Author Topic: UK Defence  (Read 6839 times)

  • Offline Serious

  • Posts: 14,467
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
UK Defence
on: March 11, 2015, 13:51:13 PM
Cameron again.... He claims that he wants to preserve the 2% of GDP being put into defense.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31829187

All very well, except that he's including military pensions in that -£800 million without which the total would fall below the 2% this year. And he's asked MPs to look into including intelligence funding too.

Looks like UK defense could end up a rowboat for the navy, a pedalcar for the army and a hang glider for the air force.

And none of the other parties are making promises either....

Anyone not think that defense spending is important for the UK?

  • Offline Dave

  • Posts: 3,467
  • Hero Member
Re: UK Defence
Reply #1 on: March 12, 2015, 15:25:41 PM
yup, could do with more benefits cuts rather than defence cuts tbh...

  • Offline bear

  • Rutabaga
  • Posts: 6,323
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member

  • Offline Serious

  • Posts: 14,467
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
Re: UK Defence
Reply #3 on: March 19, 2015, 08:23:45 AM
yup, could do with more benefits cuts rather than defence cuts tbh...

I have nothing against benefit cuts providing they aren't made to give some already rich corporates a tax break. For that point perhaps the government should make sure people and companies actually pay the tax they should rather than letting them avoid it? Tax evasion in it's many forms, whether legal or not, is higher than all of the benefits paid out by the state.

  • Offline Dave

  • Posts: 3,467
  • Hero Member
Re: UK Defence
Reply #4 on: March 22, 2015, 19:50:05 PM
I have nothing against benefit cuts providing they aren't made to give some already rich corporates a tax break.

they're not per say, I'm not sure you can often isolate one particular cut in spending and state it was done to fund some other reduction in revenue

Quote
For that point perhaps the government should make sure people and companies actually pay the tax they should rather than letting them avoid it? Tax evasion in it's many forms, whether legal or not, is higher than all of the benefits paid out by the state.

indeed they should

though re: evasion being higher than all the benefits paid out by the state, that is a very dubious claim and rather unlikely (are you getting confused with evasion being larger than the cost of benefits fraud - that likely is the case, but larger than the cost of all the benefits paid out by the state - nope you're mistaken there)

  • Offline Serious

  • Posts: 14,467
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
Re: UK Defence
Reply #5 on: March 23, 2015, 05:10:17 AM
It depends on what you include, surprisingly benefit fraud is estimated to cost UK Plc less than £1.2 billion a year according to government figures on http://www.benefitfraud.org.uk/. Their own figures are 5 billion, an incredibly large sum. Then you get to tax evasion/fraud/unpaid tax - a massive estimated 150 billion. Total social benefits excluding pensions about 110 billion

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_welfare_spending_40.html

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/6348/economics/cost-of-benefit-fraud-v-tax-evasion-in-uk/

Governments love to shout about benefit fraud and what they are doing about it, it makes the whole issue much more visible and because people think that something is being done the government more popular. Problem is while they are pushing benefit fraud they are not doing the same for tax.

Re: UK Defence
Reply #6 on: March 23, 2015, 18:12:46 PM
It depends on what you include, surprisingly benefit fraud is estimated to cost UK Plc less than £1.2 billion a year according to government figures on http://www.benefitfraud.org.uk/. Their own figures are 5 billion, an incredibly large sum. Then you get to tax evasion/fraud/unpaid tax - a massive estimated 150 billion. Total social benefits excluding pensions about 110 billion

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_welfare_spending_40.html

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/6348/economics/cost-of-benefit-fraud-v-tax-evasion-in-uk/

Governments love to shout about benefit fraud and what they are doing about it, it makes the whole issue much more visible and because people think that something is being done the government more popular. Problem is while they are pushing benefit fraud they are not doing the same for tax.

Thing is, its easy to quote figures, but how much does it actually cost to get results?
Lots of businesses close down one day & open up again the next day with a clean slate. Phoenixing businesses is quite common.

With small debts to HMRC in Corporation Tax, PAYE & VAT it is sometimes not cost effective to do so.
Business men are clever enough to phoneix a company, they are clever enough not to leave any loose ends up that could incriminate them.

As for Amazon & Co - While I disagree with their manipulation of the tax the system, the bigger picture is they still bring in a lot of money directly & indirectly. They create a lot of jobs indirectly. How many people are employed by courier firms because of the increase in work from amazon? They still bring in PAYE & NIC to the coffers.

Better with something, or nothing, if they decided to pull out of the UK & shipped everything from mainland Europe (I get fantastic delivery service from Germany - usually 2-3 days!)

  • Offline Dave

  • Posts: 3,467
  • Hero Member
Re: UK Defence
Reply #7 on: March 23, 2015, 20:28:59 PM
Governments love to shout about benefit fraud and what they are doing about it, it makes the whole issue much more visible and because people think that something is being done the government more popular. Problem is while they are pushing benefit fraud they are not doing the same for tax.

I thought you might be getting confused with benefits fraud rather than all benefits. Though your last point is more one of perception than a reflection of reality - they're cracking down on both.

Ref the figures you've got a rather wild estimate for evasion - if you're going to use govt figures for benefits fraud then look to the tax gap figures for avoidance/evasion. Evasion is clearly larger though probably not quite to the extent your other link is suggesting.

Both absolutely need to be cracked down on and evasion probably is larger than outright benefits fraud. Having said that the welfare budget as a whole is huge (even when taking away pensions which do make up a big chunk). It isn't just fraud which needs to be cracked down on - that is a (relatively small figure) and only includes estimates of people who carrying out blatant fraud - there are plenty more people out there who could really be working but aren't and are in receipt of ESA etc.. It isn't just the obvious fraud that needs to be cracked down on but also a bigger effort to get more of those people into work - essentially give them a kick up the arse - even if it ends up being min wage roles where we still end up partially subsidising them with tax credits and housing etc..

as for the corporates, well starbucks can't move offshore and still supply coffee - they do need to start levying a tax on them and forget about the dodgy business with them paying license fees to other entities for IP etc.. at the end of the day if starbucks left then it isn't as though a bunch of other uk based coffee shops couldn't step in right away and take their place... hopefully the recent proposals should solve some of this but frankly the govt does need to be a bit more ruthless with this and just crack down on these companies sending profits earned in the UK overseas to the likes of entities in Luxembourg etc..
Last Edit: March 23, 2015, 20:34:50 PM by Dave #187;

Re: UK Defence
Reply #8 on: March 23, 2015, 23:26:50 PM
I think a large part of the problem with benefits (inc. fraud) are all the people who are better off on benefits


can't blame someone for sitting on there ass doing nothing all day if you're financially better off like that than if they go to work

and/or there's not much in it for them if they do work... if you're not very skilled, and have the choice between working all week and paying your own way, or getting benefits and only being £30 a week worse off.... of course you'll sit on your ass and do nothing


:(

Re: UK Defence
Reply #9 on: March 24, 2015, 16:57:18 PM
Governments love to shout about benefit fraud and what they are doing about it, it makes the whole issue much more visible and because people think that something is being done the government more popular. Problem is while they are pushing benefit fraud they are not doing the same for tax.

I thought you might be getting confused with benefits fraud rather than all benefits. Though your last point is more one of perception than a reflection of reality - they're cracking down on both.

Ref the figures you've got a rather wild estimate for evasion - if you're going to use govt figures for benefits fraud then look to the tax gap figures for avoidance/evasion. Evasion is clearly larger though probably not quite to the extent your other link is suggesting.

Both absolutely need to be cracked down on and evasion probably is larger than outright benefits fraud. Having said that the welfare budget as a whole is huge (even when taking away pensions which do make up a big chunk). It isn't just fraud which needs to be cracked down on - that is a (relatively small figure) and only includes estimates of people who carrying out blatant fraud - there are plenty more people out there who could really be working but aren't and are in receipt of ESA etc.. It isn't just the obvious fraud that needs to be cracked down on but also a bigger effort to get more of those people into work - essentially give them a kick up the arse - even if it ends up being min wage roles where we still end up partially subsidising them with tax credits and housing etc..

as for the corporates, well starbucks can't move offshore and still supply coffee - they do need to start levying a tax on them and forget about the dodgy business with them paying license fees to other entities for IP etc.. at the end of the day if starbucks left then it isn't as though a bunch of other uk based coffee shops couldn't step in right away and take their place... hopefully the recent proposals should solve some of this but frankly the govt does need to be a bit more ruthless with this and just crack down on these companies sending profits earned in the UK overseas to the likes of entities in Luxembourg etc..

Thats the other point I was going to make Dave, while Amazon can move, Starbucks cant & so they should pay up or f**k off & let small independent coffee shops make a go at it.

Re: UK Defence
Reply #10 on: March 24, 2015, 17:03:01 PM
I think a large part of the problem with benefits (inc. fraud) are all the people who are better off on benefits


can't blame someone for sitting on there ass doing nothing all day if you're financially better off like that than if they go to work

and/or there's not much in it for them if they do work... if you're not very skilled, and have the choice between working all week and paying your own way, or getting benefits and only being £30 a week worse off.... of course you'll sit on your ass and do nothing


 :(

But you can blame someone if they are feigning an illness not to work. The benefit is to help those who cant work.
DLA for example is an allowance to help the not so abled in their daily routine & tasks.

Once someone can get on sickness benefits, then with DLA its a gravy train. Of course its going to look like a lot more money if your abled bodied.
A fraudster could probably easier walk a few hundred yards to a shop, while someone on DLA may actually need that DLA money to pay for deliveries or take taxi's, etc.

I dont have an issue with people claiming their entitlements up to a point. I do have an issue when they are fraudulently claiming it.

If when they are caught, nothing happens anyway.. except their money gets stopped. very few go to prison... and if made to pay it back, its pennies a week because it is means tested.

Im sorry but its easy solution, if your caught abusing the system, then you lose all entitlements to the system.

  • Offline Serious

  • Posts: 14,467
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
Re: UK Defence
Reply #11 on: March 25, 2015, 13:13:41 PM

But you can blame someone if they are feigning an illness not to work. The benefit is to help those who cant work.
DLA for example is an allowance to help the not so abled in their daily routine & tasks.



Part of benefits is to help those who can't or shouldn't work. Can't is a really difficult term, is it that they can't work period? Where do you set the limit? You have oddities like Stephen Hawking. Set the level to him and you get virtually zero people on sickness benefits. Truth is he is a very niche person, few if any fully able people could do his job. There are some people who could in theory do some extremely limited work but it is uneconomic or unreasonable for the country to try to make them.

There are also a few who want to cheat the system, these are fewer than the government would like you to believe and the system in place not only removes those it also ends up removing plenty of people who shouldn't work, which is why they are presently kicking Atos out. Employing Atos is one thing you can stick on the Blair Labour government.

The other part is to put those who can work on a minimum living allowance while they search for work. The only issues with this is the availability of work and the jobs having a decent wage. Usually, if there is a job available with reasonable pay you will get people applying for it.

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.