy a house without a garage. Not everyone can afford his lifestyle, but he quickly forgets that as he lives the high life off the backs of people thinking they are giving to charity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecrashingisles Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I was complaining to a guy at work before Christmas about having to de-ice the car each morning and got a reply back that he wouldn't buy a house without a garage. His wife is high up in one of these charities. She is always jetting off all over the world. They live in a detached on something like 10 acres of land and have numerous horses. Fooking incredible really. All the guy does at work is screw boxes together but yet he's telling me, a fully qualified engineer, that he wouldn't buy a house without a garage. Not everyone can afford his lifestyle, but he quickly forgets that as he lives the high life off the backs of people thinking they are giving to charity. If society wants morally righteous people I'm afraid we will have to pay the going rate for them. These charity workers are highly mobile and can easily go off and do good elsewhere if we don't give them enough money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) Charities have called for bank bonuses to be taxed and the proceeds given straight to good causes to help protect them from Government spending cuts. Sir Stephen Bubb, chief executive of the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations which represents 2,000 charity leaders, wants a summit with the Chancellor. He claims cuts to local government grants this year will force thousands of charities to slash their services or close entirely. Sir Stephen suggested an extra bank levy would raise billions which could go straight into the coalition's Big Society Bank whose aim is to promote social enterprise. Charities could then bid for funding to help offset the estimated £1billion cuts due to hit local government grants in 2011, the charities' boss told The Times. Daily Mail He'll know full well of course that any extra tax like that will just get passed onto bank customers one way or another. Another double whammy. If they want a cut of the bonus money they should start rattling their tins inside the banks HQs like they waylay the public inside supermarkets etc. Edited January 1, 2011 by billybong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no accountant Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Its more how London earns its money that concerns me. More money made by the "massive financial services sector" and another part of the real economy dies. Why? Surely if London is global financial centre, pulling in revenue from around the world then the 'real' economy (I guess you mean manufacturing) is boosted. Who will buy the Aston Martin DB9s otherwise? You can't just make things, you need someone to buy them! If we tax London it will disappear - I don't see how this creates jobs. Quite the opposite in fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@contradevian Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) Why? Surely if London is global financial centre, pulling in revenue from around the world then the 'real' economy (I guess you mean manufacturing) is boosted. Who will buy the Aston Martin DB9s otherwise? You can't just make things, you need someone to buy them! If we tax London it will disappear - I don't see how this creates jobs. Quite the opposite in fact. It what way does it pull in revenue from around the world? London has expanded and grown fat on the huge amount of global debt creation. Huge amounts of private, business and sovereign debt. Hardly sustainable is it? And thats before the other scams, fleecing pensioners and the share "front running." Also the detriment of the wider economy such as supporting takeovers such as Cadburys. Result: jobs lost to Poland, and loss of CT revenue to the exchequer. Predicably champagne and bonuses all round in the City. Edited January 1, 2011 by Sir John Steed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormymonday_2011 Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Its more how London earns its money that concerns me. More money made by the "massive financial services sector" and another part of the real economy dies. As Naked Capitalism so eloquently put it the City of London is to finance what Bangkok is to the sex trade. It survives by providing the dirty and dubious services that are illegal elsewhere. Its greasy fingers are all over practically every scam and financial blow up that has happened around the world in the past few years. While it prospers the rest of the UK economyis rotten with the pox it has given us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicestersq Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I was complaining to a guy at work before Christmas about having to de-ice the car each morning and got a reply back that he wouldn't buy a house without a garage. His wife is high up in one of these charities. She is always jetting off all over the world. They live in a detached on something like 10 acres of land and have numerous horses. Fooking incredible really. All the guy does at work is screw boxes together but yet he's telling me, a fully qualified engineer, that he wouldn't buy a house without a garage. Not everyone can afford his lifestyle, but he quickly forgets that as he lives the high life off the backs of people thinking they are giving to charity. These stories are all too common. Much of the charitable sector takes advantage of the word charity, and the tax advantages, to make money for themselves. The situation is so bad that many don't give to charities anymore. Instead, best spend it on themselves. I think it would be a good change to remove the tax advantages of charities. This would be good for genuine charities, as those who seek to exploit the tax status create a bad name for the whole charitable sector. It would remove a lot of the crooks too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenny dalglish Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Those people could just start to work charitably (as in 'for free') instead of making easy money, and all is as it should be. But they demand money along with the threat to stop to work ,which proves they are a business and not a charity... None of those beggars ever ask for actual 'help' -- the only 'help' they ever want is with collecting free money! Typical of the boorish, vacuous and most of all completely ignorant posts on these boards. You clearly have very little experience, knowledge or understanding of charities and the good work many of them do in our communites. I work for a charity in the SouthWest I am a volunteer, comprendez ? I and 50 other people all give up our time voluntary and for no renumeration because we want to better our community. We are not a wishy washy charity either, we work with families with young children that are experiencing real hardship, often the children are suffering in one form or another and the parents are often blighted by addictions and/or mental health problems. Each of our volunteers is given a CRB check, which costs money, they are placed on accredited training, which costs. We have 1 full time co-ordinator, because co-ordinating all the volunteers is a full time job and does require someone with a special set of skills, this person works many long hours, is dedicated and works for many hours more than she is paid and the pay that she does receive is very modest. We are in one of the most deprived parts of the country and we have helped over 50 families last year and in the 25 years that we have been operating not a single child that we that we have been involved with has had to been taken into care, a considerably better record than social services. We may have to close soon - after 25 years - because the funding for the 3rd sector has virtually evaporated and trust me the consequences of the hole that we will leave and the people that will be left to fend completely for themselves, with no help and no support structure, will be felt and will be paid for many times over by society. So, you will excuse me for replying to your sickeningly ignorant post, but occasionally I have to respond to posts like yours, even though I appreciate the message has little chance of penetrating your empty skull. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Why? Surely if London is global financial centre, pulling in revenue from around the world then the 'real' economy (I guess you mean manufacturing) is boosted. Who will buy the Aston Martin DB9s otherwise? You can't just make things, you need someone to buy them! If we tax London it will disappear - I don't see how this creates jobs. Quite the opposite in fact. Banks are a tax on every individual and business in the UK Our inflation is their profits They borrow off the govt (us) as 0.5% then lend us back our money at >3.5%. If thats not leeching, i dont know what is. Even if you dont want to pay them for the priviledge of borrowing your own money, we pay again through the inflation caused to make their ponzi viable. Most financial services jobs (ie call centres and so on) would still exist without banks - people still need somewhere to park their cash, or to borrow from. just there would be a few less twats in ferraris zapping through London. Thats the only 'negative' I can think of. Think more and bigger building societies and credit unions. They still provide jobs, but dont need politicians to give them taxpayer funds. Still, dont know what charities expect, theyre nearly as big a crooks as the bankers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radge Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) Dry your eyes, Kenny. I think it's fairly obvious the bit of the "3rd Sector" that's getting it in the neck here is the bit that pays (usually wives of ..) a shedload. Go to the Guardian jobs site and search Charities by salary: Charities jobs by Salary None specified (279) Up to £10,000 (3) £10,000 - £15,000 (9) £15,000 - £20,000 (29) £20,000 - £25,000 (66) £25,000 - £30,000 (98) £30,000 - £40,000 (132) £40,000 - £50,000 (62) £50,000 - £60,000 (43) £60,000 - £80,000 (13) £80,000 - £100,000 (3) Over £100,000 (1) Around 120 current vacancies at > £40K and 4 over £80K ffs! Edited to add: The >£100K job is filed under Charity - Poverty Relief! You couldn't make it up! Edited January 1, 2011 by Radge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Charities have called for bank bonuses to be taxed and the proceeds given straight to good causes to help protect them from Government spending cuts. giving up their nice company cars. corrected Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I was complaining to a guy at work before Christmas about having to de-ice the car each morning and got a reply back that he wouldn't buy a house without a garage. His wife is high up in one of these charities. She is always jetting off all over the world. They live in a detached on something like 10 acres of land and have numerous horses. Fooking incredible really. All the guy does at work is screw boxes together but yet he's telling me, a fully qualified engineer, that he wouldn't buy a house without a garage. Not everyone can afford his lifestyle, but he quickly forgets that as he lives the high life off the backs of people thinking they are giving to charity. charities are no longer charities in the traditional sense - they make their money by lobbying government for funds, they are extensions of the public sector Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 We may have to close soon - after 25 years raises the question - for the first 15 years the money didn't come from the state, try surviving that way instead - because the funding for the 3rd sector has virtually evaporated and trust me the consequences of the hole that we will leave and the people that will be left to fend completely for themselves, with no help and no support structure, nasty socialist bully Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okaycuckoo Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Cheer up, everyone! At least the parasites are turning on each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) Charities have given themselves a bad name over these past few years, as the article makes clear; if local cuts are made charities will lose out. Well why are charities surviving on government cash in the first place? It's despicable use of taxpayers money shows these entities up as little more than money grabbing opportunists. Charity for me means; corruption, marxism, governmentalism, tax fraud and unpalatable self righteousness. I only give to local small scale operations when I know exactly where the money is going. Edited January 1, 2011 by Chef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radge Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 The National Trust only gives figures for those in excess of £60K per year: The numbers of full‑time/regular employees whose pay and taxable benefits exceed £60,000 fell within the following bands: 2010 £160,000–£169,999 1 £140,000–£149,999 - £130,000–£139,999 1 £120,000–£129,999 2 £110,000–£119,999 4 £100,000–£109,999 3 £90,000–£99,999 6 £80,000–£89,999 13 £70,000–£79,999 17 £60,000–£69,999 30 In 2010, 57 of the 77 staff earning in excess of £60,000 (2009: 57 of the 66 staff earning in excess of £60,000) participated in the defined benefit pension scheme (see Note 29). Contributions of £114,011 (2009: £43,999) were made in relation to 13 members of staff (2009: 8) earning in excess of £60,000 who participated in the defined contribution pension scheme. The members of this rip-off scheme must be off their tatties! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.