h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Keynesian economics is bollocks. According to Denis Healey, former Labour Chancellor of the Exchequer.

>>classic Keyensianism of paying people to dig holes..and then paying others to fill them in again?


Well that's not Keyenesianism. Keynseianism is about paying people to do things that are going to be useful for the future. Things like building the Hoover damn.


AB:
>>That was when we had the money to do it.

Takaxtion? And, yes, borrowing - but with the expectation that that the investment will pay off in the form of economic growth and hence increased future revenues.

Agreed...cuts are also part of the solution, but taxation and growth are being ignored due to neo-liberal ideology. Cuts alone will send us backwards.

swl:
>>Keynesian economics is bollocks. According to Denis Healey, former Labour Chancellor of the Exchequer.

And I assume you've always hung on his every word.

I'd believe a Chancellor of the Exchequer before an internet Marxist

And actually, I well remember thinking at the time that Healey would make a better Labour leader than the nutter Foot.

> than the nutter Foot.<

Yes but he had great fashion sense in that donkey jacket.

Twonames - You just keep wriggling and rabbiting on about tax.
Anyone who has paid Employment Tax, P.A.Y.E, Council tax, V.A.T, Road Tax and every other bloody tax successive governments have dreamed up for the past 67 years since taking home a first 14 shilling pay packet and giving their mother 10 shillings of it for house keeping is totally pissed off with tax and you lot bleating about the protection of what you call vital services and human rights. (That's a bloody long sentence, literally)
Those 'vital' services will never be cut in the true sense of the word but like Education and other Public Sector services there is a need for change and commonsense saving in expenditure.
You are young people with a future, what do you look for in the years to come ? Think about it and the consider this. We have a minimum wage and all forms of help aid and charity for the poor and needy, migrants, other countries and even animals. Is there a situation where you can say someone should live tax free, having paid their debt to society ?

@swl:

I still rather surprised to see you looking to Denis Healey for economic wisdom. *I* might agree that we should 'Tax the rich until the pips squeak'...but I didn't think that would be your kind of thing.

AB:

To answer your question briefly rather than rabbiting on...some of us don't see tax as the evil imposition that you do.

I would have thought the point was perfectly clear. Keynesian economics was rejected by the Left the last time they were in power as idealistic tosh with no place in the real world.

>>Anyone who has paid Employment Tax, P.A.Y.E, Council tax, V.A.T, Road Tax and every other bloody tax successive governments have dreamed up for the past 67 years since taking home a first 14 shilling pay packet and giving their mother 10 shillings of it for house keeping is totally pissed off with tax and you lot bleating about the protection of what you call vital services and human rights. (That's a bloody long sentence, literally)<<

That's the attitude of a child. You have to pay taxes - deal with it. Do you think I enjoy losing nearly 15% of my 10k a year salary to taxes?

I don't like cleaning my house or not being able to lock the kids in a room until they stop annoying me, but I have to do all of those things if I want to live in a decent society.

Taxes are the price you pay for being free, safe and relatively affluent all at the same time.

>>Those 'vital' services will never be cut in the true sense of the word but like Education and other Public Sector services there is a need for change and commonsense saving in expenditure.<<

So you keep on saying, but you've yet to suggest where these cuts should fall. You're also talking to at least 4 people with extensive experience of education and the public sector who know how tight things are already.

I'd also like to remind you that the single biggest burden on the taxpayer is pensioners.

>>Is there a situation where you can say someone should live tax free, having paid their debt to society?<<

No. We all live in society and so all of us who are able should pay for it.

<>

It's closer to 34% HonestIago http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn91.pdf

Good luck Otto - Long may you pay tax as I have done and continue so to do.
Remember Marshall Aid the debt of World War 2, the pensions of my parents the education of my children, the health and welfare of my family, my own retirement. All paid I owe nothing. Quite a satisfying feeling. I would like to use the money I have earned and saved as I see fit not to have it squandered on futile political causes abroad or at home.
I am not wealthy man but if I say charity begins at home would it give you a clue as to my beliefs.
What bothers me is that you fail to see that you and your beliefs are part of the problem, it bothers me even more that to a certain extent you hold the destiny of my grand children in your hands.

>> it bothers me even more that to a certain extent you hold the destiny of my grand children in your hands.<<

To be fair, they also hold our futures in their hands. We pay for their education, they pay for our retirement.

Whoisit - No.4 of Gang of 4. I suspect that things will change somewhat before you reach pension age. In any event my grand chidren may well opt for a Public Sector career in a much streamlined service. The eldest daughter is presently at University building up debt, a debt that the tax her granddad has to pay could help her avoid.
Try thinking about your own future it is not guaranteed. In fact Public Sector pensions are long overdue for a revue and will without doubt come under the hammer. Just imagine if your pension is invested in the private sector. I gather there are a significant number of people in the public sector who hold down a job and enjoy a pension at the same time. a double wammy for the tax payer.

Gang of 4? Me, Ed, Otto - who's the fourth?

>>a debt that the tax her granddad has to pay could help her avoid.<<

You really don't understand how tax works, do you?

>>Just imagine if your pension is invested in the private sector.<<

I don't have a public sector pension so I don't know that much about them. What I do know is that I'm very unlikely to receive anything like the sort of state pension and healthcare that you do: as it stands the current dependency ratio in the UK is roughly 3:1 (that is, 3 productive people are supporting 1 non-productive person). In 50 years time when I'm looking to draw my pension, that'll be a lot closer to 1.5:1 and the current situation won't be remotely possible.

Thing is, I don't whinge about it, I just accept it as a fact of life.

>>I gather there are a significant number of people in the public sector who hold down a job and enjoy a pension at the same time. a double wammy for the tax payer.<<

"Mummy - some people have better toys than me. It's not faaiir!"

And, I have to remind you again, public sector workers have to pay taxes too. And it's just as much of a burden for us.

When are we going to see Income Tax used as it was intended?


Paying for fighting the French

"Just imagine if your pension is invested in the private sector."

It is.

"I gather there are a significant number of people in the public sector who hold down a job and enjoy a pension at the same time. a double wammy for the tax payer."

Gather? Gather from where? Any actual evidence for this 'gathering'?

I'm aware of only a very small number of people in my sector who have taken early retirement, or partial early retirement, while still undertaking small amounts of paid work. This is very tightly regulated and it's not permitted to earn more than the full time rate for the job. And as far as I'm aware, is exactly the same for the private sector.

>>When are we going to see Income Tax used as it was intended?

Paying for fighting the French<<

It's still used for that - we just call it the EU.