%age Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Manx Radio News Probably the best thing to do would be to divide this amount by £140, 000,000 (the amount we are losing off the UK in the VAT palava) and so we could make up that amount each year. I know this doesn't seem a very good thing to do but if you think about it, it would be ok for quite some years, in my estimation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Is that a traditional British billion or an American billion ? An American billion would not last long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Aye, a simple fact that can change things in an instant, but I think billions are measured a la americane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Both sides treat a billion as the same thing these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 It's got to be an American Billion if it was a British one all we'd need to do is share it out. It'd be £12.5 million each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Sorry, forgot the .28 of a billion, it's 16million each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted October 28, 2009 Author Share Posted October 28, 2009 Even so, I think you're onto something here Declan. We could share it out and get, er £16,000 each? I say we do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRIVER Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 Even so, I think you're onto something here Declan. We could share it out and get, er £16,000 each? I say we do it. Just think Mr Whitaker is sitting at home with more than the government has got ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 Look at the government's own pink book. This 'reserve', is pretty much exactly the same £1200M figure as the current Civil Service pension 'liability'...a 'liability' currently growing by £100M a year. How do you feel now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanxfella Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Manx Radio News Probably the best thing to do would be to divide this amount by £140, 000,000 (the amount we are losing off the UK in the VAT palava) and so we could make up that amount each year. I know this doesn't seem a very good thing to do but if you think about it, it would be ok for quite some years, in my estimation. I find this odd on the basis of the Foot Report confirming that:- "3.25 None of the Crown Dependencies have, however, taken on significant levels borrowing. This is a measure of the economic resilience achieved by pursuing a policy of building up reserves during a period of rapid economic growth to provide a cushion during a downturn. The reserves range from £582 million (at 31 December 2008) in Jersey to £221.3 million (at 31 December 2008) in Guernsey. The reserve fund in the Isle of Man stood at £337 million at 31 March 2009." So how do we get from reserves of £337m to £1.28bn? The fact is that most of the money in the MR report is not in 'reserve' but allocated against specific government liabilities its not rainy day money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 The fact is that most of the money in the MR report is not in 'reserve' but allocated against specific government liabilities its not rainy day money. Its money for specific types of rain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanxfella Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 The fact is that most of the money in the MR report is not in 'reserve' but allocated against specific government liabilities its not rainy day money. Its money for specific types of rain. Agreed but its simply bad reporting as most of this money is not government 'reserves' as such. The money is allocated to specific budgets such as the NI fund which may or may not already be underfunded so the fact that we have £500m in the NI 'reserve' is useless if the total NI liability is £900m - as our free 'reserve' of £337m couldn't even cover the shortfall . The MR report is rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebees Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Tax Mr Whittaker and his other 'rich list' buddies just a few percent more....problem solved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
localyokel Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 The fact is that most of the money in the MR report is not in 'reserve' but allocated against specific government liabilities its not rainy day money. Its money for specific types of rain. Agreed but its simply bad reporting as most of this money is not government 'reserves' as such. The money is allocated to specific budgets such as the NI fund which may or may not already be underfunded so the fact that we have £500m in the NI 'reserve' is useless if the total NI liability is £900m - as our free 'reserve' of £337m couldn't even cover the shortfall . The MR report is rubbish. That's the problem when you operate "pay as you go" systems that are ostensibly funded out of general government revenue. The public sector pension liability is over £1 billion already and has no reserve account allocated to it at all, so all of these figures suggesting that we have "a billion" in reserve are misleading really as the total of what we have is nowhere near the liabilities that IOMG have to meet over the next 30 or 40 years. As with the national insurance fund there is some money allocated to that reserve account but its likely that this is only a small proportion of the total liability that fund has to pay out peoples' state pensions and benefits etc over the next 30 or 40 years. Looks like MR have again just re-printed another official IOMG press release without even stopping to read it or attempting to apply a sense-check the content. They must have been deafened by all that trumpet blowing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Tax Mr Whittaker and his other 'rich list' buddies just a few percent more....problem solved Any percentage application is now irrelevant with their £100,000 tax cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.