OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[MadAmster]

University Principals. Can they be compared to CEO's in business? Quite probably yes. The bigger and better known tend to have some faculties that cost a lot of money to run. The actual cost to students would run into tens of thousands or more a year if not for sponsors, bequests and the huge amounts they charge foreign students to study there. If the Principal can be seen as greatly responsible for all this extra "income" then he may well be worth a large stipend.

[ramAnag]

Whats different is I'm conceptually trying to help you with your cash-starved public sector issue, and exec pay saved in the private sector wont help with that. I've already offered the idea of reducing demand rather than supply, now I'm proposing distribution of cash further down the food chain rather than onto the gravy train

And again (is this some kind of record?) I can only agree with your final sentence...but maybe the ‘cash starved public sector issue’ will only be resolved by a rethink on the distribution of money from the Exchequer or, to speak the unspeakable, an increase in Income Tax.
Perhaps, seeing as the electorate were obviously thought capable of reaching an informed decision on something as complex as Brexit we should now have a referendum on what the priorities should be for public spending...multi choice answers...HS2, the Armed Forces, Trident, Education, the NHS, civilised care facilities for the elderly or restoration of the Houses of Parliament etc.

[Andy_Faber]

And again (is this some kind of record?) I can only agree with your final sentence...but maybe the ‘cash starved public sector issue’ will only be resolved by a rethink on the distribution of money from the Exchequer or, to speak the unspeakable, an increase in Income Tax.
Perhaps, seeing as the electorate were obviously thought capable of reaching an informed decision on something as complex as Brexit we should now have a referendum on what the priorities should be for public spending...multi choice answers...HR2, the Armed Forces, Trident, Education, the NHS, civilised care facilities for the elderly or restoration of the Houses of Parliament etc.

And there we disagree. An increase in income tax is the easy way out, driving efficiency is the way to go. And I DON'T mean slashing budgets, that's a crude tool. I mean making things run better and then reaping the time and money benefits of doing that. I've only worked on the margins of process improvement/efficiency, but Mrs F spent a decade in the thick of it and her employers made some startling changes (in the private sector), notably without redundancy impact

As I'm sure you know, the electorate won't be trusted with such decisions, because they would of course be inclined to vote for the return of capital punishment and to slash/remove foreign aid. Ironically, both of these changes would aid your desire of increasing resources available for public services, but I'm sure not in the way you want.

[MadAmster]

I am in favour of foreign aid. Partly because some of those in need are from countries we raped of their natural recources in order to make GB Great. We owe them IMO.

Some are countries with Space programmes and Nuclear arms. If they prefer to spend on those two "projects" rather than on your own people and their futures, then you should not receive aid.

[ramAnag]

And there we disagree. An increase in income tax is the easy way out, driving efficiency is the way to go. And I DON'T mean slashing budgets, that's a crude tool. I mean making things run better and then reaping the time and money benefits of doing that. I've only worked on the margins of process improvement/efficiency, but Mrs F spent a decade in the thick of it and her employers made some startling changes (in the private sector), notably without redundancy impact

As I'm sure you know, the electorate won't be trusted with such decisions, because they would of course be inclined to vote for the return of capital punishment and to slash/remove foreign aid. Ironically, both of these changes would aid your desire of increasing resources available for public services, but I'm sure not in the way you want.

Take your point about taxation, Andy, but I think we have to, at some point, recognise that tax can be a good thing provided that the money raised is targeted properly.
As for the referendum point...it was partly ‘tongue in cheek’, but the serious point is...if, and I agree again, the electorate can’t be trusted with such decisions, then wtf were they ever given the ‘vote’ over our future role in Europe? Totally senseless imo.

Also agree with MA about Foreign Aid.

[roger_ramjet]

My two pence worth:

HS2 - Vote NO to investment therein but use the resources for a more sensible investment in public transport - really, does it matter if we can get to Birmingham from London 20 minutes quicker! Idiotic in my view but Im sure others will differ.

The Armed Forces - Vote NO to investment therein and realise that in terms of military might we are pointless, so why try to keep up.

Trident see above

Education Priority Number 1 for spending, but direct spending sensibly recognising the evolution of the future workforce needs. We need to reconsider why we are educating people: is it just to get a relevant future workforce or is it for the sake of it and the glory of knowledge for its own sake. or where does that balance lie?

The NHS - needs a radical rethink too. Wrongly directed spend on grotesque management infrastructures, seems to waste more money than it spends (this based on knowledge from friends/clients working inside to try to make it efficient). Has to refocus on what its there for - to care for patients: not to provide jobs for life for bureaucrats. Needs to reevaluate free prescriptions system as almost everyone seems to get then free when they could perfectly well afford to pay some or all of cost of drugs - myself included as a diabetic. Maybe means test it: also make people responsible for their own actions - make people contribute directly to lifestyle abuse afflictions: be it smoking, drinking, obesity etc. Favour investment therein but only when it addresses its own overbloated economic waste and brings back personal accountability.

Civilised care facilities for the elderly - yes but again there has to be a return to family values where children will look after parents not just throw the problem on the state. Consider the inverse - what if parents had children and then just gave them to the state to look after? There is a "one size fits all" mentality about this and again it has to be "needs focussed".

Restoration of the Houses of Parliament - if it pays its way in terms of functional and tourism revenue, yes: if not its just a building - soon enough it will all be done on video conferencing and whatever future that has anyway!!

[roger_ramjet]

Take your point about taxation, Andy, but I think we have to, at some point, recognise that tax can be a good thing provided that the money raised is targeted properly.
As for the referendum point...it was partly ‘tongue in cheek’, but the serious point is...if, and I agree again, the electorate can’t be trusted with such decisions, then wtf were they ever given the ‘vote’ over our future role in Europe? Totally senseless imo.

Also agree with MA about Foreign Aid.

Foreign Aid - limited to impoverished nations for sure; also tie in more directly to future trade agreements, especially as we are about to break the restrictive shackles of EU trade agreements. but aid to BRIC and Tiger economies? Really? I dont buy MA's argument of "reparation for past sins" - it smacks rather of the compensation for slavery argument. Next the Italians will be asking for money off the Germans since Attila the Hun destroyed Rome. This though could be a growth are in the next 10 years as we try to work our way into preferential trade deals with emerging economies: reality is that charity is a two way street....

Earnings related taxation is in many ways a flawed concept: move onto a consumption based taxation system and many of the flaws in the current system will be eliminated (as would be my job!!). No need for anti avoidance measures although no doubt there will be new ways found to get round a consumption tax. Have a basic flat rate tax on essentials such as food, clothes, housing etc and then a luxury tax on non essentials such as cars (although allow a tesco blue label car as an essential) electronics, holidays etc

A consumption based tax would be augmented by some sort of savings/global wealth tax to make the haves pay more than the have nots, which is where the complications should arise. So abolish income tax, boost VAT and introduce an assets based tax. Simples (and you can sneak in some bracket creep which always happens in radical change!)

[ramAnag]

Foreign Aid - limited to impoverished nations for sure; also tie in more directly to future trade agreements, especially as we are about to break the restrictive shackles of EU trade agreements. but aid to BRIC and Tiger economies? Really? I dont buy MA's argument of "reparation for past sins" - it smacks rather of the compensation for slavery argument. Next the Italians will be asking for money off the Germans since Attila the Hun destroyed Rome. This though could be a growth are in the next 10 years as we try to work our way into preferential trade deals with emerging economies: reality is that charity is a two way street....

Earnings related taxation is in many ways a flawed concept: move onto a consumption based taxation system and many of the flaws in the current system will be eliminated (as would be my job!!). No need for anti avoidance measures although no doubt there will be new ways found to get round a consumption tax. Have a basic flat rate tax on essentials such as food, clothes, housing etc and then a luxury tax on non essentials such as cars (although allow a tesco blue label car as an essential) electronics, holidays etc

A consumption based tax would be augmented by some sort of savings/global wealth tax to make the haves pay more than the have nots, which is where the complications should arise. So abolish income tax, boost VAT and introduce an assets based tax. Simples (and you can sneak in some bracket creep which always happens in radical change!)

Very interesting!

Don’t agree about foreign aid being conditional upon future trade agreements though. Surely aid shlould be directed to where it is most needed regardless...or is altruism entirely dead (silly question).

[Ram59]

HS2 is always looked at in a simplistic view of spending all that money so that us brummies can get to London 20 minutes quicker. The facts are that the rail system is vastly overcrowded, even Corbyn can't find a seat. Why did we build the M1 when we had a perfectly good A1 trunk road?

So what's the solution, increase the 2 tracks up to 4? This would be nigh on impossible, every bridge would have to be rebuilt, as would the current stations and buildings near to the tracks demolished and think of the many years of disruption to the existing rail traffic.

So the sensible answer is to build a new line causing as little disturbance as possible and while we are building this new line, lets make it a quick one for very little extra cost. Could you imagine the fuss if it was made to be as slow as the rest of the network.

This is coming from a person who's one man business in rented premises is getting evicted with no little or no compensation.

[roger_ramjet]

Very interesting!

Don’t agree about foreign aid being conditional upon future trade agreements though. Surely aid shlould be directed to where it is most needed regardless...or is altruism entirely dead (silly question).

Altruism long dead to my mind