Am I missing the point about tuition fees?

[Cheshire Cat]

Indeed, some of them take some of their money abroad. But many of our higher earners and extremely wealthy also spend their money in the UK, in cars, airport taxes, restaurants, clothes, jewellery, poodle parlours and the like. Not all of them take all of their money abroad. Imported electrical goods might increase the income for, say, Japan or Germany, but an increase in Sales Tax (on these and other goods and services) would improve the UK state coffers.

One problem resulting from some of the lower earners, however, is they have cashed up, and gone to cheaper countries like Bulgaria and Romania. There has been a huge population swap during the past decade with the better-off going to more exotic places, the middling sort going to Spain and France and the less well-off going to those cheaper Balkan countries. To some extent, they have been replaced by the huge swathe of immigrants who have landed on these shores in between. And this is all part of the problem. Those who have come in are poorer than those who have left.

Thinking about this and.......... .......................No

 

[Uter]

The richer you are, the higher your propensity to invest, which is the rich person's version of saving. Few rich people actually have much cash. It's all "tied up". You invest in property, gold, silver, art, funds, stocks and shares. If you make these investments in your own country, in this case, the UK, you are actually helping to stimulate the economy and to preserve and create jobs. If you are rich, you might even invest in a business and help to expand it or even create a new business, by buying it and investing in it, and create more jobs. It is rich people, in the private sector, who pay the wages. Few of them just sit on their money.

I guess that's a roundabout way of admitting you were wrong that rich people spend a higher proportion of their income.

And I'm not exactly sure how investing in gold, silver and art stimulates the economy.

 

[KneeOn]

I can't help feeling that the Tories are rather pleased that the Lib Dems have been made fools of. I would think this decision will have cost the Lib Dems a lot of votes for many years to come.

I said this on an interview on CNN on Thursday (the little media whore i'm becoming).

Is it really worth being the whipping boys for the tories? Because the tories were always going to get this reaction and therefore havn't taken as much of a personal brunt of the anger. I'm not outraged at the Tories because its a Tory agenda to do this sort of thing. Its expected. Therefore i'm angry but not shocked and betrayed by them. Not quite the case for the Liberal Hypocrites though. My source is the beeb here but some MP's are angry at how they are taking more of the abuse and blame for this policy than the Conservatives are.

I ended the interview with this statement: The tories have LOST a generation of voters. I can't see a recovery. During the first debate, i actually considered changing my allience to the Lib Dems and putting aside the issue of Falmer. I'm glad I didn't.

Advanced warning: Students have no one now they'll trust to help them anymore. Obviously the Conservatives. Unless Labour go back to being a propper socialist party then New Labour just seeks to appeal to the Middle England and has ditched its roots of helping the workers. The Lib Dems were the only real party that'll try to help us and they've abused that trust. Turn out could decreace unless a party steps forward and earns our trust during the next Parliament.

 

[beorhthelm]

So, close down the opportunities for tax avoidance

you'll be pleased to note, and no doubt will credit, that they are taking measures in this direction, about half a dozen rules/issues are being targeted.

 

[Buzzer]

No. It's all a question of what people spend their money on. Foreign property, sports trips to Dubai, expensive imported electronic goods, etc etc, contribute very little to the UK economy. Diverting that expenditure, via a taxation mechanism, into education in the UK (and other services that benefit the whole community) delivers far better value to the nation.

Genius. Your talents are wasted on here. Sod the Laffer curve, sod the fact that the very people you intend to hit are the most mobile in arranging their tax affairs, sod the fact that you intend to wipe out the luxury goods market in this country overnight.

So how do you plan to implement this tax so that it is equitable, doesn't drive wealth creators from this shore and there are no loopholes for creative accountants to exploit? Hopefully you've got something a little more concrete than "it just works" which was, I recall, your less than robust defence of Keynesian economics (which clearly didn't work, doesn't work and will never work and whose fundamental precept doesn't involve pissing away tax receipts on non-capital public expenditure and then having record borrowing during boom times).

In answer to your question:

So ... have I got this right? The country got into this mess, thanks to unprecedented levels of public debt. And we are solving the problem by borrowing more money?

The simple is no. Once again on macroeconomics, you don't appear to know your arse from elbow but I'm glad that you've finally come round to seeing that Keynesian economics is a fraud.

 

[crasher]

The UK is £13 trillion pounds in debt, thanks to Labour. I hardly think the new Government has an ideological agenda. What would that agenda be, anyway? The only agenda this government has, is to reduce the national debt, or reduce the capacity for creating even more national debt.

Where to begin?

We're that much in debt because of a global financial crisis caused by rampant, irrresponsible, unchecked financial chicanery. Labour are partly culpable because of their cowardice in regulating the City but it would have happened anyway.

Do you honestly think the Govt has no agenda except shrinking the deficit? Right-wingers believe in a small state and low taxes. So wherever they can shift the financial burden on to individuals and away from central coffers, they will do. In a way there's nothing wrong with that - if that's what you believe. But at least have the courage to admit that it's what you believe.

 

[Stoo82]

Where to begin?

We're that much in debt because of a global financial crisis caused by rampant, irrresponsible, unchecked financial chicanery. Labour are partly culpable because of their cowardice in regulating the City but it would have happened anyway.

Do you honestly think the Govt has no agenda except shrinking the deficit? Right-wingers believe in a small state and low taxes. So wherever they can shift the financial burden on to individuals and away from central coffers, they will do. In a way there's nothing wrong with that - if that's what you believe. But at least have the courage to admit that it's what you believe.

Small government and low taxes is exactly what I want. You say 'right-wingers' like its a criminal offence!

 

[crasher]

Small government and low taxes is exactly what I want. You say 'right-wingers' like its a criminal offence!

Not at all. I disagree but respect people who are honest about it. I just don't think this Govt is.

 

[Westdene Wonder]

HovaGirl, you should be a lecturer so that these cretins that gain admission to Universties these days can see what is ahead of them,which is very little,so many are now gaining access at a time that vacancies for top positions are declining which will result in them applying for jobs they could have had three years earlier.Blair is unlikely to apologise for this situation or Iraq.

 

[drew]

I said this on an interview on CNN on Thursday (the little media whore i'm becoming).

Is it really worth being the whipping boys for the tories? Because the tories were always going to get this reaction and therefore havn't taken as much of a personal brunt of the anger. I'm not outraged at the Tories because its a Tory agenda to do this sort of thing. Its expected. Therefore i'm angry but not shocked and betrayed by them. Not quite the case for the Liberal Hypocrites though. My source is the beeb here but some MP's are angry at how they are taking more of the abuse and blame for this policy than the Conservatives are.

I ended the interview with this statement: The tories have LOST a generation of voters. I can't see a recovery. During the first debate, i actually considered changing my allience to the Lib Dems and putting aside the issue of Falmer. I'm glad I didn't.

Advanced warning: Students have no one now they'll trust to help them anymore. Obviously the Conservatives. Unless Labour go back to being a propper socialist party then New Labour just seeks to appeal to the Middle England and has ditched its roots of helping the workers. The Lib Dems were the only real party that'll try to help us and they've abused that trust. Turn out could decreace unless a party steps forward and earns our trust during the next Parliament.

You seem to forget that, historically, students have virtually always been radical but in a few years time when they have steady jobs and are paying tax on a full time salary, have the spouse, house and kids then they will become more reserved. That doesn't mean they all become true blues but you do see things from a different perspective. All that can happen with the space of one parliament.

Genius. Your talents are wasted on here. Sod the Laffer curve, sod the fact that the very people you intend to hit are the most mobile in arranging their tax affairs, sod the fact that you intend to wipe out the luxury goods market in this country overnight.

So how do you plan to implement this tax so that it is equitable, doesn't drive wealth creators from this shore and there are no loopholes for creative accountants to exploit? Hopefully you've got something a little more concrete than "it just works" which was, I recall, your less than robust defence of Keynesian economics (which clearly didn't work, doesn't work and will never work and whose fundamental precept doesn't involve pissing away tax receipts on non-capital public expenditure and then having record borrowing during boom times).

In answer to your question:

So ... have I got this right? The country got into this mess, thanks to unprecedented levels of public debt. And we are solving the problem by borrowing more money?

The simple is no. Once again on macroeconomics, you don't appear to know your arse from elbow but I'm glad that you've finally come round to seeing that Keynesian economics is a fraud.

So then Mr Clever what is the answer.



As for the tuition fees debate, what I would like to know is what did the Tories agree to in order to secure the libdems support for increasing fees. Was it just the chance to be in government or was it the deal breaker so the libdems got their referendum on electoral reform which, because of their pathetic showing in this current debate, they are likely to lose badly. Everything that Ashdown and Kennedy built up, Clegg has destroyed.

 

[KneeOn]

You seem to forget that, historically, students have virtually always been radical but in a few years time when they have steady jobs and are paying tax on a full time salary, have the spouse, house and kids then they will become more reserved. That doesn't mean they all become true blues but you do see things from a different perspective. All that can happen with the space of one parliament.

That is a fair point but I think this is one of those things where we will look back and never trust the Lib Dems again. I might be being radical but i really cannot see the Lib Dems being ever seen by my generation as the way forward.

 

[drew]

That is a fair point but I think this is one of those things where we will look back and never trust the Lib Dems again. I might be being radical but i really cannot see the Lib Dems being ever seen by my generation as the way forward.

I doubt any generation will see them as the way forward from now!

 

[Stoo82]

Has anyone ever inthe last 100 years seen the Lib Dems as the way forward?

 

[Buzzer]

So then Mr Clever what is the answer..

Dunno. I'm just of the opinion that we need a taxation policy that has slightly more substance than saying 'tax the rich'.

 

[HovaGirl]

So, close down the opportunities for tax avoidance, stop subsidising the rich and introduce proper taxation of those on over 100k, scrap Trident. The Tories between 1979 and 1997 sold off public assets on the cheap, encouraged massive house price inflation, gave us at least two recession, mass unemployment, 15% interest rates and cheered on the spiv attitudes responsible for this latest crisis of capitalism.

I am one of those who believe that Mrs Thatcher laid the foundation stone of the present state of our society, both financially and morally. You'll get no argument from me there. The only thing I agreed with her on, was Europe. I voted for the Common Market in 1975. I did not vote for a United States of Europe.

 

[HovaGirl]

I guess that's a roundabout way of admitting you were wrong that rich people spend a higher proportion of their income.

And I'm not exactly sure how investing in gold, silver and art stimulates the economy.

It pays the wages of the people who sell it. No one mentioned proportion of income. I know it's Saturday, and we lost, but that's no reason to move the goalposts.

 

[El Presidente]

As Buzzer says, a good accountant is worth his/her weight in gold to the rich, and will always be a step ahead of HMRC when it comes to arranging the affairs of their clients to maximise avoidance.

As for the rest of us, it's going to be tough, and there are few alternatives to touching our toes and taking the painful medicine.

What sticks in my neck is the hypocrisy of 'we're all in in together'. At least with Mrs Thatch she admitted to looking after her boys first and last and always, and if you were poor, sick or old you could go f*** yourselves.

 

[HovaGirl]

Thinking about this and.......... .......................No

It's basic economics.

 

[KneeOn]

Has anyone ever inthe last 100 years seen the Lib Dems as the way forward?

Students did.

 

[El Presidente]

It's basic economics.

It certainly is basic