Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Lots of sense here....


How to make the recession less painful ? cut taxes


If we want to get out of this recession in one piece, what really needs to be done?


Interest rate cuts won't work. They haven't worked in the US, they didn't work in Japan. That's because as a nation, we're up to our eyeballs in debt. Banks can't afford to lend money; we can't afford to borrow it. All of us need to pay off our debts and build up our savings. So it doesn't matter how cheap money gets, we've snapped out of spending mode and strapped on our tin hats.


So the quickest route out of recession is to help people pay down debt and build up their savings. Inflation is one way to reduce the value of debt, but it generally comes with a hefty price tag ? currency collapse and economic meltdown. Higher interest rates might help build up savings, but they'd also make debt more expensive to service.


How can we help people save more without fuelling inflation or making our debt burden even worse? Simple. Cut taxes.


If you cut taxes, you almost automatically increase productivity, because you take money from a wasteful, inefficient organisation ? the government ? and reallocate it to someone who actually gives a damn about how effectively it's spent ? the individual. And rather than squander the money on property (as the Government is proposing), individuals would use it sensibly, saving it, or using it to pay down debt.


This isn't a magic bullet. It won't stop the recession ? nothing can. The looming bust is nature's way of telling us that we spent too much money on unproductive garbage during the good times.


Look at it this way. If we'd taken all the money we spent as a nation on property in the past ten years, and had pumped it into ? let's say ? our energy infrastructure, then maybe we'd have lower gas bills, and a nice, productive industry providing highly paid, specialist jobs that would be tough to outsource. Instead, all we've got is big debts, an unwanted pile of jerry-built buy-to-let flats which are already turning into slums, thousands of unemployed estate agents, and a national energy crisis.


It's depressing, yes. But what we can do now is put an end to the rot and the waste. The quicker those savings build up, the faster balance sheets are repaired and the quicker we can get out of this downturn.


Will this happen? I doubt it. The Government still believes the great lie, that you can spend yourself rich. It still believes that "something must be done."


Better get ready for a long, drawn-out, painful recession.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/4074-cut-paste-recession/
Share on other sites

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If you cut taxes, you almost automatically

> increase productivity, because you take money from

> a wasteful, inefficient organisation ? the

> government ? and reallocate it to someone who

> actually gives a damn about how effectively it's

> spent ? the individual. And rather than squander

> the money on property (as the Government is

> proposing), individuals would use it sensibly,

> saving it, or using it to pay down debt.


This is where, for me at least, this argument falls down. 'People' are given far too much credit. 'People', in general, are actually quite dim and wouldn't know a good investment if it bit them on the arse. For a long time, probably a decade or more, the average person has had a bit more cash to play with. Have people saved wisely, or invested? No, they bought plasma tvs and expesnive foreign holidays. Why do you assume that if everyone suddenly got a bit more cash in their pocket with lower taxes of whatever sort they would suddenly turn into Warren Buffet?

Exactly. The (tax) money from the 'People' is supposed to be spent wisely by the 'Government'. This is essentially the problem.


If anything though, there should have been tighter controls around debt. 110% mortgages should never have been allowed. Multiple credit cards with crazy limits should never have been allowed. But they were, and now we're picking up the pieces. There were fairly easy controls that could have been put around retail debt. The more complex instruments were merely a derivative of this debt mountain which the government would never have been able to understand anyway (well, neither did the bankers and risk managers!)

Given (y)our job AcedOut, I imagine anyone suggesting those controls a couple of years ago would have been given short shrift n'est pas? When times are good, no-one is allowed to say "hang on a minute, is this wise?"


Anyone who does is told "hush, this is different to the last boom - we won't crash again"

If the Government were to spend less, it would hit a lot of Government funded projects etc, many of which are a complete waste, but it keeps people employed.


I don't know what volume of people will face redundancy, but the people who are able to hang on to their jobs and avoid salary cuts should have a higher disposable income with cuts in interest rates?

Well trading is a little like being in government - you just have too stay out of trouble for your term (typically a year, but longer periods of consistency for head trader - the real money maker). Timing in this business is key to a prosperous career. Unfortunately for Gordon Brown, the mess is just starting unravel (yes, just STARTING)...


There is far too much short-sightedness everywhere. Banking, politics, everything. If personal incentives were longer-term, then I'm sure things would improve, but unfortunately human beings are inherently forgetful of cycles over around 8-10 years, so the same mistakes get made over and over again.

The government speak of real estate as if it is our economy.


Big mistake, money is made from what products we make and sell abroad.


Nothing in real estate makes wealth for the country.


When we produce like China, then we will be loaded just like them.


Soooo not a five minute job then.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...