National Insurance is simply a tax, essentially a supplementary income tax. It goes into the same pot as all (or nearly all) the other taxes - so what? Printing money? Well, as an individual you can issue IOUs. If you can persuade lots of people to accept your IOUs, that's a matter of confidence. In the absence of such confidence, your IOUs would be worthless. Much like money. As regards pensions, the essence of them is that the entire population participates; everyone potentially gets a pension, and everyone potentially contributes. There will definitely be a continual stream of new contributors into the indefinite future, and the existing pensioners will definitely be dropping off their perches at some time. Neither the contributors nor the pensioners have accumulated any capital sum, and nor have any contributors or pensioners been misled about that fact. I say again, this bears no resemblance whatever to a Ponzi scheme which consists entirely of lies and fraud.
I reckon that terming a lump of your income tax "National Insurance" is entirely misleading. You think it's paid into some form of pension scheme whereby the capital is set aside and accrues interest, like a normal pension. Indeed, in Switzerland AVS (Assurance viellesse et sociale - Social and pensions insurance) is ring-fenced. It's a separate pot. You, Pete, are particularly well-informed about such things. Organise a poll asking people about their NI contributions and I'd bet good money people don't know that it works (or doesn't) as labelled.
I agree that the way NI is set up is potentially misleading to the public. I agree it would be simpler to add them together into a single figure for all purposes. Economists and people in finance simply add income tax and national insurance together into a global figure, and use that as the starting point for further calculations. Unfortunately, the so-called "standard rate" of income tax at 20% has become iconic, and there would be a political price to pay for adopting a higher headline percentage even if there was no real increase in tax take. I cannot see any Chancellor of the Exchequer doing this in the foreseeable future, realistically. What would he gain?
In the case of any nation which has a National Debt, which is most nations (not Norway or Qatar), I cannot see how the government can accumulate a capital fund of the kind you describe, except by increasing the National Debt by an amount equal to the capital fund. This would be like opening a savings account and then increasing your overdraft so that you can put money into savings. Perhaps Switz is doing exactly that - or does Switz have no National Debt?
Cyclist act like they rule the road, yet pay jack shit to use it, cyclist to blame! I hate it when you see them side by side having a chin wag blocking half the lane! Rant over, normally a very calm ducati owner, but cyclists irritate the shit out of me!
I'm sure we've been here before? http://ducatiforum.co.uk/f18/yay-54p-per-day-15244/index3.html http://ducatiforum.co.uk/f18/poll-austerity-how-has-affected-you-3600/index5.html http://ducatiforum.co.uk/f18/fuel-tax-thread-8471/index8.html http://ducatiforum.co.uk/f18/best-bikes-buy-investments-15598/ http://ducatiforum.co.uk/f18/vote-leave-european-union-7741/index7.html http://ducatiforum.co.uk/f18/left-wing-right-wing-9723/index3.html http://ducatiforum.co.uk/f18/americans-7733/ http://ducatiforum.co.uk/f18/go-blame-baby-boomers-8918/ Can we stop going on about poxy Ponzi schemes? ffs.
At the start. He wheels back and in a polite non aggressive way, he points out to the driver he has moved beyond a solid white line into the safe zone. Do that on a license test = instant fail. Do that in front of the police = £100 fine
