David Cameron: Taxes will rise unless we can raid bank accounts

[murraypaul]

To add some commonsense:

If a certain proportion of the population don't pay the taxes they owe, everyone else has to pay more to ensure the same total amount of tax revenue.
That isn't particularly complicated.

[5flags]

To add some commonsense:

If a certain proportion of the population don't pay the taxes they owe, everyone else has to pay more to ensure the same total amount of tax revenue.
That isn't particularly complicated.

Well, that's a truism.

If fewer people are victims of theft, the remaining victims will need to lose more in order for the thieves to get the same amount.

[practicaldreamer]

The main requisites of being a good politician are the same as those required to be a good man :- a)intelligence, b)courage, and c) a sense of morality. Unfortunately, none of these three things can be acquired from a University education. It is the illusion that they can that has led us into the sorry situation that we find ourselves in today.

Where can they be acquired?

Where does a man acquire character ? I am tempted to say that he can acquire it nowhere - and that that is the point I was trying to make.

But that answer wouldn't be wholly true - because I reckon a man can, over time, acquire character to some degree - and if he can it wouldn't be via the lofty towers of Oxford and Cambridge and eating icecream off golden plates.

 It might, for example, be acquired through having the responsibility of being the head of a family - and having people rely on you - sticking with a job you secretly loathe for years because you are the provider. It could be through being unemployed for several years  - and the hard graft and determination it took to lift yourself out of the poverty trap. It might be through being a teenager and having sole caring responsibility for a sick parent. It might be through starting up your own business and having the responsibility of keeping afloat when the whole economy seems to be conspiring against you. It might be acquired through being a union rep and fighting someones corner when no-one else would.

    Why aren't these things valued ? Why is a PPE degree a requisite for any kind of political success ? Its ridiculous.



I take your point about the professions (largely a closed shop etc) - but we are talking about politics here, which is a qualitatively different beast - we are talking about the diverse and multifarious life experiences of a population being authentically represented in the corridors of power. Thats all democracy is about - not being au faire with Plato's political philosophy, not knowing the difference between M1 and M3 money supply. All that stuff can be acquired at any time by an alert mind as and when the need arises.

In short, I don't want a Health Secretary who uses Bupa, an Education Secretary who has his son down on the waiting list for Eton - and I don't want a Chancellor who will leave office to several lucrative non executive directorships/consultancies with the likes of Credit Suisse and Santander. I don't want this because it means that they have no vested interest in the success of those sectors for which we have delegated them the responsibility. For them, the career politician, the interest is via proxy - whereas for you and I, its our lives.

[5flags]

Go post in a libertarian thread.

Please find a pro-taxation thread, if you want to be silly.

[pummle]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/10819885/David-Cameron-Taxes-will-rise-unless-we-can-raid-bank-accounts.html

It's like Cyprus, only with a British accent.

This is completely unlike what happened in Cyprus. In Cyprus they took money from everybody. What Cameron is suggesting is that the government should be able to target people who owe tax money and take money from their accounts. The government can already do this if they get proper approval from the courts, but Cameron wants to save time and money and just take what he thinks is his instead of proving it, the lazy bastard.

[bryant.coleman]

What Cameron is suggesting is that the government should be able to target people who owe tax money and take money from their accounts.

Well.. if this is true, then I don't have anything against Cameron or this measure. He is just collecting the tax arrears and not robbing anyone as the Cypriots did over there.

[pummle]

What Cameron is suggesting is that the government should be able to target people who owe tax money and take money from their accounts.

Well.. if this is true, then I don't have anything against Cameron or this measure. He is just collecting the tax arrears and not robbing anyone as the Cypriots did over there.

Think about it harder. His suggestion is a horrible idea. It opens up an avenue of abuse of unprecedented power. There should always be a presumption of innocence, and if the government wants to take something they should be able to prove that you are guilty, not take the money and then make you prove you are innocent to get it back.

[Fdt]

Potential side effects. People cash can be frozen without court order if they happen to support opposition party and so on and on. And then person have to go to court with free lawyer, as money are frozen, and try to argue for months to have money released.

I suggest to stash % of fiat in crypto currencies.

What Cameron is suggesting is that the government should be able to target people who owe tax money and take money from their accounts.

Well.. if this is true, then I don't have anything against Cameron or this measure. He is just collecting the tax arrears and not robbing anyone as the Cypriots did over there.

Think about it harder. His suggestion is a horrible idea. It opens up an avenue of abuse of unprecedented power. There should always be a presumption of innocence, and if the government wants to take something they should be able to prove that you are guilty, not take the money and then make you prove you are innocent to get it back.

[5flags]

Lol. Have you read this thread?

Yes. I started it.

[bryant.coleman]

Potential side effects. People cash can be frozen without court order if they happen to support opposition party and so on and on. And then person have to go to court with free lawyer, as money are frozen, and try to argue for months to have money released.

Hmm... didn't thought about that. Already many people are finding their funds frozen for silly reasons, such as trading in Bitcoins. Yes... this can be exploited by the government.

Think about it harder. His suggestion is a horrible idea. It opens up an avenue of abuse of unprecedented power. There should always be a presumption of innocence, and if the government wants to take something they should be able to prove that you are guilty, not take the money and then make you prove you are innocent to get it back.

I agree. Only the courts should be having that sort of power.... not the government.

[5flags]

This is completely unlike what happened in Cyprus.

In Cyprus, the regime decided that people owed them money and that they should be able to remove it at will from their bank account.

In the UK, if the regime decides that you owe them money, they will be able to remove it at will from your bank account.

They were both for taxation. They were both theft.

[murraypaul]

This is completely unlike what happened in Cyprus.

In Cyprus, the regime decided that people owed them money and that they should be able to remove it at will from their bank account.

In the UK, if the regime decides that you owe them money, they will be able to remove it at will from your bank account.

They were both for taxation. They were both theft.

They are completely different.
In Cyprus, the banks became insolvent, and customer deposits took a haircut to refinance them. For customers who had done nothing wrong.
In the UK, if you owe taxes, and have refused to pay them after being contacted several times, and you have enough money to pay, they will take what you owe.

I agree. Only the courts should be having that sort of power.... not the government.

Which, as a principle, is fine. The problem is that it costs more to take an individual to court to recover the tax they owe than is gained by recovering the tax.
Which people can evade paying taxes with a likelihood of no real penalty.

[zetaray]

If a person owes taxes, and have the money in their bank account, gov should be allowed to take the money out of his account, instead of wasting time and money in courts or raising taxes. This is a different issue to the one in Cyprus.

[murraypaul]

Btw, the equivalent US powers are massively more draconian: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_levies

[5flags]

In Cyprus, the banks became insolvent, and customer deposits took a haircut to refinance them. For customers who had done nothing wrong.
In the UK, if you owe taxes, and have refused to pay them after being contacted several times, and you have enough money to pay, they will take what you owe.

They are more similar than you care to admit. They both represent wealth confiscation. They are both non-voluntary. Both confiscations occur under the banners of necessity and state-sanctioned legitimacy.

[murraypaul]

In Cyprus, the banks became insolvent, and customer deposits took a haircut to refinance them. For customers who had done nothing wrong.
In the UK, if you owe taxes, and have refused to pay them after being contacted several times, and you have enough money to pay, they will take what you owe.

They are more similar than you care to admit. They both represent wealth confiscation. They are both non-voluntary. Both confiscations occur under the banners of necessity and state-sanctioned legitimacy.

In one case there is a debt owed that is being collected. In the other there wasn't.
One is targeted to just those who actually owe debts. The other wasn't.
They aren't the same.
If you happen to disagree with taxes per se, that is a different matter.

[5flags]

If a person owes taxes, and have the money in their bank account, gov should be allowed to take the money out of his account, instead of wasting time and money in courts or raising taxes.

And if you refuse to pay tax because you feel that funding the state is morally repugnant?

Or are you opposed to non-violent, civil disobedience?

[5flags]

In one case there is a debt owed that is being collected. In the other there wasn't.

There was a debt owed the second the regime in Cyprus decided a debt was owed.

One is targeted to just those who actually owe debts. The other wasn't.

It was decided that certain depositors "owed" 40% of their balance.

[5flags]

Btw, the equivalent US powers are massively more draconian: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_levies

On this we agree. But then the US is arguably THE most aggressive confiscator of personal wealth on the planet.

[murraypaul]

If a person owes taxes, and have the money in their bank account, gov should be allowed to take the money out of his account, instead of wasting time and money in courts or raising taxes.

And if you refuse to pay tax because you feel that funding the state is morally repugnant?

Then you should be prepared to suffer the consequences of your actions.
It is easy to take a moral stand when there are no consequences.
Alternatively: Sod off and live somewhere else.

Or are you opposed to non-violent, civil disobedience?

Do you think you should be able to ignore the law with impunity?