And here is another example of a priviliged rich idiot "doing his bit" to help the poor with other people's money.
Where exactly has any government anywhere displayed any competence in turning tax revenue into helping poor people? We may not like bankers and their wealth but their money is better spent on yachts flash cars and hookers than it is by HM govt.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...-Hood-Tax.html
'A banker is a fellow who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining, but wants it back the minute it begins to rain." Mark Twain's quote of more than a century ago shows that banks have long had an image problem. But it hardly does justice to the opprobrium heaped on the financial sector since the collapse of Lehman Brothers 16 months ago precipitated a worldwide economic crisis.
Banks have been painted as up-market welfare scroungers reliant on government handouts to fund a lavish lifestyle, as reckless gamblers who ruined the world economy and as greedy Sheriff of Nottingham types who get rich at the expense of those around them.
Related Articles
Russell Crowe: first pictures from Robin Hood movie
Robin Hood at Birmingham Hippodrome: all man and all for men
Sienna Miller dropped from Ridley Scott's Robin Hood movie for 'partying lifestyle'
Financial crisis turns Gordon Brown and bankers into pantomime villains
Australia may have lost the Ashes, but its economy is batting aheadBut what if, instead of being the Sheriff of Nottingham, banks had the chance to become Robin Hood?
An unprecedented coalition of domestic charities, aid agencies, trade unions, faith organisations and green groups have come together today to campaign in support of a Robin Hood Tax that aims to turn banks from the pantomime villains of the world economy into its dashing heroes.
The fact is that a tiny tax on the transactions – shares, bonds, foreign currency and derivatives – of the financial institutions that caused the recession could make a massive difference to people at home and abroad who have to live with its consequences.
So when Richard Curtis called and asked me to play the part of a banker in a short film to launch the campaign I did not have to think twice. Of course we argued about the suit I would wear – and the tie – but not about the content. Richard has an exemplary record in fighting poverty from Comic Relief to Make Poverty History. But this campaign could have the biggest impact of the lot.
As my character is forced to admit, an average global levy of about 0.05 per cent, starting at just 5p for every £1,000 traded, would raise hundreds of billions of pounds (some experts say up to £250 billion) to preserve crucial services here at home, take urgent action on climate change, and do huge things to fight poverty and save lives abroad.
When you realise that all this could be achieved by a tax on transactions between banks, with high street customers unaffected, there is a temptation to start looking for the catch.
Of course there will be a lot of argument about it – it is high economics. Opponents argue that such a tax might damage the City of London and we argue that the city could sustain it and that it's worth working out something if the benefits could be so large, and consistent, year by year.
This is the key thing to me. Clearly there have been major mistakes and imbalances in the world of finance over the past few years. Apparently, the global financial sector is now worth 60 times as much as the real economy – and there has been a massive increase in profits and activity without a parallel increase in taxation. We pay VAT of 17.5 per cent on most things we buy, but people who make money from buying and selling currency, for instance, don't pay tax on that at all. Lord Turner, chairman of the Financial Services Authority, pointed out last year that much financial activity is socially useless. Let's use this moment to put that right; let the new contract with the banks be socially crucial.
All three political parties have promised to fight child poverty in this country. All are determined to tackle climate change, and all have promised to support the Millennium Development Goals that will halve extreme poverty by 2015. But in such tough times, where is the money to fulfil those mighty promises going to come from?
We propose the Robin Hood Tax. As an Oxfam global ambassador, I know that sometimes people are concerned that a great deal of charitable energy is directed overseas when we still have serious problems at home. The advantage of the Robin Hood Tax it that it would raise enough money to solve problems at home and overseas. And it can do it without hurting ordinary people – this is a tax on bank-to-bank transactions that would not hit the high street.
Just imagine how the public's view of the financial sector would change if it could claim responsibility for halving child poverty in Britain, providing a proper fund to tackle climate change, and meeting the Millennium Development goals to cut child deaths by two thirds worldwide, maternal mortality by two thirds and tackle malaria and HIV/Aids.
Many people have already realised the possibilities of a Robin Hood Tax. A YouGov poll for Oxfam showed that more than twice as many people support the tax than oppose it – it could indeed be the first poplar tax in history – and today hundreds of economists have joined the campaign in calling for its introduction.
Now I'd ask our leaders to think about it seriously – to come up with a brilliant, new, modern source of money in a new decade. It is not too late to turn a crisis for banks into a huge opportunity for the world.
Where exactly has any government anywhere displayed any competence in turning tax revenue into helping poor people? We may not like bankers and their wealth but their money is better spent on yachts flash cars and hookers than it is by HM govt.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...-Hood-Tax.html
'A banker is a fellow who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining, but wants it back the minute it begins to rain." Mark Twain's quote of more than a century ago shows that banks have long had an image problem. But it hardly does justice to the opprobrium heaped on the financial sector since the collapse of Lehman Brothers 16 months ago precipitated a worldwide economic crisis.
Banks have been painted as up-market welfare scroungers reliant on government handouts to fund a lavish lifestyle, as reckless gamblers who ruined the world economy and as greedy Sheriff of Nottingham types who get rich at the expense of those around them.
Related Articles
Russell Crowe: first pictures from Robin Hood movie
Robin Hood at Birmingham Hippodrome: all man and all for men
Sienna Miller dropped from Ridley Scott's Robin Hood movie for 'partying lifestyle'
Financial crisis turns Gordon Brown and bankers into pantomime villains
Australia may have lost the Ashes, but its economy is batting aheadBut what if, instead of being the Sheriff of Nottingham, banks had the chance to become Robin Hood?
An unprecedented coalition of domestic charities, aid agencies, trade unions, faith organisations and green groups have come together today to campaign in support of a Robin Hood Tax that aims to turn banks from the pantomime villains of the world economy into its dashing heroes.
The fact is that a tiny tax on the transactions – shares, bonds, foreign currency and derivatives – of the financial institutions that caused the recession could make a massive difference to people at home and abroad who have to live with its consequences.
So when Richard Curtis called and asked me to play the part of a banker in a short film to launch the campaign I did not have to think twice. Of course we argued about the suit I would wear – and the tie – but not about the content. Richard has an exemplary record in fighting poverty from Comic Relief to Make Poverty History. But this campaign could have the biggest impact of the lot.
As my character is forced to admit, an average global levy of about 0.05 per cent, starting at just 5p for every £1,000 traded, would raise hundreds of billions of pounds (some experts say up to £250 billion) to preserve crucial services here at home, take urgent action on climate change, and do huge things to fight poverty and save lives abroad.
When you realise that all this could be achieved by a tax on transactions between banks, with high street customers unaffected, there is a temptation to start looking for the catch.
Of course there will be a lot of argument about it – it is high economics. Opponents argue that such a tax might damage the City of London and we argue that the city could sustain it and that it's worth working out something if the benefits could be so large, and consistent, year by year.
This is the key thing to me. Clearly there have been major mistakes and imbalances in the world of finance over the past few years. Apparently, the global financial sector is now worth 60 times as much as the real economy – and there has been a massive increase in profits and activity without a parallel increase in taxation. We pay VAT of 17.5 per cent on most things we buy, but people who make money from buying and selling currency, for instance, don't pay tax on that at all. Lord Turner, chairman of the Financial Services Authority, pointed out last year that much financial activity is socially useless. Let's use this moment to put that right; let the new contract with the banks be socially crucial.
All three political parties have promised to fight child poverty in this country. All are determined to tackle climate change, and all have promised to support the Millennium Development Goals that will halve extreme poverty by 2015. But in such tough times, where is the money to fulfil those mighty promises going to come from?
We propose the Robin Hood Tax. As an Oxfam global ambassador, I know that sometimes people are concerned that a great deal of charitable energy is directed overseas when we still have serious problems at home. The advantage of the Robin Hood Tax it that it would raise enough money to solve problems at home and overseas. And it can do it without hurting ordinary people – this is a tax on bank-to-bank transactions that would not hit the high street.
Just imagine how the public's view of the financial sector would change if it could claim responsibility for halving child poverty in Britain, providing a proper fund to tackle climate change, and meeting the Millennium Development goals to cut child deaths by two thirds worldwide, maternal mortality by two thirds and tackle malaria and HIV/Aids.
Many people have already realised the possibilities of a Robin Hood Tax. A YouGov poll for Oxfam showed that more than twice as many people support the tax than oppose it – it could indeed be the first poplar tax in history – and today hundreds of economists have joined the campaign in calling for its introduction.
Now I'd ask our leaders to think about it seriously – to come up with a brilliant, new, modern source of money in a new decade. It is not too late to turn a crisis for banks into a huge opportunity for the world.
So true.
Comment