Would you pay a terror tax?

Former Member

Just the latest twist in the war on terror is that, surprise surprise, it costs a lot of money to have police swarming everywhere, £500,000 a day in fact.......and so the government is tapping their fingers thinking, gee how can we pay for this? oh I know, let's tax the people that always works a treat.......my question is would you pay a terror tax to feel 'safe'?.......my personal bias is intentionally transparent, only last night there was a helicopter hovering over my area for a good hour with no obvious motive, apart from letting everyone know it was there........very strange.......why should i pay for that?

Former Member

More to the point why should I have to pay for the helicopter hovering over YOUR area.

I think we get taxed on enough as it is and already have the feeling that my tax (Council tax, road tax, etc...) isn't being plowed back into my community but finds it's way down the M74 and into the London coffers.

Former Member

Why? Is it any different from the myriad of other things that my tax money goes on?

Former Member

Now, I would actually not object to more policemen on our streets and buses... so long as they manage to keep their fingers off their guns' triggers and that they also tackle the kind of crimes which we are infinitely more likely to suffer from: muggings, assaults on buses and crack dealers.

Many people will have seen more coppers on their neighbourhood in the last two weeks than they have seen in the last 20 years. Putting the tragic circumstances behind their presence aside, this will have been a welcome sight for many.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

Now, I would actually not object to more policemen on our streets and buses... so long as they manage to keep their fingers off their guns' triggers and that they also tackle the kind of crimes which we are infinitely more likely to suffer from: muggings, assaults on buses and crack dealers.

Many people will have seen more coppers on their neighbourhood in the last two weeks than they have seen in the last 20 years. Putting the tragic circumstances behind their presence aside, this will have been a welcome sight for many.

Wouldn't disagree with that.

Former Member

But why should this increase sighting of police cost us extra money?

Surely the police are getting paid no matter where they are working. Or have they drafted in extra police from a previously unpaid sector. Sure I can understand the extra cost of flying helicopters and stuff but extra cost of a copper plodding the street and not sitting on his arse?

And for the record I haven't seen any increase in police presence in my area. Granted I live in a quiet suburb but a terrorist attack here would cause as much outrage as anywhere.

Former Member

I've seen a lot more police at Victoria Station and at my underground and around Walthamstow Market on the weekend.

The extra cost is police working overtime and not getting leave. I understand British Transport Police have told all their officers that they are not getting any summer leave - in which case they'll also be having to pay compensation for any holidays which have to be cancelled.

Former Member

Fair enough. I'm sure I'd be pretty pissed if I had to cancel my hols. Surely the government has a stash of cash somewhere that can cover the extra cost though. They manage to pull ££ out of a magic hat for war, Africa, etc...

Former Member

But you'd have still paid tax for it - money doesn't just magically appear in the Govt coffers. You are either taxed for it (or at least someone is) or its borrowed in which case future generations are being taxed for it.

Former Member

As an aside on war and taxation we've almost finished paying off the money we borrowed from the US in WW2.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/vo020228/text/20228w04.htm

Bob Spink: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what outstanding liabilities there are to the United Kingdom of lend-lease loan facilities arranged during the Second World War; [38441]


(2) what total payments have been made to meet World War II debts owed to the United Kingdom by other countries; what debts remain unpaid; and what the schedule is of future payments to the UK; [38425]
(3) what the level is of First World War debt owed by the United Kingdom to the United States of America; in what year repayments were last made to the USA; and what plans he has to (a) pay off the debt and (b) cancel liability to this debt; [38427]

(4) what outstanding schedule of payments the United Kingdom Government will make to the USA in respect of World War II debt; and what the date is of the final payment; [38424]


28 Feb 2002 : Column 1440W


(5) what loans and other financial liabilities incurred by the United Kingdom with the United States of America for World War II (a) have been paid and (b) are outstanding; [38426]

(6) what recent representations the United Kingdom Government have made to the USA for the cancellation of (a) World War I and (b) World War II debts and lend-lease loans. [38440]



Ruth Kelly: The information is as follows.

First World War debt

At the end of the First World War the United Kingdom debt to the United States amounted to around ÿ850 million. Repayments of the debt were made between 1923 and 1931. In 1931, President Hoover of the United States proposed a one-year moratorium on all War debts, which allowed extensive international discussions on the general problems of debt repayment to be held. However, no satisfactory agreement was reached. In the absence of such an agreement no payments have been made to, or received from, other nations since 1934.

At the time of the moratorium the United Kingdom was owed more by other nations (ÿ2,269 billion) than the outstanding principal it owed the United States ($4,368 billion—at 1934 exchange rates this was around ÿ866 million).

Second World War debt

Under a 1945 Agreement the United States Government lent the United Kingdom a total of $4,336 million (around ÿ1,075 million at 1945 exchange rates) in war loans. These loans were taken out under two facilities: (i) a Line of Credit of $3,750 million (around ÿ930 million at 1945 exchange rates); and (ii) a Lend-Lease loan facility of $586 million (around ÿ145 million at 1945 exchange rates), which represented the settlement with the United States for Lend-Lease and Reciprocal Aid and for the final settlement of the financial claims of each government against the other arising out of the conduct of the Second World War.


28 Feb 2002 : Column 1441W


Under the Agreement the loans would be repaid in 50 annual instalments commencing in 1950. However the Agreement allowed deferral of annual payments of both principal and interest if necessary because of prevailing international exchange rate conditions and the level of the United Kingdom's foreign currency and gold reserves. The United Kingdom has deferred payments on six occasions. Repayment of the war loans to the United States Government should therefore be completed on 31 December 2006, subject to the United Kingdom not choosing to exercise its option to defer payment.

As at 31 March 2001 principal of $346,287,953 (ÿ243,573,154 at the exchange rate on that day) was outstanding on the loans provided by the United States Government in 1945. The Government intend to meet its obligations under the 1945 Agreement by repaying the United States Government in full the amounts lend in 1945.

All World War II debts owed to the United Kingdom by other countries have either been repaid or settlements have been agreed with the countries concerned. Details are provided in the Finance Accounts of the United Kingdom and their successor the Supplementary Statements to the Consolidated Fund and National Loans Fund Accounts for the financial years 1945–46 to 1987–88 and the following Command Papers:

Former Member

I wouldn't pay 'terror tax', it's a stupid idea. We don't need to employ more bullies to search Asians and fire bullets randomly at anybody who isn't caucasian.

Former Member

terror tax!
i nearly threw a thromby there.

Former Member

now if they were to build a big huge ugly city in snowdonia ...all these traffic cops would have to head there ...leaving me alone.
i'm going to vote yes tommorow for the by pass ...thanx for the help.

Former Member

i dont get it. They taken away our rights n stuff, n now they wana charge us for it. all this stuff is really startin to take the piss. i think we shud all grab out pitchforks and head upto london.

Former Member

It's not like Labour to want to tax people, is it?

Stop MPs getting their grotesque salaries and there's enough money for everyone.
Get this Government to stop giving IT contracts to corrupt firms and there's enough money for everyone.
Take some of the obscene salary away from Iain Blair and there's plenty of money for everyone.

Teh_Gerbil

I've got a better idea. Why not levy a tax on those carrying out terrorist attacks? If you are gonig to carry one out, you must pay at least £1,000,000 per attack.

We get taxed to much now. Britain is the most taxed nation. It takes the piss.

Former Member

Teh_Gerbil wrote:

Britain is the most taxed nation.

It is? Can you prove that?

I know we are often told that this is the case by the right-wing press, but I've yet to see anything which confirms that. You need to compare personal tax and corporate taxes too...

~~~~

As for the original question. Yes I have a problem with this, as it supports the permise that we need the security measures being put in place.

Having said that, if we saw a comparable drop in taxes for MPs salaries or a reduction in the "speed trap" tax brought about through Gatso then I would be a little more interested. Maybe.

Former Member

apollo_69 wrote:

my personal bias is intentionally transparent, only last night there was a helicopter hovering over my area for a good hour with no obvious motive, apart from letting everyone know it was there........very strange.......why should i pay for that?

Yes your personal bias is transparent. You have no idea why the police helicopter was there, really pisses me off when people critisize the police in that way. You have zero information to make that claim. It's just your own paranoia.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

Now, I would actually not object to more policemen on our streets and buses... so long as they manage to keep their fingers off their guns' triggers and that they also tackle the kind of crimes which we are infinitely more likely to suffer from: muggings, assaults on buses and crack dealers.

Many people will have seen more coppers on their neighbourhood in the last two weeks than they have seen in the last 20 years. Putting the tragic circumstances behind their presence aside, this will have been a welcome sight for many.

Yeah, exactly.

Teh_Gerbil

We are the most taxed nation personally. The thing that pisses me off is that they waste the majority of it. They earn over £3billion from road users each year. How much is, on average, reinvested in the road networks? £3million. And our road networks are shit.

The NHS is given loads, wasted on pointless adminstrators, very little reaching the wards. The same is true elsewhere. Public Transport, Police...

Don't cut taxes, but don't bring in daft new ones just to pocket a bit extra. Reinvest what we have properly.

Former Member

Teh_Gerbil wrote:

We are the most taxed nation personally.

Again, can you show me that?

You might also want to consider how much those other nations pay for private healthcare etc as those costs are not borne by UK taxpayers in addition to their taxes... ETA I mean not out of necessity, maybe out of choice they will...

The thing that pisses me off is that they waste the majority of it.

Who's "they", do you just count the waste by civil servant and Mps, or do you include those people who waste resources by hoax calls to the police/fire/ambulance service and those who do not turn up for health appointments? What about fly tippers, doe sthey waste taxpayers moeny too?

They earn over £3billion from road users each year. How much is, on average, reinvested in the road networks? £3million. And our road networks are shit.

I won't disagree with the last point, however can you point to anything which supports your view that £3m is all that is invested in roads annually?

The NHS is given loads

How much per head is "given" to the NHS, do you know?

wasted on pointless adminstrators, very little reaching the wards.

Firslt, wrong person to say that to

But also, why just wards? Considering that they actually account for a tiny proportion of the healthcare needs of the population why are you only concerned about them.?

Oh, and who tells you how much goes to wards? It wouldn't be the "pointless" administrators, would it?

Reinvest what we have properly.

By "properly" what do you mean?

Former Member

-[MoonRat]- wrote:

I wouldn't pay 'terror tax', it's a stupid idea. We don't need to employ more bullies to search Asians and fire bullets randomly at anybody who isn't caucasian.

That's a particularly narrow-sighted and knee-jerk line to take imho.

If we're going to continue on the the current foreign policy course, it's preferable we have the funds to counter-act terrorist activity. Where this money comes from, I don't know. But it's not really the question.

The alternative is to reform foreign policy. Do that and the terrorist threat subsides. However, I don't forsee this happening - so tightening security and generally improving the intelligence services would be the next best option in terms of preventing further attacks.

Teh_Gerbil

Scrapping departments like this would be a start...

Um, I read the road thingy in Auto Express a while back.

Yes, we pay for the services, I have no grumble at that at all. I don't mind paying for public services. IF they work. And now they are being privatised. See: Public Transport. And the tax doesn't go down. Um... shit. But, can you justify the service we receiveand that we still pay more than other countries? And hte fact 70% of the price of petrol is fuel? Tobacco tax? Alcohol? Andyet the NHS is still shite? Its that very little money get to where it is needed. Im sorry, i know we need administrators... but... to many, to many. The spending on the NHS is increasing, yet the service deteriorates and Hospitals are closed. My Local one went, along with my mum's job, as she used to work there. When I say "Wards" I mean, through various regulatory bodies etc, nabbing bits of the money so they can fund whatever they do. Sigh.

AS for evidence, I tend to read most of my stuff and not keep papers, or turn it up in random web-browsing without bookmarks. And I can never find anything on google ever, without a milenia of trawling. One day, a good search engine will be made. While we may not be in any oine set area, overall, I feel we must at least be one the most taxed nations. Road Tax is madly high, worse every year *Cringe* im dreading driving. Fuel too... now they are taxing individual roads! And maybe even pay as you go?! Tobacco is expensive... and so forth. It all adds up to a big total.

Properly reinvesting? Well, getting it so the services work maybe? We pay enough for them, other countries do it on less. I notice public transport in nearly every other country i've been too is good. 'Cept rhodes, where the bus drivers stop and chat to each other in the road. But that was, at least, amusing. I jsut want to know where the hell this monery goes? WHY is the NHS so fucked up?

Former Member

Teh_Gerbil wrote:

Scrapping departments like this would be a start...

?

the british potatoe council?

cut and paste .....>

The British Potato Council is all about Improving Competitiveness and Increasing Usage of GB potatoes. We are a non-departmental public body (NDPB) funded by potato growers and trade purchasers.

Teh_Gerbil

Oh dear. My faith in my college just fell... I was told that was a government body. :shocking:

Former Member

Teh_Gerbil wrote:

Oh dear. My faith in my college just fell... I was told that was a government body. :shocking:

that was a cut and paste from YOUR link!

Teh_Gerbil

I'm afriad i didn't read the site, I just googled it after hearing about it.

Former Member

Teh_Gerbil wrote:

Oh dear. My faith in my college just fell... I was told that was a government body. :shocking:

It is - its a non-Departmental Government Body, or Quango as we used to call them when I was at school.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quango

Former Member

Teh_Gerbil wrote:

The NHS is given loads, wasted on pointless adminstrators, very little reaching the wards. The same is true elsewhere. Public Transport, Police...

Given how much more money Labour has put into the NHS there should be more noticeable improvements. They need to cut the amount of waste but I think like most people I’d agree in that spending more on the NHS is a good idea if it’s spent well. Public transport hasn’t been given the amount it needs. The tube should be getting a lot more. Education, police and defence all need more too. And I think social security should get less.

Former Member

So is anyone going to actually not pay or are you going to piss and moan and then cough up like normal?

Henry David Thoreau is laughing, I can hear him.

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote:

Given how much more money Labour has put into the NHS there should be more noticeable improvements. They need to cut the amount of waste but I think like most people I’d agree in that spending more on the NHS is a good idea if it’s spent well. Public transport hasn’t been given the amount it needs. The tube should be getting a lot more. Education, police and defence all need more too. And I think social security should get less.

The tube? I think that The Glasgow Underground should be given more so it can expand. It's ridiculous how big this city is and how small the subway is. One of the most reliable modes f transport in Glasgow and it's restricted.