Level 5
Warren_Jeeves wrote:
LarasAider wrote:My views on the economy still stand. As for me posting rubbish, that may be true but at least I keep to the topic at hand, unlike most folk on here. The amount of crap I see on here, is more than the crap I post.
Oh I've replied to that other thread about the monarch. At least I admit I'm wrong unlike you guys who sit there insulting me.
I know what you mean with the non stop off topic nonsense and it's getting right on my boobies too!
It's usually that Pat fella who starts it all off with his constant posting of cat pictures in threads that have nothing to do with cats at all, he even posted cat stuff in a thread all about ferrets one time
I've been trying to get him a ban for a long time now but no one seems to listen to me, the boy needs a short sharp shock, that should sort him out.
As for the name calling, Fen's probably right when he said they are jealous. I bet they wished they had come up with the idea of making council tax and road tax into one straight forward simple payment that way the people who don't drive at all can pay for the up keep of our roads, bloody free loading pedestrians have been getting away with this for far too long now (bit like Pat and his cat pictures).
It got me thinking and thanks to you I came up with this genius idea, instead of having so much tax on a packet of smokes, take half of it off and then slap it on gym membership!
A Gym membership isn't tax!
Like pedestrians, these people need to be taxed more too. With gyms popping up alover the place these days and so many people using them this idea is sure to make the government some good money while smokers get a little relief from tax for a change.
We do need to be clamping down on pedestrians and people who go to the gym, they need to be made an example of! And don't get me started on cyclists, I'll save that one for a new thread (don't want to go too far off topic like that Pat fella).
O.K. First off; the mergence of council tax and road tax would be combined together under a new system called Council Maintenence (name mentioned in previous post) So in effect, you wouldn't even notice you were paying road or council tax, unless a report is published on council's finances. Most taxes hide the contents in which you pay for anyway, so how would this scheme be any different?
So out of the all my points made in my previous posts, this one gains the most attention and as for the David Cameron question, I already answered it in my first post; now I'm just moving the topic forward by creating some new IDEAS, not facts... IDEAS!! on how to save the economy. Kapiche!
EDIT: I've just remembered pedestrians use the roads two for biking and walking on and have you ever wondered why your stuck in traffic, it's due to a pedestrian walking on the road and blocking traffic. How many times have people blocked the roads by holding protests, rioting, street parties, parading, perviting on the queen. So yeah I'm inclined to say, that this tax would be a good thing, hence the reason why I thought of it.
Level 5
PatC_PSN wrote:
LarasAider wrote:O.K. First off; the mergence of council tax and road tax would be combined together under a new system called Council Maintenence (name mentioned in previous post) So in effect, you wouldn't even notice you were paying road or council tax, unless a report is published on council's finances. Most taxes hide the contents in which you pay for anyway, so how would this scheme be any different?
There isn't actually a logical argument for not charging people road tax because they don't use roads. We do that already with services such as health and education. There may well be resentment from people who have recently bought a particular model of crappy low-emission car because of the low tax band though, if they then find that they needn't have bothered.
But aside from the fact that road tax doesn't go to councils today and is far from being exclusively spent on local (council maintained) roads (or indeed transport at all), what on earth do you think that combining these two taxes into one would achieve? I don't hear anyone complaining about the complexity of the tax system, at least not this part of it. And even if it did simplify the tax system in a meaningful way, you have to balance the simplicity of the tax collection system with the perceived fairness of the tax regime. Plenty of votes to be lost, but few if any to be gained.
Solutions are only efective if they solve problems. This isn't a problem that needs to be solved.
O.K. thank heavens I'm not in power then or we would all be in the stinking creek. The mergence thing was only an example, it didn't have to be them, What about child benefit and family tax credit, could they be merged? Or do you think it's not worth bothering with the mergence for taxes.
What about these two; any good to help the public save money?
- Get rid of services which are no longer required by the public or are redundent.
- Merging multiple businesses e.g. employment training into one national training program
- Scrap state funding on businesses that don't need it. e.g. the BBC and help them to seek funding through other means like advertisements and media publishing.
Level 3
PatC_PSN wrote:
LarasAider wrote:O.K. thank heavens I'm not in power then or we would all be in the stinking creek. The mergence thing was only an example, it didn't have to be them, What about child benefit and family tax credit, could they be merged? Or do you think it's not worth bothering with the mergence for taxes.
I don't understand your drive for merging taxes or goverment programs. I assume that cost savings would be the objective, but how much do you think you would really save? And how much do you think it would cost in huge government IT projects (that typically are many years late being delivered, cost many millions more than budget, and in any case don't work as intended)?
And let's not have any of that loose talk about advertising on the BBC either.
I'm going to stick up for this boy because he makes a fair point. his examples are truly terrible but i think we all know what he is trying to say. Anyway, I'm going back to bed
Website ©2013 Sony Computer Entertainment Europe
All content, game titles, trade names and/or trade dress, trademarks, artwork and associated imagery are trademarks and/or copyright material of their respective owners. All rights reserved. [more info]
