General Election, June 8th

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Webbo said:

We are talking billions, he is pretending only the rich will pay and he keeps saying the rich are getting richer as if getting rich was a crime.

 

Just now, Webbo said:

Who's saying pay no tax?

 

You're blaming ordinary people's problems on  a section of society and trying to stir up anger. You no different to Trump.

 

The point is that since 2010 the richest section of society has seen its wealth increase significantly whilst those further down the chain have not seen a commensurate improvement in their own position. 

 

There is nothing wrong with success or wealth. Absolutely nothing. The ideas proposed are not simply a measure for the jealous poor to hit back against the mean rich.

 

Since 2010 taxes on business and the wealthy have decreased at the same time as their incomes have increased by a much larger % than the rest of society. Help for the poorest through increasing the main tax starting point were welcome but were offset by cuts elsewhere and haven't brought about relative improvement in living standards.

 

If we're "all in it together" then all sections of society need to see the fruits of their labour. Public sector workers have seen their real terms wages dropping for getting on for a decade! At this moment we need to redress the balance through tax increases at the top to allow breathing space elsewhere in the economy.

 

Just for a second look at the bigger picture. There needs to be balance in the economy or we end up in a very difficult place socially.

 

 

[Webbo]

When people talk about the rich getting richer they think it's the same people all the time. There'll always be a top 1%, that's a mathematical certainty but the people in it change all the time. Fortunes are won and lost everyday. Jamie Vardy earns £6 million a year, he didn't in 2010. While the economy is growing people will make money, that's a fact of life.

[Buce]

10 hours ago, Strokes said:

What system? Capitalism? Maybe but that's a different conversation, still a minimum wage increase won't help those on minimum wage. They will still earn the lowest, in fact you could argue it could bring more people into poverty,

 

Based on that argument, you'll be asking your boss for a pay cut then?

 

 

10 hours ago, Webbo said:

Says somebody who doesn't employ anyone. £20 a day, 5 day week? That's only an extra £100 per employee per week. Easy, everyone knows small business owners have millions in the bank.

 

Why should they get rich on the backs of the workers? If a few hundred quid a week is enough to put them out of business, then you could argue that they are not very good at their job (running the business) and that it's the workers' efforts that actually make the difference.

[Webbo]

Just now, Buce said:

 

Based on that argument, you'll be asking your boss for a pay cut then?

 

 

 

Why should they get rich on the backs of the workers? If a few hundred quid a week is enough to put them out of business, then you could argue that they are not very good at their job (running the business) and that it's the workers' efforts that actually make the difference.

Who says they're getting rich? Not all businesses are making money hand over fist, some are struggling to survive. 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Webbo said:

When people talk about the rich getting richer they think it's the same people all the time. There'll always be a top 1%, that's a mathematical certainty but the people in it change all the time. Fortunes are won and lost everyday. Jamie Vardy earns £6 million a year, he didn't in 2010. While the economy is growing people will make money, that's a fact of life.

But the fact is you've argued elsewhere that it had been growing and large sections of society haven't seen any benefit. It absolutely cannot be right that business and wealth taxes are decreasing at the same time as well tell nurses they have to accept year on year pay cuts for a decade.

 

It strikes me as you arguing from a personal position of doing well from the status quo. That's fine, many people vote that way. What i object to is you trying to dress it up as an opinion based on what's good for society.

[Webbo]

Just now, toddybad said:

But the fact is you've argued elsewhere that it had been growing and large sections of society haven't seen any benefit. It absolutely cannot be right that business and wealth taxes are decreasing at the same time as well tell nurses they have to accept year on year pay cuts for a decade.

 

It strikes me as you arguing from a personal position of doing well from the status quo. That's fine, many people vote that way. What i object to is you trying to dress it up as an opinion based on what's good for society.

No, I'd guess my income is bellow average.

 

Socialism is a disaster, just look at Venezuela ,a country swimming in oil where extreme poverty is rocketing.

[Guest MattP]

4 minutes ago, Buce said:

Why should they get rich on the backs of the workers? If a few hundred quid a week is enough to put them out of business, then you could argue that they are not very good at their job (running the business) and that it's the workers' efforts that actually make the difference.

Why should a small business that is happy to make a few hundred a week be shut down just because you don't think they are good at their job because they don't make loadsamoney?

[Guest Dirkster the Fox]

25 minutes ago, MattP said:

 Now get back to your Daily Mail, you Daily Mail reader. 

 just about sums up most on here.  You don't like the views of those not left wing and all those are "Allocated" as Daily Mail readers and asked to leave.

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

Just now, Webbo said:

No, I'd guess my income is bellow average.

 

Socialism is a disaster, just look at Venezuela ,a country swimming in oil where extreme poverty is rocketing.

You know when somebody is losing an argument because they keep shifting the debate in different directions....

 

A 26% business tax and 5% extra above £80k is not going to see Fidel Castro riding into the palace of westminster!

[Guest]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

Why should a small business that is happy to make a few hundred a week be shut down just because you don't think they are good at their job because they don't make loadsamoney?

The corporation tax rise only affects big business and small business is protected.

 

If you're suggesting they shouldn't pay their staff enough to live without state handouts then you're wrong. 

[Guest Dirkster the Fox]

6 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Who says they're getting rich? Not all businesses are making money hand over fist, some are struggling to survive. 

Most on here wouldn't handle the pressure of running their own business, much easier to think all who do are swimming in £cash.  Utopia is a much easier place for them to work their morals in....

[The Guvnor]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1NgVT8dRKE

 

 

[Nick]

3 minutes ago, Dirkster the Fox said:

Most on here wouldn't handle the pressure of running their own business, much easier to think all who do are swimming in £cash.  Utopia is a much easier place for them to work their morals in....

 

 no stereotyping here, move along now...

[Guest Dirkster the Fox]

Just now, Swan Lesta said:

 

 no stereotyping here, move along now...

 just like saying all those who are not lefty's like you are Daily Mail readers. Now jog on.... 

[Guest MattP]

25 minutes ago, toddybad said:

The corporation tax rise only affects big business and small business is protected.

 

If you're suggesting they shouldn't pay their staff enough to live without state handouts then you're wrong. 

I'm referring to the minimum wage rise which as I say, whacks over 5k on a small business per staff member. 

[breadandcheese]

27 minutes ago, toddybad said:

The corporation tax rise only affects big business and small business is protected.

 

If you're suggesting they shouldn't pay their staff enough to live without state handouts then you're wrong. 

Minimum wage up to £10/hour (£10.30/hr when pension contributions are factored in). This is a fine if businesses can increase their prices to cover costs but most small businesses I know are unable to do this. 

[Guest Dirkster the Fox]

22 minutes ago, toddybad said:

You know when somebody is losing an argument because they keep shifting the debate in different directions....

 

A 26% business tax and 5% extra above £80k is not going to see Fidel Castro riding into the palace of westminster!

He was simply pointing out a fact.  Venezuela is in a mess and deep Socialism doesn't work because it spends too much money.   

 

Labour is now Momentum and not even Labour anymore and despite all the double bluffing, would inflict a deep form of Socialism on the UK. Thus eventually through time in office, spending more money than ever before.  Before you throw back the Tories can;t get the deficit down, forgetting the pile of crap they inherited the only.....only argument is borrowing more to grow is good when interest rates are extremely low, as they currently are.  All that argument goes down the plug hole when the interest rates go up and the debt interest rogers our economy further..I'll tell you what then, we'll be double ****ed. Too much debt, too much going on interest payments, borrowing new bonds for capital at the same higher rate and the death spiral really begins.  These are just facts, the reality.

 

Listen the Tories are hardly running thing well, but sometimes you just weigh up which one gives you the best hope for the future.  Labour's gift list of spending needs money, lots of money, it will eventually stifle the economy and all this Utopia you all want on here becomes the impossible dream.

 

As Sir Winston once said:

 

“If a man is not a socialist by the time he is 20, he has no heart. If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.”

 

I am 45

 

[The Guvnor]

Going back to last nights audience debate it is quite clear that TM is not at all comfortable in that environment, and JC is obviously lapping up his renewed popularity and why shouldn't he. It is a shame the 'red button' issue seems to be his main Achilles heel as I am sure most intelligent people understand that once that is pressed you might as well kiss your arse goodbye. Although I admire JC's vision for wholesale disarmament it is a bit 'pie in the sky' in the modern world with so many 'crackpot' dictators. For all the Tory's balls ups Labour seem to be matching them and the Trident' issue' is a prime example,  JC and Abbott casting doubt in the electorates minds by saying the whole of British defence will be subject to a review including Trident then the shadow defence secretary Nia Griffiths trying to convince Andrew Neil and the public that Trident will be renewed saying I am the defence secretary not Jeremy, it's hardly surprising the audience milked that point.

 

[Voll Blau]

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, breadandcheese said:

Minimum wage up to £10/hour (£10.30/hr when pension contributions are factored in). This is a fine if businesses can increase their prices to cover costs but most small businesses I know are unable to do this. 

But they will increase prices. And that's fine. 

If you want to grow you're business you need staff. You hire staff and you have to pay them properly. You make sure this is costed within your charges. Otherwise we're back in Victorian Britain. 

As it stands some - SOME - small business treat employees as little more than dirt. Paying as little as they can is part of that, despite the fact that the rest of us have to pick up the pieces by paying more in tax - which should be to the horror of the likes of Webbo and MattP - to cover in-work benefits. 

If you can't grow a business by planing staff increases and costing your product properly then you shouldn't be in business. Too many small business owners  see it as their income and any staff they take on are there to help out and be paid a pittance. If there are only two or three of you making that company work then those extra staff should be seen as much more than that and be paid properly.

A reminder: I said SOME, NOT all. 

We need to move to an economy where more people have money in their pockets which requires business to pay more but repays this by allowing more potential customers.  

 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

That was the guy I mentioned last night. Asked a question about being a working student. It was Jezza's best answer of the night so when Dimbleby went back to the lad he genuinely didn't have  clue what to say! A bit Tim nice-but-dim!

[Webbo]

7 minutes ago, toddybad said:

But they will increase prices. And that's fine. 

If you want to grow you're business you need staff. You hire staff and you have to pay them properly. You make sure this is costed within your charges. Otherwise we're back in Victorian Britain. 

As it stands some - SOME - small business treat employees as little more than dirt. Paying as little as they can is part of that, despite the fact that the rest of us have to pick up the pieces by paying more in tax - which should be to the horror of the likes of Webbo and MattP - to cover in-work benefits. 

If you can't grow a business by planing staff increases and costing your product properly then you shouldn't be in business. Too many small business owners  see it as their income and any staff they take on are there to help out and be paid a pittance. If there are only two or three of you making that company work then those extra staff should be seen as much more than that and be paid properly.

A reminder: I said SOME, NOT all. 

We need to move to an economy where more people have money in their pockets which requires business to pay more but repays this by allowing more potential customers.  

 

How many businesses have you run?

[Guest Dirkster the Fox]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

How many businesses have you run?

Hazard a guess,......ziltch.  Much easier to moan about those will the balls for enterprise, with a nice collective comment that "most" are nasty bastards paying peanuts.

 

Chip removal from shoulder needed. 

 

toddybad......no balls......no small businesses.......less jobs. Do you have the balls?

 

[Guest Dirkster the Fox]

12 minutes ago, toddybad said:

 ! A bit Tim nice-but-dim!

Way to go you class warrior!!!!

[breadandcheese]

14 minutes ago, toddybad said:

But they will increase prices. And that's fine. 

If you want to grow you're business you need staff. You hire staff and you have to pay them properly. You make sure this is costed within your charges. Otherwise we're back in Victorian Britain. 

As it stands some - SOME - small business treat employees as little more than dirt. Paying as little as they can is part of that, despite the fact that the rest of us have to pick up the pieces by paying more in tax - which should be to the horror of the likes of Webbo and MattP - to cover in-work benefits. 

If you can't grow a business by planing staff increases and costing your product properly then you shouldn't be in business. Too many small business owners  see it as their income and any staff they take on are there to help out and be paid a pittance. If there are only two or three of you making that company work then those extra staff should be seen as much more than that and be paid properly.

A reminder: I said SOME, NOT all. 

We need to move to an economy where more people have money in their pockets which requires business to pay more but repays this by allowing more potential customers.  

 

So if businesses put up prices to cover the cost of the wage increase, where's the benefit to the economy and more importantly, the workers? The workers are no better off. If anything, our low tech exporting businesses are at an economic disadvantage as their cost base is higher than their global competitors.