Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-02-06 10:06:36 +0000, The Natural Philosopher said:

Andy Hall wrote:
Why do people perceive a need to go to central London to work and
do their shopping?



Simple. Because in the case of Cambridge, you can earn 100K plus
jumping on a train and going to the city, whereas 50k is the tops
locally.

Fair point. However, how about having the 100k City job but doing it
from home?


If only...

My wife had a £30k job in the city..a job that was completely doable at
home (graphic design).

Despite actually doing work at home perfectly successfully on occasion,
the cost and stress of the job finally got to her, and when we
calculated that after all expenses and taxes it was actually netting
only about £600 a month..for what amounted to a 12 hour working day..we
decided to give it up. We offered. I mean it would have been so easy to
go self employed at a reduced rate..but they didn't want to know.

"everybody will want to do it and how will we know if they are doing the
crossword or not!?"

Cries of "if they are doing the work, who cares" fell on deaf ears..

Managers would rather outsource to India than east Anglia...

The answer is so bloody simple.

Tax fuel to the hilt, and chuck income tax. Nay, *subsidise* incomes. By
giving everyone a citizens pension..man woman and child.

Once employing someone in London will mean £100k a tear just for he
commute, whereas employing someone at home in Orkeny for the same job
will cost maybe not much more than "Bombay Call centers inc". then the
patterns will shift.

The government has proved totally inept at manging any process to
achieve the actual results it says it wants..Want less accidents? well
simple. Forget traffic calming. Every time someone has an accident that
results in death or injury, hold a full CAA style enquiry. Blame must be
assigned,. Whether its to the car drivers, the car makers or the road
designers or maintainers. Or the stupid mother that let her kid run
across the road.

Adopt swingeing fines or imprisonment, and potential lifetime bans. With
luck half the population that can't actually drive a car properly anyway
will be taken off the roads, and the rest will be so damned careful ...

Want to stop people burning fossil fuels? Make it very expensive

Want to stop people causing accidents?. Make them very expensive.

Want jobs to stay in this country? Make them cheaper to employ here than
in China.

Want people to recycle more and buy less? Tax new goods, but not
secondhand sales, and not repairs.

Want to solve the drug problem? make em so cheap and legal no one can
make money pushing them. That will sort out Afghanistan as well.
No one need steal to get them or commit violent acts because they
haven't got them. Just get them on the NHS like you do anyway for the
ones with more side effects that usually make you feel worse anyway.



With a ****ing lawyer at the head of the country, and a bloody religious
lawyer tho, we have no chance. Ban everything and reintroduce Puritanism.

I can't think of ONE piece of anything this government has done to
encourage people to *do* anything *good*. Its just 'ban this ban that
ban the other tax that fine this '

So MUCH is illegal its now costing us £27k a year to keep 'criminals'
locked up, let alone the police to arrest them and the courts to convict
them..

Government has two ways to tilt playing fields in socially desirable
directions....legislation and taxation. Legislation is entirely a
negative force, It never permits, only denies.

So far they have used the one to appallingly bad effect.

Taxation can be net neutral to the balance of the population, and if
applied slowly over a period, gives people time to adjust their lifestyles.