Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

fluffy666

Members
  • Posts

    10,124
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by fluffy666

  1. But if benefit tourism was only a minor problem, so policing benefit tourism cost more than the problem in the first place, that would be both mean spirited and stupid. I do suspect that there is a deliberate misdirection here - we are being told to look at the impact of immigration on benefits instead of on the job market. You have to wonder why that is.
  2. It's very relevant if it's true. Indeed, many of these PFI deals have been about new buildings - usually new buildings that were very much required, but acquired in the most expensive possible way due to a political decision to try and shift spending off the balance sheet. Not sure how that sort of thing means that it's the fault of the NHS.
  3. Can you imagine - if we all had access to good quality cheap housing, people who worked hard would be able to buy nice things instead of spending everything on rent or mortgage for a hovel.. Civilization would collapse!
  4. Heard about that for a while. Just another bit of petty vindictiveness.
  5. Getting rid of the PFI deals, which generally represent appalling value for money, would allow the NHS to increase front line spending whilst decreasing overall spending. But it would upset quite a lot of Tory and Labour doners. And a lot of people in the city.
  6. But if we put a tax on the staff, that means that Amazon will have to pay more or (overall) see lower sales, they still pay. And if we taxed dividends, they'd have to pay bigger dividends to keep the share price up, so they still pay. Same argument; we might as well put ALL taxes onto businesses because it would have the same result but be much simpler (for most people). A counter proposition is that our 'elite' or senior level management class would like us to think that corporations are just untouchable vapour because it absolves them from tax, or blame, or any form of accountability.
  7. Because corporations don't have bank accounts? Silly semantic games..
  8. Umm, no. Possible useful contribution for a transition period, yes, if done carefully, but with the proviso that no commercial well has been drilled yet in this country. If you want cheap and secure for the 100+year timescale, then it's breeder reactors (Uranium and/or Thorium based) plus or minus solar and wind contributions. That's the physical reality, annoying as many people seem to find it.
  9. It would be nice to actually see some. Given that separating legitimate concerns out from a tidal wave of butts**t scaremongering can prove tricky at times. (Note: YouTube videos are not scientific reports. )
  10. Interesting. So the organisations that run much of the economy, fund a hideous amount of our political processes (and indirectly write a fair number of our laws), employ large numbers of people, are listed on the stock market, advertise on our TVs and generally appear extremely powerful and near-omnipresent, suddenly vanish in a puff of smoke when the word 'Tax' is mentioned (or merely point out that they do all their business in Luxembourg and the Cayman Islands, honest guv).
  11. Indeed. Most people have children at some point. The rest depend on other people having children. So what's your point?
  12. I'd assume that they are adding in corrections for future changes to T&Cs as well.
  13. I'm sure that there's a Think Tank working on it. Strange thing is, I bet that if stable, reasonably paid jobs existed for young people, the problem would go away. And as long as those jobs don't exist the problem will stay. Past a certain point more training might make things worse, because training can never quite match actually doing a job.
  14. Of course, if we had a large stock of high quality council housing, then the whole 'pro single parent' thing would be pointless.
  15. The problem is, this is how Economists seem to think.. If a person freezes to death in their home, it's because they made a rational decision not to pay for heating. We can't possibly interfere, because that would mean admitting a market failure, which is defined as impossible.
  16. Well, no. The amount IS relevant. If it's £10 million a year then it's really not worth worrying about.
  17. It will be funny when they find out what a £250,000 Luxury Executive Flat in central Manchester is actually like, though.
  18. No, you didn't read Wonderpup's post correctly. The problem is one of propaganda. We are told that rich people only work for money, and therefore if we dare to tax them any more or even restrain their pay, they'll down tools and we'll all be worse off. But we are also told that it is immoral to live on benefits, even when people would lose out by taking a job. Which is often the case, especially when childcare is involved. Or zero hours contracts. So.. if you are rich, you are allowed to whine about the injustice of a 45% marginal rate, but if you are poor you are not allowed to complain about marginal rates over 100%.
  19. Only problem is, what are you going to cut? I see an awful lot of people posting rants like this about how high the tax burden is meant to be, but never a plan of what they would actually cut. Usually a bit of a rant about 'diversity consultants' which would not make the slightest difference. It's lazy and ignorant, to be honest. Much of this 'state beast' is transfer payments, pensions being the biggest part. Then there are health and education. It's a hugely complicated problem.
  20. Depends - In the official rules, if you land on an unowned property and don't want to buy it, it has to go for auction to the highest bidder. Often seems to be forgotten. You could borrow money from other players under any agreement you choose.
  21. Yes, it's part of the whole Neoliberal steamroller.. outsource, privatise, deregulate, never, ever stop or reverse this process, no matter how much the voters scream at you to do so. Treat it as some sort of force of nature. (Then act shocked when the voters stop voting for you)
  22. Do bear in mind that the Lib Dems could have stopped any conservative policy they felt like.
  23. What? Do you want the moon on a stick as well? It's only 24 times average salary, what do people want?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.