Treasury Minister thinks paying with cash is wrong
Discussion
toppstuff said:
YES !!! They are a research organisation. They are SUPPOSED to publish their methodology. If, for example, a science research organisation published a press release about research on Panda mating patterns, it would be expected that they show their research methodology. It is how it works. This is no different.
Jeez you are a gullible godsend to the "research" apparatiks that feed the media. You haven't recently sent some money to some struggling Doctor in Nigeria lately have you? Are you that unquestioning?
Let me ask a simple question:
Given that the Trillions of cash stuffed offshore is subject to at least the same secrecy and data protection laws that we have here, how can a "research organisation" with a dodgy website and offering no methodology to support their claims, find a way to circumvent the rules of privacy without going to jail for eternity?
Simply looking up lists of offshore jurisdictions and adding up their assets under custody or management achieves nothing. Anyone can do that.
But what they cannot know ( or anyone can know ) is where the money is attributed. How much of it is deposited from Mr John Smith of Streatham and how much of it by Roman Abramovich? How much of the money is the cash reserves from the Gazprom, the Russian energy Co, or the earnings from a Chinese mining company in Africa that doesn't trust the banking system in Nigeria? No-one knows.
Therefore, to extrapolate and present as fact that individual countries are missing out on certain "tax income" is, to put it mildly, completely disingenuous. And the timing of the release is too opportunistic to be considered anything other than politically motivated pandering to the media.
I have dealt with so called "research groups" in the past. Many of them are obnoxious, nasty little groups with a massive political agenda who live in the pocket of special interest groups and will say and do anything to get funding for their next round of ill-informed nonsense. I see nothing here to make me believe that this lot are any better.
I actually don't care if it is true or not. But I do care when leaping suppositions and dodgy data is presented as fact.
But how do you know?Jeez you are a gullible godsend to the "research" apparatiks that feed the media. You haven't recently sent some money to some struggling Doctor in Nigeria lately have you? Are you that unquestioning?
Let me ask a simple question:
Given that the Trillions of cash stuffed offshore is subject to at least the same secrecy and data protection laws that we have here, how can a "research organisation" with a dodgy website and offering no methodology to support their claims, find a way to circumvent the rules of privacy without going to jail for eternity?
Simply looking up lists of offshore jurisdictions and adding up their assets under custody or management achieves nothing. Anyone can do that.
But what they cannot know ( or anyone can know ) is where the money is attributed. How much of it is deposited from Mr John Smith of Streatham and how much of it by Roman Abramovich? How much of the money is the cash reserves from the Gazprom, the Russian energy Co, or the earnings from a Chinese mining company in Africa that doesn't trust the banking system in Nigeria? No-one knows.
Therefore, to extrapolate and present as fact that individual countries are missing out on certain "tax income" is, to put it mildly, completely disingenuous. And the timing of the release is too opportunistic to be considered anything other than politically motivated pandering to the media.
I have dealt with so called "research groups" in the past. Many of them are obnoxious, nasty little groups with a massive political agenda who live in the pocket of special interest groups and will say and do anything to get funding for their next round of ill-informed nonsense. I see nothing here to make me believe that this lot are any better.
I actually don't care if it is true or not. But I do care when leaping suppositions and dodgy data is presented as fact.
(I've suddenly realised why the PH young debaters post that sort of thing...it's fun and so much quicker to post than a reasoned response with proper links to actual facts rather than shonky news/research articles with little of either
)Gene Vincent said:
I'm slightly baffled by the attitude of Gauke.
There isn't a true black economy in the UK, pay someone cash-in-hand and the only effect is that the money goes to the government earlier than any other way.
Simple example, tradesman takes £5k without paying Income or Value Added tax, we'll call that £2,500 not paid.
£800 in vat which is paid in 3 months, £1700 not paid for about a year.
Because you can't buy fuel or food in the black economy any money that is spent 'living it up' is paid instantly through taxes at that time and because of the size of these businesses, the tax stream is monthly.
So the tax is paid quicker, meanwhile the lubricating effect of the partial black economy, means that those businesses are bolstered by the extra spending at the tills, this contrasts to giving the money to the state which doles it out rather badly, losing a huge part of the potential goodness in the machine itself.
I would say that in reality, this is far superior to 'big business' taking the money out of the Country to avoid tax, cash-in-hand bolsters the economy, because the black economy is not endemic, it is limited and that is why it is actually an essential part of it.
The is only a detrimental effect on the economy if the circle of the black economy becomes complete, it isn't and so it has only the benefit of improving the flow of money in the real economy.
Why, I ask, is this moron Gauke in such a position to talk the rubbish he does without having the intellectual rigour to understand simple free-state economics? That is the big question here.
Couldn't of put it better!There isn't a true black economy in the UK, pay someone cash-in-hand and the only effect is that the money goes to the government earlier than any other way.
Simple example, tradesman takes £5k without paying Income or Value Added tax, we'll call that £2,500 not paid.
£800 in vat which is paid in 3 months, £1700 not paid for about a year.
Because you can't buy fuel or food in the black economy any money that is spent 'living it up' is paid instantly through taxes at that time and because of the size of these businesses, the tax stream is monthly.
So the tax is paid quicker, meanwhile the lubricating effect of the partial black economy, means that those businesses are bolstered by the extra spending at the tills, this contrasts to giving the money to the state which doles it out rather badly, losing a huge part of the potential goodness in the machine itself.
I would say that in reality, this is far superior to 'big business' taking the money out of the Country to avoid tax, cash-in-hand bolsters the economy, because the black economy is not endemic, it is limited and that is why it is actually an essential part of it.
The is only a detrimental effect on the economy if the circle of the black economy becomes complete, it isn't and so it has only the benefit of improving the flow of money in the real economy.
Why, I ask, is this moron Gauke in such a position to talk the rubbish he does without having the intellectual rigour to understand simple free-state economics? That is the big question here.
£2Bn??? I'm sure they could find that behind the sofa! or better yet the welfare bill!
t.Murph7355 said:
But how do you know?
(I've suddenly realised why the PH young debaters post that sort of thing...it's fun and so much quicker to post than a reasoned response with proper links to actual facts rather than shonky news/research articles with little of either)
I'm hardly young. And I am not the one offering hypothesis without any links to facts - that is the preserve of the publishers of the original report. The problem is that there seem to be plenty of people taking the "report" at face value even though it offers no apparent evidence. The shonky research is coming from them, not me. The news media has picked it up although it seems that they simply made it up.. (I've suddenly realised why the PH young debaters post that sort of thing...it's fun and so much quicker to post than a reasoned response with proper links to actual facts rather than shonky news/research articles with little of either
)
toppstuff said:
eccles said:
How do you know it's not?
Do you really think they'll publish all their research in the article?
YES !!! They are a research organisation. They are SUPPOSED to publish their methodology. If, for example, a science research organisation published a press release about research on Panda mating patterns, it would be expected that they show their research methodology. It is how it works. This is no different. Do you really think they'll publish all their research in the article?
Jeez you are a gullible godsend to the "research" apparatiks that feed the media. You haven't recently sent some money to some struggling Doctor in Nigeria lately have you? Are you that unquestioning?
Let me ask a simple question:
Given that the Trillions of cash stuffed offshore is subject to at least the same secrecy and data protection laws that we have here, how can a "research organisation" with a dodgy website and offering no methodology to support their claims, find a way to circumvent the rules of privacy without going to jail for eternity?
Simply looking up lists of offshore jurisdictions and adding up their assets under custody or management achieves nothing. Anyone can do that.
But what they cannot know ( or anyone can know ) is where the money is attributed. How much of it is deposited from Mr John Smith of Streatham and how much of it by Roman Abramovich? How much of the money is the cash reserves from the Gazprom, the Russian energy Co, or the earnings from a Chinese mining company in Africa that doesn't trust the banking system in Nigeria? No-one knows.
Therefore, to extrapolate and present as fact that individual countries are missing out on certain "tax income" is, to put it mildly, completely disingenuous. And the timing of the release is too opportunistic to be considered anything other than politically motivated pandering to the media.
I have dealt with so called "research groups" in the past. Many of them are obnoxious, nasty little groups with a massive political agenda who live in the pocket of special interest groups and will say and do anything to get funding for their next round of ill-informed nonsense. I see nothing here to make me believe that this lot are any better.
I actually don't care if it is true or not. But I do care when leaping suppositions and dodgy data is presented as fact.
Are you seriously telling me that every time you read a magazine or newspaper you ignore any facts or figures presented because they haven't put all their sources and research in the article as well!
I'm just asking why you question these figures when doubtlessly you accept other figures on face value every day.
eccles said:
toppstuff said:
eccles said:
How do you know it's not?
Do you really think they'll publish all their research in the article?
YES !!! They are a research organisation. They are SUPPOSED to publish their methodology. If, for example, a science research organisation published a press release about research on Panda mating patterns, it would be expected that they show their research methodology. It is how it works. This is no different. Do you really think they'll publish all their research in the article?
Jeez you are a gullible godsend to the "research" apparatiks that feed the media. You haven't recently sent some money to some struggling Doctor in Nigeria lately have you? Are you that unquestioning?
Let me ask a simple question:
Given that the Trillions of cash stuffed offshore is subject to at least the same secrecy and data protection laws that we have here, how can a "research organisation" with a dodgy website and offering no methodology to support their claims, find a way to circumvent the rules of privacy without going to jail for eternity?
Simply looking up lists of offshore jurisdictions and adding up their assets under custody or management achieves nothing. Anyone can do that.
But what they cannot know ( or anyone can know ) is where the money is attributed. How much of it is deposited from Mr John Smith of Streatham and how much of it by Roman Abramovich? How much of the money is the cash reserves from the Gazprom, the Russian energy Co, or the earnings from a Chinese mining company in Africa that doesn't trust the banking system in Nigeria? No-one knows.
Therefore, to extrapolate and present as fact that individual countries are missing out on certain "tax income" is, to put it mildly, completely disingenuous. And the timing of the release is too opportunistic to be considered anything other than politically motivated pandering to the media.
I have dealt with so called "research groups" in the past. Many of them are obnoxious, nasty little groups with a massive political agenda who live in the pocket of special interest groups and will say and do anything to get funding for their next round of ill-informed nonsense. I see nothing here to make me believe that this lot are any better.
I actually don't care if it is true or not. But I do care when leaping suppositions and dodgy data is presented as fact.
Are you seriously telling me that every time you read a magazine or newspaper you ignore any facts or figures presented because they haven't put all their sources and research in the article as well!
I'm just asking why you question these figures when doubtlessly you accept other figures on face value every day.
I don't accept their numbers because to start with sheer logic suggests that they can't possibly be reliable. Investments are confidential, so how can they claim to know what country the money came from? So I looked at their website. Again, there is a lot of polemic posturing and nothing in the way of demonstrated facts.
If someone claimed they had solved cold fusion, would you just believe them or would you expect some explanation?
Likewise, if a group apparently knows the secret confidential breakdown of where offshore money originates from, but fails to explain how they know, would you not expect some explanation? And would you not become deeply sceptical if they failed to provide evidence?
groucho said:
I'm a tradesman and I can assure you that customers always say "If I pay cash can you knock the vat off"
Does my head in. NO!
Same here. What people fail to realise is that it's actually quite difficult to dispose of cash. Does my head in. NO!
Most tradesmen have got bills and mortgages to pay through their bank accounts.
Cash is of no use to me.
I had somebody ask me if I would do a £180K job for cash last year. I refused.
Unless someone has a large reserve of cash to live on (and I would say most tradesmen don't) then it's
virtually impossible to take large sums of cash. Unless you're off the radar of course!
toppstuff said:
If someone claimed they had solved cold fusion, would you just believe them or would you expect some explanation?
Yeah, about that...http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/29/ros...
Oakey said:
toppstuff said:
If someone claimed they had solved cold fusion, would you just believe them or would you expect some explanation?
Yeah, about that...http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/29/ros...
toppstuff said:
t
I don't accept their numbers because to start with sheer logic suggests that they can't possibly be reliable. Investments are confidential, so how can they claim to know what country the money came from? So I looked at their website. Again, there is a lot of polemic posturing and nothing in the way of demonstrated facts.
If someone claimed they had solved cold fusion, would you just believe them or would you expect some explanation?
Likewise, if a group apparently knows the secret confidential breakdown of where offshore money originates from, but fails to explain how they know, would you not expect some explanation? And would you not become deeply sceptical if they failed to provide evidence?
You're still missing my point.I don't accept their numbers because to start with sheer logic suggests that they can't possibly be reliable. Investments are confidential, so how can they claim to know what country the money came from? So I looked at their website. Again, there is a lot of polemic posturing and nothing in the way of demonstrated facts.
If someone claimed they had solved cold fusion, would you just believe them or would you expect some explanation?
Likewise, if a group apparently knows the secret confidential breakdown of where offshore money originates from, but fails to explain how they know, would you not expect some explanation? And would you not become deeply sceptical if they failed to provide evidence?
I bet you believe many figures presented to you every day without asking to see all the data behind them, yet you dismiss these ones out of hand as it suits your ideology. You don't know what access these people have had, there may be a way of arriving at the figures by averages.
If the news tells you that inflation is up, do you dismiss it because they haven't shown you all the research behind it?
TheEnd said:
Why?
Because he's unhappy with people not declaring their full income and skipping paying the tax due?
More because after claiming expenses to pay his stamp duty (all above board of course........) he has no right whatsoever to talk about what is and isn't morally correct.Because he's unhappy with people not declaring their full income and skipping paying the tax due?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff