http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9221081/What-can-the-Government-cut-to-make-savings.html
Yay! Let the surfs watch Correy instead of going to a museum, so we can fund inheritance and corporation tax cuts!
expert Alison Wolf estimates that about half of government expenditure on skills is wasted. If the budget for this area was cut, that could save close to £2bn. If funding to research councils was reduced by a similar proportion that could save an additional £1.5bn.
People don't need an education or skills, they just need to be the good cleaners and waiters that we want them to be.
Its worse than that, under this government the serfs have been so poorly treated they've forgotten how to spell "serfs".
If funding to research councils was reduced by a similar proportion that could save an additional £1.5bn.
Whilst they're on that subject, how about killing all the poor, that would save a load of money...
Precisely, I'm clearly a walking manefeztation of tory policiii. Yo.
gwaelod - MemberIts worse than that, under this government the serfs have been so poorly treated they've forgotten how to spell "serfs".
It's "smurfs", you div.
I didn't see a linky to the Kew protest website. Can anyone help, please?
It would be very English of us, if after all the cuts....we finally rioted over cuts to kew.
They can cut health, benefits and pensions....but my god...if they cut funding to the place with pretty flowers that serves nice but overpriced tea....
Well, the cuts aren't all bad!
Hah!
Tom - have you contributed any of your own money to Kew and if not, why not ?
There's more to it than flowers and tea though: centre of excellence, international reputation, historic archive and such. These things are priceless.
Trafford Council built themselves a lovely new building along with some lovely office furniture, monitors and a nice carpark etc etc etc.
Longford Park nearby has had to close its animal petting area due to council cuts.
What next? Build houses/sell off our parks to developers?..
Government's 'austerity measures' could put English game back 50 years, claims leading Football Association figure
Awesome as that would put us at 1964, only 2 years till we win a world cup 🙂
For every £1 in tax collected by HMRC, 48p is spent in the collection of said tax.
I think savings could be made...
Aren't cuts to corporation tax sort of academic, as none of them pay any anyway. I thought every multinational in the world now shares the same head office, located in a flat above a bookies in Luxembourg?
Government's 'austerity measures' could put English game back 50 years
So that'd mean cheaper football strips, gate prices etc?
Tom - have you contributed any of your own money to Kew and if not, why not ?
I have a yearly membership, as I do for ZSL. The rest of my wife allocated pocket money goes on a yearly subscription to Nature, New Scientist and a savings account so I don't feel poor whilst I'm studying for a PhD in the future. Peasant. 😈
Once I earn more, I will donate on top of spending a fortune in their cafe. 😆
Aren't cuts to corporation tax sort of academic, as none of them pay any anyway.
Every plumbers, builder, car mechanic etc. pays corp tax. As for the big guys getting them to pay it in the UK is better than them paying nothing here and as you say routing it elsewhere (Ireland for example is 2% lower or something like that)
Corporations/Businesses paying tax is a good thing as they are employing people. There are trade offs between direct taxation and the benefit of the business growing.
In fairness Kew gardens looks like one that could be cut if it meant saving something useful like healthcare.
In fairness, a ridiculous amount of chemicals with medical properties are derived from the amazon rainforest. Kew has a long history of botanical research in South America, hence with a little interdisciplinary research they could easily support healthcare.
Just because it's "flowers and plants" doesn't mean to say what they do isn't useful. The majority of human problems in the future are going to have environmental causes - considering that, cutting back research at a renouned institution is rather ****ing stupid.
We are a nation of accountants who value nothing that we can't easily quantify in terms of cold hard cash.
In fairness Kew gardens looks like one that could be cut if it meant saving something useful like healthcare.
This is typical woolly thinking, healthcare just eats money often for diminishing returns and doesn't exist in a vacuum. Life would be sh*t if we all lived for a few months longer, but every museum, park, Kew, theater, sports venue etc had been sacrificed for it.
If that is the case it should be able to fund itself by selling on the research or contracting itself to big pharma.
Edit even simple solution 2p on income tax & no C2W on higher rate tax.
[i]Every plumbers, builder, car mechanic etc. pays corp tax[/i]
I think only limited companies (and similar) pay corporation tax. Everyone else pays income tax? and the rules are slightly different.
Yup. The opposite side of the idiocy sprectrum is to say that all healthcare does is let people live to 90 with Alzheimers. Instead of letting the leeches die. The Romans had it right when they threw them off cliffs.
Kew is making life better for healthy people.
If that is the case it should be able to fund itself by selling on the research or contracting itself to big pharma.
Big pharma has **** all R&D cash at the moment due to diminishing returns on traditional profit makers and an unwillingness to plow billions into research that goes tits up at the Phase III stage.
I think only limited companies (and similar) pay corporation tax. Everyone else pays income tax? and the rules are slightly different.
Sorry assuming that the tradies would have had the sense to go limited (most I know have) any working together will do. I paid it for 4 years as a sole trader.
Time to bring this back
[img] 
[/img]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MONIAC_Computer
The MONIAC was approximately 2 m high, 1.2 m wide and almost 1 m deep, and consisted of a series of transparent plastic tanks and pipes which were fastened to a wooden board. Each tank represented some aspect of the UK national economy and the flow of money around the economy was illustrated by coloured water. At the top of the board was a large tank called the treasury. Water (representing money) flowed from the treasury to other tanks representing the various ways in which a country could spend its money. For example, there were tanks for health and education. To increase spending on health care a tap could be opened to drain water from the treasury to the tank which represented health spending. Water then ran further down the model to other tanks, representing other interactions in the economy. Water could be pumped back to the treasury from some of the tanks to represent taxation. Changes in tax rates were modeled by increasing or decreasing pumping speeds.
Why? We have much better models than that now.
Anyhow, the Tory party have outed themselves as a bunch of counter-enlightenment religious bigots, who have no interest in science. The enlightenment and scientific research is what made this country great, not Christianity and an unhealthy aversion to education.
Would love to see a proper breakdown of their accounts as to how much is spent on the science and maintaining the collection, versus costs and receipts of maintaining a tourist attraction.
Strange that the inevitable result of any mention of cuts seems to be the science, rather than the tourism? Another example of the parade of the bleeding stumps perhaps?
Edit: Not long ago they spent 3 million quid on a treetop walkway - think about how much science could have been done with that money?
Tom_W1987 - Member
Why? We have much better models than that now.
As a simple demonstration that once it's all been spent, it's all being spent. That you then need to decide between things, as a visual representation it's quite clever. Spending my days trying to represent complex information on difficult choices to people this comes out very well as a method.
As a simple demonstration that once it's all been spent, it's all being spent. That you then need to decide between things, as a visual representation it's quite clever. Spending my days trying to represent complex information on difficult choices to people this comes out very well as a method.
I can think of a number of ways to save money but it involves pissing off the 60+ voter base or UKIP voters.
Cutting science and innovation is not one of them whilst cutting free attendance for Britons to museums is simply an ideological attack.
we are all in this together............
turns out that the taxpayer has to subsidise shotgun licenses 150 quid a go
while unimportant things like passports and driving licenses have to pay for themselves
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/22/cameron-blasted-battle-shotgun-licence-fees
😆
The message is, we have to fund their pastimes. However the landed gentry (by divine right) won't see fit to fund the education of their underlings and they will use rhetoric and deceit to get the myopic middle classes to vote for those policies.
as an example of local authority spending still out of control.. rochdale council felt that rather than have a number of disparete scattered offices it would save money putting them all in one new build eco friendly solar powered building.. it cost 26m to build, they built twice as much office space as they needed as they forgot they made 20% of staff redundant and sold off the socil housing dept.
the building was recently valued at being worth 11m.. so with the emppty space they though .. ding dong we ll move the libary into it.. great idea so they paid the libary building owner 2m quid to get out of the lease then paid 14 quid a book 14 quid a book to move the stock 200m..
turns out that the taxpayer has to subsidise shotgun licenses 150 quid a go
Figure is bullshit, because there is no unified cost - most police forces don't have a figure, those that do come up with wildly differing figures, the cheapest seems to administer a licence for about a third the cost of the dearest, although they're all supposed to be implementing the same procedure, go figure!
On top of this the police accept there is a huge amount of needless inefficiency in the system - for example if I wanted to exchange gun 1 for an identical gun, say because the barrel was worn out - I would have to get a variation on my certificate that involves filling out a whole new form, posting it off, waiting for it to be processed & posted back before I can go in and do a 1 for 1 exchange - this has no benefit in public safety, nor is there any public benefit in having to fill out a form and post it off to change between a .308 bolt action and a .303 bolt action, they are both as lethal as each other. If I wanted to own a shotgun as well as my - much more dangerous (!) - rifles, I would need to apply for a separate (shotgun) certificate , unless I wanted a shotgun that takes more than three shots, which I can keep on my firearms certificate... I can keep as many bullets as I like at home for reloading, unless they're expanding ones, which I can only keep a certain number of, though if they are identical ballistic tip bullets they're still unregulated - and I can keep as many cases, primers and bullets as I like at home to build my own ammunition, but have limits on how much complete ammo I can buy or possess... Thats why the system costs so much.
Doesnt matter, it's the principle. I'm paying for a bunch of Tories to run around their subsidised fields with shotguns, whilst they collectively shit on scientific research in terms of funding and conclusions drawn from science. Great.
Only Tories own shotguns? who knew... everyday is a school day!.....
... Nice edit BTW... 😉
Over 600,000 Shotgun certificate holders in the UK. They're all Tories are they?
Statistically speaking, they are probably more likely to be tories. The rest (if they had to pay more) would be collateral damage for the cause/greater good. I'm sure that if any of them are any proper lefties, they'd understand.
Good lord, you don't like em do you? 🙂
Nope 
would be collateral damage for the cause/greater good.
Its lefties like that that make me relieved I've got a nice collection of guns in the cupboard... Come the revolution brother 😀
Its lefties like that that make me relieved I've got a nice collection of guns in the cupboard... Come the revolution brother
Hilariously enough, I'd place a bet on myself being a better shot than you. 😈
Aye, of course 😉 and regardless of that, holes on a stationary bit of paper at a known distance isn't proper shooting, its just loud darts! 8)
Now then, back on topic:
over 2 million quid a year wasted on keeping Wakehurst place open, at Kew Gardens/taxpayer expense, for the benefit of national trust members...
[img] 
?v=1392134273[/img]
>over 2 million quid a year wasted on keeping Wakehurst place open, at Kew Gardens/taxpayer expense, for the benefit of national trust members...
First, from the evidence of Kew’s 2008/09 Annual Report, the quality of Kew’s substantial research base has diminished in recent years, largely because posts that have fallen vacant have remained unfilled through lack of funds. There has also been some diversion
of core research effort into income-generating activities
Wheres the part about Wakehurst Palace mostly being for trustees, I believe they have the seed bank there.
For every £1 in tax collected by HMRC, 48p is spent in the collection of said tax.
I think savings could be made...
Can you back this up?
Wheres the part about Wakehurst Place mostly being for trustees,
[i]101: In this context, the review team noted that Wakehurst Place, [u]excluding the Millennium Seed
Bank[/u], costs Kew about £2.2 million per annum. Given that Kew has to service some 375,000
National Trust Visitors who gain free admission, the National Trust’s annual payment of some
£80,000 represents a small contribution to Kew’s costs.
119: ...it is the review team’s view that it would be to both Kew’s
and to the National Trust’s advantage to negotiate now a new lease to replace the existing one.
Should such negotiations fail, then the review team believes that the costs to Kew of
maintaining a presence on the land it leases at Wakehurst Place cannot be justified, and that
Kew should mothball Wakehurst Place and plan an exit strategy[/i]
national trust members they must all be tories too.. add in the shot gun licence holders and all those who voted for them at the general election then theres precious few out there who arent tory..
and all those who voted for them at the general election then theres precious few out there who arent tory..
Doesn't mean we can't hunt them all down and kill them though.....
101: In this context, the review team noted that Wakehurst Place, excluding the Millennium Seed
Bank, costs Kew about £2.2 million per annum. Given that Kew has to service some 375,000
National Trust Visitors who gain free admission, the National Trust’s annual payment of some
£80,000 represents a small contribution to Kew’s costs.119: ...it is the review team’s view that it would be to both Kew’s
and to the National Trust’s advantage to negotiate now a new lease to replace the existing one.
Should such negotiations fail, then the review team believes that the costs to Kew of
maintaining a presence on the land it leases at Wakehurst Place cannot be justified, and that
Kew should mothball Wakehurst Place and plan an exit strategy
It also says that Wakehurst is good value for money in terms of educational benefits. Renegotiating seems like a good idea - however that's not the main contributory factor that has led to the decline in Kews scientific output. Funding losses occured before Kew could renegotiate that contract.
scientific funding has taken a hammering in the last couple of years through direct cuts and the attack on universities, its no surprise that output is down
still at least cameron only has to pay 50 quid for his shotgun license so he can go and kill bambi etc
scientific funding has taken a hammering in the last couple of years through direct cuts and the attack on universities, its no surprise that output is down
Well, in the case of the DEFRA report linked above, it seems to suggest that the funding problem predates the last couple of years
[i]the quality of Kew’s substantial research base has diminished in recent years, largely because posts that have fallen vacant have remained unfilled through lack of funds. There has also been some diversion
of core research effort into income-generating activities[/i]
and that was in a DEFRA report dated [b]February 2010[/b] - before the election
Bastard Tories!
Which, the Tories are exasperating with even deeper cuts.
Typical tory politico =
[img] 
[/img]
we all know that nulabour were just torry-lite, just imagine the impact the coalition will have had now!
Lets remember that the period quoted is exactly when Kew found three million quid down the back of the sofa for an aerial walkway!
Maybe they could have spent their money more wisely?
For every £1 in tax collected by HMRC, 48p is spent in the collection of said tax.
I think savings could be made...
Where are you getting this from?
From [url= https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/home/2012/05/cost-collecting-tax-barely-fallen-50-years.html ]the taxpayers alliance[/url] (who I wouldn't expect to be underestimating)...
[img] 
[/img]
which might be high from an international standpoint, but still...
[img] 
[/img]
Lets remember that the period quoted is exactly when Kew found three million quid down the back of the sofa for an aerial walkway!Maybe they could have spent their money more wisely?
I should imagine they will need more of them when visitors start having to pay theme park prices to visit.
It's 20 odd quid already to get in, so they probably needed that to attract families looking at the brochure. If the government had properly funded the research and made the research the sole beneficiary of that funding, then they wouldn't have had to start looking for alternative income by turning into a shit theme park.
Tom_W1987 - Member
Which, the Tories are exasperating with even deeper cuts.Typical tory politico =
Good to know you approach these things from a balanced standpoint.
Good, no visitors, more money for doing science
(I refer to the previous points about the lack of breakdown of costs/losses between science and provision of a tourist location)
Good to know you approach these things from a balanced standpoint.
It's right though. I went to private school, so I know the enemy from within. I can play a reactionary Tory or raging Marxist based on my experience of school and then university.
(I refer to the previous points about a breakdown of costs/losses between science and tourist facilities)
Do you not think that Kews original idea was to spend more on tourism so that it eventually recieved a boost in tourist based income. It might have been shortsighted but I doubt they should be blamed for trying, considering that the scientific world has been worried about substantial future cuts for a number of years.
I quite like the aerial walkway! must have had 100s of thousands if not millions of people on it by now, it seems like good value
It's right though. I went to private school, so I know the enemy from within.
ah champagne socialist, how is islington darling 🙂
No I'm not. I woz a token charity case (so that they could dodge tax).
If the budget for this area was cut, that could save close to £2bn. If funding to research councils was reduced by a similar proportion that could save an additional £1.5bn.
Similarly, if i didn't spend any money on food i'd save loads of money. But then i'd have no food.
Sorry assuming that the tradies would have had the sense to go limited (most I know have) any working together will do. I paid it for 4 years as a sole trader.
You either paid corporation tax, or you were a sole trader. If you were a sole trader you were paying income tax.
Sorry my bad it's been a few years, ltd company. It's sole trader over here in Oz where it's even more complicated
