The NHS
#1
Who said this about which party? A party some it seems are happy to vote for! 

Quote:“The NHS is about as safe with them as a pet hamster would be with a hungry python”.
Reply
#2
Had the pet hamster spent most of its life in the same cage as the python?
Reply
#3
Luckily both will probably get better treatment from the vet than might be the case from our wonderful NHS
Reply
#4
(11-25-2019, 07:12 PM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: Who said this about which party? A party some it seems are happy to vote for! 

Quote:“The NHS is about as safe with them as a pet hamster would be with a hungry python”.

And yet, despite all the 'X HOURS TO SAVE OUR NHS!!!' electioneering every 2-5 years, it continues in existence.
Reply
#5
(11-26-2019, 10:14 PM)Neil Parsley Wrote:
(11-25-2019, 07:12 PM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: Who said this about which party? A party some it seems are happy to vote for! 

Quote:“The NHS is about as safe with them as a pet hamster would be with a hungry python”.

And yet, despite all the 'X HOURS TO SAVE OUR NHS!!!' electioneering every 2-5 years, it continues in existence.

And yet, after nearly a decade of Tory management waiting times are up, dissatisfaction in care is up, Doctors and Nurses need increasing and privatisation continues. 

Btw the quote was from John Major the well known fervent Marxist.
Reply
#6
I know I've mentioned this a few times but I think the onus should be on government to incentivise companies to buy private healthcare for their employees and even, if possible, for individuals to try and alleviate the pressure on the NHS. Would rather this instead of making false promises to chuck more and more money at it. A premium of, say £200 a month, for a family is a lot money but if it were £100 it could tempt people to take up a policy. This would necessarily be as a replacement, per se, because the NHS will need every increasing sums due to an aging population but at least put some of the burden on those who can 1) afford it and 2) see the worth in investing in a premium product.
Reply
#7
Another option is to have a rate of Corporation Tax which is broadly in line with comparable G7/EU economies and - here's the really innovative bit - actually collect the tax. No blind eyes, no so-called 'sweetheart deals', just cough up an amount commensurate with the profits being generated.

Set it a couple of percentage points lower than Germany and France, if that's what it takes to placate the so-called free marketeers (where the accent seems to be on the 'free') and then set about collecting it. I'm not buying this argument that it's an ever-decreasing tax rate that attracts business; more likely to be the slipshod, look the other way, collection régime. If you're not being required to pay, the rate is pretty academic.

If tax and NI are inescapable facts of life for Amazon's minimum wage employees, the same should apply to the business; particularly considering the wear and tear its ever-growing deliveries inflict on our crumbling infrastructure.
Reply
#8
(11-27-2019, 10:08 AM)Ossian Wrote: Another option is to have a rate of Corporation Tax which is broadly in line with comparable G7/EU economies and - here's the rally innovative bit - actually collect the tax. No blind eyes, no so-called 'sweetheart deals', just cough up an amount commensurate with the profits being generated.

Set it a couple of percentage points lower than Germany and France, if that's what it takes to placate the so-called free marketeers (where the accent seems to be on the 'free') and then set about collecting it. I'm not buying this argument that it's an ever-decreasing tax rate that attracts business; more likely to be the slipshod, look the other way, collection régime. If you're not being required to pay, the rate is pretty academic.

If tax and NI are inescapable facts of life for Amazon's minimum wage employees, the same should apply to the business; particularly considering the wear and tear its ever-growing deliveries inflict on our crumbling infrastructure.

So long as transfer pricing exists, that is totally unworkable. The Laffer Curve is, unfortunately, an inescapable fact.
Reply
#9
I remember thinking that I could have made up the theory behind the Laffer Curve when studying it, it's fucking obvious - If you tax at 100% you won't collect any because no-one will have any point in trading, and if you tax a 0% then you won't collect anything because you are not asking for any. The optimal figure is somewhere inbetween - I could have written that!!

The problem does lie in the enforcement and identifying the optimal rate. We are taxing at a low rate (comparably) and not doing a very good job of it. Because of Brexit it would be a difficult task to raise corp tax because international companies will see it as another disincentive.
Reply
#10
Even among people who subscribe to Laffer's hypothesis (and there's many who've debunked it) there's plenty of agreement that our enforcement régime is inadequate. And economies run on that principle - Reagan's being a notable example* - usually end up running in deficit, if they weren't already.

* Chosen because Reagan was the first to really buy into the idea; Laffer was on the US government payroll for a while. As an aside, this (the burgeoning deficit) eventually led to Bush Snr having to renege on his "Read my lips, no new taxes" promise.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)