| Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Itemised tax spends | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 4 2014, 05:14 PM (560 Views) | |
| rizzo | Nov 4 2014, 05:14 PM Post #1 |
|
Junior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I see that Cameron's latest wheeze is to show tax-payers exactly how much they individually contribute to each pot. I have only briefly read this ''idea'' but it would appear that the wording is heavily slanted towards the amount contributed to benefits. Also itemised amongst others is the overseas aid figure, now Cameron is eager to point out that benefits MUST be reduced but no mention of reducing overseas aid, why is that? Could it be that the fat cats who cream off a goodly slice of that aid rush out to buy luxury cars, planes, yachts etc. along with shopping trips for their wives to London's Bond Street? Doesn't Cameron realise that the majority of benefit payments get spent in the community and constantly reducing that figure only leads to more crime? |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 4 2014, 05:26 PM Post #2 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Seems you are confusing two policies in order to create some smoke. We can afford, if we so wish, to keep past promises to poor countries. I think it is not good for a rich country to promise support and then for domestic reasons pull the plug on what is a trivial amount. However I do not believe we should aid China or India or Pakistan when they are diverting resources to finance their nuclear arms programmes. It is not a large amount, but understandably such resonates when cuts are made at home. We cannot longer afford our burgeoning welfare budget. Even if you split that down to component parts it remains unaffordable, unless you wish to dictate that our grandchildren must pay. Now what sort of morality is that? There is no evidence that the UK aid programme has been designed especially to enrich the fat cats you fail to identify. That said I would like every Penny possible to get to the coal face. |
![]() |
|
| rizzo | Nov 4 2014, 05:42 PM Post #3 |
|
Junior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm confusing nothing, I was merely pointing out the government's plan to sent individual tax payers an itemised breakdown of how much they contribute to each pot, welfare, education, health, overs aid etc etc. It was actually Osborne who spoke of this plan a couple of years ago but it has come back onto the forefront again. You are obviously unaware of mis-spent overseas aid, a little Googling will furnish you with ample proof of ''fat cats'' benefiting. |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Nov 4 2014, 10:02 PM Post #4 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It is propaganda .. pure and simple, and paid for by the tax payer. not a good use of public money imo. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 4 2014, 10:51 PM Post #5 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It'll only be propaganda if it isn't true. And the truth is a lot does go on welfare, NHS and pensions way beyond that earnt by the original NI contributions But how much? Interesting to compare two different views with what the BBC say HMRC will send us as The difference apparently being how you account for pensions paid to public sector workers such as doctors - debateable. More here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29898083 And as for a "latest wheeze" Rizzo, far from it. It was a specific promise in the 2012 budget statement Over 30 months ago. Edited by Steve K, Nov 4 2014, 10:52 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Nov 4 2014, 11:02 PM Post #6 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
'Kin ell Steve the blue wedge for the EU is massive! Can't see any wedges for bank bailouts,liability insurance for them or the money used to prop up asset prices, perhaps they forgot or just spread them around a bit? |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 4 2014, 11:26 PM Post #7 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Perhaps they don't exist HMRC made a profit out of intervention in the banks in the last year. Much though you want to deny it |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Nov 4 2014, 11:43 PM Post #8 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Perhaps this alleged profit does not exist either considering how banks make money? According to figures on the NAO website the Government as of 31st of March 2013 was still supporting the banks to the tune of £141bn, I wonder if this was factored into the alleged profit from last year? Don't forget Steve banks and this government have a habit of being economical with the truth. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 4 2014, 11:49 PM Post #9 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
2013 is so last year Tigger, perhaps in your determination to divert another thread to your pet obsession you forgot about the shares sold at a profit earlier this year. |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Nov 4 2014, 11:56 PM Post #10 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Not at all Steve, I remember it very well! The government sold off £3.2bn of Lloyds shares and made a vast profit of £61m. Let me go and get my calculator I can't do £141bn minus £61m in my head.
|
![]() |
|
| Rich | Nov 4 2014, 11:56 PM Post #11 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A bit like the post office ones?
Edited by Rich, Nov 4 2014, 11:56 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Affa | Nov 4 2014, 11:57 PM Post #12 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Or only part of the story ......... so why not breakdown welfare spending? £56.7bn, 50% of the total welfare spend, is for social protection n.e.c – defined by the UN as the administration costs £29.2bn, 26% of the total welfare spend , is for social exclusion n.e.c £18.8bn, 16% of the total welfare spend, is for family and children £5.9bn, 5% of the total welfare spend, is for unemployment £3.5bn, 3% of the total welfare spend, is for housing Virtually half the spend is on administration ........ itself a huge employer (not all of it public sector employment). The cost of which has of course risen alarmingly due to the IDS reforms. You do need to look at the definition for 'Social exclusion' before joining the group castigating these people. |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Nov 4 2014, 11:58 PM Post #13 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| Rich | Nov 5 2014, 12:19 AM Post #14 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Mind you, although the Chancellor obviously means well by his actions by being a "transparent" governing body, in the same breath, that same governing body has openly admitted to shredding all of the documentation regarding MP's expenses prior to the last expenses scandal. Read what this certain Axxxxxxe has to say on the matter. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2818359/MP-s-expenses-records-shredded-amid-accusations-authorities-trying-avoid-scrutiny-claims.html |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 5 2014, 12:25 AM Post #15 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
And that ^ ladies and gentlemen is conclusive proof that Tigger does not understand finances. And I'm betting even with that big hint you cannot spot your error |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 5 2014, 09:39 AM Post #16 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But you are free to put up your evidence and show how the Gov. is colluding in these so called scams. Why don't you? I do not claim that all such aid is spent wisely, I know the State rarely ever spends Taxpayers money so, what I am questioning is your claim of collusion. |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 5 2014, 09:47 AM Post #17 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I am yet to determine, outside of holding ladders, what the said person knows anything about. A self declared Builder Businessman (joke) did not even know there is a VAT threshold. An self professed expert on all matters Germany and he has now idea of the difficulties DB found themselves in from outrageous uncontrolled gambling in the USA. He does not even seem to be aware the the UK is years ahead of the rest of the EU in re-capitalising Banks and instituting reforms. There may still be risks in our system, but a lot more in the EZ. You will find that just about everything he says is based on ignorance and to belittle the UK and/or the English or one of the Posters. It would be helpful, for himself, if he tried just once to substantiate a claim. As we say up north "all fur coat and no knickers". |
![]() |
|
| Tytoalba | Nov 5 2014, 10:43 AM Post #18 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Dont you want to know where your money goes Affa, and can you explain why it is propaganda to know the truth ? If they are facts that can be disproved if not correct,how can that be propaganda? Living in Wales where nearly everyone speaks English fluently we get every form bill and council documents in duel language, meaning half of what we get has to be thrown away. That is certainly not a good use of peoples money. The Welsh asswmbly has now reduced costs by reporting everything in English unless specifically requested. |
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Nov 5 2014, 10:44 AM Post #19 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I see the newspapers this morning are all taking a shot at Osborne for his dishonesty in working out the Welfare portion of the pie-chart. Seems he lumped his pension and perks in with real Welfare spending. All The Best |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 5 2014, 12:25 PM Post #20 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Especially when ~95% of recipients throw the half in Welsh straight into the bin. I have checked this with local Welsh speakers, ones where on a day to day basis Welsh is their preferred language. They tell me that they often struggle to understand the English version, but the Welsh ones are impossible. You have to be bi-lingual in Wales even though the vast majority wish to converse with their local Gov. in English. |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 5 2014, 12:26 PM Post #21 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Not Osborne. This has been so for a very long time. |
![]() |
|
| rizzo | Nov 5 2014, 12:40 PM Post #22 |
|
Junior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you take note I did amend my initial post to the fact that Osborne talked about this in 2012. I do usually check my facts. |
![]() |
|
| rizzo | Nov 5 2014, 12:53 PM Post #23 |
|
Junior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Wow, in words of an old song ''I could write a book'' ! Are you stating that corruption is so small that it is not worth troubling about? If one could stamp out all the corruption every country would have enough money to pay their debts and give their electorate a decent standard of living. |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Nov 5 2014, 01:07 PM Post #24 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Anyone who cannot see the deception intended just does not want to see it. |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Nov 5 2014, 07:34 PM Post #25 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No batteries in my calculator? And I look forward to a raft of data from you proving what a jolly good thing it has been bailing out the banks and how much better off the taxpayer is as a result, what with all that profit we've made
|
![]() |
|
| AndyK | Nov 5 2014, 08:15 PM Post #26 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The money doesn't appear on the chart because its not a part of this years spend, that was a one off payment in 2007/8. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 5 2014, 09:44 PM Post #27 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So do I There is no such edit of your original post, here it is again:
Can you please point out where you make it clear this was not a "latest wheeze" but in fact a 2012 promise? |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 5 2014, 09:48 PM Post #28 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There's a vacancy for you at Old Trafford, we need someone who can move goal posts. They might pay you enough to get that calculator battery you so desperately need |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Nov 5 2014, 10:43 PM Post #29 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Answered post 12 this thread ........ http://w11.zetaboards.com/UK_Debate_Mk_2/single/?p=8232980&t=10709438 |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 5 2014, 11:03 PM Post #30 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Perhaps you'd supply a link please to where you say I was "joining the group castigating these people" And any link to those £ figures of yours please? Particularly as you assert that £56.7B is "administration" according to the UN Because the UN as in the United Nations doesn't seem to exactly agree with you http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regcs.asp?Cl=4&Lg=1&Co=10.9.0
|
![]() |
|
| Affa | Nov 6 2014, 12:06 AM Post #31 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
edit in process
Edited by Affa, Nov 6 2014, 12:10 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Affa | Nov 6 2014, 12:56 AM Post #32 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Not the same source, but this'll do. http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/welfare_budget_2013_4.html Your social protection UN definition bares this out somewhat - it is Administration, operational, and contingency costs outside normal means tested claims.. The spend that is 'actually paid out in benefits is social exclusion nec' defined by the UN -
I had difficulty finding the original link which set out to debunk some of the myths about Welfare spending, how out of work costs are among the least spend for instance. However; Social protection nec is a large bill and from what I did find when looking for that previous link is that administration costs are included but not entirely itemised ...... the actual administration spend is hidden. It was that other link that had more detail and made the calculation of 'half'. I did come across this Guardian comment when searching -
Back on topic - this propaganda exercise is another 'divisive' attempt, and as such is motivated by party politics, which is not how government should use public money. As government it is their duty to represent everyone, even those on benefits, and not victimise them. If the Conservatives wish to make these sort of representations then use their own money. |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 6 2014, 08:08 AM Post #33 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So it is OK when Labour present data in such a format, which they have, but nooK when the Tories do so? Gotcha. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 6 2014, 08:28 AM Post #34 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Affa you haven't substantiated either your "joining the group castigating these people" accusation against me or those £B figures - see post 30 |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Nov 6 2014, 11:46 AM Post #35 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"before joining the group castigating these people" I did make it clear, you again omitted the caveat. |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Nov 6 2014, 12:20 PM Post #36 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"nook" when whoever does it, especially if it is as obvious as in this case.
|
![]() |
|
| rizzo | Nov 6 2014, 12:38 PM Post #37 |
|
Junior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Look again, in post #3 4/11. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 6 2014, 09:04 PM Post #38 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Perhaps you should reconsider next time calling your second post in the thread your "initial post" which was of course the OP, FWIW the OP is still uncorrected by you and is still attempting to perpetuate a myth. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 6 2014, 09:09 PM Post #39 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
As written that isn't a caveat on your insult to me but lets move on, you are still failing to post a link to those £ figures you wish us to take seriously |
![]() |
|
| Lefty | Nov 6 2014, 10:24 PM Post #40 |
|
New Member
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I believe this so-called 'transparent' tax statement idea from George Osborne is a cynical ploy from this government to justify their cuts to welfare and turn the "hard-working" taxpayer against the unemployed on benefits. The government's own website shows that only 3% of welfare goes to the unemployed, while pensions account for 46%. Edited by Lefty, Nov 6 2014, 10:38 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2




![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)



as

7:32 PM Jul 11