Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute


10:15 am - November 12th 2009

by Don Paskini    


      Share on Tumblr

Thanks to tim f for drawing our attention to this recent BBC / GlobeScan poll. The top findings…

1. Most British people (57%) think that the problems associated with free market capitalism can be addressed through regulation and reform; however, 19 per cent think that capitalism is fatally flawed, and only 13% think that it works well as it is.

2. Four in ten (40%) believe that the government should play more of an active role in owning or controlling major industries, 31 per cent believe that the government should play a less active role, and 23 per cent believe that it should continue to play the same role it does now.

3. Two-thirds (67%) of respondents say the government should do more to distribute wealth more evenly, while 20% say it should maintain its current level of involvement and only 10% say that it should do less.

4. A majority (56%) favour increased government regulation of businesses, compared to 23% who favour the status quo and 16% who favour less regulation.

More information, including comparisons with 26 other countries, can be found here.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Don Paskini is deputy-editor of LC. He also blogs at donpaskini. He is on twitter as @donpaskini
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Economy ,Reform

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


Ok guys, it is time that brits faced some harsh realities before they get bitten by them in the next few years :-
– The UK is hugely reliant on the Financial Services industry for tax revenues. It is very unfortunate that this is the case but it is true and we need to face up to it. Many of the other UK service industries (IT, advertising etc) are indirectly highly reliant upon financial services because they comprise many of their principal clients.
– The French and Germans have their own industries (principally aerospace and autos) but they can’t move abroad overnight very easily.
– The UK needs to diversify its industrial base and increase manufacturing – we all agree on that. This will take several years at least if not a decade to implement to any meaningful degree. Tax revenues wont come in for many years after that. You have to ask yourself what would make the UK an attractive place for entrepreneurs and companies to start these business here – a low tax environment would be right at the top of the list.
– In the meantime our gargantuan deficit and bloated public sector and welfare state have to be paid from somewhere. Britain doesnt have North Sea oil anymore and the only source of revenue for the government is taxes on business and private sector employees. Again, a huge part of this tax-take has been generated by the city and its employees for years now. The proportion generated indirectly by the city is immense. Unfortunate but true.
– If you levy punitive taxes on the banks or their employees they will move and move fast (hedge funds are leaving for Zurich by the dozen every month now – see article below out today). Unlike the auto and aerospace industries of the French and Germans there are no factories to move. A hedge fund or bank can relocate to Zurich or New York or Dubai in a matter of months – they just have to move their people and hire a new office. They will then be servicing the same clients as before, doing the same business but paying taxes to someone else’s government. Simple as that. An unfortunate reality but a reality nonetheless.
– I work in the city and spoke to a senior economic advisor to Sarkozy last month. He said the French can’t believe their luck in the Brown government alienating our only cash cow (the banks and bankers) and sending many of them back to Paris where they are now paying tax to France instead of the UK. He cant belive that we are supporting EU restrictions on banks and hedge funds when he believes our economy is dependent on them. He thinks that we sink unless we face up to reality and support the city and the bankers fast.

Face reality. The UK is dependent upon the financial services industry and it will take a decade at least to change this. In the meantime they are our major source of tax revenue. All very well to say enough is enough and time we hurt the bankers out but that will mean an instant plummet in living standards, the IMF stepping in (our deficits are the worse in the OECD already) and an emergency reduction of NHS provision and withdrawal of many public services – no exaggeration whatsoever.

Bankers can leave easily. You might want to see the back of us but be careful what you wish for. The below article was just out this morning. Those 50 in themselves probably represent £75m per year of tax lost to the Swiss.

By Tom Cahill
Nov. 12 (Bloomberg) — BlueCrest Capital Management Ltd.,
a London-based hedge fund firm that oversees about $15.4 billion,
plans to open an office in Geneva as increased taxes and
regulation make London a less attractive location, a person
familiar with the situation said.
As many as 50 BlueCrest employees may move, said the person,
who declined to be identified because the plans are confidential.
The firm has about 300 employees in London.

As many as 50 BlueCrest employees may move, said the person,

Can I volutneer to drive these useless, unproductive, self important fools to Heathrow?

3. Mike Killingworth

Andy, you could have written a much shorter post.

“The reality is that the British economy is now so skewed and debilitated that investment bankers can and will blackmail the rest of the population.”

Ben M

“Can I volutneer to drive these useless, unproductive, self important fools to Heathrow?”

You wont need to, they’ll have their own driver probably (who will also probably be out of a job soon). These people might be unproductive on a global scale and do nothing but push money from one place to another…..but while they were sat in the UK their personal tax take probably supported at least one NHS hospital.

They will now be doing the same job, taking the same risk for the same clients as before, but all the benefit will be for someone else’s country. The first thing you learn in the world of work (I dont know if you have got there yet) is to put aside envy and think of the bigger picture and other people’s interests.

Mike Killingworth – sadly, you are right that our economy is skewed

But we have to work from the situation we are in, not the situation we wish were in. We have to unskew our economy away from financial services – but not in a petulant and short-sighted manner that would be vastly self-destructuve

Most want an end to immigration too.

Is the majority always right?

So Andy Jarm is a banker. Brilliant- I’ve had a little coward from the City who’s never served a day in the armed forces telling me that the closest I’ve ever come to the military is watching a fucking movie.

Let me know if you’d like to repeat that to my face, Andy. For starters you can have a look at my MOD-90 (that’s a military ID card, ignoramus) and my Afghanistan campaign medal; and then for the main course you can apologise, or we can sort things out another way.

8. Mike Killingworth

[5] Andy, let me be clear. One of these bankers is put to death, and the coroner’s jury returns a verdict of justifiable homicide on the grounds that it’s a banker. You would condemn that jury I take it – how many newspapers would? The FT… and any other? You would presumably then call on the government to use the new powers it has for secret inquests in the case of the deaths of any other bankers, yes?

You seem to have no awareness of why most of us feel that these people’s behaviour has put them beyond the pale of human sympathy (much like the BNP). What they do is a sophisticated form of theft. Can you understand that?

# 7

If I’m correct, and this is a forum for debate – you just lost.

Dan Hardie

Every message I’ve had from you has contained a physical threat. If I was less charitable than I am, I might have concluded you were a thick squaddie who can’t make it in civvy street and spends his days venting his spleen on socialist blogs

Sli- no, mate, Andy made threats to another poster (John B) on the ‘Sun’ forum, as well as telling me I’d never been in the Army, and I’m merely giving him the chance to repeat his comments to my face. Fair’s fair.

Dan – do you have contribution to the debate on this forum?

Classic, another gallant defender of our armed forces turns out to be someone who insults soldiers if they disagree with him. I take it your apology to me for suggesting I hadn’t served in the military is just being typed out now, eh, Andy?

As it happens, I have a good degree from Balliol and a good job in your neck of the woods, but unlike you I don’t mouth off about the army in Afghanistan without being prepared to go out there myself. That’s what happens when you start threatening people, Andy, as you did with John B- sooner or later someone else turns up on the scene and asks you if you want to try it on with them. There’s nothing funnier than seeing a bully suddenly getting upset by aggression.

I’m still waiting Dan

Responsibility for the current crisis does not rest solely with the banks. How have we ended a decade of unparalleled prosperity with the largest deficit ever recorded? We have a public sector which we had to borrow to fund even during the boom years. Now, faced with a greatly reduced tax take, levels of borrowing are set to increase thus adding to our mountain of debt. Yet still no one in government seems to take notice, for instance public sector jobs increased by 13,000 in the second qtr of this year, whereas the private sector saw over 200,000 jobs lost. How are we funding the 13,000 additional salaries and pensions when the 200,000 people who lost their job are no longer paying income tax? Printing money perhaps?

Andy, let me be clear. One of these bankers is put to death, and the coroner’s jury returns a verdict of justifiable homicide on the grounds that it’s a banker. You would condemn that jury I take it – how many newspapers would? The FT… and any other? You would presumably then call on the government to use the new powers it has for secret inquests in the case of the deaths of any other bankers, yes?

Good work. Ignorant and unpleasant. Briefly – no such thing as justifiable homicide in the UK. No juries in coroners’ courts unless the death was in prison (and even then hardly ever used). Coroners courts rule only on cause of death, not degree of criminality. Blindingly insightful other than that. And your suggestion that the majority of newspapers in this country would approve of the murder of people because they are bankers is disgusting. Your comment, in fact, is disgusting.

No, Andy, I’m still waiting for you to do something rather more serious- to apologise for typing this rubbish:’Dan and John b.I suspect the closest that either of you got to the military was watching Blackhawk Down at the Odeon.’

John’s never claimed to be a soldier, but you can apologise to me now. And you can also apologise to John for writing this ridiculous and thuggish threat:
‘john b, as you are clearly so comfortable and confident in your views on soldiers why dont you publish your full name and I’ll ensure they get some more coverage.’

Those comments are on this thread (http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2009/11/10/why-new-labour-should-pick-a-fight-with-the-sun/), comments 26 and 52.

Look at the little bully Jarm- he really doesn’t like it when someone turns on him. Don P- sorry for the threadjacking but this individual threatened someone on the ‘Sun’ thread and then ran away when I called him on it.

In fact we are printing money…QE as it is called.

I’m sure you’ve seen the price of gold…this kind of thing has not ended well in the past.

On topic: one of the best articles I have seen on the UK end of the economic crisis was a piece by Martin Wolf, pointing out that the UK tax system was unusually dependent on revenues from finance and housing, by comparison with other OECD countries.

This has all sorts of implications. One is that the government has a major incentive to believe that any financial or housing bubbles are in fact not bubbles at all. Yes, a lot of countries had banking supervision that missed major problems (although a large number of developed countries didn’t); a smaller number of countries developed housing price bubbles.

But in the UK at least, one explanation of why there wasn’t closer scrutiny is that any government, and perhaps especially a Labour government devoted to expanding public spending, didn’t want to start suggesting that lower house prices or tighter financial regulation might be a good thing.

19 – but Labour did say that lower house prices were a good thing – right in Gordon Brown’s first budget:

Volatility is damaging both to the housing market and to the economy as a whole. So stability will be central to our policy to help homeowners. And we must be prepared to take the action necessary to secure it. I will not allow house prices to get out of control and put at risk the sustainability of the recovery.

Tim, good catch, but that was in 1997. There was a large and sustained rise in house prices in the UK for almost all of the New Labour govt, and no effective action against it.

And as for Brown in particular not saying that the UK needed tighter financial regulation: this is inarguable, surely? (Though I’ll be interested to see if there are arguments against it.) Many of his speeches, right up to his notorious last Mansion House outing as Chancellor, praised the City for its creativity and energy in developing so many splendid new financial instruments, etc…

“I’m sure you’ve seen the price of gold”

Not the first reference I’ve seen this week from people apparently more obsessed with the price of gold than anything that actually matters, like jobs and investment. Why? Has some right wing talking head started spouting somewhere and they’re all toddling along behind faithfully chanting the same line, like a gang of Gollums?

All the comments against bankers or financial services industry I see here follow the usual format – essentially striking out at bankers emotionally and based on retribution against bankers for their perceived sins (and I dont pretend for a moment that bankers dont have their share of the blame).

Shouldnt the arguments be a little more constructive and less vindictive? Shouldnt they deal with what needs to be done to get us out of this hole?

Andy Jarm says ‘Shouldnt the arguments be a little more constructive and less vindictive?’…

…and he also said ‘‘john b, as you are clearly so comfortable and confident in your views on soldiers why dont you publish your full name and I’ll ensure they get some more coverage.’

Yes, why can’t everybody be as polite and unthreatening as Andy Jarm? Poor little Andy. Apology on the way, is it?

21 – I suppose you could argue that FSMA represented the largest piece of financial regulation legislation that the UK has ever seen, and that the removal of the self-regulatory system that the City used to have was also an increase in direct regulation. However, a counter would be that more regulation is not the same thing as tighter/better regulation.

Tim, ‘more regulation is not the same thing as tighter/better regulation’ is pretty much what I think. And I’d go further and say that Brown continually praised (or boasted about) the ‘lighter touch’ regulation that he had introduced in the UK, implicitly contrasting it with tighter regimes elsewhere. To prove that I need to go through Brown’s speeches, but that is my strong memory of what he was saying from 1997 to 2007.

26 – that chimes with my recollection – certainly in his Mansion House speeches and so on.

I’ve often thought that an effective Party Political would be a generic ‘small businessman’ trying to set up a business, and then having the various statute books dumped on his desk – Tolley’s Tax Code (10,000 pages or so), the Companies Act 2006 (largest piece of legislation in UK history), FSMA and the Money Laundering Regulations – and so on and so forth. When I was in the tax department (briefly thank God) the books of legislation (not commentary) stacked up about three feet high.

Tim J, it strikes me that one might say New Labour believed in ‘light touch regulation for the rich, and the firm smack of government for everyone else’.

I sometimes think that one way of looking at the last twelve years is that government has in some ways united the interests of the City- which would generate huge amounts of tax revenue through their exciting new financial instruments- and the public sector, which would spend it. Maybe that’s unfair.

Tom, agree that jobs and investment are more important than the price of gold. The problem is that our economy was once agricultural, then industrial and since the war has rapidly become a de-industrialised service economy that was nourished through the worst stages of de-industrialisation by north sea oil. The technology gap with Asia is rapidly diminishing and the average indian or chinese is highly motivated, highly educated yet currently earns around 5% of the average blue collar UK worker. That gap in earnings is not sustainable and means a decline in western living standards and welfare state provision is simply unavoidable if we are not to become utterly uncompetitive with Asia and the BRICS. Our appalling state education system is probably the biggest single threat to our future competitiveness but we abandon financial services and other service industries at our peril.

@26, 27 – I thought the point was more “principle based rather than rule based” than “lighter rather than heavier”, although that’s probably angel-pin-dancing.

(incidentally, now he’s calmed down and thinks that threatening violence in blog comments is a Bad Thing, I wonder if it’s safe to point out to the wise and munificent Mr Jarm that my name links through to my personal blog, hosted on a domain that’s my actual name, and that I’m a regular blogger under my own actual name on LC…?)

@28 Government has in some ways united the interests of the City- which would generate huge amounts of tax revenue through their exciting new financial instruments- and the public sector, which would spend it. – YES, New Labour epitaph WIN.

Hi, Andy, how are you? Bet you’re pleased we’re all talking about regulation and tax. Shame one or two people said ‘vindictive’ things, which is why manners are so important.

Oh, yes- about your apology for threatening John B and saying I’d never seen war except on a movie screen: that’s coming now, isn’t it?

Inviting someone to put their name against their comments isnt a threat (whereas some of the things I see above most definately are). Actually I have been sat here pissing myself at the pair of you and your comments – as I suspect have many others

Right, Jarm, you’re a fool for telling me I wasn’t a soldier in Afghanistan when I can quite easily prove that I am; you’re a coward for being unable to apologise to me for that insult.

You’re a hypocrite who accuses others of insulting the military when they haven’t but who himself likes to sneer at ‘thick squaddies’ (and let me tell you, boy, you are not fit to clean the boots of the average private soldier).

You’re a would-be bully who threatens others, a braggart who is too scared to meet someone in person to repeat his insults, and a self-deluder who thinks he can pretend that a threat is in facdt not a threat.

Other than that, you must be a fine young man.

30 – Hurrah, we’re back to the Governor’s eyebrows! I think it’s a very fair argument that the volume of regulation could be substantially smaller, while the impact of that regulation could be substantially greater. If you replace community with compliance, you find the letter of the law being strictly adhered to (mostly) while the spirit of the law can go hang.

28 – Agree entirely. The unanimity of opinion is becoming nauseating.

Dan and John, I’m flattered with all the attention you pay to me and my comments, I honestly am. I wanted a debate but finding a couple of wallies who were so easily wound up has made my day. I’m off to make money now chaps, seeya.

‘The unanimity of opinion is becoming nauseating.’

True, but there has been a certain amount of amusement in watching Andy Jarm load the cannon, stick his head down the barrel, and, with a self-righteous flourish, press the FIRE button.

And this Briton wants to reform, regulate and redistribute as follows:

1. Reform monetary policy which, through expansion, caused the financial crisis in the first place.
2. Regulate monetary policy by allowing the Bank of England to once again identify failing institutions and warn them off their most irresponsible practices.
3. Redistribute power from government to people. And if we want to redistribute wealth, the best way is through the market. Stop immigration of cheap labour that undercuts wages, and allow competition to flourish, creating real jobs, not those fake government jobs that eat other peoples wealth.

cjcjc: Most want an end to immigration too.

Is the majority always right?

Funny argument to make, since you’re constantly telling us to listen to what the people want. Next time cjcjc I look forward to you telling us we should ignore people’s concerns on immigration. Or perhaps you only want to listen at certain times.

Tinker, tailor, soldier, sailor, banker… Oh, FFS!

“Most want an end to immigration too.”

Including you.

The interesting thing is that anti-immigration hysteria has been repeated in the mass media on a daily basis at least for the last decade, but the same publications are very much in favour of capitalism and less regulation on business. On one issue the media reflect (or create) popular opinion, on the other they swim against the tide. Why is that do you think?

Ben M

“Can I volutneer to drive these useless, unproductive, self important fools to Heathrow?”

You wont need to, they’ll have their own driver probably (who will also probably be out of a job soon).

Why pay, when I am offering to do it for free??!

The UK has no use for these semi-skilled fraudsters anymore (if it ever did). Surplus to requirements, they are quite welcome to bugger off to whatever seedy tax haven rat hole that cares to take them.

BenM

The hedge fund guys dont need to go to a tax haven – most countries in the world will soon have a lower rate of tax than the UK. You dont need to go to Hong Kong, Geneva or Dubai, even Madrid or Dublin will do. And most have decent state schools and state healthcare systems unlike us (Brown pissed away our taxes on our world-famous bloated welfate state).

You still seem to have your head stuck firmly in the sand. Nobody gives a monkeys about what you think about the hedgies – they may well be a bunch of tossers for all it matters – what does matter is that you dont bother to either i) consider the consequences of them leaving for the UK or ii) suggest your own solution to the dire economic state we are in.

We only need one regulation: sound money. Banks who lend out more money than they have been explicitly contracted to should be charged with fraud.

Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute

They probably want lower taxes too. We can’t always get what we want.

@Andy Jarn,

I know all too well what benefits the Hedge Funds bring to the UK – they’ve helped lead us into the longest period of recession since the depression.

No country needs hedge funds. Every industrialised nation on earth became so without Hedge funds. And all had higher taxes too.

I note you advise Hedge Fund managers to head for Madrid and Dublin. I mean, fucking LoL! Two of the other nations in Europe smashed to bits by the Credit Crunch?!

Honestly, I’m wetting myself with laughter. As I said, if they want to go, they can. The UK needs scientists, innovators, lateral thinkers, go-getters and a banking class to do its fucking job for the first time in history and support coal face industries rather than feathering their own useless, ill-gotten nests.

People like you, deluded enough to think that nothing has changed in the last two years since your wild west economic system crumbled into the dust, need to understand this – The UK just doesn’t need casino managers.

Cheerie-Bye, as they say.

47. Mike Killingworth

[46] The UK needs… a banking class to do its fucking job for the first time in history and support coal face industries rather than feathering their own useless, ill-gotten nests.

Whilst I agree, isn’t that an argument for taking banking out of the private sector into the state or (more likely) voluntary sector in order to attract the other-directed people needed? The argument will come back that this contradicts human nature, because we also need bankers to be innovative and only inner-directed AKA selfish people innovate. (I’ve no idea if that’s true but I do know from past experience here that there are folk who will defend the notion furiously. Whether they have any experience of life or only of economics textbooks I really couldn’t say.)

No country needs hedge funds. Every industrialised nation on earth became so without Hedge funds. And all had higher taxes too.

You believe that the UK had higer taxes in the 19th century when it industrialised?

BenM

You clearly dont have the first clue about what actually happened to the UK during the credit crunch and who caused it. Reading the popular press or listening to the BBC wont get you very far.

Hedge funds actually never lost one penny for the taxpayer and never received one penny of bailout money. London is the centre of the global hedge fund industry and it is a huge tax-generator for our economy. Tell me another industry that we are successful in, let alone world beating?

You need to face up to the fact that however much you despise the bankers and hedgies, for the next decade at least you need them far more than they need you. If they all fucked off tomorrow (as you would clearly like) the UK wouldnt have the money to support NHS wards or state pensions, let alone our grossly bloated welfare state.

Yet again, another socialist with only emotional bile to throw at the problem, unable to face harsh realities and completely determined not to discuss economics and how as a country we actually pay our bills.

London is the centre of the global hedge fund industry and it is a huge tax-generator for our economy. Tell me another industry that we are successful in, let alone world beating?

What is the title of that chapter in the book Fantasy Island? Bullshit Britain! The above is a classic case of Bullshit Britain.

France does agri-business well, Germany does high tech engineering well. The US innovates in IT.

Britain? Well, it’s just one vast casino! And Andy Jarm loves it!

What a mug!

If they all fucked off tomorrow (as you would clearly like) the UK wouldnt have the money to support NHS wards or state pensions, let alone our grossly bloated welfare state.

And you still push this nonsense on me as if it’s true! If all the hedge funds buggered off tomorrow, I’m sure we, the people of Britain, would wave them a merry goodbye and get on with the rest of our lives free from their damaging, grasping self indulgence.

And the welfare state chum is acting as the main stabiliser in this recession caused by the banking system’s collapse! Thank our great Labour forefathers that they had the wisdom to put in in place. A bucket of smelly gunge over the heads of myopic free market fundamentalists for attempting to diminish its coverage and usefulness.

51. Mike Killingworth

[49] A few figures would help your case, Andy.

Office of National Statistics report that UK financial services now account for 31% of GDP

Darling’s Budget Red Book says the financial sector provided 25 per cent of the £47 billion in Britain’s total corporation tax before the recession, plus a “significant” proportion of income tax and national insurance receipts.

Note the second part of that – significant proportion of income tax and national insurance receipts. Realise what that means.

We already have the highest deficits in the west – not due to the bank bailouts but due to the explosion in welfare state spending (see stats in article below) over Brown’s tenure. Do you really still think that the financial industry needs you more than you need it? If your ignorance is shared by voters (I fear it maybe) then our economy and living standards will plummet years before the time it takes (a decade at least) to bring in the other industries I agree we need to transition to. And do you think those other industries will choose to come to a country with a 50% tax rate and school leavers with the worst literacy rates in europe?

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article6175289.ece

54. Mike Killingworth

[52] Not all those taxes were generated by hedge-fund traders, Andy. Most of them will have practised tax avoidance anyhow. Your point about education is a much better one, and lots of people here would agree with it. However, if you follow David Simon’s argument in “The Corner” once children no longer value education – because there are no jobs – it is beyond policy to get them to do so.

Mike

It used to be easy to legitimately practise tax avoidance – I know because everyone in the city used to do so. It simply isn’t anymore (hasn’t been since about 2005) and nobody bothers because the cost and hassle of IR investigations means it isnt worth the candle unless you are an international billionaire with no tax residency (sadly I am not there yet). All the loopholes were closed (eg the Film Production tax rebate) and if you aren’t a non-dom the only answer now is to pay-up leave the country (or risk jail). Quite right too. I will check out the Corner now!

Darling’s Budget Red Book says the financial sector provided 25 per cent of the £47 billion in Britain’s total corporation tax before the recession, plus a “significant” proportion of income tax and national insurance receipts.

So far you have dug up abut £12 billion that the City contributes to the tax take. Considering public expenditure prior to the crash was about £650 billion that represents approximately 2% of public spending. I’d like to see figures for income tax, NI etc but so far you haven’t provided evidence that the City is a indispensible element of our tax base.

The material that was posted claiming that the deficit is caused by spending on a bloated public sector is bollocks. The deficit is primarily made up of the 1) bailout cash for the banks 2) the liabilities for the zombie banks now appearing on the public balance sheet 3) the drying up of the tax receipts for all the illusory growth from the financial and property sectors during the bubble years.

bubby, you can’t add up mate. you are only counting the corporation tax. the income tax component dwarfs that (not least due to much higher rates) – being a taxpayer and somebody who works for a living I dont have time to dig up the stats now but will over the weekend. These stats also dont count the revenues from other industries (such as IT or advertising etc) who rely indirectly on financial services companies as their largest clients.

the Government’s own bleak forecasts from September show that the Treasury expects to pay out £193.4 billion on social security benefits in 2013/14. Paying interest on the Government’s outstanding debts will cost £63.4 billion.

Total Government spending in the same year will be £758.3 billion. Welfare and debt interest will be 33.8 per cent of that total.

The welfare bill will also absorb more money than every worker in the country pays the state in income tax. In 2009/10, the Treasury is expecting to take in £140.5 billion in gross income tax receipts.

Already the largest single item in the budget, by 2013/14 spending on social security will dwarf every other item of Government expenditure.

For example in 2010/11, total spending on the NHS in England will be £107 billion.

If you tossers are happy to sit here and believe that somehow you dont need the financial sector then good luck to you! Enjoy the bliss of your ignorance before you find yourselves in a rainy, bankrupt island in the north sea with very little to offer to the world

@56. Well said bubby.

Someday the shining light of reality will break through to people like Andy Jarm.

Someday.

also, did you miss the 31% of GDP – i.e. one THIRD of our economy dependent on Financial services?!

Actually I can add up. All I asked for was the evidence that the City provides an indispensible part of our tax base. So far you haven’t stumped up the evidence but have instead acted like a petulant four year old.

I am not saying that financial services don’t provide an important element of out tax base I just want the proof. So far you have provided £12 billion from Corporation Tax let’s see the rest of it.

You also dodged the issue of where the deficit has come from which isn’t increases in spending on the public sector.

You quote big figures for social security but these pay for things like pensions, unemployment benefit, childcare. Things that are indispensible in any decent society.

This money is also recycled through the economy. Do you not see that cutting pensions, benefits would reduce aggregate spending in the economy?

The deficit could be reduced easily- it would just require increased taxation on the vast assets held by the richest 5% of the population.

Considering that Lord Turner recenetly backed a ‘Tobin Tax’ your definition of leftist ‘tossers’ who don’t understand the economy looks remarkably broad.

The Tobin tax has been abandoned as unworkable by everyone except Turner, Sarkozy and Brown and the socialist fringe who think taxes are the answer to everything. Not an inspiring contingent. Even James Tobin who devised the tax now things it would be a bad idea.

We are spending over 100% of our taxes on the welfare state and financial services comprise 31% of our GDP. Unlike other industries financial services are entirely people-based and can move rapidly (as is now happening as the hedge fund industry hops to Geneva). It will be impossible to replace the loss with other industries within any timeframe shorter than a decade. And it wont happen at all in a high tax, high-spend environment. That is the key.

As for welfare being recycled into the economy, that argument could be applied to money being thrown out of a window. It is a gross waste of hard-earned taxpayer money and additionally results in a generation of workshy people and has contributed to the breakdown of working class values.

Unlike other industries financial services are entirely people-based and can move rapidly (as is now happening as the hedge fund industry hops to Geneva).

My car is waiting, engine revving, for the remainder.

I’d really like a cite for this 31% percent figure as well since the figure I’d seen quoted before was 9%. I am not saying you are incorrect but I’d just like to see the evdence.

The Tobin tax has been abandoned as unworkable by everyone except Turner, Sarkozy and Brown and the socialist fringe who think taxes are the answer to everything. Not an inspiring contingent. Even James Tobin who devised the tax now things it would be a bad idea.

Really?

Did you establish this via a seance because Tobin has been dead for seven years.

I don’t want to be rude but you really are talking out of your arse.

Even James Tobin who devised the tax now things it would be a bad idea.

Was his opinion canvassed by seance because you do realise he’s been dead since 2002?

Are you just making this up as you go along?

@61: “We are spending over 100% of our taxes on the welfare state and financial services comprise 31% of our GDP”

In 2007, the Financial Services Skills Council reported that “Financial services constitutes about 7 percent of total output (GDP)” – try Figure 2 in:
http://www.fssc.org.uk/post16_selcom_response_jan_2007.pdf

This reports that Financial Serices, together with Business Services contribute 31.2% of Britain’s GDP:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7789844.stm

I know of complaints that the government is not spending enough on the military and the various wars but I hadn’t realised that it was spending nothing. Readers may find this recent feature in The Economist in September a more dependable guide: Deflating the State:
http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14505343

This press report in March is why we need to worry about the size of the Financial Services sector:

“Alistair Darling has already spent almost a fifth of Britain’s GDP on bailing out its shattered banking system – more than any other major economy, according to a grave assessment of the world financial crisis published today by the International Monetary Fund.” [March 2009]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/mar/06/imf-uk-bailout-gdp


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    :: Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute http://bit.ly/47PedA

  2. Boris Watch

    Ouch – what happens when dim right-wingers accuse Dan Hardie of being an armchair soldier – http://tinyurl.com/yaobyar

  3. Nicholas Stewart

    #LiberalConspiracy Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute http://tinyurl.com/yaobyar

  4. andrew

    Liberal Conspiracy » Britons want: to reform, regulate and …: Tweets that mention Liberal Conspiracy » Briton.. http://bit.ly/5UGau

  5. sunny hundal

    Britons are overwhelmingly left-wing in their outlook. It's time we recognised that: http://bit.ly/11u3kU

  6. David NP Ludlam

    RT @pickledpolitics: Britons are overwhelmingly left-wing in their outlook. It's time we recognised that: http://bit.ly/11u3kU great article

  7. David O'Keefe

    Liberal Conspiracy » Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute http://bit.ly/47PedA

  8. Labour List

    Liberal Conspiracy » Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute http://bit.ly/47PedA

  9. Rupert Read

    http://bit.ly/47PedA http://bit.ly/3ijC9S

  10. NadineHassler

    RT @LabourList

    Liberal Conspiracy » Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute http://bit.ly/47PedA

  11. Tweets that mention Liberal Conspiracy » Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute -- Topsy.com

    […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Boris Watch, Liberal Conspiracy. Liberal Conspiracy said: :: Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute http://bit.ly/47PedA […]

  12. Robert Milestone

    Liberal Conspiracy » Britons want: to reform, regulate and … http://bit.ly/166QFg

  13. Liberal Conspiracy

    Britons are overwhelmingly left-wing in their outlook. It's time we recognised that: http://bit.ly/11u3kU

  14. Girl On Girl Porn

    Liberal Conspiracy » Britons want: to reform, regulate and …: They will now be doing the same job, taking the.. http://bit.ly/3hsWag

  15. uberVU - social comments

    Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by libcon: :: Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute http://bit.ly/47PedA

  16. Rosie Hucklesby

    RT @pickledpolitics: Britons are overwhelmingly left-wing in their outlook. It's time we recognised that: http://bit.ly/11u3kU

  17. Richard Lane

    RT @pickledpolitics: Britons are overwhelmingly left-wing in their outlook. It's time we recognised that: http://bit.ly/11u3kU

  18. Adam White

    RT @pickledpolitics: Britons are overwhelmingly left-wing in their outlook. It's time we recognised that: http://bit.ly/11u3kU

  19. T.A.

    Liberal Conspiracy » Britons want: to reform, regulate and … http://bit.ly/4s9Bch

  20. twit(te)rantics

    Liberal Conspiracy » Britons want: to reform, regulate and … http://bit.ly/4s9Bch

  21. nagla allamnagla_87

    Liberal Conspiracy » Britons want: to reform, regulate and … http://bit.ly/33diy2

  22. Paul Evans

    Have a look? Britons want: to reform, regulate and redistribute http://url4.eu/n6Zk





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.