Derek wrote:

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 14:37:28 GMT, "nemo" wrote:
"Derek" wrote
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:21:21 GMT, "nemo"
wrote:
[..]
I think my generation will probably be the last to be so lucky.

Nope. The aging population is growing fast, and if they're
looked after properly they'll keep voting the right way.
Never forget that governments govern by consent of the
governed.

The trouble with ours is: they govern with the consent of a public
swayed by a Tory Party and Tory press vehemently opposed to any rise
in taxes, however commendable the reason. That's why they're even
reluctant to raise taxes to pay fully for the NHS and prefer to blame
its structure and the way it's run. Of course it employs lots of
administrators! But it seems as if our government and the Tories would
rather have the doctors and nurses swamped with so much paperwork that
it stops them treating patients!

Don't forget, a basic rate increase of just one penny in the pound for
a multi-millionaire press baron and his cronies is a hell of a lot of
money!

I'm glad to here it, for how else will I get to retire so much earlier
and live comfortably?

Via discipline in: working, saving, investing, living within (make that
below) your own means, etc. Some people are diligent enough to plan
their futures like that, the rest just elect politicians to take from
the diligent and give it to them. Those are the two classes in our
society: tax payers (earners) and tax gatherers (government and the
masses who elect them *to tax others*). If you don't call it theft or
robbery, what do you call it? It's taken by force or threat of force,
it's taken without consent of its owner, etc. To paraphrase Murray
Rothbard, if taxes are really voluntary -- and therefore not robbery --
then why doesn't government rid the lawbooks of punishments like fines
and prison for those who'd prefer not to pay?