Pay Back the Bailout Money

Major cuts are being proposed to keep the markets happy and reduce the interest payments we have to make. If we don't pay a substantial amount of the debt back quickly (hence the cuts) the banks will increase our interest rates and we risk further rate raises based on our credit rating with the banks.

Ok. If I'm not mistaken the banks and market system effectively went bankrupt themselves last year (hence the global bailout). Market forces where allowed to run themselves and pure capitalism virtutally consumed itself. Private greed turned into public debt.

Why now make further cuts into our public spending to support the bankrupt banks over charging us and using poor credit rating to force cuts. Our credit rating seemed ok to borrow £1trillion + last year from UK alone!!

So its time to turn the tables and request full repayment of the that bailout money so the debts and public deficit can be repaid in full. No public spending cuts required. If the money is not immediately repaid then interest payments should be significantly increased in line with credit rating defaults.

I also note when the banks bankrupt a company or person they seize assets to pay down as much of the debt as they can. Given the banks are promoting a human face and fair play then why can't we asset strip banks and bankers. Sending in bailiffs to sieze assets like banks accunts, investments, property and pocessions. We should raise a fortune. Whats good for the goose.

Why is this idea important?

Major cuts are being proposed to keep the markets happy and reduce the interest payments we have to make. If we don't pay a substantial amount of the debt back quickly (hence the cuts) the banks will increase our interest rates and we risk further rate raises based on our credit rating with the banks.

Ok. If I'm not mistaken the banks and market system effectively went bankrupt themselves last year (hence the global bailout). Market forces where allowed to run themselves and pure capitalism virtutally consumed itself. Private greed turned into public debt.

Why now make further cuts into our public spending to support the bankrupt banks over charging us and using poor credit rating to force cuts. Our credit rating seemed ok to borrow £1trillion + last year from UK alone!!

So its time to turn the tables and request full repayment of the that bailout money so the debts and public deficit can be repaid in full. No public spending cuts required. If the money is not immediately repaid then interest payments should be significantly increased in line with credit rating defaults.

I also note when the banks bankrupt a company or person they seize assets to pay down as much of the debt as they can. Given the banks are promoting a human face and fair play then why can't we asset strip banks and bankers. Sending in bailiffs to sieze assets like banks accunts, investments, property and pocessions. We should raise a fortune. Whats good for the goose.

Legalisation of cannabis – follow the Dutch method. Limited number of plants per household, no artificial light to be used in production

The issue of Cannabis needs to be addressed.  There are many discussions on here about legalisation, the benefits of the drug and all sorts.  If this were to become a reality then I see certain criteria that would have to be met.  The main problems with Cannabis as viewed by the governement and some members of the public are:

1. The crime involved, drug dealing, supplying, violent crime etc etc.

2. The apparent health side effects (psychosis etc).

By taking a sensible approach to the problem then these can be circumvented.  the options for legalisation are:

1. Complete legalisation – buy, smoke, grow, sell openly and freely (some licences may be required).

2. Controlled legalisation.

I see the only workable answer as controlled legalisation.  If you follow the Dutch method they allow certain licenced coffee shops where you can take and buy cannabis – no alcohol is permitted in these venues.  Also in Holland one huosehold can grow up to 5 plants (previously a per person ruling but this was subject to abuse).  These plants can be grown on your premises but it is illegal to use artificial lighting to boost growth.

I feel that this method would work.  We could go one step further and issue permits to grow – like a shotgun licence. It could be based on a quick medical and the knowledge that the governing body has the right at any time of day to check that you are not using artificial lighting (as with a shotgun licence they can check yours are locked away safely).  You could even charge for this licecne to cover the costs.

If you went for complete legalisation then you could have controlled, licenced "coffee" shops.  These would provide a sizeable, taxable income to the government which would help with the deicit.  It could also boost tourism, however the view may be that it can only be sold to UK citizens.

Why is this idea important?

The issue of Cannabis needs to be addressed.  There are many discussions on here about legalisation, the benefits of the drug and all sorts.  If this were to become a reality then I see certain criteria that would have to be met.  The main problems with Cannabis as viewed by the governement and some members of the public are:

1. The crime involved, drug dealing, supplying, violent crime etc etc.

2. The apparent health side effects (psychosis etc).

By taking a sensible approach to the problem then these can be circumvented.  the options for legalisation are:

1. Complete legalisation – buy, smoke, grow, sell openly and freely (some licences may be required).

2. Controlled legalisation.

I see the only workable answer as controlled legalisation.  If you follow the Dutch method they allow certain licenced coffee shops where you can take and buy cannabis – no alcohol is permitted in these venues.  Also in Holland one huosehold can grow up to 5 plants (previously a per person ruling but this was subject to abuse).  These plants can be grown on your premises but it is illegal to use artificial lighting to boost growth.

I feel that this method would work.  We could go one step further and issue permits to grow – like a shotgun licence. It could be based on a quick medical and the knowledge that the governing body has the right at any time of day to check that you are not using artificial lighting (as with a shotgun licence they can check yours are locked away safely).  You could even charge for this licecne to cover the costs.

If you went for complete legalisation then you could have controlled, licenced "coffee" shops.  These would provide a sizeable, taxable income to the government which would help with the deicit.  It could also boost tourism, however the view may be that it can only be sold to UK citizens.

Repeal European Communities (Finance) Act 2008

The UK's net contribution to the EU budget – ie the amount we pay in that is above and beyond what we get back in EU grants – is going up.

Over 2007-9 it was in the order of £4.7 billion. That's now rising over 2010-3 to between £6-6.8 billion. That's according to recent official Government statistics.

The principle reason for this change is the 2008 Act of Parliament that put into force the deal Tony Blair reached with other EU leaders.

The extra £2 billion a year to Brussels was the price British taxpayers were supposed to pay in return for massive reform of the disastrous Common Agricultural Policy. But the promises made by the French and others have not been kept.

If you paid for something by mail order and it never got sent, you'd demand a refund.

Given the huge budget cuts that the UK is now facing, we should get this money back.

Why is this idea important?

The UK's net contribution to the EU budget – ie the amount we pay in that is above and beyond what we get back in EU grants – is going up.

Over 2007-9 it was in the order of £4.7 billion. That's now rising over 2010-3 to between £6-6.8 billion. That's according to recent official Government statistics.

The principle reason for this change is the 2008 Act of Parliament that put into force the deal Tony Blair reached with other EU leaders.

The extra £2 billion a year to Brussels was the price British taxpayers were supposed to pay in return for massive reform of the disastrous Common Agricultural Policy. But the promises made by the French and others have not been kept.

If you paid for something by mail order and it never got sent, you'd demand a refund.

Given the huge budget cuts that the UK is now facing, we should get this money back.

Focus On The Victims Of Crime

In our current fiscal situation, the UK is to lose a potential 65-000 police officers.  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-10694895

Today, Louise Casey the Victims and Witness Commissioner has spoken freely of how the current judicial system is failing the victims of crime:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10691151

With Kenneth Clarke looking for ways to cut the judicial system budget, it is prudent and respectful to those who have been a victim of crime to to receive the support they deserve and appropriate penalties should be focused on crime with a victim.  This is where law and order should be focused.

It is insulting to those who have suffered real crime to still place onus on catching people with cannabis, there is no victim involved with this plant, and resources simply cannot be spared on this unjust and futile war.  Alcohol is taking up an immeasurable amount of time, money and resources on the police, cannabis has never and can never create this drain on the force as an ingested substance; and as many senior members of the force have spoken out in ending the war on cannabis, please can they be listened to.  It is an infringement of everyone's civil liberties as it stands that cannabis is still given attention by law when violent crime is so prevalent.  Crime needs a victim, so please let's focus on that ethos.

Why is this idea important?

In our current fiscal situation, the UK is to lose a potential 65-000 police officers.  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-10694895

Today, Louise Casey the Victims and Witness Commissioner has spoken freely of how the current judicial system is failing the victims of crime:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10691151

With Kenneth Clarke looking for ways to cut the judicial system budget, it is prudent and respectful to those who have been a victim of crime to to receive the support they deserve and appropriate penalties should be focused on crime with a victim.  This is where law and order should be focused.

It is insulting to those who have suffered real crime to still place onus on catching people with cannabis, there is no victim involved with this plant, and resources simply cannot be spared on this unjust and futile war.  Alcohol is taking up an immeasurable amount of time, money and resources on the police, cannabis has never and can never create this drain on the force as an ingested substance; and as many senior members of the force have spoken out in ending the war on cannabis, please can they be listened to.  It is an infringement of everyone's civil liberties as it stands that cannabis is still given attention by law when violent crime is so prevalent.  Crime needs a victim, so please let's focus on that ethos.

Limit Ministers to deciding %ages of budget

Rather than allowing Governments to decide random numbers for departmental budgets that may or may not be affordable I would propose they decide what percentage of tax revenues are alloted to each major department, i.e. Welfare, Education, Defence, Infrasructure, Health, Justice and Foreign Affairs.

Whatever is left after paying off our debt interest is split up using this system and handed to each department. If there is a cry for more cash in one department it must be combined with a proposal detailing which other department is overfunded and why a re-allocation would better serve the country.

Why is this idea important?

Rather than allowing Governments to decide random numbers for departmental budgets that may or may not be affordable I would propose they decide what percentage of tax revenues are alloted to each major department, i.e. Welfare, Education, Defence, Infrasructure, Health, Justice and Foreign Affairs.

Whatever is left after paying off our debt interest is split up using this system and handed to each department. If there is a cry for more cash in one department it must be combined with a proposal detailing which other department is overfunded and why a re-allocation would better serve the country.

Raise taxes to fight wars or don’t fight them

If a government decides to war, and that war comes to a vote in Parliament, that vote would have to include a measure to increase taxes to fund the war. Perhaps add a penny to the basic rate of income tax if they wanted war.

Why is this idea important?

If a government decides to war, and that war comes to a vote in Parliament, that vote would have to include a measure to increase taxes to fund the war. Perhaps add a penny to the basic rate of income tax if they wanted war.

Mathematical reasoning – RE: Cannabis Legalisation

133 posts in 5 days (site opened 01/07/2010) on the subject of the legalisation of cannabis of which 97% agree with the motion.

97% of 133 = 129.01. Therefore, we will assume a pro-lobby post total of 129.

129 (posts) / 5 (days) = 25.8 average (posts a day)

Average of 12 replies per post of which over 99% agree with the motion.

Therefore, 12 (users per topic posting replies) x 129 (original posts) = 1,548 (average pro -motion advocates) + 129 (Pro-motion original posters) = 1,677 Pro-motion users, average.

1,677 (Pro-motion users) / 5 (days) =  335 new pro-motion users a day, average.

335 (pro-motion users a day) x 365 (days a year) = 9,460 original pro-motion posts/ replies a year by mostly individuals numbering the same.

9,460 (posts / users per year) x 1,677 (pro-motion users) = 122,275 pro-motion users a year.

122,275 (annual pro-motion users) / 60,000,000 (UK population) = above 2 % of our national population! Of course, that's only annual average of those that visit this site to join the call for legalisation.

Taking the number of individuals who have bothered to post here into account and applying a reasonable average, one could assume that for each of the 122,275 annual pro-lobby posters here there will be 100 similar minded individuals who won't visit this site.

Therefore: 122,275 x 100 = 12,227,500 probable adult cannabis users or pro-lobbyist's in the UK. That's 20% of our national population.

Lets say that each user spends an average of £30.00 a week on supporting their habit, which currently goes to the black market.

£30 x 12,227,500 = £360,000,000.00 Annual revenue which could (should) be diverted towards growing British business and emboldening our dwindling economy in general.

Now, the good bit if you're a politician / law maker: Say tax on cannabis would be similar to that of alcoholic spirits. That's 17.5% VAT + 5.5% alcoholic spirit tax = 23%

23% of £360,000,000 =  £82,800,000 in annual tax revenue through usage alone without calculating other additional income such as tourism, GDP,entertainment and other particulars.

 

 

Why is this idea important?

133 posts in 5 days (site opened 01/07/2010) on the subject of the legalisation of cannabis of which 97% agree with the motion.

97% of 133 = 129.01. Therefore, we will assume a pro-lobby post total of 129.

129 (posts) / 5 (days) = 25.8 average (posts a day)

Average of 12 replies per post of which over 99% agree with the motion.

Therefore, 12 (users per topic posting replies) x 129 (original posts) = 1,548 (average pro -motion advocates) + 129 (Pro-motion original posters) = 1,677 Pro-motion users, average.

1,677 (Pro-motion users) / 5 (days) =  335 new pro-motion users a day, average.

335 (pro-motion users a day) x 365 (days a year) = 9,460 original pro-motion posts/ replies a year by mostly individuals numbering the same.

9,460 (posts / users per year) x 1,677 (pro-motion users) = 122,275 pro-motion users a year.

122,275 (annual pro-motion users) / 60,000,000 (UK population) = above 2 % of our national population! Of course, that's only annual average of those that visit this site to join the call for legalisation.

Taking the number of individuals who have bothered to post here into account and applying a reasonable average, one could assume that for each of the 122,275 annual pro-lobby posters here there will be 100 similar minded individuals who won't visit this site.

Therefore: 122,275 x 100 = 12,227,500 probable adult cannabis users or pro-lobbyist's in the UK. That's 20% of our national population.

Lets say that each user spends an average of £30.00 a week on supporting their habit, which currently goes to the black market.

£30 x 12,227,500 = £360,000,000.00 Annual revenue which could (should) be diverted towards growing British business and emboldening our dwindling economy in general.

Now, the good bit if you're a politician / law maker: Say tax on cannabis would be similar to that of alcoholic spirits. That's 17.5% VAT + 5.5% alcoholic spirit tax = 23%

23% of £360,000,000 =  £82,800,000 in annual tax revenue through usage alone without calculating other additional income such as tourism, GDP,entertainment and other particulars.

 

 

End compensation culture and reduce the deficit!

We need to eliminate the compensation culture by: –

(i) introduce a presumption of common sense (i.e. why didn't you look where you are going)

(ii) a presumption that 'sh*t happens, get over it'.  Accidents are part of life.

(iii) abolish no-win no-fee solicitors, litigation funding etc.

(iv) Bring back Crown immunity in respect of negligence claims, (local authorities, schools etc) but especially for NHS. OK, things go wrong but we should be grateful we have an NHS at all.  Better to spend the money on nurses rather than lawyers.

Why is this idea important?

We need to eliminate the compensation culture by: –

(i) introduce a presumption of common sense (i.e. why didn't you look where you are going)

(ii) a presumption that 'sh*t happens, get over it'.  Accidents are part of life.

(iii) abolish no-win no-fee solicitors, litigation funding etc.

(iv) Bring back Crown immunity in respect of negligence claims, (local authorities, schools etc) but especially for NHS. OK, things go wrong but we should be grateful we have an NHS at all.  Better to spend the money on nurses rather than lawyers.

For the Coalition to introduce a Robin Hood Tax…

As some people know, a Robin Hood tax is a tax on banks and other financial institutions transactions.

There could also add piece of legislation in which, when enough money is raised (to combat the deficit), 40% of that tax income could go to some sort of Treasury Kitty that will be a bit like a savings account. The money saved could then could help future generations in this country when another version of the "Credit Crunch" comes along and the Country is suddenly in dire straits. It would come in very useful. 

Why is this idea important?

As some people know, a Robin Hood tax is a tax on banks and other financial institutions transactions.

There could also add piece of legislation in which, when enough money is raised (to combat the deficit), 40% of that tax income could go to some sort of Treasury Kitty that will be a bit like a savings account. The money saved could then could help future generations in this country when another version of the "Credit Crunch" comes along and the Country is suddenly in dire straits. It would come in very useful. 

Regulate the amount that government can borrow to 0.5% of GDP

There has to be a limit to what government spends otherwise government spending can be used wrongly to buy votes or can create problems for future generations

Why is this idea important?

There has to be a limit to what government spends otherwise government spending can be used wrongly to buy votes or can create problems for future generations

Reduce taxes on work, increase taxes on debt, drugs, energy

Increase taxes on debt, drugs and energy and reduce income taxes by the same amount.   Legalising drugs would also allow the drug industry's profits to be taxed and reduce the amount of taxpayer money spent on the criminal justice system.

Why is this idea important?

Increase taxes on debt, drugs and energy and reduce income taxes by the same amount.   Legalising drugs would also allow the drug industry's profits to be taxed and reduce the amount of taxpayer money spent on the criminal justice system.