The Politics Thread 2019

[Uptherams]

Apparently consumers only care about one thing and that is price ? 

[GboroRam]

Just now, Uptherams said:

Apparently consumers only care about one thing and that is price ? 

Well, it's fair to say that there's a reason my tesco doesn't sell quails' eggs. 

[Uptherams]

25 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Well, it's fair to say that there's a reason my tesco doesn't sell quails' eggs. 

So people only buy the cheapest products in Tesco then? The logic of the UK being flooded with cheap imports is flawed. As a consumer, they should, within reason, be allowed to purchase what they want. Keep your hands off of other people's disposable incomes and on your own. 

[jono]

32 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Well, it's fair to say that there's a reason my tesco doesn't sell quails' eggs. 

yeah but I bet they sell ready chopped onions. 

[1of4]

4 hours ago, Wolfie said:

You have to negotiate on tarrifs to get to a free trade position, since the default setting will be WTO 10% tariffs on most things.

When we become an independent trading country, we can allow goods to enter with zero tariffs into our country if we so wish and all without any negotiations taking place.

For our exports, if we do so under WTO rulings then 10% would be the minimum tariff we can face. As for negotiating any deals that will be as good or better for us than we already have with most countries. That will take a lot longer than we were lead to believe by senior brexit campaigners. We will be paying WTO tariffs for a long time, meaning our companies will be at a disadvantage when it comes to being competitive in the world market.

[AndyinLiverpool]

1 hour ago, StivePesley said:

He probably sees it as a win/win. He gets the kickback from the corporate lobbyists AND he thinks it will win him votes amongst the "poor people" who consume the most fags/booze/junk food.

On the face of it - it's true that "sin taxes" disproportionately affect those on lower incomes - but it's a disastrous idea. The whole point of taxing these things is to increase tax take to fund the NHS whilst simultaneously improving the health of the nation so that the NHS is not overcome.

 

Beware of Tories showing 'concern' for those on lower incomes.

[bcnram]

1 hour ago, StivePesley said:

He probably sees it as a win/win. He gets the kickback from the corporate lobbyists AND he thinks it will win him votes amongst the "poor people" who consume the most fags/booze/junk food.

On the face of it - it's true that "sin taxes" disproportionately affect those on lower incomes - but it's a disastrous idea. The whole point of taxing these things is to increase tax take to fund the NHS whilst simultaneously improving the health of the nation so that the NHS is not overcome.

 

Didn’t he say he wants it to be more ‘evidence based’? If the evidence shows that sales of sugar based drinks have not reduced then it is the lower income brackets who are being punished. I can understand his thinking, but personally I would triple the tax on cigarettes to try and reduce the self inflicted lung cancer sufferers from clogging up the nhs resources. 

[GboroRam]

1 hour ago, Uptherams said:

So people only buy the cheapest products in Tesco then? The logic of the UK being flooded with cheap imports is flawed. As a consumer, they should, within reason, be allowed to purchase what they want. Keep your hands off of other people's disposable incomes and on your own. 

I'm pleased for you if cost is not a factor in your shopping. 

[Uptherams]

3 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I'm pleased for you if cost is not a factor in your shopping. 

Not said or implied. Try harder. ??

[Stive Pesley]

15 minutes ago, bcnram said:

Didn’t he say he wants it to be more ‘evidence based’? If the evidence shows that sales of sugar based drinks have not reduced then it is the lower income brackets who are being punished. I can understand his thinking, but personally I would triple the tax on cigarettes to try and reduce the self inflicted lung cancer sufferers from clogging up the nhs resources. 

Yeah - if I had any faith that the evidence presented was factual and not created by the lobbyists themselves. 

In truth - if there was evidence showing sales of sugar based drinks have not reduced then I'd say that's an argument to keep increasing the tax until they do. 

[Wolfie]

29 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

When we become an independent trading country, we can allow goods to enter with zero tariffs into our country if we so wish and all without any negotiations taking place.

For our exports, if we do so under WTO rulings then 10% would be the minimum tariff we can face. As for negotiating any deals that will be as good or better for us than we already have with most countries. That will take a lot longer than we were lead to believe by senior brexit campaigners. We will be paying WTO tariffs for a long time, meaning our companies will be at a disadvantage when it comes to being competitive in the world market.

I know all that. I was just answering your question on why we need to negotiate on tariffs.

[cstand]

Convicted for financial misconduct Christine Lagarde is now head of the ECB this has to be fake news come on remainers tell me it's not true. But when you are spending vast amounts of other people's money does the EU actually care.  Oh well it's ticked the girl power box I suppose.

 

[Ghost of Clough]

2 hours ago, StivePesley said:

Yeah - if I had any faith that the evidence presented was factual and not created by the lobbyists themselves. 

In truth - if there was evidence showing sales of sugar based drinks have not reduced then I'd say that's an argument to keep increasing the tax until they do. 

I would say it's an argument to increase the 'education' in such areas.

[GboroRam]

3 minutes ago, cstand said:

Convicted for financial misconduct Christine Lagarde is now head of the ECB this has to be a fake news come on remainers tell me it's not true. But when you are spending vast amounts of other people's money does the EU actually care.  Oh well it's ticked the girl power box I suppose.

 

I don't think Brexit supporters can take the moral high ground in fiscal responsibility, after being found guilty of overspending on their campaign. 

[GboroRam]

5 hours ago, McRainy said:

I'm sure they will be relieved by your reassurances. 

If you want to believe that the structures and institutions of the EU have the best interests of ordinary working people at heart, then that's up to you. I have suggested that that is far from the case, because of the ways in which it enables the corporate elite to pursue their agenda of removing the democratic shackles to their wealth and power. These are issues which go far beyond the minutiae of specific trade deals.

I only mentioned the deal on beef because it is an example which directly contradicts claims that were being made by another poster. 

An example. If I find an example of someone injured by a seat belt do we ban them? 

[1of4]

2 hours ago, Wolfie said:

I know all that. I was just answering your question on why we need to negotiate on tariffs.

 The need to negotiate on tariffs is not quite the question I was asking originally. So I answered your post like you answered mine. Giving an aswer that didn't answer the question.

[Uptherams]

3 hours ago, bcnram said:

Didn’t he say he wants it to be more ‘evidence based’? If the evidence shows that sales of sugar based drinks have not reduced then it is the lower income brackets who are being punished. I can understand his thinking, but personally I would triple the tax on cigarettes to try and reduce the self inflicted lung cancer sufferers from clogging up the nhs resources. 

But the reality is that the tax already generated is more than the expenditure spent on smoking related patients. 

[eddie]

5 hours ago, Uptherams said:

Apparently consumers only care about one thing and that is price ? 

Enjoy your chlorine-washed chicken.

[GboroRam]

52 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

But the reality is that the tax already generated is more than the expenditure spent on smoking related patients. 

Then it's an investment in public health. 

[cstand]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

I don't think Brexit supporters can take the moral high ground in fiscal responsibility, after being found guilty of overspending on their campaign. 

Talking of moral high ground Lagarde never fell on her sword at the IMF after being found guilty did she?  Remainers cannot take the moral high ground because they have no morals in the first place proven with their antics and hysteria after losing a democratic vote.