If you could choose where your tax was spent

[discodown]

Where would you choose that it go?

 

Lets say you could, what would you see funded and what would you leave to others?

[Swan_Vesta]

Fund:

Proper equipment for our troops

Police

Prisons

Probation

The BBC

Better roads

Nuclear power stations

 

Cast by the wayside:

Quangos

The stocking of the houses of commons wine cellars

Benefits for the idle

Religion

The arts

Culture

[chem1st]

NATIONALIZATION for the greater good.

 

Nationalised food and water, electricity/alternative fuels, be they gas/oil/coal/renewable electric-heating/biofuels/reclaimed fuel from waste/sewage. Nationalised transport, housing and industry.

 

I suppose I am a bit of a Nazi at heart

 

But not only do I want these things for myself, my family, friends, townsfolk, Yorkshiremen, British and European, I want them for ALL.

 

So I suppose I am a Communist, but then again I'd want an incentive for people to better themselves, teetering on Capitalism.

 

As it stands, I can have most things without doing nothing for the greater good, albeit in very small proportions. It's a bit of a joke really.

[HeadingNorth]

NATIONALIZATION for the greater good.

 

 

Nationalisation isn't for the greater good. It leads to total bankruptcy, and we have to go to the IMF for a bailout to keep the country going.

 

We've been down that path before. I see no sense in setting off down it again.

[Guest sibon]

Nationalisation isn't for the greater good. It leads to total bankruptcy, and we have to go to the IMF for a bailout to keep the country going.

 

We've been down that path before. I see no sense in setting off down it again.

 

So, why have we recently nationalised several major banks?

 

I was told that it was for the greater good. Perhaps you know otherwise.

[Vague_Boy]

So, why have we recently nationalised several major banks?

 

I was told that it was for the greater good. Perhaps you know otherwise.

 

Have you seen the bonuses being paid since the bailouts? Or that RBS recently had an £800k Wimbledon junket?

 

It was certainly for the greater good of someone. Moral hazard? What's that?

 

The banks should have been allowed to fail, as Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz says here:

 

The Government should allow every distressed bank to go bankrupt and set up a fresh banking system under temporary state control rather than cripple the country by propping up a corrupt edifice, according to Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist.

 

Professor Stiglitz, the former chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, told The Daily Telegraph that Britain should let the banks default on their vast foreign operations and start afresh with new set of healthy banks.

 

"The UK has been hit hard because the banks took on enormously large liabilities in foreign currencies. Should the British taxpayers have to lower their standard of living for 20 years to pay off mistakes that benefited a small elite?" he said.

 

"There is an argument for letting the banks go bust. It may cause turmoil but it will be a cheaper way to deal with this in the end."

 

LINK

 

Cheaper in the long run to have let the banks fail. Personally this is something I agree with. The problems that caused the 2008 crisis have not been addressed, all we've had is the usual "private profits, socialized losses" scam, where financial institutions can behave irresponsibly, yet escape the consequences of their actions because the UK taxpayer will pick up the bill.

 

Sadly all the money spent (squandered?) on the bailouts will be for naught. The banking collapse has not been averted, merely postponed.

[chem1st]

Have you seen the bonuses being paid since the bailouts? Or that RBS recently had an £800k Wimbledon junket?

 

It was certainly for the greater good of someone. Moral hazard? What's that?

 

The banks should have been allowed to fail, as Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz says here:

 

 

 

LINK

 

Cheaper in the long run to have let the banks fail. Personally this is something I agree with. The problems that caused the 2008 crisis have not been addressed, all we've had is the usual "private profits, socialized losses" scam, where financial institutions can behave irresponsibly, yet escape the consequences of their actions because the UK taxpayer will pick up the bill.

 

Sadly all the money spent (squandered?) on the bailouts will be for naught. The banking collapse has not been averted, merely postponed.

 

It's all under control, we can get a loan from the IMF to pay off the debt!

[TheDaniel]

I'd spend my tax on educating and taking care of children :-)

[Phanerothyme]

Free high quality education and childcare from 6 months.

[Ms Macbeth]

Children, children, children.

 

Increase spending on social services for children - so that their needs are put before 'keeping the family together', or returning them countless times to incapable or uncaring parents. Invest in training suitable people from underprivileged areas as children's social workers. Most of them would have experience and therefore more of an understanding of children's lives in dysfunctional families than middleclass graduates could possibly have, at least at the beginning of their careers. Up the numbers generally and liaise properly with schools, gps, housing staff and anyone else children come into contact with.

 

Invest in early years education - including nursery, so that every child has a decent chance in life.