Posts Tagged laws
Surely there is a good idea to use the tax system to give incentives to companies to move to high unemployment areas? And at the same time, give extra incentives for companies to export more goods to new markets.
First of all, if a company opens up a factory in an unemployment black spot, as designated by the Board of Trade, a series of incentives could be given. First of all, lower rates of Corporation Tax could be levied for the first ten years. And also Capital Gains taxes could be reduced for the same period.
In addition, a totally free “Employers Contribution” to National Insurance could be made for each employee who has (a) lived in the local area for a year or so, and (b) has been unemployed for over six months. And this should continue for the first five years.
Incentives for exporting to new markets are not quite so easy to assess. It is an expensive business travelling to, and opening up, new markets in countries you haven’t traded with before. I suggest that all sales to new markets have the entire gross profit for that market, taken out of the tax equation for the first five years.
I know that these lengthy terms are over the life of the Government’s term of five years but there is a precedent for politicians biding future Governments into decisions made on long tern projects. I am referring to signing treaties taking us further into the European Union.
19 February 2009 – A report by UCL Student Human Rights Programme Compiled for the Convention on Modern Liberty
One of the problems with the erosion of liberty in Britain over the last decade was that the public failed to pay attention to what was happening in Parliament. Laws that fundamentally challenged our traditions of rights and liberty and flew in the face of the Human Rights Act (“HRA”) were passed with relatively little debate. Few grasped the impact they would have on our society and Ministers were able to brush aside protests with assurances that their desire to protect us was equal to their respect for civil liberties.
The difficulty campaigners faced was to press home the argument about the scale of the loss. An account was needed to show that the legislative programme, which swept away centuries old rights and transferred so much power from the individual to the state, actually existed.
Now we have that evidence and the Convention on Modern Liberty can demonstrate with confidence what Britain has lost and discuss how this crisis of liberty took root in one of the world’s oldest democracies and what to do about it. This report by the UCL Student Human Rights Programme (“UCLSHRP”) is a concise and approachable inventory of the loss. It is a profoundly disturbing document, even for those who thought they knew about the subject, for it not only describes the wholesale removal of rights that were apparently protected by the HRA and set down nearly 800 years ago in Magna Carta, it also shows how the unarticulated liberties that we assumed were somehow guaranteed by British culture have been compromised.
Read the rest of the article here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/19606667/What-We-Have-Lost
Pensioners could be forced to carry identity cards to qualify for free bus travel, a Government minister has said.Published: 7:00AM GMT 18 Mar 2010
Campaigners last night attacked the plans, with some suggesting that it could stop retired people who are opposed to the controversial scheme from using buses altogether.
The Home Office estimates that more than 17 million cards will be in circulation by 2017 – although the Tories have pledged to scrap them if they win the general election.
This government is determined that, by hook or by crook, they will force us all to have identity cards.
The real purpose of these electr0nic, biometric identity cards is so they can have an “audit trail” of everything any citizen does, and everywhere they go to, at the exact times of travel, stored on their huge mainframe computers so that, at any time, day or night, they can check up on where you may be or have been.
With Councils paying members of the community of spying on each other; with the labour government having introduced 4,300 new laws since 1997 (that’s an average of one a day); with the government creating a huge amount of non-jobs, and turning a blind eye (although they say otherwise) to people on benefits, they create permanent voters for their party. The Labour Party know they can’t openly turn Britain into a dictatorship, but they can stack the odds up in their favour. And I haven’t even mentioned how they fiddle with postal votes.
I, for one, will not be surprised if Gordon Brown wins the election and has another term to fuck up the Anglo-Saxon even further. How the left hate us.
These could well be the headlines that Labour will not want to see if they go ahead with their plans to make people insure their dogs.
The figure that many seem to think this will cost is around £600 a year. But, pet insurance does go up each year, so nobody knows where it will end up.
And, how many poor families will not be able to use the insurance and will elect to pay £40 to have their beloved pet put to sleep rather than see it starve through its owners lack of available funds?
How many votes lost can one equate to such a headline? Half a million perhaps? Especially when most pet dogs are harmless.