Councils going bust, schools crumbling, the NHS in crisis: the answer is more tax [OPINION]

[14stFlyer]

On 9/8/2023 at 5:55 PM, Will! said:

I would prefer the subsidy to be paid to the employer.  My reasons:

1. It would make price discovery of wages for jobs easier.

2. It would allow conditions to be imposed on the employer to weed out subsidies for jobs which only exist to facilitate the claiming of Tax Credits / Universal Credit.  Where I live there are lots of dog walkers, cupcake makers, yoga teachers whose jobs exist for this purpose.

Thanks for the answer. I agree.  Though there will need to be some form of controls to stop unscrupulous employers from either sacking staff at the end of the subsidy period and replacing with a new staff member under subsidy, or constantly changing the job spec at the end of the subsidy period.  

[Will!]

3 hours ago, 14stFlyer said:

Thanks for the answer. I agree.  Though there will need to be some form of controls to stop unscrupulous employers from either sacking staff at the end of the subsidy period and replacing with a new staff member under subsidy, or constantly changing the job spec at the end of the subsidy period.  

There is a risk that employers just sack the employee at the end of the 12 month subsidy period and then hire another employee in order to claim another subsidy.  My answer would be to set a minimum period (probably between 5 and 10 years) per employee for each 12 months of subsidy so there aren't enough unemployed people eligible for the subsidy to make that viable.  It would also be necessary to make the subsidy unavailable for economic migrants.

The other attraction of a time-limited subsidy is that it simplifies the problem of tapering the subsidy for employees on higher wages.  I would start the taper at a wage of NMW x 40 hours, but it's difficult to know how much it should be reduced by as wages increase while avoiding discouraging people from seeking higher-earning jobs, such as promotions.  Time-limiting makes the taper less important.

[spyguy]

On 08/09/2023 at 18:08, petetong said:

Never going to happen when so many MPs are BTL parasites. 

There are 650 MPs.

Most only have 2nd homes- HoP/ constituencies.

I've never seen a number of how many actually have btl investments.

I'd be surprised if its more than a fifth.

[msi]

1 hour ago, spyguy said:

There are 650 MPs.

Most only have 2nd homes- HoP/ constituencies.

I've never seen a number of how many actually have btl investments.

I'd be surprised if its more than a fifth.

Replace them with the top 650 most wealthy in the UK....at least you can see who is f******g you over

[spyguy]

5 minutes ago, msi said:

Replace them with the top 650 most wealthy in the UK....at least you can see who is f******g you over

Again, I don't know anyone I regard as wealthy (people with 2m+ in non property or pension) with a BTL.

Btl, esp io btl, has all been potless fkwits leveraging up.

Anyone with money n senses,oops at tge leveraged return and goes - Fckit.

I *do* know loads - and I mean loads, of lefty /public sector who are very exposed to btl.

It's nuts.

Shares - capilistic exploitation, bad...

Taking out an io mortgage, shoving a load of EE families into a 3br house - good...

 

[msi]

1 minute ago, spyguy said:

Again, I don't know anyone I regard as wealthy (people with 2m+ in non property or pension) with a BTL.

Btl, esp io btl, has all been potless fkwits leveraging up.

Anyone with money n senses,oops at tge leveraged return and goes - Fckit.

I *do* know loads - and I mean loads, of lefty /public sector who are very exposed to btl.

It's nuts.

Shares - capilistic exploitation, bad...

Taking out an io mortgage, shoving a load of EE families into a 3br house - good...

 

Hardly many 'lefties' on the BTL forums.  Your own gammon glasses blocking your view there mate

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

On 07/09/2023 at 09:35, msi said:

No. The argument is for the top 0.1% to stop f***ing us over and blaming 'others'.

Use the money spent on Test-N-Trace, Dodgy PPE, Dodgy Bounce Back Loans, Tax 'reliefs', PFI, off-balance-sheet accounting, and offshore evai-dance to spend on stuff that people actually need. 

Oh and stop the id*ots that spout soundbite sh*te every time to deflect, avoid, and deny the real issue eh

 

 

Agree. The issue is the Billionaires, they need reining in, a bit like big oil was reined in.

Breakup Google/Alphabet, Microsoft, Apple, JPMC, Saudi Aramco, Meta, Amazon etc and keep  going. Make sure proper taxes are paid without dodgy transfer pricing, and offshore accounts. 

 

[petetong]

On 10/09/2023 at 16:28, msi said:

Hardly many 'lefties' on the BTL forums.  Your own gammon glasses blocking your view there mate

I know of quite a few Labour voting teachers who have BTL's. 

[msi]

1 hour ago, petetong said:

I know of quite a few Labour voting teachers who have BTL's. 

wow that settles it...all BTLs are lefty sandal wearers then.  Thanks.

[petetong]

On 10/09/2023 at 14:50, spyguy said:

There are 650 MPs.

Most only have 2nd homes- HoP/ constituencies.

I've never seen a number of how many actually have btl investments.

I'd be surprised if its more than a fifth.

Even 20% is bad news as far as a change policy is concerned

[Social Justice League]

The west is finished imo.

Printing worthless fiat only takes you so far before the wheels fall off your society.

It's really pitiful how printing and forcing it on mug punters as debt  became the whole western economic system.......lol.

[14stFlyer]

On 9/11/2023 at 6:08 PM, petetong said:

I know of quite a few Labour voting teachers who have BTL's.

There are morally corrupt people on all sides of the political spectrum. 

[msi]

38 minutes ago, 14stFlyer said:

There are morally corrupt people on all sides of the political spectrum. 

True, but one side seems under the impression they are entitled to be corrupt and its an affront to call them out

[petetong]

2 hours ago, msi said:

True, but one side seems under the impression they are entitled to be corrupt and its an affront to call them out

In case you think I dislike the ones on the left more than right you are incorrect although I do find them to be more hypocritical with their holier than thou attitude whilst getting rich by being a van hoogstraten.

Edited September 13, 2023 by petetong

[msi]

On 10/09/2023 at 16:26, spyguy said:

I *do* know loads - and I mean loads, of lefty /public sector who are very exposed to btl.

 

 

 

[14stFlyer]

0% for The Greens.  
 

Admittedly only one MP though. 

[spyguy]

5 hours ago, msi said:

 

Thats MPs.

I said public sector lefty types.

There are 1000s n 1000s of those.

 

[regprentice]

On 11/09/2023 at 19:10, msi said:

wow that settles it...all BTLs are lefty sandal wearers then.  Thanks.

i think BTL ownership is more of a class distinction rather than a political one. You can very broadly talk about labour being working class and conservatives not but thats less true now than it was before new labour. BTL was Gordon Browns baby after all  

[Will!]

The most unbearable people at Labour party meetings are the BTLers who claim they're "providing a public service".  At least the Tories are clear they're only in it to make money.

[msi]

3 hours ago, spyguy said:

Thats MPs.

I said public sector lefty types.

There are 1000s n 1000s of those.

 

Does the public sector recruit on political affiliations?  Showing your colours there mate

[msi]

41 minutes ago, Will! said:

The most unbearable people at Labour party meetings are the BTLers who claim they're "providing a public service".  At least the Tories are clear they're only in it to make money.

I find Tories that drone about how they are entitled to f*** you over and you deserve to be f***ed over even more unbearable, only beaten by ToryFanBoyz that cheer them on because ThErE iS nO AlTeRnAtIVe, so long as they can sneer at someone else as they are being f***ed over.