[Archived] 2 Million Unemployed By Christmas

[rebelmswar]

Doesn't mean it's morally right though.

But Reb has actually made a very good argument about adjustments to tax levels, earlier in this thread, which might mean a reduction in tax avoidance - possibly.

As far as the why should we (the taxpayers) give an order to a UK company rather than a German one? Well isn't the simple answer: because the company and all of it's employees pay tax back into the UK coffers and keep people gainfully employed, rather than the money going out of the country.

The actual cost (to the taxpayer) of the German carriages is the cost on the order, plus the cost of benefits to the people who will now be out of work as a result. I'd be interested to see how this adds up in the total cost of acquisition figures.

It certainly would Jisty.

If this government did a tax amnesty for all monies coming back into the country for a month, there would be an influx of cash into this country that you could not believe.

I firmly believe that rich Britons do not WANT to have their money abroad, they do so so that they are not eaten alive by the ridiculous and totally lopsided tax laws.

The same holds true for businesses - if you take more money from them, then the less jobs they will create, take less - the more jobs they will create. They are in the business of making money and will expand aggressively if they are not pruned aggressively. Expansion always creates jobs, always.

It is true with the train argument that if we bought British it would only benefit the British economy, but you can not buy British if it does not make fiscal sense to do so. If the cost, for whatever reason, would cost the tax payers more money that getting it elsewhere, plus the knock on effect of taxes back, then it makes no sense do to so. There is NO REASON, no reason, why it should cost more to build it in Britain than it does in Germany. The sweat off the brow of an English worker is not laced with gold.

[colin]

quote name='BiggusLaddus' timestamp='1310028137' post='1094282']

Tax avoidance is perfectly legal though and evasion would only increase if tighter controls were brought in.

Both could be reduced if both "avoidance" and "evasion" of tax rules were screwed dowm. I don't suppose it will happen as long as the likes of Philip Green continues to be a friend of the Tories

here [

[Stuart]

It is true with the train argument that if we bought British it would only benefit the British economy, but you can not buy British if it does not make fiscal sense to do so. If the cost, for whatever reason, would cost the tax payers more money that getting it elsewhere, plus the knock on effect of taxes back, then it makes no sense do to so. There is NO REASON, no reason, why it should cost more to build it in Britain than it does in Germany. The sweat off the brow of an English worker is not laced with gold.

Ever hear the expression "Rip Off Britain"? Surely it's down to cost of living? How does the cost of living (utilities, fuel, food, etc) compare between Britain and Germany

You seem to make out that us Brits are fat, lazy and greedy, and Germans are lean and hard-working. From my experience (friends, colleagues) the standard of living in Germany is much better than in the UK. So what does the difference come down to?

EDIT: I'm probably being grossly unfair and putting words in your mouth there - maybe I'm being hyper sensitive. I do wonder too, could the tax issue in this country also inflate the cost of 'buying British'?

[rebelmswar]

Ever hear the expression "Rip Off Britain"? Surely it's down to cost of living? How does the cost of living (utilities, fuel, food, etc) compare between Britain and Germany

You seem to make out that us Brits are fat, lazy and greedy, and Germans are lean and hard-working. From my experience (friends, colleagues) the standard of living in Germany is much better than in the UK. So what does the difference come down to?

EDIT: I'm probably being grossly unfair and putting words in your mouth there - maybe I'm being hyper sensitive. I do wonder too, could the tax issue in this country also inflate the cost of 'buying British'?

Nothing to do with the people by themselves Jisty. Never once did I say that the Germans were better workers, nor did I say that the British workers is a slack assed slob.

It is the collective groupthink of the society that is miles apart.

Everything in life comes down to cost, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, everything.

Cost of living in the UK is so expensive due to taxes, cost of labour in Britain is so high due to taxes and unions, cost of anything made in Britain is so high because of taxes, cost of labor and unions. It is an ever increasing snowball of cost that ends up making the product grossly expensive to buy and has become grossly expensive to produce - to the point that it is no longer feasible to make it in the first place.

The above link by Colin is the perfect example of why business will in the end flee the UK. Why are those people protesting? Because the cost of the product is too high? Because the workers who make the stuff are paid to little? Because the workers living conditions are terrible? No. The answer is none of these. It is because the owner has done well for himself and succeeded in building something and as apposed to allowing all of his endeavors to be sucked up in the enormous vacuum that is government and its tragic spending, he moves the money away so that it cant be touched as much.

When has it become a negative thing in this country to be successful?

If I bought a rovers shirt from you for 50 pounds, would you be happy to mail in 12 of them to the tax collectors? If not, you are just as guily as the man who moves his money away.

And therein lies the trap. At how much income does it become fair to completely rip someone off tax wise?

I say it should be the same for all. Sink and die together or swim and live together.

[jim mk2]

Cost of living in the UK is so expensive due to taxes, cost of labour in Britain is so high due to taxes and unions, cost of anything made in Britain is so high because of taxes, cost of labor and unions. It is an ever increasing snowball of cost that ends up making the product grossly expensive to buy and has become grossly expensive to produce - to the point that it is no longer feasible to make it in the first place.

Arrant nonsense.

Look at the chart on the left in the link below showing Britain's labour costs are way below those of our main European competitors. The figures are for fourth quarter of 2009 but won't have changed much in the past 18 months.

http://www.spiegel.d...,686736,00.html

Germany has a strong manufacturing base yet still manages to reward its workers with good pay and conditions because its companies are well managed by employers who focus on the long term and do not reward themselves with extortionate salaries and bonuses.

Weak government such as this week's failure to back Bombadier in Derby is partly to blame but the prinicipal cause of Britain's industrial decline since the second world war is rooted in the boardroom.

[rebelmswar]

Arrant nonsense.

Look at the chart on the left in the link below showing Britain's labour costs are way below those of our main European competitors. The figures are for fourth quarter of 2009 but won't have changed much in the past 18 months.

http://www.spiegel.d...,686736,00.html

Germany has a strong manufacturing base yet still manages to reward its workers with good pay and conditions because its companies are well managed by employers who focus on the long term and do not reward themselves with extortionate salaries and bonuses.

Weak government such as this week's failure to back Bombadier in Derby is partly to blame but the prinicipal cause of Britain's industrial decline since the second world war is rooted in the boardroom.

Arrant spin.

There is far more that goes into the cost of a persons pay than just the amount received in the pay packet and you know it.

I do agree that the government in charge for the last decade have led to the total collapse of the industries.

You also blame boardrooms of companies, why on earth would a company try and fail.

[jim mk2]

Arrant spin.

There is far more that goes into the cost of a persons pay than just the amount received in the pay packet and you know it.

I do agree that the government in charge for the last decade have led to the total collapse of the industries.

You also blame boardrooms of companies, why on earth would a company try and fail.

Unit labour costs in the link I provided and all surveys of this type include pay, pensions and working conditions / benefits.

If you knew anything about this subject you would know this.

The deindustrialisation of Britain started in the 1960s and accelerated under the Tory government of 1979 - 97 with their deliberate policy of taking on and destroying the trade unions. In the process they also destroyed much of British manufacturing. They believed the service economy and the "financial services" in the City would replace manufacturing but the imbalance that caused in the economy became evident in the recent financial crisis.

Companies don't try to fail but they usually do so through the incompetence of the executives and directors.

[Stuart]

Nothing to do with the people by themselves Jisty. Never once did I say that the Germans were better workers, nor did I say that the British workers is a slack assed slob.

It is the collective groupthink of the society that is miles apart.

Everything in life comes down to cost, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, everything.

Cost of living in the UK is so expensive due to taxes, cost of labour in Britain is so high due to taxes and unions, cost of anything made in Britain is so high because of taxes, cost of labor and unions. It is an ever increasing snowball of cost that ends up making the product grossly expensive to buy and has become grossly expensive to produce - to the point that it is no longer feasible to make it in the first place.

The above link by Colin is the perfect example of why business will in the end flee the UK. Why are those people protesting? Because the cost of the product is too high? Because the workers who make the stuff are paid to little? Because the workers living conditions are terrible? No. The answer is none of these. It is because the owner has done well for himself and succeeded in building something and as apposed to allowing all of his endeavors to be sucked up in the enormous vacuum that is government and its tragic spending, he moves the money away so that it cant be touched as much.

When has it become a negative thing in this country to be successful?

If I bought a rovers shirt from you for 50 pounds, would you be happy to mail in 12 of them to the tax collectors? If not, you are just as guily as the man who moves his money away.

And therein lies the trap. At how much income does it become fair to completely rip someone off tax wise?

I say it should be the same for all. Sink and die together or swim and live together.

I may be being naive but I don't see why the tax rate can't just be the same for everyone. It would naturally mean the more you earn, the more you pay. Without the need for a higher percentage bracket. (Which I think is what you've already alluded to).

[colin]

The above link by Colin is the perfect example of why business will in the end flee the UK. Why are those people protesting? Because the cost of the product is too high? Because the workers who make the stuff are paid to little? Because the workers living conditions are terrible? No. The answer is none of these. It is because the owner has done well for himself and succeeded in building something and as apposed to allowing all of his endeavors to be sucked up in the enormous vacuum that is government and its tragic spending, he moves the money away so that it cant be touched as much.

Rebelmswar, You may have misunderstood the nature of my post, it may well be my fault for not adding more clarity.

The UK uncut movement targets people and businesses who make their money in the UK, using UK labour, UK customers. UK trading laws and then take their profits and exempt them from UK taxation. In this way they deny the UK economy of income to spend on whatever the UK government (regardless of it's political hue) would like to spend it on. I beleive Phillip Green squirrels his away in Monaco via his wife. It is luxury that very few of us can do. Presumably 99% of posters here who live in the UK pay our taxes. OK we may grumble a bit, but we do pay. Phillip Green, who is a rich as Croesus and can probably buy enough Rolls Royces to fill Ewood Park, opts out because he has (a) a team of highly paid financial advisors & (b ) no sense of loyalty to the country that enabled him to make his millions.

Just as a side issue, if Phillip Green is making so much money what on earth is he spending it on? How many luxury yachts & properties and fast cars does one person need? And once he's dead....

Other nororious tax dodgers include Boots The Chemist who have relocated financial head office to Switzerland to escape tax on its UK based industry, and possibly more famously, U2 who have decamped to The Netherlands to pay less tax than they would have to in Ireland. Then Bono gets all preachy about helping the poor.

And every year we see "Children In Need" where ordinary people donate money and do strange & extraordinary things to raise money for deprived children both in the UK & abroad.

Meanwhile Phllip Green; the Directors & shareholders of Boots; and U2 are sipping their tax-exempt champagne on Green's yacht and probably laughing at the plebs.

Sorry, I've probably ranted too much. I hope you get the general gist of my drift. You make your money in the UK (or Ireland,) you pay your taxes in the UK (or Ireland.) Everyone else does, just because you're rich doesn't give you a moral right to opt out.

[adopted scouser]

Just watched this week's Question Time on iplayer. Let's have Hugh Grant for PM running the country, assisted by Joanna Lumley

[tashor]

Other nororious tax dodgers include U2 who have decamped to The Netherlands to pay less tax than they would have to in Ireland. Then Bono gets all preachy about helping the poor.

You make your money in the UK (or Ireland,) you pay your taxes in the UK (or Ireland.) Everyone else does, just because you're rich doesn't give you a moral right to opt out.

100% agree - really I do........

I wish your fundamental niceness was justified by the world we all find ourselves in....but..

By your age you should be able to wake up and smell the coffee - Bono "cares" but like most puts his own interests at heart when it comes down to it.

It is impossible to tax the rich in a free society and in a "closed" society no-one becomes rich in the first place.

When I posted earlier saying the best way to increase tax revenue from the wealthiest is to reduce their tax rate no-one tried to disputed it - history proves it to be true.

So colin - would you rather stick to your principles and tax the super rich more ( and in the process watch them bugger off and pay us nowt ) or swallow your pride, reduce their liability and hence get much more off them??

I trust you to try and give me an honest answer - or are you - like jim/doris beyond redemption............

[colin]

Tashor,

I do agree with some of you coments and observations. However:

By your age you should be able to wake up and smell the coffee - Bono "cares" but like most puts his own interests at heart when it comes down to it.

I don't think my age has got anything to do with it, as I get older I get more angry at the dupicity of certain individuals like Bono who hector the rest of us yet, as you say, "put his own interests at heart." I don't need Bono to tell me to donate money to charity when he is openly sticking two fingers up to his felow countrymen & women and taking his money out of the Irish economy just to enrich his own already bloated bank account.

It is impossible to tax the rich in a free society

I'd like to disagree on that one. It is quite possible to tax the rich. You and I are possibly the poorer and the lower paid and, as I said we don't have any choice in the matter. It doesn't take much thought to extend this obligation to the filthy rich, just to stop them shifting their money off-shore. If they want to do that then deny them any of the advantages of running a business in the UK.

would you rather stick to your principles and tax the super rich more ( and in the process watch them bugger off and pay us nowt )or swallow your pride, reduce their liability and hence get much more off them?

My previous post wasn't to tax the "super-rich" more. My point was that the super-rich are already buggering off and using tax avoidance measures to not pay UK taxes on money that they have gained via UK based businesses; using UK workers; UK employment laws; & UK based customers, most of whom pay their fair whack of UK tax.

The whole chain involves people who have no option but to pay their tax contribution to society but, when it gets to the top, the people who earn millions more than those below them feck off to a tax haven in Monaco or the Cayman Islands and hang on to their millions like Gollum hanging onto the ring.

And they probably have no idea what they want the money for as they already have too much of it already.

I'd just like them to pay their fair whack of tax like 99% of us do, without somehow justifying themselves as being filthy rich and therefore being above it all.

Or, to put it more emotively: I live about five miles from Chrities Hospital in Manchester. It's a world centre of cancer research. I pay tax to partially fund it. I also sponsor friends who are running in aid of Christies. Phillip Green and his tax aviodance cohorts are basically sticking two fingers up to Christies, to me, and to my friends and saying " f**k you suckers, I don't give a damn."

That's probably enough rant from me for tonight.

[thenodrog]

The whole chain involves people who have no option but to pay their tax contribution to society but, when it gets to the top, the people who earn millions more than those below them feck off to a tax haven in Monaco or the Cayman Islands and hang on to their millions like Gollum hanging onto the ring.

And they probably have no idea what they want the money for as they already have too much of it already.

I'd just like them to pay their fair whack of tax like 99% of us do, without somehow justifying themselves as being filthy rich and therefore being above it all.

So that would be to put everybody on the same basic rate income tax then? Currently approx 20%. Same flat rate system for National health contributions too with a ceiling on for everybody equivalent to the average contribution. By cutting tax we would therefore reduce tax avoidance.

Alternatively a better system could make everything totally fair by scrapping income tax and NH contributions altogether and sticking VAT up to 50% or whatever it would take to fund the country. Completely fair and the richer in society would then pay more cos they would spend more, but ultimately it would be their choice.

[thenodrog]

Just as a side issue, if Phillip Green is making so much money what on earth is he spending it on? How many luxury yachts & properties and fast cars does one person need? And once he's dead....

... once he's dead in the UK his family would be faced with massive death duties! I've no idea what the various death taxes are in the Caymans, Monaco, Holland or wherever but love and a sense of responsibilty to ones own family must figure heavily in the decisions of such people. Scrap that and there might not be the same incentive to cut and run for a safe haven Colin.

[ABBEY]

Never mind unemployed .how many old folk are going to die this winter because they can't afford to eat or heat! Robbing gas board = greedy scum.

[BangkokRover]

Never mind unemployed .how many old folk are going to die this winter because they can't afford to eat or heat! Robbing gas board = greedy scum.

If companies like British Gas don't have a moral backbone then the government should step in and make it law. As with many countries there is a lot to fix in the UK of course the currently government is completely hamstrung by the lack of cash.

[jim mk2]

If companies like British Gas don't have a moral backbone then the government should step in and make it law. As with many countries there is a lot to fix in the UK of course the currently government is completely hamstrung by the lack of cash.

There's plenty of cash sitting in the overbloated bank accounts of the rich - all the goverment needs to do raise taxes. And when they have raised taxes once, it needs to raise them again and again.

What this government does not have is the "balls or the brains" to stand up against the EU procurement rules and fight for British workers. See article below.

http://www.thisisder...tail/story.html

[ABBEY]

Tories don't have any morals tho..alls they want is the rich richer and the poor hammered.

[thenodrog]

Never mind unemployed .how many old folk are going to die this winter because they can't afford to eat or heat! Robbing gas board = greedy scum.

Abbey walk through any town centre and shops have their doors wide open with heaters blowing hot air into the street, go in any office and people are in short sleeved shirts in January and many domestic houses are unhealthily stifling in every room through the winter. Lights are on on every street. We all know that fossil fuels are finite resources so it's arguable that gas, oil and leki are too cheap already.

I don't want to be cynical or uncaring but lots of old people who die through hypothermia have plenty of money in the bank.

Apart from that who do you think is paying for all these windmills and solar technology thats springing up all over the globe? It's us. Climate charges levied on fuels affect everything these days. The UK coalition govt is now bound by the Kyoto agreement of 1997 and subsequently adopted by the EU. http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&pq=climate%20change%20levy&xhr=t&q=climate+change+levy+kyoto&cp=25&pf=p&sclient=psy&source=hp&aq=0v&aqi=&aql=&oq=climate+change+levy+kyoto&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=85be7de52198e892&biw=1195&bih=523

Whether it's all necessary or not and whether it will have any effect on global warming is a moot point but for now you can tell Jim mk 2 that any complaints you may now be having should be directed at Tony Bliar and New Labour who were in power in 97 and who attended the Kyoto talks.

Oh and please ask Jim why he's running scared of answering my previous question. Would New Labour have blanked Siemenns and shoved that contract into Bombardier's laps?

Just as an aside I spoke to an ex employee of BR and his impression was that Bombardier was still heavily influenced by the unions and still hampered by restrictive practices and the like. I can't really comment but it's still a shame if we as a nation still have to cut our noses off to spite our faces. The 80's should have been enough to teach the unions to represent their members to the best of their ability and consign any silly political ambitions to the history books.

[Mattyblue]

There's plenty of cash sitting in the overbloated bank accounts of the rich - all the goverment needs to do raise taxes. And when they have raised taxes once, it needs to raise them again and again.

Oh dear, you really don't get it do you.

[Sandiway Blue]

There's plenty of cash sitting in the overbloated bank accounts of the rich - all the goverment needs to do raise taxes. And when they have raised taxes once, it needs to raise them again and again.

So that they can have less money to invest in British businesses? That really is one of the most absurd posts i have ever read on here.Half the trouble in Britain is getting paid benefits is now a career choice for a lot of people that are able to work and has been for some years.

[colin]

So that would be to put everybody on the same basic rate income tax then? Currently approx 20%. Same flat rate system for National health contributions too with a ceiling on for everybody equivalent to the average contribution. By cutting tax we would therefore reduce tax avoidance.

Theno,

The art & skill of discusion is to address the viewpoint of someone who takes a diffent view and to put forward an alternative view. What it does not entail is to invent an opinion of someone who has a differing view and then invite them to discuss your invention.

For example:

You said in your last post that you regularly have sex with prostitutes. Would you like to explain to the messageboard forum how you justify this and how you would explain it the your wife & children, Furthermore can you tell the messageboard whether or not you use a condom with these encounters with prostitutes.

See?

[jim mk2]

So that they can have less money to invest in British businesses pay themselves in grossly inflated salaries, share options, multimillion pound bonuses and other benefits while paying their workers the minimum wage or less ?.

Nearer the truth don't you think ?

[thenodrog]

Nearer the truth don't you think ?

What on earth do you know or care about 'the truth'?

[Sandiway Blue]

Nearer the truth don't you think ?

If thats the case then who will create more businesses which ultimately creates more jobs?