Turn on thread page Beta

Why tax the productive sector to sustain the unproductive sector? watch

    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    We? Who is this "we"?
    The UK, I'll change it for you to ensure it's not somehow misunderstood by people incapable of imagination, knew I should have included a key in my original post!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tateco)
    The UK, I'll change it for you to ensure it's not somehow misunderstood by people incapable of imagination, knew I should have included a key in my original post!
    Who in the UK? You said "we"? Are you making these decisions? Am I?
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    We? Who is this "we"?
    Me and you, hopefully :love:
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    Who in the UK? You said "we"? Are you making these decisions? Am I?
    I think we all know the answer to that one don't we :laugh:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greekislandlover)
    We actually need the unproductive part, and it needs to be paid for somehow! We all need healthcare, we all need education and we all need the bins to be emptied. None of these things can ever be self financing, so need to be paid for somehow. How would you suggest they are paid for if not out of taxation?
    I agree with you, but I wouldn't necessarily call these things unproductive, more under financed.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Why tax the productive sector to sustain the unproductive sector?

    Pointless question. The unproductive sector is, by definition, sustained by taxation of the productive sector.

    Next.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Classical Liberal)
    Police, fire service and the ambulance could all be based on insurance policies. So instead of taxing people to finance these things people could choose what they wanted.
    Right, and I suppose you'd apply the same to healthcare as well, like the American system? I suggest you watch the documentary Sicko if you don't get why this would be a bad idea. Similar reasoning would apply to other sectors as well.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by master roflcopter)
    Right, and I suppose you'd apply the same to healthcare as well, like the American system? I suggest you watch the documentary Sicko if you don't get why this would be a bad idea. Similar reasoning would apply to other sectors as well.
    I have watched it, Micheal Moore is just hilarious. Fat stupid socialist.

    And the American healthcare system is **** because the government is in bed with the insurance firms and pharmacueticals. Medicare, medicade and obama care are all the dreams of big business. Guaranteed cash flows with laws they can manipulate. It is pure corporatism.

    I am no great fan of the NHS but it is definitely better than the US healthcare system in my opinion.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rhadamanthus)
    The Broken Window Fallacy is based on the parable of the man whose shop's window was smashed. The man has to pay, say, £100 to replace the window. Someone then comes along and says that the act of destruction was a good thing due to the business that the glazier will gain from it. This belief is similar to the belief that taxation on businesses and increasing government borrowing to fund things like education is necessary/good because it provides for a healthy and educated workforce (as if the market would not cater for these things). It ignores that which is not seen, i.e. the opportunity costs for the shop owner who has been forced to abandon his plans and spend £100 on a less profitable outlet, thereby subtracting from the overall productiveness of his organisation.
    I don't understand how, or why, your applying this to the public sector. The public isn't innately distructive as with war or violance (The broken window)-it is a suppliment to the private sector rather than a replacement or something which destroys the private sector. if managed correctly then it provides boosts to economic growth by providing an educated workforce, sponsoring innovation, providing inferstructure as well as other services which either protect wealth creation (The Police, defense, law), protect contracts and trust (law) or by providing nesscary services more efficently than the private sector (Health, Social Services) etc.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The fact that seems to have escaped everyone is that the NHS pension scheme (for example) easily pays for itself - in fact it creates a £3 billion surplus that goes straight to the treasury never to be seen again. In fact it was recently described by some relevent independent assessment agency (I forget the acronym) as being "sustainable and affordable for the forseeable future". They only just renegotiated the package 3 years ago. So why the need to cut it again?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WharfedaleTiger)
    I don't understand how, or why, your applying this to the public sector. The public isn't innately distructive as with war or violance (The broken window)-it is a suppliment to the private sector rather than a replacement or something which destroys the private sector. if managed correctly then it provides boosts to economic growth by providing an educated workforce, sponsoring innovation, providing inferstructure as well as other services which either protect wealth creation (The Police, defense, law), protect contracts and trust (law) or by providing nesscary services more efficently than the private sector (Health, Social Services) etc.
    No, he doesn't understand either. He doesn't seem to understand half the stuff he posts. I think he's drunk a lot of the time.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Classical Liberal)
    I am no great fan of the NHS but it is definitely better than the US healthcare system in my opinion.
    Yeah, the NHS could definitely be improved a lot- it's not perfect, but it's definitely better than the US system.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I suppose the ultimate answer to this question is the answer to the question "what is the economy actually for in the first place?"

    People often forget that important facets of a strong economy such as efficient businesses, productive sectors, growth, low positive inflation, a large GDP etc. are not ends in themselves. They're simply the means of incentivising labour and redistributing the goods and services produced so that we can increase utility and standard of living for the general populace as a whole. In the majority of cases the capitalist system of private enterprise and the free market provide extremely effective tools for doing exactly this. But in many cases they don't - which is where public enterprise steps in. That's why we have public services in the first place.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WharfedaleTiger)
    I don't understand how, or why, your applying this to the public sector. The public isn't innately distructive as with war or violance (The broken window)-it is a suppliment to the private sector rather than a replacement or something which destroys the private sector. if managed correctly then it provides boosts to economic growth by providing an educated workforce, sponsoring innovation, providing inferstructure as well as other services which either protect wealth creation (The Police, defense, law), protect contracts and trust (law) or by providing nesscary services more efficently than the private sector (Health, Social Services) etc.
    The public sector spending is financed by taxing, debt or printing money. All of these are breaking windows.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by master roflcopter)
    Yeah, the NHS could definitely be improved a lot- it's not perfect, but it's definitely better than the US system.

    (Original post by Classical Liberal)
    I have watched it, Micheal Moore is just hilarious. Fat stupid socialist.

    And the American healthcare system is **** because the government is in bed with the insurance firms and pharmacueticals. Medicare, medicade and obama care are all the dreams of big business. Guaranteed cash flows with laws they can manipulate. It is pure corporatism.

    I am no great fan of the NHS but it is definitely better than the US healthcare system in my opinion.
    Is that really the question though? The NHS or the American system? I mean those are hardly the only two kinds of healthcare systems
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Classical Liberal)
    The public sector spending is financed by taxing, debt or printing money. All of these are breaking windows.
    The private sector couldn't operate without a healthy stable society to sell their good s and services to.

    This private vs public stuff is nonsense.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Is that really the question though? The NHS or the American system? I mean those are hardly the only two kinds of healthcare systems
    No, obviously not! I was just saying that between the insurance type system of America and our system, ours is the better one. Clearly ours is not the perfect system and there are other systems that work as well/better..
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Classical Liberal)
    The public sector spending is financed by taxing, debt or printing money. All of these are breaking windows.
    I'm sorry, but I don't really understand what you mean with this 'breaking windows' thing at all...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by master roflcopter)
    I'm sorry, but I don't really understand what you mean with this 'breaking windows' thing at all...
    That's cos its bollox.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by master roflcopter)
    I'm sorry, but I don't really understand what you mean with this 'breaking windows' thing at all...
    He means that if the money wasn't being taken off people as tax, then it could be spent on something else which you might naively think would boost the economy.

    Of course, its also true that if people were forced to pay large sums for healthcare at point of contact, that would mean they had less money to pay for other stuff, so that is "breaking windows" to the same extent.

    (Actually to a greater extent because it would hit the poorest harder, and it is the poorest who have a higher MPC.)
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.