Top Ideas to Make Britain Better

Some of these are very good indeed.

Paul Ormerod economist

I would make more explicit the connection between tax and services received by abolishing the PAYE system. Instead of income tax being deducted by employers at source, I would make everyone sign a cheque to pay their tax. While it would increase administration in the first instance, it would bring home to people what they are paying for. When you physically hand money over, you inevitably question whether you are receiving value for money. This system would put political pressure on public services to ensure they deliver efficiently and would prevent the waste of public funds.

David Starkey historian

I would remove everyone earning less than £25,000 a year out of the tax system. At the moment we have a ridiculous circular system in which people are taxed, then given their money back in tax credits. It produces the idea of the state as provider – for something like one-third of the population. It imprisons people we should be liberating.

Chris Woodhead former chief inspector of schools

I would introduce an education voucher for parents with school-age children. The voucher would pay for a state education but could be cashed in at independent schools as payment or part-payment. It would help to make the rhetoric of parental choice a reality; would promote new providers of education in to the market and at a blow, would destroy the state monopoly which has created appallingly low standards which we see in so many schools today.

5 comments on “Top Ideas to Make Britain Better

  1. I spy the usual give-me-the-money argument for Pure Science research. I also enjoyed the emptiness of “Keep it simple – diet, …. good lifestyle and attendance for appropriate screening. ” There’s wisdom, boyo: diet, type unspecified; good lifestyle, nature unspecified; screening, “appropriate”. Bloody brilliant.

  2. Woodhead is basically saying: “I would like the State to subsidise my business”, the story of producers everywhere.

  3. While my wife and I would both benefit personally from David Starkey’s tax regime, his argument for it seems to be that all of us in that sector also receive tax credit. He is wrong. We are, by a very large margin, net contributors to the exchequer.

  4. I think most of the arguments I have seen on all subjects are pretty daft, too complicated and therfore costly or just plain un-intelligent.

    With the riots/un-employment/oap prejudice and boredom (not inferm/elderly) poor pensions and youths, there are simple ways to solve some or all of these problems to a large extent.

    Ex-military bases with lots of land or bought up land/maybe government owned land, there should be conversions and builds to create Forest Farm Camps. These would have all single un-employed living alone for more than a year or year and a half without work being forced to live at a camp until employment is attained or they go without benefits including housing payments.
    OAP’S will be in seperated units of the land or a different camp if they volunteer to live and work there as they want to work and want to attain ease of life as their pensions are too small etc and live in a good community.
    Youths would have six months to a years work experience at about 13 to 14 years of age whilst still having major class lessons at a camp unit and also having evening study time for other classes.

    All things that are pleasant and useful will be provided such as internet access, phone lines and postage and paper for the un-employed who will be encouraged to apply for work anywhere through a government scheme housing them temporarily for suitable jobs only and then permanently when full-employment is attained. Very limited benefits would be given such as £10 per week for extra’s as all housing is paid for and food within reason.

    All camps will have non-energy recreation rooms/pool table’s/indoor sports and other simple games.
    Slightly more for the OAP’S for payment and activities/altered of course. Crop targets will only apply to un-employed but the more you work the more you get as an OAP or un-employed person. (limited though)
    Youths would also be given some incentives in some way?extra credit as have worked and can do a job etc(refference and performance report for employers). Or prizes.

    Forest Farms create up-to three times as much food for the same amount of land so there will be plenty of work.

    And if there is extra crops that are uneated by residents/tons per month most likely with all year round growing crop ranges etc they would be supplied to schools, police stations, NHS, fire service and military etc.
    Reducing costs further. The camps would also have low carbon footprints and either solar roofs and/or a windmill generator. Reducing costs further. Televisions are only for OAP’S til a certain time and present in different viewing rooms/channel rooms that are agreed programming over the majority of camp stayers etc.
    Lights out for working early etc.

    Schools should also/and camps teach classes each week on morality, responsibilities/duties and relious history through films also/good films not the crap cheap ones etc.

    This removes some un-employment, reduces the costs of subsidies to some pensions or un-employed rent costs. It reduces youth (I should get what i want)attitude problems.
    It reduces costs overall when looked at in this scale and also gives more people without any will some drive and force to meet their national responsibilities as well as makes some OAPS happier.

    And more. Any opposition to the point.
    Oh yeah and forcing un-employed to move make them want to get a job in the town they lived in/ even if they have to stick out another job for a while/but at least it reduces costs overall?

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.