Possible Tax Cuts on the way

drbeat

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

The problem is there is too little money supply circulating in the economy caused by the credit crunch. The mechanism of getting money to the market is broken, so the government has to find ways of getting money to the market. If it doesn't we will end up in a deflationary spiral and the deficit will balloon anyway. The deficit will increase whatever happens. We can fund a deficit for people to sit on the dole or we can fund a deficit to keep everyone in work but either way we have to fund a deficit. You say your way will make it quicker, I don't agree. Your way will make the recession last longer, be deeper and take the econmy far longer to recover from. Smashing an economy to smithereens just makes it harder to put back together.

I'm not arguing that this isn't going to be painful. I'm arguing that governments should not sit by and do nothing which is what you said in an earlier post.

I think you'll find that confidence has to return in order for recovery to take place - Govt cannot artificially create confidence! If you remember that your mates - the tories - tried to intervene during the ERM crisis with disastrous results. I'm referring to the interest rate hike - unfortunatley the speculators and investors saw it for what is was - desperate action by a desperate govt - so didn't play ball!

Your other mate - Brown - is trying the same thing! It will not work and it'll only serve to make the rich even richer!

chucky

ad44downey wrote: »

Give him a chance. His spellchecker just went haywire

Downey - i hope the numbers that i will post won't be too complicated.

don't worry as i've said to you before. you've got personal and relationship issues going on, don't try and take them out on others...

chucky

drbeat wrote: »

hmm...BACKFRMTHEEDGE and Chucky are no longer online???? Same person do you think?

i don't think so - never met the guy.

JayScottGreenspan

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

The problem is there is too little money supply circulating in the economy caused by the credit crunch. The mechanism of getting money to the market is broken, so the government has to find ways of getting money to the market. If it doesn't we will end up in a deflationary spiral and the deficit will balloon anyway. The deficit will increase whatever happens. We can fund a deficit for people to sit on the dole or we can fund a deficit to keep everyone in work but either way we have to fund a deficit. You say your way will make it quicker, I don't agree. Your way will make the recession last longer, be deeper and take the econmy far longer to recover from. Smashing an economy to smithereens just makes it harder to put back together.

I'm not arguing that this isn't going to be painful. I'm arguing that governments should not sit by and do nothing which is what you said in an earlier post.

I agree that the government needs to do something, but unfortunately sensible arguments about exactly what are not forthcoming from either of the main two parties.

Many within Labour think government borrowing is just a number on a piece of paper and doesn't matter. They point to Japan where the deficit is over 100% and life still goes on. They forget that once the deficit crosses a certain threshold, the interest accumulates faster than it can be paid back - and eventually you have to either put up taxes and cut spending drastically, or scrap the currency (and much of the economy) and start from scratch.

A lot of old school Tories seem to be unaware that sometimes it is possible to borrow some tax from future generations and deploy it for a better overall gain. Generally this means borrowing for investment (would have been nice if Gordon stuck to this mantra) but it is possible for fiscal stimuli to have a long term benefit too.

Clearly we need some sensible debate over the middle ground about where to pitch the balance between stimulus and prudence. The only man I see making that case at the moment is Vince Cable. Most others are just parroting the same old tired ill-thought-through left wing/right wing cliches that they always do.

chucky

!!!!!!? wrote: »

There are so many sock puppets in here that it's actually pretty hard to know which posters are 'real' if you see what I mean. I think 3 or 4 people are each running 2 or 3 extra accounts.

The giveaway is that they can't keep up with posting from multiple accounts at once - so while they might think that having 'backup' is great for wearing someone down they soon learn that all they can really do with the sock is make 'I agree with xxxx' posts.

haha - don't think so. just because you're getting slammed on another thread for being the hypocryte that you are. don't try and bring down to your usual level. let's keep this thread on topic if we can !!!!!!.

chucky

drbeat wrote: »

Yes it did happen!

Still waiting for your evidence that it didn't happen!

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2006/039.shtml

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2003/10_october/29/money_programme_mortgage.shtml

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article2283035.ece

give me a chance - i don't live on this forum like !!!!!! does - this is his life!!!.

just looked at the links and the amount was £40mm from the Times link. that isn't exactly a huge amount is it.

the value of UK mortgages is £1,216,728,000,000, that mortgage fraud is 0.00003% of the total value
value of UK mortgages was from here - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7641535.stm

your comment that the economy is built on fraud isn't exactly accurate though - 0.00003% of the UK Mortgages is a very small amount. as i've said on previous links it will alawys happen but not on a wide scale. sorry to dissapoint...

what a coincidence that !!!!!! and his ghetoo chums are around - right on cue....

Dan:_4

I see your still banging on about mortgage fraud drbeat. :rolleyes:

drbeat

Dan: wrote: »

I see your still banging on about mortgage fraud drbeat. :rolleyes:

LOL! I was wondering where you were

mitchaa

Why dont they follow the Lib dem idea and tax higher earners more? This would allow for a tax cut without the need for further borrowing

50% for the top earners and a reduction down to 16% for BR earners.

I wouldn't class £41k earnings as high earnings though so they would have to adjust the band upto say i would say £80-100K for 50% taxation. Perhaps a 30% tax band for £45-80k

They do it in other countries, why not this 1?

They also need to close all these tax avoidance loopholes that the super rich exploit.

It would be good to see an income tax cut but i can't see it personally. I can only imagine that it will be the benefit brigade that will be rewarded (again) and it will be the worker who will get bent over when the pre budget report is broadcast. We do have a labour government afterall.

drbeat

chucky wrote: »

give me a chance - i don't live on this forum like !!!!!! does - this is his life!!!.

just looked at the links and the amount was £40mm from the Times link. that isn't exactly a huge amount is it.

the value of UK mortgages is £1,216,728,000,000, that mortgage fraud is 0.00003% of the total value
value of UK mortgages was from here - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7641535.stm

your comment that the economy is built on fraud isn't exactly accurate though - 0.00003% of the UK Mortgages is a very small amount. as i've said on previous links it will alawys happen but not on a wide scale. sorry to dissapoint...

what a coincidence that !!!!!! and his ghetoo chums are around - right on cue....

That is what is known...we're only finding out the true extent of the situation as repossesions grow. Fraud was widespread and even mortgage advisors of well known banks were caught out - they were filmed.

Great to see that you've gone from denial to acceptance within an hour. The only people that you're dissapointing is your own ghetto chums.