<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: FT agrees with Robin Hood: global bank levy &#8220;looks pathetically inadequate&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2010/04/ft-agrees-with-robin-hood-global-bank-levy-looks-pathetically-inadequate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2010/04/ft-agrees-with-robin-hood-global-bank-levy-looks-pathetically-inadequate/</link>
	<description>Policy news and comment from the Trades Union Congress (TUC)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 17:17:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Owen Tudor</title>
		<link>http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2010/04/ft-agrees-with-robin-hood-global-bank-levy-looks-pathetically-inadequate/comment-page-1/#comment-7209</link>
		<dc:creator>Owen Tudor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Apr 2010 20:20:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.touchstoneblog.org.uk/?p=6644#comment-7209</guid>
		<description>John, it&#039;s a beginners&#039; mistake to assume people who disagree with you are stupid or evil. If you read to the end of my post you will see that I made it absolutely clear that it wouldn&#039;t all come from banks (the key phrase is &quot;it would be a tax not just on the banks, but on all institutions which trade in financial instruments&quot;). And we haven&#039;t said for a moment that &quot;it won&#039;t affect anything else much&quot;, indeed one of the whole points of such taxes is to change behaviour by making short-termism less attractive.

But then you spoil it all by making it clear that, regardless of whether it&#039;s a workable idea, you&#039;d be against it anyway. Bizarrely, yes, the TUC does believe that politicians can spend money well, although we do understand that no system is perfect. We certainly don&#039;t believe that the private sector spends money more wisely than the public sector, as the crisis demonstrated in spades. Clearly the masters of the universe weren&#039;t just wasting (our) money, they had absolutely no idea what they were doing with it!

And of course you can call it &#039;legalised theft&#039; if you like, but it&#039;s a meaningless term. All taxation involves the taking of money, but what distinguishes taxation from theft is that the former is done by democratically elected governments, so consent is required and given by majority verdict (taxation without representation is, famously, unlikely to succeed for long!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John, it&#8217;s a beginners&#8217; mistake to assume people who disagree with you are stupid or evil. If you read to the end of my post you will see that I made it absolutely clear that it wouldn&#8217;t all come from banks (the key phrase is &#8220;it would be a tax not just on the banks, but on all institutions which trade in financial instruments&#8221;). And we haven&#8217;t said for a moment that &#8220;it won&#8217;t affect anything else much&#8221;, indeed one of the whole points of such taxes is to change behaviour by making short-termism less attractive.</p>
<p>But then you spoil it all by making it clear that, regardless of whether it&#8217;s a workable idea, you&#8217;d be against it anyway. Bizarrely, yes, the TUC does believe that politicians can spend money well, although we do understand that no system is perfect. We certainly don&#8217;t believe that the private sector spends money more wisely than the public sector, as the crisis demonstrated in spades. Clearly the masters of the universe weren&#8217;t just wasting (our) money, they had absolutely no idea what they were doing with it!</p>
<p>And of course you can call it &#8216;legalised theft&#8217; if you like, but it&#8217;s a meaningless term. All taxation involves the taking of money, but what distinguishes taxation from theft is that the former is done by democratically elected governments, so consent is required and given by majority verdict (taxation without representation is, famously, unlikely to succeed for long!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john</title>
		<link>http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2010/04/ft-agrees-with-robin-hood-global-bank-levy-looks-pathetically-inadequate/comment-page-1/#comment-7183</link>
		<dc:creator>john</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 22:05:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.touchstoneblog.org.uk/?p=6644#comment-7183</guid>
		<description>Oh dear for an educated man you seem not to have grasped economics very well. You seem to think you can take out over 300 billion which incidently is more than the whole worlds banking PROFITS for last year and think it wont affect anything else much. You seem to think if we give that money to the politions they will spend it in better ways as they have done in the past?. You sir are advocating nothing more and nothing less than outright legalised theft.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh dear for an educated man you seem not to have grasped economics very well. You seem to think you can take out over 300 billion which incidently is more than the whole worlds banking PROFITS for last year and think it wont affect anything else much. You seem to think if we give that money to the politions they will spend it in better ways as they have done in the past?. You sir are advocating nothing more and nothing less than outright legalised theft.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tweets that mention FT agrees with Robin Hood: global bank levy “looks pathetically inadequate” &#124; ToUChstone blog: A public policy blog from the TUC -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2010/04/ft-agrees-with-robin-hood-global-bank-levy-looks-pathetically-inadequate/comment-page-1/#comment-7087</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention FT agrees with Robin Hood: global bank levy “looks pathetically inadequate” &#124; ToUChstone blog: A public policy blog from the TUC -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 13:47:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.touchstoneblog.org.uk/?p=6644#comment-7087</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by ToUChstone blog. ToUChstone blog said: FT agrees with Robin Hood: global bank levy “looks pathetically inadequate” http://bit.ly/bfvwG2 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by ToUChstone blog. ToUChstone blog said: FT agrees with Robin Hood: global bank levy “looks pathetically inadequate” <a href="http://bit.ly/bfvwG2" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/bfvwG2</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Served from: touchstoneblog.org.uk @ 2012-05-25 00:33:31 -->
