Great “Improve Money Rules In 50 Words” Hunt. What easy changes for our politicians

c_cottell wrote: »

Introduce single ID No. and get rid of Passport, Birth Cert, NI No, driving license, criminal record, tax records, employment history, medical records, training/education records, etc

Each section would be held on different databases and permission would be restricted so a Police Officer would be able to stop you and check any convictions or cautions but not your education records.

Would simplify not only government administration but employment recruiting, pay, etc

:eek:Scary thought. The advantages of cost savings, efficiency and security cannot be argued with. However, why not go the whole hog and tattoo a number on everyone's forearm (been done before) or stick a barcode on foreheads.

Even better, and cheaper, an electronic tag under the skin (as done with dogs). That way, when you go to an airport, football match, pay at a supermarket, drive past a police car, walk past an advertising board, or even sit at home, money can be automatically taken from your accounts, you can be blocked access at gates automatically, your whereabouts and purchases can be automatically recorded, and you can be sent junk mail or calls depending on where you've been.

It would make it much easier (than now) for Insurance companies, credit providers, etc, to pigeon-hole every person - meaning that there will be a percentage of the population that will automatically prevented from access to these things (due to cost savings from removing the human involvement that exists now).

If you connect the tag to a blood monitor (devices are currently being developed), when you go to work you can be screened for alcohol or drugs taken the night before, you can be prevented from operating motor vehicles, etc, etc. Maybe if you happen to be near a crime scene, say a mile away, the police might drag you off for interrogation/'elimination from enquiries', within 30mins of the crime taking place.

When you go abroad, the same system could potentially be used to see if you went where you were not allowed to be, or you drank alcohol or wore a hat where you were not allowed - then you could be jailed...or worse.

Maybe, we could accept the small percentage of database/IT system failures, which could cause you to be jailed or lose money? Or the possibility or massive fraud or crime that can be committed using those computer systems?

:jAlternatively, we could just accept the cost, hassle, and LOW security risks of the current system, just so that we could all be a little freer? It just means that each person has to do a little more work in keeping their own personal information & money safe and in managing their own relationships with organisations they personally have to deal with for things they want or have to do.

The same arguments here apply to Police national DNA database & widespread CCTV.

A political party offering genuine choice would be onto a winner - regulations to ensure banking, energy suppliers, phone companies, etc publish easily comparable, up to date information. Also offer genuine customer service, e.g. email query facilities often trigger a standard response to phone an 0844 number, profiting the company.

When accepting a lowest price tender for public works, don't pay more that the price quoted. It always seems like companies quote low and then charge high regardless.

Consumers cannot compare services because companies restrict parts of the service without it being clear. E.g. a cellular subscription with ‘Broadband Internet access’ might block 1) Internet based phone services, and 2) a PC from using that paid-for connection.