Thread: Customs racket
View Single Post
Old 06-05-2011, 08:50   #34
Sparkle
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Open Prison, H.M.United Kingdom
Posts: 1,037
Sparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful oneSparkle is the helpful one
Re: Customs racket
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy J View Post
Because I personally think that the government should keep it and use it to run the country and offset the costs of fighting crime.
Not sure I agree there, unless you mean offset as in reducing the burden on the taxpayer. Though, rather than adding to the existing crime budget I think they should use the money to fight cancer instead.

My reasoning is that the more money we pour into law enforcement, the less efficient it becomes, and the more efficient criminals become at circumventing it. In a nutshell, its a financial black hole, a war that will never end in the current climate. You pour another 10 billion into fighting crime, and I guarantee you crime will still be there, just in a slightly different form from before. The tax payer loses whilst the government "creates jobs" (on the back of the taxpayer of course). Even as crime is reduced in some areas, local law enforcement will find new ways to spend the existing budget, again the tax payer loses.
Even with the fortune spent on installing CCTV in retail areas, the criminals just do their stuff elsewhere - but you're not really reducing crime at all. If anything, those who can least afford to spare money get robbed instead of the retail giants. Who wins, society or big business? I've never heard of a thief who went clean because he/she couldn't find anything to steal. Never heard of a junkie who went clean because there was noone around to rob, nothing to steal.
I'm not suggesting we cut funding to law enforcement however. To fight crime you have to fight the causes of crime, which we are incapable of doing because we as a society cannot agree on exactly what the cause of crime is. Its much simpler to just chase the bad guys and lock 'em up, food, room and board - courtesy of the tax payer. Thats the American way, except they have the funds to lock'em up and throw away the key, so that's what they do. It solves nothing, and that's partly why America has so many problems today.

---------- Post added at 09:50 ---------- Previous post was at 09:43 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L View Post
They could seize billions and billions, and they'd still want our money.
Absolutely, rather than subsidise the tax payer - the gov pensions would simply be described in terms of carats rather than gold-platedness.
Sparkle is offline   Reply With Quote