Sunday, 21 August 2011

Iceland - doing what Moron Brown *should* have done.

I read in today's Mail On Sunday that Iceland maybe about to repay the money to their UK savers that was 'lost' when their banks collapsed.

Iceland set to pay back British debt 'in months' following massive sale of retail stakes
www.dailymail.co.uk

How are they doing this? Are the Icelandic taxpayers going to be fleeced by their government to pay back this money? After all that is how UK banks 'paid back' their debts - Gordon Brown gave them a blank cheque that UK taxpayers will be working for years and years to pay off.

Gordon Brown not only make the UK taxpayer refund these gamblers losses - but also made us pay out as if they had WON their gamble !!

No, the people of Iceland are not so stupid as to follow Moron Browns example. Their government were actually very keen to do so, but the Icelandic people refused point blank. Threats of doom were ignored, and their government were powerless to force them to pay.

Now the Icelandic government are doing what Moron Brown should have done -- they are selling off some of the failed banks assets and using the money to pay back the UK investors. So who loses? The banks *shareholders* (bondholders) the people who undertook the gamble and *LOST*.

They lose their stake and get *NO* winnings - that is what happens when you back a loser in the normal world - it is only the UK's (and EU's) mad politicians that think when rich people lose a bet they should be paid out anyway. Not only paid out, but paid out from innocent taxpayers money - the poorest taxpayer paying out winnings on a bet that was not only lost, but the taxpayer was never any part of!

We - the UK taxpayer - owe the people of Iceland a huge debt, as they are *proof* that Browns solution was not the only choice. Not only that, but that Browns solution was the *worst* choice.

Saturday, 13 August 2011

Luddites - maybe they have a point to make in the modern world?


Why is human labour taxed, and mechanised labour not?

Why should the government take far, far more money from a company with a human manned production line, that it would from one with an automated production line?

This isn't about increasing tax, its about distribution of the 'burden' - companies with large workforces appear to be penalised, in favour of those with automation.

If a company uses IT to run payroll/HR/accounts (or any other activity) instead of an office of workers - why should their tax bill be lower?

By hobbling the human as a resource, anyone would think the government wanted to increase unemployment!

Monday, 8 August 2011

What the people of the UK really think about our recent Governments - WOW!

A Recent Survey


A recent survey by YouGov is completely stunning.

It was done on behalf of the Fabians society who are a very left wing, big government, anti-individual, collectivist supporting organisation.

The Fabians have only been promoting one figure from the survey - the one that appears to support their cause. Pretty much every other figure on the survey completely destroys their cause, and so (unsurprisingly) those figures have been kept under wraps.

However they are now available - here:
http://www.yougov.polis.cam.ac.uk/sites/yougov.polis.cam.ac.uk/files/UK%20attitudes%20to%20government%20spending%20cuts.pdf

Spending...


Of particular interest are the facts that while only 23% of people said government is generally a force for good a massive 32% said the governments gets in the way and reduces the quality of life of them and their families.

Three times as many people thought government should cut spending and taxes as thought they should rise. Although even more said 'fariness' (whatever that is) is more important than whether they immediately go up or down.

Twice as many people thought that benefits should be cut as opposed to rising. While a similar number, again, said 'fairness' was the most important issue.

Government 'added value' on public services...


Only 8% of people said the services they received were worth MORE than they were paying for them. And while 15% said they got back what they put in, a massive 55% (an absolute majority!) said the public services provided by the government were worth LESS than they were paying in taxes for them.

A paradox?...


Given the above, it may seem strange that people seem to want the current 'cuts' to be temporary -- however I think there is an easy explanation for this.

Despite the inefficiency, burden and general contempt for the government and its provision of services - to most people the government is still a monopoly supplier. People don't want to lose the services, so feel obliged to pay whatever it takes to get those services, and not to give the government any excuse to reduce them.

Conclusion


Given the massive inefficiency and failure of recent governments to provide value for money, or help the public time for change cannot be far away.

Sunday, 7 August 2011

Cameron openly confirms himself EU-phile and his contempt for UK citizens.

THE LETTER SENT BY DAVID CAMERON'S POLITICAL PRIVATE SECRETARY
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/263461/The-letter-sent-by-David-Cameron-s-political-private-secretary

Cameron confirmed as a devious EU-phile - committed to end the UK. Here are a few choice bits of deception by Cameron.

we had a referendum on that issue in 1975

No 'we' didn't I was 10 in 1975, and the question was regarding a 'common market' not an 'european community' even less an 'european union'. A single market for europe is good, a single government for europe is bad, very bad.

most people in our country want to say neither ‘yes’ to everything from the EU, nor ‘no’ to everything

Outside the EU we can choose what we want and dont, in the EU qualified majority voting means we are told what we can and cant choose between.

we are not part of the Schengen Zone but have kept control of our own border controls

We do not control our borders - we keep out non-EU workers we don't require, but unwanted EU workers cannot be kept out. Outside the EU we would really have control of our borders and sort out our unemployment problems.

just as, crucially, we have kept the pound.

But being in the EU means we have had to contribute to Euro bailouts that are *nothing* to do with us - outside the EU we would keep the pound an not have to pay for Eurozone bailouts.

And we should not lose sight of the EU’s very useful work

The EU can continue doing whatever 'useful' work it wants for its members. But outside the EU, the UK can focus on doing what is useful for the UK.

The Government has also introduced a European Union Bill

What a government puts in place a government can remove - this offers the public no protection. And is so narrowly defined that it is still of no practical use.


ensuring that the lifting of regulatory burdens on businesses, particularly small businesses

Burdens put in place by the EU in the first place! Outside the EU these burdens to the UK economy could be removed completely.

the Prime Minister would never allow our country to slide into a federal Europe.

The risk right now is not of a federal Europe, it is of a centrally governed Europe. Claiming to be against the frying-pan but not the fire is no use to anyone.

Wednesday, 3 August 2011

I was asked what I thought of David Cameron's Big Aid Giveaway...

Dear XXXXXXXXXX

Firstly I believe people are perfectly capable of deciding for
themselves where their money should be spent - to extract money from
the public through taxation for issues that the Prime Minister
considers 'humanitarian' or 'charitable' causes robs individuals of
the opportunity to choose what they do or don't want to support.
Compulsion precludes charity, there is no virtue in compulsion. You
chip away at the humanity of millions of UK citizens by abusing them
in this way.

Secondly I notice that the Ensus 'Bio-Fuel' plant in Wilton is
designed to consume around 3,000 tonnes of wheat a day - enough for
around 6.4 million loaves of bread. Maybe not top quality wheat, but I
don't think the hungry would mind second rate wheat in their bread.
This destruction of a food crop (and other damage done by 'bio fuels'
and 'green taxes') is made profitable by the Governments artificial
loading of the tax system, does this make you feel proud?

David Cameron's bleeding heart' abuse of the poor of the UK to
aggrandise his reputation abroad quite simply disgusts me.

Yours Sincerely

Paul Perrin

Monday, 1 August 2011

Personal Trading Accounts - Get Britain Working Again - Now.

Let all all UK citizens trade (trade on ebay, run market stalls, do odd jobs etc) on their own account with a turnover of up (say) £12,000 with no strings/taxation/paperwork/red-tape etc.

This could be simply implemented by asking high street banks to setup a new type of account - to be linked to an individuals National Insurance number - the citizen/trader would put all 'business' transactions through their account, and in return the money withdrawn (up to a predetermined limit) would not be subject to tax or 'means testing' against any benefit.

This would legitimise a large part of the 'black economy' and 'benefit cheating' but also remove a huge barrier that many must feel when considering starting a small business. By enabling anyone to try their hand at running their own business so simply, to top up their income with the possibility of developing in to a full business (with VAT, tax, employees etc) - the UK could become a nation of entrepreneurs.

There would be savings to the state in the reduction of investigation and enforcement of low value tax dodging and benefit cheating, and the removal of barriers to 'help oneself' could invigorate an entire class of society to get back to work - generating tax raising opportunities as they succeed/grow, and developing a culture of work and industry to replace any culture of state dependence.

Currently there is little opportunity for poor people in the UK to 'help themselves'. Over the years every avenue of self-help, self-development, self-enterprise has been nationalised or outlawed. This nationalisation has brought overheads, red tape and bureaucracy to such a level that a whole raft of experts are needed to even understand the rules, let alone complying with them - to the extent that the government imposed costs are greater than the likely return of many small enterprises!

So here is a cheap, simple, quick proposal to cut through/sidestep the dross of the past and let people start to help themselves. A proposal that could be implemented in weeks and help millions boost their own incomes and set the UK on the road to be the land of entrepreneurs.

Many poor people (whether poorly paid or on benefits) are already enhancing their incomes by doing small amounts of business in 'the black market' - whether its trading on ebay, doing jobs 'cash in hand', running a market stall etc. I say it is wrong for these peoples enterprise to be crushed by the tax man.

So I suggest the government immediately create a new type of bank account - a Personal Trading Account - every citizen would be entitled to open one such account. Any money paid into and withdrawn from the account (upto maybe £12,000 a year) would be subject to no tax whatsoever.

Stop worrying so much about the 50p tax rate for top earners, first free the bottom earners to make this country great again.