Newsnight: Quantitative Easing

alared

SGE1 wrote: »

Oh you've always said so have you? If only we'd listened to you eh?
:rotfl:

The point I was making is that people thought the boom days would last forever (ten years) and now they find they`ve not,they seem to think the bust will be all over by next year and not in ten years time.

SGE1

Really2 wrote: »

You have seem to miss out indirect tax.

Council Tax, TV Licence, Petrol, Deisel, stamp duty, beer, etc, etc, etc.

I have "seem to miss out" information? Er, apologies, I don't own the website - I'm just trying to put up useful information.

Anyway, like for like comparisons are the interesting one. I cannot speak for all countries in the table, but I'm sure many of them do also have one-off taxes such as stamp duty, inheritance tax, and other taxes like local/council taxation.

And the TV license is not a tax. You do not HAVE to own a TV, especially with so may services like iplayer and ITV Catch Up that allow you to view - have a TV is your choice, so it is not a tax.

So, all in all, please don't try to come up with pathetic reasons as to why the information contained in the table isn't accurate or interesting. The fact of the matter is, we don't pay that much tax. Sorry if this goes against what the Daily Mail has fed you.

alared

SGE1 wrote: »

Surely it doesn't just matter whether or how much we print - but also how other OECD countries react to the recession, and whether or how much they decide to print as well?

Printing worthless money is not the answer.
Paying your debts is.
The WMF has already stated that the UK is the worse placed out of all the EU countries to cope with the recession.
Brown sold the gold cheap,he`s now trying to sell the pound cheap in favour of the euro.

Really2

SGE1 wrote: »

I have "seem to miss out" information? Er, apologies, I don't own the website - I'm just trying to put up useful information.

Anyway, like for like comparisons are the interesting one. I cannot speak for all countries in the table, but I'm sure many of them do also have one-off taxes such as stamp duty, inheritance tax, and other taxes like local/council taxation.

And the TV license is not a tax. You do not HAVE to own a TV, especially with so may services like iplayer and ITV Catch Up that allow you to view - have a TV is your choice, so it is not a tax.

So, all in all, please don't try to come up with pathetic reasons as to why the information contained in the table isn't accurate or interesting. The fact of the matter is, we don't pay that much tax. Sorry if this goes against what the Daily Mail has fed you.

Sorry Gordon Brown labour licker.:rolleyes:

We have one of the highest tax burdens in the world around 38% of every £1 is given back to the goverment.

Are you a labour spinner.;)

Dont read the daily mail but do pay tax. You may too one day.:)

SGE1

alared wrote: »

Printing worthless money is not the answer.
Paying your debts is.
The WMF has already stated that the UK is the worse placed out of all the EU countries to cope with the recession.
Brown sold the gold cheap,he`s now trying to sell the pound cheap in favour of the euro.

Perhaps, but you miss my point: we should be looking at the situation globally, because only then are the implications clear.

As for the US being the worst-placed to ride the recession out, again, perhaps, but I've not seen any figures, and I wonder again - how much worse off are we? If it's a fraction of a percentage, which I suspect it is, then that statement is meaningless, and is just something picked up by the media to cause a bit more unrest, and sell a few more papers.

SGE1

Really2 wrote: »

Sorry Gordon Brown labour licker.:rolleyes:

We have one of the highest tax burdens in the world around 38% of every £1 is given back to the goverment.

Are you a labour spiner.;)

:rotfl:
I love it. I provide a series of facts to back up my argument, you come out with a statement and expect everyone to believe it.

And no I'm not a Labour spinner (not sure what a Labour "spiner" would be ), I'm just someone with a bit of perspective.

And finally, I am a basic rate taxpayer.

amcluesent

>If the threat to savers is having the value of their money wiped out with an inflationary solution... then that is the opposite threat that comes with the real deflationary forces weighing down on the entire system.<

Clown's ruination of the economy is so complete that we have inflation and deflation simultaneously across different asset classes. The fools are throwing the dials from min to max, or vice-versa, without a clue as to the likely effects. Taxation to pay for the bloated public sector is racing ahead, while houses etc. are crashing in value.

Two things are clear -

1) All of the 'announcements' are pure spin focussed on trying to create window for TruLabour to the country in June 09. Things will go to hell after that.
2) The dangerous Mandelson is making arrangements to bounce us into the Euro, forcing GBP down to parity.

Gold is your only choice as political/economic/social instability escalates.

Really2

SGE1 wrote: »

:rotfl:
I love it. I provide a series of facts to back up my argument, you come out with a statement and expect everyone to believe it.

And no I'm not a Labour spinner (not sure what a Labour "spiner" would be ), I'm just someone with a bit of perspective.

And finally, I am a basic rate taxpayer.

Did not want to embarress you but you but if I have to.
2006 info.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/tax-advice/article.html?in_article_id=425422&in_page_id=11

Perspective, no mate that a bit of perspex.:rotfl:

SGE1

Really2 wrote: »

Did not want to embarress you but you but if I have to.
2006 info.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/tax-advice/article.html?in_article_id=425422&in_page_id=11

Perspective, no mate that a bit of perspex.:rotfl:

1) It's "embarrass", not "embarress"
2) Can you read? The article you've linked to states that "Britain's tax burden is at its highest level for more than 20 years" - do you know what this means? This means that the tax burden in Britain has increased. But it makes no comments about the tax burden relative to the rest of the world. Let me give you an example: if in country A, the tax burden increases by 10%, but in country B, the tax burden increases by 11% - who is worse off? The answer is, it still depends on the absolute level of taxation. Another analogy: if country A has a tax burden of 10, and this tax burden increases by 10% - the new tax burden is 10.1. If country B has a higher tax burden of 9, but the increase is 20%, then the new tax burden is 10.8 - higher than country A's who has a higher relative increase in taxation.
All this to explain that the data in the table I posted earlier still stands
3) :rotfl:

alared

SGE1 wrote: »

As for the US being the worst-placed to ride the recession out, again, perhaps, but I've not seen any figures, and I wonder again - how much worse off are we? quote]

If you had read my post correctly you would have seen I didn`t mention the US but the UK being the worsed placed to manage the recession according to the WMF.