Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
So - What Should The Government Be Doing?
48 Answers
A spin off from here :
http://
We still need (as a country) to save a few bob ... and the obvious stuff (scrap Trident, tax the rich, make companies pay their way) doesn't seem to be palatable to the current government.
So let's have some ideas from the great AB think tank.
I'll start you with:
1. Change the EU rules on benefits and healthcare. I suggest a very simple amendment :
"A person will receive the healthcare and benefits provided by his native country - regardless of where he lives"
So if we go abroad we get the free healthcare and good benefits which we have paid for, if someone from elsewhere in the EU comes here then they pay for healthcare as if at home and get whatever benefits they would get at home.
We can argue about what 'native country' means - perhaps it could be actually be based on a mixture of birthplace and where you have paid taxes recently.
2. "No person who has not regularly contributed to the tax/insurance system will ever get benefit (including the State Pension) amounting to more than (say) 50% of that which would be paid to someone with a full contributions record".
This would reward the "net contributors who have fallen on hard times" at the expense of idle scrotes of the "I'm entitled" persuasion.
Over to you ...
http://
We still need (as a country) to save a few bob ... and the obvious stuff (scrap Trident, tax the rich, make companies pay their way) doesn't seem to be palatable to the current government.
So let's have some ideas from the great AB think tank.
I'll start you with:
1. Change the EU rules on benefits and healthcare. I suggest a very simple amendment :
"A person will receive the healthcare and benefits provided by his native country - regardless of where he lives"
So if we go abroad we get the free healthcare and good benefits which we have paid for, if someone from elsewhere in the EU comes here then they pay for healthcare as if at home and get whatever benefits they would get at home.
We can argue about what 'native country' means - perhaps it could be actually be based on a mixture of birthplace and where you have paid taxes recently.
2. "No person who has not regularly contributed to the tax/insurance system will ever get benefit (including the State Pension) amounting to more than (say) 50% of that which would be paid to someone with a full contributions record".
This would reward the "net contributors who have fallen on hard times" at the expense of idle scrotes of the "I'm entitled" persuasion.
Over to you ...
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sunny-dave. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Yes Tony - it's a ludicrous vanity project, designed to save a few bloated plutocrats a few minutes on a journey that is already fast enough.
Actually, rather than just cancelling it, it would be better to 'start at the northern end' and improve communications between midlands/north/scotland - you would generate the jobs, could get some real journey-time savings and (since most of the route is rural wilderness) only upset a few sheep.
Actually, rather than just cancelling it, it would be better to 'start at the northern end' and improve communications between midlands/north/scotland - you would generate the jobs, could get some real journey-time savings and (since most of the route is rural wilderness) only upset a few sheep.
//scrap HS2//
easy to say, but nothing more that short-termism of the kind often criticized on here.
http://
in 5 years our oil will be gone; in 30 years the Russians won't have any either. is it really sensible policy to wait until then to decide that riding bicycles and horses everywhere is actually untenable?
scrap HS2? yes but what do you put in its place?
easy to say, but nothing more that short-termism of the kind often criticized on here.
http://
in 5 years our oil will be gone; in 30 years the Russians won't have any either. is it really sensible policy to wait until then to decide that riding bicycles and horses everywhere is actually untenable?
scrap HS2? yes but what do you put in its place?
Actually, rather than just cancelling it, it would be better to 'start at the northern end' and improve communications between midlands/north/scotland - you would generate the jobs, could get some real journey-time savings and (since most of the route is rural wilderness) only upset a few sheep.
Agree with that, Dave.
Agree with that, Dave.
SD. the west coast mainline has been subject to upgrade works for more than 15 years, and still isn't finished. users are going to have to endure another summer of major disruption while alterations are made at Watford junction. even before that's done, the capacity increase the upgrade was meant to yield has already been used up. virgin recently increased the length of their trains to 11 cars. they cannot increase any further without Network Rail spending major amounts making room for longer platforms - the classic case is Liverpool Lime Street, where the station site is constrained by a tunnel.
watch my lips. THERE IS NO MORE SCOPE FOR UPGRADES.
watch my lips. THERE IS NO MORE SCOPE FOR UPGRADES.
It would be interesting to spend absolutely nothing on defence for about a year, just to see what would happen. Who is going to invade? :P
Your first point is interesting. I can't see how it would work if you migrated abroad and then were suddenly seriously injured/got very sick and were unable to return home. Does this mean the host country should just let you die? Also, what if you come from a country which has extremely generous/extravagant healthcare and (for whatever reason) migrate to one that has average?
---
The rich are probably sufficiently taxed as it is - if you go significantly higher than we are now, then the evidence suggests that in the long term your revenue will actually shrink. A better solution would be to close the loopholes which allow so much money to go untaxed.
On this issue, actually, I'd be interested to know how easy that is to do. I mean everyone says we need to close the loopholes (and we do) but nobody actually seems to know what they are or even if they're easily closable. Does anyone know any more about this?
Your first point is interesting. I can't see how it would work if you migrated abroad and then were suddenly seriously injured/got very sick and were unable to return home. Does this mean the host country should just let you die? Also, what if you come from a country which has extremely generous/extravagant healthcare and (for whatever reason) migrate to one that has average?
---
The rich are probably sufficiently taxed as it is - if you go significantly higher than we are now, then the evidence suggests that in the long term your revenue will actually shrink. A better solution would be to close the loopholes which allow so much money to go untaxed.
On this issue, actually, I'd be interested to know how easy that is to do. I mean everyone says we need to close the loopholes (and we do) but nobody actually seems to know what they are or even if they're easily closable. Does anyone know any more about this?
-- answer removed --
One suggestion would be to absolutely scrap income tax so that what people earn is paid to them then tax absolutely everything we buy ( relief for pensioners & the low paid could be accounted for by saving till receipts & reclaiming through council outlets that already exist). Scrap road fund licences & put the money that would be lost on the price of fuel, then everyone who uses our roads would be paying for the privilege ( again build in relief for Transport operators etc.) Everyone in the country to carry official ID so that anyone who has no right to be here could eventually be weeded out. HS2 should be scrapped & present major rail tracks upgraded & RETURN to National British Rail ( at present the very idea of rolling stock, Infrastructure, & Signalling all belonging to different companies is Ludicrous). All Motorways should be Toll Roads similar to continental & US systems & contributions strictly used for Motorway maintenance.
//RETURN to National British Rail ( at present the very idea of rolling stock, Infrastructure, & Signalling all belonging to different companies is Ludicrous). //
WR, that would require us to leave the EU. is that what the government should be doing?
http://
WR, that would require us to leave the EU. is that what the government should be doing?
http://
There are already some benefits with a "contributions based" component. Extending it probably wouldn't save any money really, because as soon as you start having to introduce such a test you inevitably increase the admin involved in checking how much people have paid into the system. Not that it's a bad idea, per se, but I don't think it will change anything.
With regards to your first suggestion, this surely defeats the point of what the EU should be about, which is unity and equality. I know Health tourism is a bit of an issue, but rather than address it by saying to those people "we're going to pretend we have the same sort of (presumably rubbish) hospitals you were escaping from" we ought to drive towards improving healthcare across the EU. I think that a lot of the problems of the EU probably stem from this sort of thing, really, where the project can't be carried through as well as it should because there's still not enough of a sense of European Identity yet.
I don't think that modernising the existing rail system is feasible, not in any extensive way. It's just too based on the Victorian system, and there's a limit therefore to how much capacity you can carry, how long and high and wide the trains can be, etc. So many lines have nowhere to go. HS2 represents the right sort of idea in a new railway line, and again I'm not sure that the project is ambitious enough more than anything.
I'm probably going to spend the rest of this post rubbishing other ideas while having none of my own. I suppose that's inevitable because it's hard to know what to do. Or, at least, hard for me to know what will work in the world we have rather than my ideal one.
With regards to your first suggestion, this surely defeats the point of what the EU should be about, which is unity and equality. I know Health tourism is a bit of an issue, but rather than address it by saying to those people "we're going to pretend we have the same sort of (presumably rubbish) hospitals you were escaping from" we ought to drive towards improving healthcare across the EU. I think that a lot of the problems of the EU probably stem from this sort of thing, really, where the project can't be carried through as well as it should because there's still not enough of a sense of European Identity yet.
I don't think that modernising the existing rail system is feasible, not in any extensive way. It's just too based on the Victorian system, and there's a limit therefore to how much capacity you can carry, how long and high and wide the trains can be, etc. So many lines have nowhere to go. HS2 represents the right sort of idea in a new railway line, and again I'm not sure that the project is ambitious enough more than anything.
I'm probably going to spend the rest of this post rubbishing other ideas while having none of my own. I suppose that's inevitable because it's hard to know what to do. Or, at least, hard for me to know what will work in the world we have rather than my ideal one.
I haven't made my mind up about HS2 yet, but I have to say that its supporters haven't really made their case conclusively. Its seems an eye-watering amount of money to spend, just to ensure that our rail journeys are a few mins faster.
Its said that HS2 will bring Birmingham residents a few minutes nearer London...might it not be cheaper to move Brum about 5 miles further south-east ?
Its said that HS2 will bring Birmingham residents a few minutes nearer London...might it not be cheaper to move Brum about 5 miles further south-east ?
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
Crosswords20 mins ago
Connections 322 - Sunday 28 April
Quizzes & Puzzles104 mins ago
ChatterBank127 mins ago
