Overcomplicating Simple Issues?
Discussion
I've been thinking.
There must be occurrences in modern life where we massively over-complicate what can be a simple situation. I'm thinking along the lines of simple solutions for complex problems or radical changes to current norms. I'll give some examples of what I mean:
1) Booze cruises to France. Why not set up a dedicated tax free zone in the UK, such as the Isle of Wight (just an example), so that the revenue stays within the UK. Why give the money to the French?
2) A flat rate tax. The current system is so complex. Does a flat rate work in other countries? Could it be adopted here? Would we lose or gain tax revenue?
3) An airport in the Thames Estuary. Could it work provided excellent onward travel links? Combine this with Heathrow's 3rd runway. What are the pro's and cons? On this issue, the argument is that the 3rd runway will cause more pollution, but the average holding time is around 30 minutes, that's a lot of fuel. A 3rd runway will surely decrease this amount and go some way to reducing emissions?
I'm interested to hear other peoples thoughts on these plus any others that you may have. I don't pretend to be knowledgeable on the above subjects which is why I'd like to hear other views.
Please post any other ideas you have to change currently accepted norms for the better?
Thanks
There must be occurrences in modern life where we massively over-complicate what can be a simple situation. I'm thinking along the lines of simple solutions for complex problems or radical changes to current norms. I'll give some examples of what I mean:
1) Booze cruises to France. Why not set up a dedicated tax free zone in the UK, such as the Isle of Wight (just an example), so that the revenue stays within the UK. Why give the money to the French?
2) A flat rate tax. The current system is so complex. Does a flat rate work in other countries? Could it be adopted here? Would we lose or gain tax revenue?
3) An airport in the Thames Estuary. Could it work provided excellent onward travel links? Combine this with Heathrow's 3rd runway. What are the pro's and cons? On this issue, the argument is that the 3rd runway will cause more pollution, but the average holding time is around 30 minutes, that's a lot of fuel. A 3rd runway will surely decrease this amount and go some way to reducing emissions?
I'm interested to hear other peoples thoughts on these plus any others that you may have. I don't pretend to be knowledgeable on the above subjects which is why I'd like to hear other views.
Please post any other ideas you have to change currently accepted norms for the better?
Thanks
Abolish Road Tax and put that tax on fuel - not only will it get rid of unnecessary civil service jobs, it'd have the effect of ensuring that tax is paid by those that drive more.
Controversial I know, but simple.
Or link road tax to vehicle emissions at MOT time - it'd have the effect of trying to persuade people to ensure their cars are well maintained.
Or something.
Controversial I know, but simple.
Or link road tax to vehicle emissions at MOT time - it'd have the effect of trying to persuade people to ensure their cars are well maintained.
Or something.
Edited by james_tigerwoods on Thursday 5th November 16:07
Crusoe said:
Get rid of tax credits, just tax people less in the first place instead of taxing them more, having to apply for some back and then administrate the system for mistakes and fraud. (No wait that would put civil servants out of work and we need more of those...)
Ah, but that would also benefit the capitalist middle classes on their huge, unwarranted, £15K pa salaries. Can't have that.
Edited by Justayellowbadge on Thursday 5th November 16:11
Should be :
1) Wash Stuff.
2) Wash missus's stuff in a way that won't shrink stuff.
3) Wash stuff after 10 pints of Snakebite, dog vindaloo, and 3 picked eggs.
4) Don't do anything, just store wet towels for 3 days.
No need for the hieroglyphic clip art.
Oh, and can I nominate the word 'heiroglyphic' too, I had to check how to spell that.
pushthebutton said:
2) A flat rate tax. The current system is so complex. Does a flat rate work in other countries? Could it be adopted here? Would we lose or gain tax revenue?
Depends what the flat rate is...At the moment it's:
10% for <~£3000
20% for <~£35,000
40% for >~£35,000
At a flat rate of 10% everyone would benefit apart from the poor.
At a flat rate of 20% the poorest would be worse off, the middle class would stay the same and the rich would benefit.
At a flat rate of 30% the poor and the middle class would suffer and the rich would still benefit.
As fair as a flat rate tax is, no one would ever get voted in if it was a policy of theirs.
pushthebutton said:
2) A flat rate tax. The current system is so complex. Does a flat rate work in other countries? Could it be adopted here? Would we lose or gain tax revenue?
I argued that it was a terrible idea and (after being belittled) was referred to the Adam Smith institute who have demonstrated how it can work. It is not as simple as most people wrongly believe though.To answer your question there is a decrease in tax revenue because of the increased "tax free allowance" which would be Circa £16,000 (lower than that would cripple the poor and increase reliance on benefits).
However the flat tax would also favour the wealthy so the assumption is that people would return to Britain in a "fairer" tax system. But this is very difficult to quantify. Afterall if you're living in Monaco why the bloody hell would you want to come back to old blighty?
Personally I'm open to the concept but pessimistic of it ever being implemented.
pushthebutton said:
3) An airport in the Thames Estuary. Could it work provided excellent onward travel links? Combine this with Heathrow's 3rd runway. What are the pro's and cons? On this issue, the argument is that the 3rd runway will cause more pollution, but the average holding time is around 30 minutes, that's a lot of fuel. A 3rd runway will surely decrease this amount and go some way to reducing emissions?
Anyone who uses city airport regularly will be familiar with the place grinding to a halt when it gets foggy. If they can deal with this then great, if not then it will cause a fair bit of chaos IMO.Arese said:
sneijder said:
No need for the hieroglyphic clip art.
Oh, and can I nominate the word 'heiroglyphic' too, I had to check how to spell that.
And you still ballsed it up Oh, and can I nominate the word 'heiroglyphic' too, I had to check how to spell that.
In my defence I've just got back from 3 hours of Norwegian lessons and my brain is fried.
I nominate the Norwegian language too. When will Johnny Foreign bloke cave in and accept the fact everyone speeky English now and adopt it.
bga said:
pushthebutton said:
3) An airport in the Thames Estuary. Could it work provided excellent onward travel links? Combine this with Heathrow's 3rd runway. What are the pro's and cons? On this issue, the argument is that the 3rd runway will cause more pollution, but the average holding time is around 30 minutes, that's a lot of fuel. A 3rd runway will surely decrease this amount and go some way to reducing emissions?
Anyone who uses city airport regularly will be familiar with the place grinding to a halt when it gets foggy. If they can deal with this then great, if not then it will cause a fair bit of chaos IMO.Edited by pushthebutton on Thursday 5th November 16:27
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff