The 2017 GE & Politics Thread

[Ekona]

I would imagine the PM tells the CE what she wants to prioritise, then instructs him to find a way to do it. He runs off and tells all his plebs to do the proper maths, they come back to him with a couple of ideas then he passes that up the line to the PM, who makes the final decision.

 

Politics is too political to leave it purely down to people who actually know what they're doing. They'd rather look good to the public than do what's right, hence the reason the NHS hasn't been torn apart and made into something that actually works.

[BobbyZ]

I think with organisations like the NHS though they do need to get someone in who knows what they're doing to sort it out / run it if things are going to get better. Someone ruthless and skilled enough to reorganise it into something that works properly, but willing to do it for the interests of the country rather than their own financial interests (I'm thinking a successful businessperson of some description).

[AliveBoy]

They need someone who has worked in the NHS to run it, they need someone who has been a teacher to run education. It absolutely baffles me when people with no experience in those fields try to run them and make massive decisions which can literally change peoples lives very quickly.

[gangzoom]

 

Yoiu seem to being ok though

 

Yes I am, but have never had an accountant, never put a single £ on the stock market, have never claimed or tried to calim any tax relief of any kind, and have never voted for a party that see tax avoidance as a valid career.

 

If you work hard your sold be rewarded and pay your due to society through taxation, but the entire banking system is setup to help those who can avoid paying tax. I keep on getting told we should get an accountant to reduce some of our tax bill, but if you can afford to pay tax than why should you try to get out of it??

 

Even MPs have admitted pretty much the entire accountancy industry is built around the principle of tax avoidance. Surely its perverse those who have the most in society can also access services to enable them contribute the least (in relative terms)?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31147276

Edited April 21, 2017 by gangzoom

[Ekona]

Because I don't want to pay any more tax than I absolutely have to. If they can't make laws that cover every base, that's their problem not mine.

 

If I said to you pay me £500 and I'll legally save you £5000, you're telling me you wouldn't take it? No dodgy off-shore schemes or anything like that.

[Jetpilot]

But the politicians are not business men or women as you say, most of them are career politicians, how would they know how to run a business and the big problem with running a business is you have to be ruthless (on the most part), you are never going to be popular if you make ruthless decision, i.e closing down coal mines, the steel industry, if you can buy it cheaper elsewhere why wouldnt you, thats what a business man or woman would do, if a politician was ruthless they would just loose votes.

Edited April 21, 2017 by Jetpilot

[BobbyZ]

They need someone who has worked in the NHS to run it, they need someone who has been a teacher to run education. It absolutely baffles me when people with no experience in those fields try to run them and make massive decisions which can literally change peoples lives very quickly.

 

I don't see the necessity for someone to have worked in the industry. I feel that the NHS in its current form is becoming obsolete and is in need of a shake up, so maybe someone from outside the organisation would be better placed to do so. A fresh pair of eyes, as it were.

[Ekona]

I think with organisations like the NHS though they do need to get someone in who knows what they're doing to sort it out / run it if things are going to get better. Someone ruthless and skilled enough to reorganise it into something that works properly, but willing to do it for the interests of the country rather than their own financial interests (I'm thinking a successful businessperson of some description).

Absolutely agree 100%. This is why I think we should pay our MPs significantly more than we do, get the big business owners with a proven track record interested in helping run the country. Stop this faffing around, it's the most important job in the country so we should pay a proper wage.

[BobbyZ]

But the politicians are not business men or women as you say, most of them are career politicians, how would they know how to run a business and the big problem with running a business is you have to be ruthless (on the most part), you are never going to be popular if you make ruthless decision, i.e closing down coal mines, the steel industry, if you can buy it cheaper elsewhere why wouldnt you, thats what a business man or woman would do, if a politician was ruthless they would just loose votes.

 

I believe the phrases 'get someone in' and 'but willing to do it for the interests of the country rather than their own financial interests' address those issues

 

Easier said than done, of course.

 

EDIT: and yes, I agree that there would inevitably be some unpopular decisions to be made. You can't please everyone...

Edited April 21, 2017 by BobbyZ

[Jetpilot]

Whatever party will still be accountable, not the person making those decisions, so they will loose votes if they drew a hard line.

[Ekona]

Which is why politics doesn't work in this country, every time they make a hard but right call they get slaughtered on it.

[gangzoom]

If I said to you pay me £500 and I'll legally save you £5000, you're telling me you wouldn't take it?

 

That's exactly what we keep getting told, but I will personally never do it. I get an income and I'll pay my dues.

[Ekona]

In that case, thank you for reducing my tax bill by paying more than necessary!

 

I pay my dues too, I just don't pay more than I have to.

[gangzoom]

I feel that the NHS in its current form is becoming obsolete and is in need of a shake up, so maybe someone from outside the organisation would be better placed to do so. A fresh pair of eyes, as it were.

 

The problems facing the NHS is urgent/acute care. You cannot deliver 'free' care as the NHS does without someone paying for it. The NHS is actually one of the most efficient health care systems, the US health care system spends upto 30% of their income on simply working out how much to invoice people!!

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/uks-healthcare-ranked-the-best-out-of-11-western-countries-with-us-coming-last-9542833.html

 

The whole A&E system is about to collapse anyways, demand is simply overwhelming the system, I'm surprised we made through this winter, the next flu outbreak will kill the NHS. What replaces will be interesting, as the private sector have already realised running an acute hospital will never make money without charging people up front - Which is fine if you can afford to pay, but if you cannot what do you do....Either way we'll find out soon.

 

http://nyenquirer.uk/excusive-virgin-pulls-out-of-whitby-hospital-deal/

Edited April 21, 2017 by gangzoom

[BobbyZ]

Of course someone has to pay for it. The point is about getting the most out of what goes in.

 

Your point about the US system isn't relevant, as I don't think anyone's ever held that up as an example of how to do things, and I'm sure I can find examples of inefficiency in the NHS easily enough. Being the best of a bad bunch doesn't mean that improving the system (as opposed to ploughing in more cash) wouldn't be a very good thing.

[GreenLandy]

Wow....

 

The NHS is incredibily inefficient. The media and lefties bang on about not spending enough on the NHS but that's complete bollocks. My local NHS Trust (or whatever they're called now) spend 52% of their budget on admin. That is absolute lunacy in my view. More money on admin than medical staff.

 

Also, your point about tax is just ridiculous. Yes my job as an accountant does involve a lot of tax avoidance as that's what we're paid to do - identify legal tax breaks etc. I presume that you are fully utilising your personal allowance each year? Well that saves you tax, perhaps you'd better ring up HMRC and say you don't want that either. People with high incomes don't get it, so why should you enjoy that legal tax break?

 

I'm with Ekona - top policitcians should earn 2-300k in my book. You might attract people who are competent then

[The G Man]

Because I don't want to pay any more tax than I absolutely have to. If they can't make laws that cover every base, that's their problem not mine.

 

If I said to you pay me £500 and I'll legally save you £5000, you're telling me you wouldn't take it? No dodgy off-shore schemes or anything like that.

 

If I said to you and the countless other selfish citizens, pay the £5k taxes you're obligated to and can afford to, rather than £500 to a tax spiv to avoid them and you will have a governance system that works and be proud of, you would rather do the later?

 

Probably sums up some sectors of society quite well, allows us all to moan though eh?

Edited April 21, 2017 by The G Man

[BobbyZ]

It's a bit of a moot point whether people should willingly pay more tax than they have to or not, because lots of people won't anyway.

 

Review the loopholes / available tax breaks, and remove them if they're deemed unfair.

[Jetpilot]

^^ The problem isnt the loopholes, the problem is the government are scared that if they force them into paying the correct tax even if they completely ring fenced it (which i dont think they could), they will all up and leave and as Ekona says, leaving 1000's unemployed.

 

No different to putting some duty etc on aviation fuel, total paranoia that they will move their UK head offices, which is the only reason there isnt any.

Edited April 21, 2017 by Jetpilot

[coldel]

Wow....

 

The NHS is incredibily inefficient. The media and lefties bang on about not spending enough on the NHS but that's complete bollocks. My local NHS Trust (or whatever they're called now) spend 52% of their budget on admin. That is absolute lunacy in my view. More money on admin than medical staff.

 

Also, your point about tax is just ridiculous. Yes my job as an accountant does involve a lot of tax avoidance as that's what we're paid to do - identify legal tax breaks etc. I presume that you are fully utilising your personal allowance each year? Well that saves you tax, perhaps you'd better ring up HMRC and say you don't want that either. People with high incomes don't get it, so why should you enjoy that legal tax break?

 

I'm with Ekona - top policitcians should earn 2-300k in my book. You might attract people who are competent then

 

I agree on the politicians salaries, far too low for the responsibility they carry. Sarah Olney who won the Richmond by election is probably on half the salary she was on prior to giving up her job and becoming a politician. She genuinely seems to want to do it to get a voice and do it for the people, albeit she is very inexperienced and not the best public debater! But the political system relies on people giving up bigger salaries to do it for the good of the country etc. Its a no win situation really, the really good economists, business people, financial whizzes are not going to apply for government when private sector gives them better financial (and job!) security.

[docwra]

If you earn an MP's wage (which I also agree isnt high enough) you pay £4K more in tax than an entire minimum wage salary. You also contribute £5K on NI and your employer just under £10K.

[BobbyZ]

^^ The problem isnt the loopholes, the problem is the government are scared that if they force them into paying the correct tax even if they completely ring fenced it (which i dont think they could), they will all up and leave and as Ekona says, leaving 1000's unemployed.

 

No different to putting some duty etc on aviation fuel, total paranoia that they will move their UK head offices, which is the only reason there isnt any.

 

It sounds like you're talking about lower taxes for large companies - I was responding to the posts regarding using an accountant to find ways to pay lower tax.

[Irn Bru]

Oh dear http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39659304

 

WTF. .... who voted for her, jeezypeeps, what a incompetent person she really is

[coldel]

News bouncing around today about the tories raising income tax/NI/VAT - given they cannot touch corporation tax as leaving Europe makes us less attractive to foreign investment and hiking that up would only make us less so. But they need to make money somehow, looks like the public will need to pay, rather than business. All quite predictable I guess.

[GreenLandy]

That flipping NI increase - was going to cost people what, £600 and that's all the media banged on about. Didn't mention that Class 2 iss being abolished, which saves a lot of that £600 anyway...

 

Or that the dividend allowance is being slashed from £5k to £2k, just a couple of years after the tax on dividends was upped 7.5% That has cost people an awful lot more than the attempted NI increase.