Not sure what you mean but size of flashlight and brightness/dimness of bulb have little correlation by the way.
You need to work on your reading comprehension.
India’s successful Moon Landing
- Thread starter deema
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
- Status
Nothing wrong with my comprehension. You need to stop attributing meaning to people's comments to suit your narrative.
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
The trouble is we can't have ever inflating house prices and rents unless we also have similar with incomes - which is of course inflationary.
One answer to the housing crisis would be to let inflation rip, increase wages, benefits, etc but at the same time keep house prices level by taxation and regulation, so that prices get back in step with incomes, without hitting negative equity.
https://www.crisis.org.uk/ending-homelessness/housing/housing-supply/
The wealth tax proposal makes interesting reading, and I broadly agree with its aim. I can imagine it would be a nightmare, and costly to administer. But the money that could be raised would certainly make it worthwhile. The other issue I have had with some of these sort of proposals is fairness. There will be many people who live in properties of very high value, in London for example, who are by no means rich. If you base the rate of tax on value of assets, and pitch it at too low a level, some would be forced to sell up in order to pay it. I do like the idea to restrict the tax to the very top of the pile, as this would probably largely avoid this situation. I think the most important thing, as acknowledged by this report, is that anything of this kind is only going to work if accompanied by robust enforcement to address the scale of evasion.
So, in the right form, I would say bring it on.
As an aside I suspect we will agree that getting rid of so many tax inspectors and investigators as an "austerity" measure was one of the Tory governments more monumentally stupid ideas
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
I agree. You'd imagine the opposite would be a good idea if times were hard, but austerity really has only ever been for the less well off......
As an aside I suspect we will agree that getting rid of so many tax inspectors and investigators as an "austerity" measure was one of the Tory governments more monumentally stupid ideas
See companion article not to be missed!
https://gala.gre.ac.uk/id/eprint/42714/9/42714_TIPPET_The_good_life_at_the_top.pdf
Last edited:
@Jacob The philosophy of spend spend spend, leads to hyper inflation and makes everyone in the country extremely poor. You could of course try eliminating money, rather like the failed experiment of the Marxists when they took over Russia. Absolute carnage that led to the starvation of millions.
It’s impossible for any government to build enough houses when you have no idea how many people there will be in the country. Uncontrolled Immigration is the route of the housing crisis. If the population had stayed at roughly 57 million, and we hadn’t had the uncontrolled 10 million landing on our shores we would actually now have a surplus of housing. As it’s already be highlighted that actual build level of housing is actually higher than the population demands of the stable indigenous UK.
Mainly illiterate, none English speaking, with no shared culture or values individuals primarily men landing on our shores is going to cause massive social problems in the medium to long term. They already are getting priority over the housing needs of the indigenous population and that’s breading huge resentment. Now a policy of only housing migrants AFTER we have housed everyone who is legally in the UK would be both very popular and probably a huge deterrent to those trying to get here. After all, they are leaving a far more socialist country (France) to come to a centralist country risking crossing the sea. So, the socialist dream of the all the European country’s they tracked through wasn’t what they were after, or indeed the actual socialist countries who have embraced some form of communism that they could access by land bridges.
Let’s face it, given a chance, most people get out of socialist societies. Those in the UK who dream of the utopia of a socialist state, like Jacob could have but didn’t emigrate to any of the numerous countries held up as shinning examples of the benefit of socialism…..oh, they were unable to name a single one…..as it doesn’t exist!!
It’s impossible for any government to build enough houses when you have no idea how many people there will be in the country. Uncontrolled Immigration is the route of the housing crisis. If the population had stayed at roughly 57 million, and we hadn’t had the uncontrolled 10 million landing on our shores we would actually now have a surplus of housing. As it’s already be highlighted that actual build level of housing is actually higher than the population demands of the stable indigenous UK.
Mainly illiterate, none English speaking, with no shared culture or values individuals primarily men landing on our shores is going to cause massive social problems in the medium to long term. They already are getting priority over the housing needs of the indigenous population and that’s breading huge resentment. Now a policy of only housing migrants AFTER we have housed everyone who is legally in the UK would be both very popular and probably a huge deterrent to those trying to get here. After all, they are leaving a far more socialist country (France) to come to a centralist country risking crossing the sea. So, the socialist dream of the all the European country’s they tracked through wasn’t what they were after, or indeed the actual socialist countries who have embraced some form of communism that they could access by land bridges.
Let’s face it, given a chance, most people get out of socialist societies. Those in the UK who dream of the utopia of a socialist state, like Jacob could have but didn’t emigrate to any of the numerous countries held up as shinning examples of the benefit of socialism…..oh, they were unable to name a single one…..as it doesn’t exist!!
Agreed, we have a friend who was a tax inspector. As he observed getting rid of people who regularly recovered more than their salaries, sometimes a lot more, was a curious way to save money!
And no argument from me regarding your second link, perfectly reasonable, and I think that is the key.
Healey's tax the rich until they squeal at 98%, or whatever it was, may have played well to the far left. In reality it amounted to 98% of b****r all, as it was mostly avoided by one means or another. Set it at a reasonable level and I suspect most will pay up, then you can concentrate your efforts on chasing down those who wont, with lots of publicity and hefty fines, seizure of assets and or imprisonment as an encouragement. I think it is unrealistic to expect that you can ever close down every avenue of avoidance, if you can reduce the number inclined to do so in the first place you have a much better chance to Hoover up the remainder. I think it is quite wrong to universally demonize the rich, and assume that they are all intent on Jimmy Carr type schemes. Of course there are those who fit that stereotype, but I suspect most don't, and many already distribute huge sums through various philanthropic activities.
And no argument from me regarding your second link, perfectly reasonable, and I think that is the key.
Healey's tax the rich until they squeal at 98%, or whatever it was, may have played well to the far left. In reality it amounted to 98% of b****r all, as it was mostly avoided by one means or another. Set it at a reasonable level and I suspect most will pay up, then you can concentrate your efforts on chasing down those who wont, with lots of publicity and hefty fines, seizure of assets and or imprisonment as an encouragement. I think it is unrealistic to expect that you can ever close down every avenue of avoidance, if you can reduce the number inclined to do so in the first place you have a much better chance to Hoover up the remainder. I think it is quite wrong to universally demonize the rich, and assume that they are all intent on Jimmy Carr type schemes. Of course there are those who fit that stereotype, but I suspect most don't, and many already distribute huge sums through various philanthropic activities.
- Status
