Everybody says that taxing and spending are a bad thing..
But what are the alternatives?
Spending and Spending?
Taxing and Taxing?
Not taxes - deterioration of the country, everything given to charities to run (a model not used anywhere on earth)?
Out of all the alternatives isn't taxing and Spending the best?
2007-07-29
01:22:30
·
14 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
So the public should decide what to spend their money on? Sounds nice...BUT!!!
Don't we elect parlimentarians for this? Again where is this economic model working? Where is this city street filled with lobbyists and charities asking for cash for projects? How in the name of god can you run a country like that?
2007-07-29
01:35:16 ·
update #1
Spot on. "Tax and Spend" is just another meaningless Tory soundbite, along with "Stealth Tax" which the Tories now trot out for any new tax change, no matter how openly it is announced.
2007-07-29 09:35:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
What seems to be meant by tax and spend is a fear of a return to the boom and bust economy of the past.
While Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown for about ten years, managed to keep the UK economy on an even keel. There was no boom and no bust. Instead we got steady improvement and many people did very well in the Stock Market and the Property Market.
If UK returns to high taxation and high spending which ultimately will lead to bust followed by boom then more bust again; then the people will not vote for it.
Most of us want stability in the economy and for the moment that's what we have. Not too much inflation and our properties are steadily gaining value. Not sure how long this housing boom will last. Crash coming soon I think. But it has helped a lot of people who already own property and that's about 75% of the pop of UK by the way.
These and other reason are why Middle England have voted Labour for the last two elections and look set to give Labour a further 5 years from the next election.
2007-07-29 20:04:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The alternative is a more free market approach. For example our taxes today are lower than any time during the Clinton administration. Yet we have much higher tax revenue. The money is best in the hands of the people not the government or its programs.
EDIT: TomPink, I don't mind someone questioning me but at least have some info to back up your claim.
First, yes revenue is up even with the tax cuts. This is directly from the IRS website.
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/table_6_2006_dp.xls
Second, your question about why we have a deficit. Well I don't know maybe it has something to do WITH THE WAR IN IRAQ. LOL what the hell, do we need Captain Obvious?
Also, reading your answer I don't think you understand what revenue means.
2007-07-29 01:26:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
If you tax too much - it makes us uncompetitive. It doesn't matter how you take that tax - whether at source or later on - it still pushes costs up and that is transferred down the line.
What does Britain make any more ? Next to nothing. If we outsource to China and India - what is left in the end ?
2007-07-29 04:33:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by LongJohns 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Raising taxes to give money and services to immigrants and the work shy. Raising taxes to pay for foreign wars. Raising taxes to pay the E.U. so they can subsidise french farmers. Raising taxes to pay for things like the millennium dome and the Olympics which nobody wants.
There are some of the reasons why tax and spend is a bad thing.
2007-07-29 01:30:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by paul m 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
An alternative is to leave the public to spend their own money on the things they want themselves, rather than appear to be a nanny state that takes lots more from you in taxes and spends it on Bogus IT projects or ID cards etc.
2007-07-29 01:26:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by 'Dr Greene' 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
you are right -- everyone expects something from the government and for it to furnish anything they have to have a certain amount of taxes. but, after being in the service and working with government contractors for over 45 years i think that there is too much waste with in the government. if it was ran like a business it would be broke within 6 months.
2007-07-29 01:31:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by mister ed 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Isn't it ridiculous how Bush criticizes Dems with the old slogan "tax and spend" but he and his pawns don't criticize "borrow and spend". Rajin Cajin says revenues are up, so why is the deficit approaching 9 trillion dollars and growing? If we have the revenues, why do we need to borrow to pay for Bush's wars?
2007-07-29 03:00:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by topink 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
You fire all the fat cats in Washington, that would be the Senators. Then eform a new , efficient a and honest Government. For The People, By The People, and Of the People.
2007-07-29 01:41:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The alternative is spending wisely but they never do that with other peoples' money.
2007-07-30 07:58:14
·
answer #10
·
answered by Beau Brummell 6
·
0⤊
0⤋