Jump to content

The Politics Thread 2019


Day

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

Do you think the new labour plan is flawed at only targeting the rich ?

It's not really 'targeting' the rich is it? It's just bringing the tax rates of high earners in line with the rest of the world. It's not like they have a load of other countries they can move to if they don't like Labour's taxes - because most other countries are already taxing them at those levels or higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 12.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, Pastinaak said:

It's not really 'targeting' the rich is it? It's just bringing the tax rates of high earners in line with the rest of the world. It's not like they have a load of other countries they can move to if they don't like Labour's taxes - because most other countries are already taxing them at those levels or higher.

I guess any EU states are out too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

I guess any EU states are out too

Most likely. And also, we do have the NHS- which is a massive plus if it can be saved rather than sold. Most other countries have to fork out a lot of their wages on healthcare. £20k p/a for an American family plan??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

Because I’m happy with the tax I pay at the moment.

Now I’m sure you do me the same courtesy and answer my earlier question. Do you think the new labour plan is flawed at only targeting the rich ?

No. Because we are able to make a plan that involves taxing very high earners a small amount, which will suffice. If it turns out we need to drive more tax income, I'm sure people on a little less will contribute a fraction more too. 

At the income levels we're talking about, you will still be far, far ahead of almost everyone in the country. You might even have a free NHS still. Functional roads that your business relies on. Clean air we all rely on. It truly is a win-win. Not doing some of these things is definitely a lose-lose. 

So you're happy with the current tax levels, but being a tenner a week worse off will be enough to get you to leave the country? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Norman said:

I don't get what your point is. 

The mayor of London is Labour. So what? A crazy man has killed 2 people.

I think it's because Paul71 said the tories don't set the threat level, when it would appear that the tory home Secretary indeed does set it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

No. Because we are able to make a plan that involves taxing very high earners a small amount, which will suffice. If it turns out we need to drive more tax income, I'm sure people on a little less will contribute a fraction more too. 

At the income levels we're talking about, you will still be far, far ahead of almost everyone in the country. You might even have a free NHS still. Functional roads that your business relies on. Clean air we all rely on. It truly is a win-win. Not doing some of these things is definitely a lose-lose. 

So you're happy with the current tax levels, but being a tenner a week worse off will be enough to get you to leave the country? 

So we back to the original point, you want change but want someone else to pay for it. You also have more spare income than other people, yet you don’t think it’s right that you have to contribute anything towards free broadband etc...it’s only a tenner you say, but as long as it doesn’t come out of your wage packet, so easy to say when it’s not your own money.

It’s not just the tenner a week that would want me to leave, it’s the above as well where people moan that we need to improve the country but always want someone else to pay for it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Pastinaak said:

It's not really 'targeting' the rich is it? It's just bringing the tax rates of high earners in line with the rest of the world. It's not like they have a load of other countries they can move to if they don't like Labour's taxes - because most other countries are already taxing them at those levels or higher.

Really ? Spain Germany and America are all lower than us, or don’t they count ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Norman said:

But how old are you? Do you already own a house, have grown up kids, nice car, holidays etc? 

I've seen a few of your holiday shots, haven't I? 

It really isn't that simple. 

You'll have to be more thorough with your stalking. No nice car, I down graded to a smaller car many years ago, to keep the running cost down and help me live within my budget. The car is now starting to show signs of wear and could do with replacing, but will probably have to run it into the ground and hope it lasts out until I get my bus pass.

As for the holidays. I've been lucky enough to have built up a small holiday nest egg. I've now taken more holidays in the last few years than I have had during the rest of my life. Was planning to spend more time travelling when I had retired but due to a change in circumstances. Decided to do it now while I could enjoy it and before the body got to old and decrepit.

Not sure why you raised what I do in my life in regards to what I post about. But hope it helped.

If I was asked to contribute more to help our nation's society, then so be it. Doing this may affect how I presently live my life but I'll accept it and alter how I live accordingly. Pity that people far wealthier than me appear to be reluctant in wanting to do the same and with the probability that any extra they are asked to contribute will have less of an impact on their life style than it would on the rest of us, that are lower down in the rich list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AdamRam said:

Most wealth ? That’s not correct for sure, highest paid yes.

Because why shouldn’t other people share the burden, those that sit in the band below for example ?

Pay me more, then by definition I'll be wealther. Therefore have more cash available to me and thus be able to contribute more to the upkeep of the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it seems the guy shot today by the police was a previously convicted terrorist who had been released on a tag and was a guest of a Cambridge University sponsored conference in London today on 'prisoner rehabilitation'.

You can't make this crap up ?

 

EKk568lXkAE35M6.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listened to the first 30mins of the debate on the radio tonight.

It was good that there wasnt the usual cheerleading from the crowd. 

I tried to listen without any bias and give credit for actually speaking positively rather than whataboutery. 

The conservative and brexit representatives were terrible, the labour one only slightly better. 

Swinson, to my surprise spoke well, as did Sturgeon and the Plaid Cymru person. 

Star of the show for me tonight and over the past week has been Caroline Lucas. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GboroRam said:

I think it's because Paul71 said the tories don't set the threat level, when it would appear that the tory home Secretary indeed does set it. 

 

Is the home secretary the only person in the JTAC? 

Which part of working independently means the home secretary sets it?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50293238

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, 1of4 said:

Pay me more, then by definition I'll be wealther. Therefore have more cash available to me and thus be able to contribute more to the upkeep of the country.

Wouldn’t surprise me if that was on Labours manifesto, get the “rich” to contribute to other people’s wages.

Mind you in essence, the free broadband is doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, maxjam said:

So it seems the guy shot today by the police was a previously convicted terrorist who had been released on a tag and was a guest of a Cambridge University sponsored conference in London today on 'prisoner rehabilitation'.

You can't make this crap up ?

 

 

This is incredible.

How do we allow it to happen? Wonder where the others are that went to Prison at the same time as him?

Ultimately innocent people have died because someone, or people, made a decision to free someone like this.

We have seen people charge with Manslaughter through gross negligence (Hillsborough). Should we see the same happen when something like this happens?

I don't know what the answers are, but even to me letting someone out 5 years into a 16 year sentence of which he much serve half seems to be gross negligence.

This morning i feel ashamed at a justice system that has allowed this to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

This is incredible.

How do we allow it to happen? Wonder where the others are that went to Prison at the same time as him?

Ultimately innocent people have died because someone, or people, made a decision to free someone like this.

We have seen people charge with Manslaughter through gross negligence (Hillsborough). Should we see the same happen when something like this happens?

I don't know what the answers are, but even to me letting someone out 5 years into a 16 year sentence of which he much serve half seems to be gross negligence.

This morning i feel ashamed at a justice system that has allowed this to happen.

Is it the justice system to blame or what this country has become. We have public outcry when we take away the citizenship of people who leave to become part of a terroirist organisation, known for attacks in this country, and then want to come back when it suits them.

For me we should have zero tolerance on anyone convicted on terrorist charges, but I can imagine that wouldn’t go down to well with some.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

Is it the justice system to blame or what this country has become. We have public outcry when we take away the citizenship of people who leave to become part of a terroirist organisation, known for attacks in this country, and then want to come back when it suits them.

For me we should have zero tolerance on anyone convicted on terrorist charges, but I can imagine that wouldn’t go down to well with some.  

I honestly don't know. I am with you Zero Tolerance, but what that means i don't know. I would say it means 100% (or as close as can be) certainty that the convicted has been fully rehabilitated, just not sure how you do this, but what it should also mean is that even if they are considered rehabilitated they should still serve their time and punishment.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, AdamRam said:

So we back to the original point, you want change but want someone else to pay for it. You also have more spare income than other people, yet you don’t think it’s right that you have to contribute anything towards free broadband etc...it’s only a tenner you say, but as long as it doesn’t come out of your wage packet, so easy to say when it’s not your own money.

It’s not just the tenner a week that would want me to leave, it’s the above as well where people moan that we need to improve the country but always want someone else to pay for it.

 

Dress it up how you like, your income puts you in a position where a small tax increase leaves you less affected than the rest of the country. If we're all in it together, you'll have to start contributing a little more to fix the nation's problems. Because you are unaffected by those problems. You aren't homeless, you don't need to use a food bank, you can afford to buy your home, you can feed your family and aren't living life on the bread line. But I'm confident that some people who you rely on to keep you in the position you are in will have experienced one or more of those issues. 

Be thankful for your ability to help others for a small cost. I wish I was unfortunate enough to be in your position. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...