atticus wrote:I asked questions to get more detail.
Hairyloon wrote:Imagine Claire Rayner as SOS Health, saying "Prime Minister, the people elected me to run the hospitals and I shall spend what I consider necessary."
That would be the tricky bit: deciding on the distribution of funding, but why not give the taxpayer more control over how it is spent?
For example, half of your tax goes into central funds, but you can allocate the other half to the departments you choose.
atticus wrote:Yes, I think this idea has legs.
One concern is that individuals who may not wish to have to look into all the details of public expenditure and money raising. They might also be worried what might be overlooked. Some may get apathetic or bored of going through this every pay day.
To counter this, groups of like-minded people might come up with overall plans for government expenditure and fund raising, so that we could opt for an overall plan. And to counteract the tailing-off as people get bored and apathetic, this choice could be made periodically, say every five years. There could be an organised vote in which people choose between plans.
Slartibartfast wrote:I do not think those comments successfully overcome the difficulties. In fact, they simply add more difficulties.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest