tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33451096.post8353135626375743048..comments2024-03-28T07:14:01.343+00:00Comments on donpaskini: Welfare to workdonpaskinihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05963534291677598324noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33451096.post-81505824699158040452007-03-08T17:15:00.000+00:002007-03-08T17:15:00.000+00:00At the moment the UK has one of, if not the, lowes...At the moment the UK has one of, if not the, lowest corporation tax rates in the western world. There ought to be some scope to raise it without creating the mass disinvestment you envisage.<BR/><BR/>Duff by name...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33451096.post-80445889471106394992007-03-08T09:42:00.000+00:002007-03-08T09:42:00.000+00:00"I'm in favour of *raising* the present national r..."I'm in favour of *raising* the present national rate of tax on corporate profits"<BR/><BR/>That's a 'brill' idea! Then, when all the multi-nationals depart these shores for countries where the tax and red tape burden is much less, there will be zillions of unemployed people thrown onto the streets who can be taken on as traffic wardens, diversity inspectors and such like and their pay and pensions can be paid for by, er, ... (Let's start again, shall we?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33451096.post-53686892020938566602007-03-07T23:35:00.000+00:002007-03-07T23:35:00.000+00:00actually I'm in favour of *raising* the present na...actually I'm in favour of *raising* the present national rate of tax on corporate profits to increase the government revenue base but discounting tax rates where it assists regional developmentAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33451096.post-44308458773721484512007-03-07T23:22:00.000+00:002007-03-07T23:22:00.000+00:00David Duff,yes I do think more public service jobs...David Duff,<BR/><BR/>yes I do think more public service jobs at decent wages would be socially beneficial. <BR/><BR/>On the 'going broke' thing...cutting business taxes from their present levels (outside the world of Reaganomics) would cost the government money.<BR/><BR/>As my point about regional policy implied I'd rather we cut business taxes in a targeted way to create more private sector or self-employed jobs in areas of high unemployment. Yes, it would cost money.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33451096.post-5431996990663614992007-03-07T11:48:00.000+00:002007-03-07T11:48:00.000+00:00Actually, more help for people to start up busines...Actually, more help for people to start up businesses or be self-employed is something that I think should happen. It's something which has particularly been identified as a priority by some black and minority ethnic people in poverty. Self-employment has the advantage over working for many employers that people are able to manage their time and have more control over their lives and working patterns.<BR/><BR/>Your point about lowering benefits is still a stupid one, though.donpaskinihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05963534291677598324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33451096.post-59031534553491339722007-03-07T11:38:00.000+00:002007-03-07T11:38:00.000+00:00"Here's a radical idea. To reduce unemployment, th..."Here's a radical idea. To reduce unemployment, the government might think about putting serious resources into *creating more jobs* in the public and private sectors, not least through a proper regional policy."<BR/><BR/>Here's an even more radical idea: cut business taxes and red tape so that more people will have a go at starting their own businesses and thus employ others. Of course, if you really want *more* litter wardens, council tax inspectors, 'Elf 'n' Safety' Jobsworths, etc, etc, all on good salaries and pensions for life, so be it, but don't be surprised when we go broke!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33451096.post-57331714386228654572007-03-06T20:56:00.000+00:002007-03-06T20:56:00.000+00:00I see the report-on the basis of no evidence-descr...I see the report-on the basis of no evidence-describes unemployment in Britain as basically 'frictional'. <BR/><BR/>You don't exactly get that impression from looking at the considerable surplus of registered unemployed over the number of job vacancies that exists even at a national level, never mind in certain areas. At the moment the New Deal is-to a considerable extent-a revolving door between low paid temporary work and short term unemployment that helps keep down the 'long term unemployment' figures.<BR/><BR/>Here's a radical idea. To reduce unemployment, the government might think about putting serious resources into *creating more jobs* in the public and private sectors, not least through a proper regional policy. Unemployment as an issue needs to be put back on the political agenda.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33451096.post-44705260033632705552007-03-05T19:19:00.000+00:002007-03-05T19:19:00.000+00:00"wages which are too low for people to be better o..."wages which are too low for people to be better off in real terms in work"<BR/><BR/>Or, to put it another way, benefits which are so high that wages look like a poor option!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com