Could or should the city be sacrificed for good brexit deal??
Discussion
Greg66 said:
Silly question. That's not how the country is run.
I never thought t was, but it's essentially the same question as the OP (which I agree is rather silly, FWIW). If you think No, the city should not be "sacrificed" for a good Brexit deal then you are saying that the country should be run in some very significant sense for the benefit of the city, if you assume that one option or the other is the only available choice.
AJS- said:
I never thought t was, but it's essentially the same question as the OP (which I agree is rather silly, FWIW).
If you think No, the city should not be "sacrificed" for a good Brexit deal then you are saying that the country should be run in some very significant sense for the benefit of the city, if you assume that one option or the other is the only available choice.
That's not the choice, so that's not what anyone is saying. What is the point in silly and false hypotheses to a stupid question?If you think No, the city should not be "sacrificed" for a good Brexit deal then you are saying that the country should be run in some very significant sense for the benefit of the city, if you assume that one option or the other is the only available choice.
Baffled.
oyster said:
And that's well before you consider all the indirect taxes that come from the City.
All those financial services firms need ancillary support. The shops, the coffee bars, pubs, restaurants, hotels, taxis etc etc etc etc. They all earn money and pay tax partly because of financial services.
3.4% of the workforce was a made up figure...All those financial services firms need ancillary support. The shops, the coffee bars, pubs, restaurants, hotels, taxis etc etc etc etc. They all earn money and pay tax partly because of financial services.
Mrr T said:
TonyToniTone said:
Blue Oval84 said:
The City represented 15% of all government tax receipts in 2015. Would you really like to sacrifice that? Would you be happy to pay a good chunk more tax to plug the hole?
Are you sure about that, I thought it was 11% and that figure was extrapolated so unlikely to accurateTry https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/business/economic-...
Total Tax Contribution of UK Financial Services Eighth Edition said:
1.1m people (3.4% of the UK workforce) were employed by the FS sector.
Estimated employment taxes broadly remained stable at £30bn (2014:£30bn), with a slight decrease within these figures.
These taxes represent 11% of government receipts of PAYE (pay as you earn) and NIC (national insurance contributions).
The figures above are for the UK not for the city.Estimated employment taxes broadly remained stable at £30bn (2014:£30bn), with a slight decrease within these figures.
These taxes represent 11% of government receipts of PAYE (pay as you earn) and NIC (national insurance contributions).
TonyToniTone said:
Mrr T said:
TonyToniTone said:
Blue Oval84 said:
The City represented 15% of all government tax receipts in 2015. Would you really like to sacrifice that? Would you be happy to pay a good chunk more tax to plug the hole?
Are you sure about that, I thought it was 11% and that figure was extrapolated so unlikely to accurateTry https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/business/economic-...
Total Tax Contribution of UK Financial Services Eighth Edition said:
1.1m people (3.4% of the UK workforce) were employed by the FS sector.
Estimated employment taxes broadly remained stable at £30bn (2014:£30bn), with a slight decrease within these figures.
These taxes represent 11% of government receipts of PAYE (pay as you earn) and NIC (national insurance contributions).
The figures above are for the UK not for the city.Estimated employment taxes broadly remained stable at £30bn (2014:£30bn), with a slight decrease within these figures.
These taxes represent 11% of government receipts of PAYE (pay as you earn) and NIC (national insurance contributions).
"Executive summary The key findings from this eighth study show that, for the financial services (FS) sector in the UK in the year to 31 March 2015:
• The sector paid an estimated amount of total taxes in the region of £66.5bn, or 11.0% of total UK Government tax receipts
...
• 1.1m people (3.4% of the UK workforce) were employed by the FS sector."
https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/business/economic-...
powerstroke said:
gibbon said:
powerstroke said:
I think for me personaly , coming from a town that once had world class maufactures of trucks , and the near by town was known all over the world for its trains, I would love to see a strong manufacturing base , trade with all of the world again, Maybe I don't understand the city and banking but its function as a service industry to enable trade and to help finance company growth seems to have been overtaken by greed and casino banking , asset stripping and funny money deals with currency shorting etc,
Why do you think these manufacturing industries, trains, trucks etc failed to survive?I am from an engineering education, and now work in banking, so as you may expect have some views on this, but i would like to know your view of it first.
t and move on to the next victim...julian64 said:
Really not happy with the ridicule being put on the original poster.
The country is more important than the London banking sector and money isn't the only criteria by which people vote. If it was we'd still be in Europe.
Its been the case for a number of years now that the country places far too much emphasis on the financial and service sectors and has effectively sidelined any serious manufacturing because London has held the country up financially. It was easy to do politically but I think many years of this has left us with quite a divided union.
This might be a time to reflect on that and any ways we can rebalance the economy and country rather than just ridicule anyone who dares question money as the ultimate goal of all our lives.
Before you commend London financial services as all things mighty in this country it would be interesting to see how much of the pounds recent fall was secondary to those same patriotic bankers in London short selling sterling.
and I voted stay.
You write as if there has been a conscious decision by the 'unseen hand' to promote banking services and sabotage manufacturing. The country is more important than the London banking sector and money isn't the only criteria by which people vote. If it was we'd still be in Europe.
Its been the case for a number of years now that the country places far too much emphasis on the financial and service sectors and has effectively sidelined any serious manufacturing because London has held the country up financially. It was easy to do politically but I think many years of this has left us with quite a divided union.
This might be a time to reflect on that and any ways we can rebalance the economy and country rather than just ridicule anyone who dares question money as the ultimate goal of all our lives.
Before you commend London financial services as all things mighty in this country it would be interesting to see how much of the pounds recent fall was secondary to those same patriotic bankers in London short selling sterling.
and I voted stay.
Has it occurred to you that, instead, global market forces have had a hand in this? That other economies have caught up, started to exploit their own resources to compete with UK mining/manufacturing etc. Cheaper labour. More abundant resources etc.
While the UK financial services industry enjoys competitive advantages over others you should all be thinking of how to maximise its benefits, not thinking of ways to artificially cripple it in some short sighted aim to revive industries in which the UK has no advantage.
johnfm said:
powerstroke said:
gibbon said:
powerstroke said:
I think for me personaly , coming from a town that once had world class maufactures of trucks , and the near by town was known all over the world for its trains, I would love to see a strong manufacturing base , trade with all of the world again, Maybe I don't understand the city and banking but its function as a service industry to enable trade and to help finance company growth seems to have been overtaken by greed and casino banking , asset stripping and funny money deals with currency shorting etc,
Why do you think these manufacturing industries, trains, trucks etc failed to survive?I am from an engineering education, and now work in banking, so as you may expect have some views on this, but i would like to know your view of it first.
t and move on to the next victim...julian64 said:
Really not happy with the ridicule being put on the original poster.
The country is more important than the London banking sector and money isn't the only criteria by which people vote. If it was we'd still be in Europe.
Its been the case for a number of years now that the country places far too much emphasis on the financial and service sectors and has effectively sidelined any serious manufacturing because London has held the country up financially. It was easy to do politically but I think many years of this has left us with quite a divided union.
This might be a time to reflect on that and any ways we can rebalance the economy and country rather than just ridicule anyone who dares question money as the ultimate goal of all our lives.
Before you commend London financial services as all things mighty in this country it would be interesting to see how much of the pounds recent fall was secondary to those same patriotic bankers in London short selling sterling.
and I voted stay.
Thanks , I started the thread as a genuine question after thinking about our new PM's speech , and how they were going to do a deal with the EU that would suit and benefit the majorty of the population,The country is more important than the London banking sector and money isn't the only criteria by which people vote. If it was we'd still be in Europe.
Its been the case for a number of years now that the country places far too much emphasis on the financial and service sectors and has effectively sidelined any serious manufacturing because London has held the country up financially. It was easy to do politically but I think many years of this has left us with quite a divided union.
This might be a time to reflect on that and any ways we can rebalance the economy and country rather than just ridicule anyone who dares question money as the ultimate goal of all our lives.
Before you commend London financial services as all things mighty in this country it would be interesting to see how much of the pounds recent fall was secondary to those same patriotic bankers in London short selling sterling.
and I voted stay.
Ive found some of the responses very interesting certainly it's touched a raw nerve for some, and they tried to belittle me and divert the discussion , one thing is for sure our economy is in a period of great change ,
thanks Guys it's always good to debate and question .....
If we had a choice of promoting a part of our economy that generates 10% of our wealth, is it a good idea to throw that under a bus to try and promote a part of the economy that generates 0.07% of our wealth, and which probably can't grow any bigger due to sustainability considerations?
What do you think?
Maybe brexit is a good opportunity to bin the 10% one and promote the 0.07% one thats effectively stagnated anyway?
This thread is one of the best cases for bregret yet.
Amusing thread is amusing.
OP would have been better stating to diversify the UK economy at the volume end rather than display his prejudice.
Cottage industries are just that, fishing is a classic example. Even if we got back 100% of our waters, an extra 1.8bn in fishies, the total tax take will be tiny non? It's not a non cost operation.
Financial services is going to loose jobs over the coming years not due to Brexit, but disruptive Fintech. You don't go further damaging one of the biggest single contributors to UK Plc for fish, knitting or whatever else is in the utopia. We'd be like Greenland with a lot more people.
OP would have been better stating to diversify the UK economy at the volume end rather than display his prejudice.
Cottage industries are just that, fishing is a classic example. Even if we got back 100% of our waters, an extra 1.8bn in fishies, the total tax take will be tiny non? It's not a non cost operation.
Financial services is going to loose jobs over the coming years not due to Brexit, but disruptive Fintech. You don't go further damaging one of the biggest single contributors to UK Plc for fish, knitting or whatever else is in the utopia. We'd be like Greenland with a lot more people.
fblm said:
What is your point? 3.4% of the workforce is responsible for generating 11% of tax receipts. With the obvious exception of 2008, it's been pretty much the same story for over at least the last decade.
I thought my point was perfectly clear - those figures aren't for the city.stongle said:
Amusing thread is amusing.
OP would have been better stating to diversify the UK economy at the volume end rather than display his prejudice.
Cottage industries are just that, fishing is a classic example. Even if we got back 100% of our waters, an extra 1.8bn in fishies, the total tax take will be tiny non? It's not a non cost operation.
Financial services is going to loose jobs over the coming years not due to Brexit, but disruptive Fintech. You don't go further damaging one of the biggest single contributors to UK Plc for fish, knitting or whatever else is in the utopia. We'd be like Greenland with a lot more people.
Fishing!!! fishing is and was a tiny part of our economy , why not talk about car manufacture , or the chemical and plastics industry , OP would have been better stating to diversify the UK economy at the volume end rather than display his prejudice.
Cottage industries are just that, fishing is a classic example. Even if we got back 100% of our waters, an extra 1.8bn in fishies, the total tax take will be tiny non? It's not a non cost operation.
Financial services is going to loose jobs over the coming years not due to Brexit, but disruptive Fintech. You don't go further damaging one of the biggest single contributors to UK Plc for fish, knitting or whatever else is in the utopia. We'd be like Greenland with a lot more people.
Whoozit said:
Define "the City"..... 660,000 people.
Good post. I work for a supplier to the City and spend very little time with the investment banks (who are the usual targets for banker bashing). When I do spend time with them it's usually with people in their IT departments who are all quite normal. Usually pretty smart and well paid by IT standards but not making vast bonuses/driving around in Fezzas and Bentleys.70% of my time is with people in retail banking who just turn the wheels so we can all have bank accounts, savings accounts, mortgages, overdrafts and unsecured loads.
The rest is with a mix or regulators, insurance companies of various sorts and other odds and sods.
I can never see the logic of putting 10-20% of these people out of jobs "because bankers".
There's nothing wrong with attempting to rebuild other parts of the economy but these people don't deserve to lose their any more than anyone else.
Some of the arguments are a bit silly, but the overall point by the OP is interesting. Just how much are we willing to give up to keep the city as it is these days? We will need to give up something to be allowed passporting, and even then it depends what the EU wants. It could well be they don't offer passporting as an option if they want to grab "our" financial services. Or offer it at a very high cost to the UK.
Also some of you have focused a little bit too much on the details that have been posted - if you do give up banking it's not just fishing that will have to cover the tax income from banking. You can reduce tax rates, encourage other businesses here etc. It doesn't make much sense to lose a solid business for uncertainty, but if we are not offered that/ it comes at too high a cost what do you do? Also it wouldn't be the entire 10-15% that would go - there would still be a pretty large percentage left over (although no idea what).
Questions like this should be looked at now, since it's a time of big change, and so if the country wants to go a different direction now is the time to do it. Particularly when you could question what the City will look like in the future with computers starting to replace more workers there. Thus workers taxes could drop, placing more emphasis on the need to keep corporation tax within the UK if possible. It is the chance to spread wealth more equally across the country, and does not have to be as black and white as most are arguing here (get rid of all of financial services for just fishing).
Also some of you have focused a little bit too much on the details that have been posted - if you do give up banking it's not just fishing that will have to cover the tax income from banking. You can reduce tax rates, encourage other businesses here etc. It doesn't make much sense to lose a solid business for uncertainty, but if we are not offered that/ it comes at too high a cost what do you do? Also it wouldn't be the entire 10-15% that would go - there would still be a pretty large percentage left over (although no idea what).
Questions like this should be looked at now, since it's a time of big change, and so if the country wants to go a different direction now is the time to do it. Particularly when you could question what the City will look like in the future with computers starting to replace more workers there. Thus workers taxes could drop, placing more emphasis on the need to keep corporation tax within the UK if possible. It is the chance to spread wealth more equally across the country, and does not have to be as black and white as most are arguing here (get rid of all of financial services for just fishing).
AC43 said:
Whoozit said:
Define "the City"..... 660,000 people.
Good post. I work for a supplier to the City and spend very little time with the investment banks (who are the usual targets for banker bashing). When I do spend time with them it's usually with people in their IT departments who are all quite normal. Usually pretty smart and well paid by IT standards but not making vast bonuses/driving around in Fezzas and Bentleys.70% of my time is with people in retail banking who just turn the wheels so we can all have bank accounts, savings accounts, mortgages, overdrafts and unsecured loads.
The rest is with a mix or regulators, insurance companies of various sorts and other odds and sods.
I can never see the logic of putting 10-20% of these people out of jobs "because bankers".
There's nothing wrong with attempting to rebuild other parts of the economy but these people don't deserve to lose their any more than anyone else.
The excesses of the "city" are confined to such a tiny minority, it's absurd to labour the sector accordingly. It was very expedient for the government and press to bash finance, but at the same time the G20 was legislating for the finance industry to support public sector debt burden via Basel3. Divert attention away from failures of the state or liberal policies. It's the same with the "immigrant" problem we evidently have. It's total nonsense, we don't have an immigrant problem, we have a lazy c**t problem.
I'd rather sacrifice the spongers on the Rock & roll, before we decimate industries. Minimum public service for benefits. Litter picking for instance. Working in libraries etc. These are all investments in the UK. The net benefits will be huge compared to the implementation costs thereof.
NRS said:
Questions like this should be looked at now,...
Questions like this should heave been asked, and answered in some detail, before the referendum. I did ask a similar question on one of the many EU threads 'Would Brexit be worth it if it meant the loss of a large part of our financial service sector?' but I never got an answer other than 'It'll never happen' (and I think one poster (guess who) accused me of being a teenage bedwetter for even considering the possibility).NRS said:
Some of the arguments are a bit silly, but the overall point by the OP is interesting. Just how much are we willing to give up to keep the city as it is these days? We will need to give up something to be allowed passporting, and even then it depends what the EU wants. It could well be they don't offer passporting as an option if they want to grab "our" financial services. Or offer it at a very high cost to the UK.
Also some of you have focused a little bit too much on the details that have been posted - if you do give up banking it's not just fishing that will have to cover the tax income from banking. You can reduce tax rates, encourage other businesses here etc. It doesn't make much sense to lose a solid business for uncertainty, but if we are not offered that/ it comes at too high a cost what do you do? Also it wouldn't be the entire 10-15% that would go - there would still be a pretty large percentage left over (although no idea what).
Questions like this should be looked at now, since it's a time of big change, and so if the country wants to go a different direction now is the time to do it. Particularly when you could question what the City will look like in the future with computers starting to replace more workers there. Thus workers taxes could drop, placing more emphasis on the need to keep corporation tax within the UK if possible. It is the chance to spread wealth more equally across the country, and does not have to be as black and white as most are arguing here (get rid of all of financial services for just fishing).
The original proposition was fairly binary as was the thread title. However, I agree with your sentiment in my earlier post re diversification at the volume end given tech advances. I do not agree we have the ability to compete on volume manufacturing though, as globalisation cannot be uninvented (regardless of whatever OP thinks).Also some of you have focused a little bit too much on the details that have been posted - if you do give up banking it's not just fishing that will have to cover the tax income from banking. You can reduce tax rates, encourage other businesses here etc. It doesn't make much sense to lose a solid business for uncertainty, but if we are not offered that/ it comes at too high a cost what do you do? Also it wouldn't be the entire 10-15% that would go - there would still be a pretty large percentage left over (although no idea what).
Questions like this should be looked at now, since it's a time of big change, and so if the country wants to go a different direction now is the time to do it. Particularly when you could question what the City will look like in the future with computers starting to replace more workers there. Thus workers taxes could drop, placing more emphasis on the need to keep corporation tax within the UK if possible. It is the chance to spread wealth more equally across the country, and does not have to be as black and white as most are arguing here (get rid of all of financial services for just fishing).
Tax incentives for fintech, creative industries, R&D, high end engineering all would be welcome; but at the base end we have to slash our welfare bill (if we offer reduced taxes).
The finance deal, will be exceptionally complex. Passporting and compliance burden are but one factor. You also cannot divorce economic cycle from legislative impact (too many people think in silos). As its stands the peripheral states are pretty f
ked, with bail in conditions you could swap one cost or risk for another. And if you think at it from the simple end of the spectrum English law is the base of nearly all Financial Agreements. No matter how much the EC or France wants it otherwise the practicalities must be acknowledged.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff