Jon the Hat Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 1 hour ago, Foxin_mad said: Trouble is they want to take a lot more than £10 off the person warning £5000 a week!! They already do in fact! Indeed, under Labour proposals, someone earnig £5k a week £260k a year would pay £200 a week more, over £10k a year - a 10% increase in their income tax contribution.
Webbo Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 6 hours ago, toddybad said: The coming financial crash will occur because any growth there has been has resulted in inflated house prices and record personal debt. It has not been because of wage growth. Recession occurs when people stop spending. Putting money into the real economy would cause people to spend making recession less likely. This is like having an argument with a high-schooler who doesn't do their homework. You've answered a question I didn't ask. People are spending money now, we don't need extra spending.
Alf Bentley Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 1 hour ago, KingGTF said: I'm a learner, I'm not an academic and uni feels stifling to me. Maybe it's a failure of me but I don't want to be learning material for an exam, I want to be asking my own questions and delving deeper and really getting stuck into things. I quite simply couldn't invest myself into preparing for exams. I have been considering this for a few months now so it's not due to, what I agree would be the wrong reasons. I have already deferred this years exams so I have a year out now but I also have very little intention of going back and completing them next year. I'm hoping in this time, I am able to sell myself to someone who can give ME the chance rather than giving it to the bit of paper I hold. Maybe I'm living in fantasy land but I'm giving myself the opportunity to make my own way with LSE as an insurance. I just want to learn, I have my ideas I just need to learn how to develop and implement them. The fact is, uni makes me miserable and the whole graduate train that I'd already fallen into was going to carry that on, whether this break works or not I don't know. That sounds like a good plan. Gives you a decent chance to find out what your prospects are right now - and a fall-back option if they aren't as good as you'd like and you can stomach returning to jumping through hoops to boost those prospects. Good luck! I dropped out of a degree course I'd started straight from school, and with my plans a lot less thought through than yours. I ended up going back and doing a very different degree 10 years later, to which I was properly committed. I've never regretted that original decision, though some thought I was crazy at the time. Sometimes you just have to trust your judgment - and you're pretty much in a win-win situation, anyway, with your fall-back option.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 4 hours ago, Sharpe's Fox said: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/danny-devito-backs-jeremy-corbyn-10453082 Don't pay Pound Shop Thatcher's troll toll! he needs to write a song about not diddling kids to win a few more votes imo
Guest Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 2 minutes ago, Webbo said: You've answered a question I didn't ask. People are spending money now, we don't need extra spending. The April figures were surprisingly good, its true, after three months of lower than expected sales. However, wage decreases in real terms and near record personal debt levels suggest that people's spending is based on debt at a time of record low interest rates. It doesn't take much imagination to see that if inflation continues to rise - and it's expected to keep going towards 3% - then interest rates would have to rise and suddenly all that debt becomes risky to the economy. We do need more public spending.
Webbo Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 1 minute ago, toddybad said: The April figures were surprisingly good, its true, after three months of lower than expected sales. However, wage decreases in real terms and near record personal debt levels suggest that people's spending is based on debt at a time of record low interest rates. It doesn't take much imagination to see that if inflation continues to rise - and it's expected to keep going towards 3% - then interest rates would have to rise and suddenly all that debt becomes risky to the economy. We do need more public spending. The economy of this country has been based on consumption fueled by debt since the 80s, good times and bad. Massive public spending isn't going to stop anyone splurging on their credit card.
Guest Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 17 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said: Indeed, under Labour proposals, someone earnig £5k a week £260k a year would pay £200 a week more, over £10k a year - a 10% increase in their income tax contribution. The poor things.
Guest Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 Just now, Webbo said: The economy of this country has been based on consumption fueled by debt since the 80s, good times and bad. Massive public spending isn't going to stop anyone splurging on their credit card. Public spending puts money into the real economy. It goes to businesses (so increases their profits and offsets higher corporation taxes) and workers. This allows them to spend more with less debt. It should be noted that privatisation of the trains will cost nothing. The same with water. If they are currently operated at a profit then there is no spending involved. With power labour are not talking of nationalising the companies themselves just the national grid.
Webbo Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 1 minute ago, toddybad said: Public spending puts money into the real economy. It goes to businesses (so increases their profits and offsets higher corporation taxes) and workers. This allows them to spend more with less debt. It should be noted that privatisation of the trains will cost nothing. The same with water. If they are currently operated at a profit then there is no spending involved. With power labour are not talking of nationalising the companies themselves just the national grid. I can't be bothered any more with these simplistic solutions, I'm just glad these loons have no chance of being elected.
Guest Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 1 minute ago, Webbo said: I can't be bothered any more with these simplistic solutions, I'm just glad these loons have no chance of being elected. The tories have no solutions.
Jon the Hat Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 8 minutes ago, toddybad said: The poor things. The poor things will bugger of to take their income and tax to another country which doesn't tax over 40% of the their earnings. There are probably 10-15 peope in my organisation earning between £250-£750k a year who can choose where in Europe they are based, and if even 2 of them chose to move, it would cost the treasury £250k in tax a year. Which is why this is a very bad plan.
Jon the Hat Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 4 minutes ago, toddybad said: The tories have no solutions. I think they just came up with one for the social care crisis, and no one seems to like it.
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 5 minutes ago, toddybad said: Public spending puts money into the real economy. It goes to businesses (so increases their profits and offsets higher corporation taxes) and workers. This allows them to spend more with less debt. It should be noted that privatisation of the trains will cost nothing. The same with water. If they are currently operated at a profit then there is no spending involved. With power labour are not talking of nationalising the companies themselves just the national grid. Public spending doesn't always go into the real economy, there is absolutely no evidence of this at all. It wont increase companies profits because they will just shut up shop and move abroad to Poland or wherever its cheaper to operate, making thousands redundant in the process. The water companies they would have to buy. Who is to say a publically run railway or water company would be efficient enough to be profitable? After the unions have had their 2 pence worth, there will be jobs for the boys, persistent strikes. The reason the utilities and railways are now profitable is because they have been rationalised by private businesses to make profits. We could start to run NHS Trusts as private companies now and I bet there would be companies that could run them more efficiently for less and make a profit. There is no incentive in the public sector not to be wasteful.
Guest Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 Just now, Jon the Hat said: I think they just came up with one for the social care crisis, and no one seems to like it. The problem with their solution is that they initiated a study into the sector and how to fund it which found that 'the market' wasn't working and requires serious reform. Because they're tory they don't like the idea of market failure (the right always puts the system above the people) and would prefer ordinary people to lose out to keep the failing market going.
Webbo Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 4 minutes ago, toddybad said: The tories have no solutions. Let me tell you why the Tories are doing so well in the polls. It's because most people are broadly content with the job they're doing. Despite all the pretence, the economy is doing okay, far better than all the doomsayers said it would. Labour/the left have spent the last year telling core vote that they're thick, lazy, racists and now the election is here they're pretending to think they're victims.Corbyn wants to bring back policies that failed in the 70s, he's surrounded himself with terrorist sympathisers and anti semites and he has the all charisma of a pencil sharpener.Labour are going to lose badly and they deserve it.
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 3 minutes ago, toddybad said: The problem with their solution is that they initiated a study into the sector and how to fund it which found that 'the market' wasn't working and requires serious reform. Because they're tory they don't like the idea of market failure (the right always puts the system above the people) and would prefer ordinary people to lose out to keep the failing market going. Taking money from someone estate after they have died if they own a house 100k or more. Ordinary people who rent and have no assets don't pay a penny!! As opposed to the magic money tree that provides everything free for the masses and all the uncapped unskilled immigration Labour advocate allowing. We simply don't have enough money for it, this is a cruel hard fact. Their fix is lets tax the nasty rich men more, it may make them spend less in the services sector, it may put more pressure on the NHS as they may cancel their Bupa, it may put more pressure on schools because they stop sending little johnny to private school. Taxing business means the average workers bonus is lower, the company might not send employees on a training course and they may have to reduce headcount. Socialism in its entirety as admirable as it is will never work, it never has worked. We need to take the best of bother worlds and try and do the best we can.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 22 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said: The poor things will bugger of to take their income and tax to another country which doesn't tax over 40% of the their earnings. There are probably 10-15 peope in my organisation earning between £250-£750k a year who can choose where in Europe they are based, and if even 2 of them chose to move, it would cost the treasury £250k in tax a year. Which is why this is a very bad plan. Labour will probably pay for the plane ticket to ship these very very bad people away
Sharpe's Fox Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/theresa-may-internet-conservatives-government-a7744176.html better stop posting on here if I don't want to be carted off to one of Theresa May's reeducation camps and made to watch her saying 'Strong and Stable' with my eyelids propped open.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 you've got to be a complete nutcase to vote for this utter nutter
Sharpe's Fox Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 14 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said: you've got to be a complete nutcase to vote for this utter nutter https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/19/foreign-reporter-frozen-out-theresa-may-behaving-trump?CMP=share_btn_tw more evidence to show how batshit mental this woman is
Buce Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 2 hours ago, Foxin_mad said: Public spending doesn't always go into the real economy, there is absolutely no evidence of this at all. It wont increase companies profits because they will just shut up shop and move abroad to Poland or wherever its cheaper to operate, making thousands redundant in the process. The water companies they would have to buy. Who is to say a publically run railway or water company would be efficient enough to be profitable? After the unions have had their 2 pence worth, there will be jobs for the boys, persistent strikes. The reason the utilities and railways are now profitable is because they have been rationalised by private businesses to make profits. We could start to run NHS Trusts as private companies now and I bet there would be companies that could run them more efficiently for less and make a profit. There is no incentive in the public sector not to be wasteful. Public utilities and services shouldn't be there to make a profit. They should be there to provide the cheapest possible delivery to the public at large, not making dividends for rich shareholders.
davieG Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 57 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/theresa-may-internet-conservatives-government-a7744176.html better stop posting on here if I don't want to be carted off to one of Theresa May's reeducation camps and made to watch her saying 'Strong and Stable' with my eyelids propped open. Quote "Our starting point is that online rules should reflect those that govern our lives offline," the Conservatives' manifesto says, explaining this justification for a new level of regulation. The Conservatives will also seek to regulate the kind of news that is posted online and how companies are paid for it. If elected, Theresa May will "take steps to protect the reliability and objectivity of information that is essential to our democracy" – and crack down on Facebook and Google to ensure that news companies get enough advertising money. So is she going to ban all the shit lying newspapers and magazines?
Guest Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 Party manifestos make it clear: a Conservative victory will see the housing crisis continue https://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2017/may/19/party-manifestos-conservative-victory-housing-crisis-continue
leicsmac Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 1 hour ago, Sharpe's Fox said: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/theresa-may-internet-conservatives-government-a7744176.html better stop posting on here if I don't want to be carted off to one of Theresa May's reeducation camps and made to watch her saying 'Strong and Stable' with my eyelids propped open. Every time a sitting government promises to try and restrict the internet, I'm reminded of both how laughable and futile it is. Even the Chinese can't do it properly and they have a million folks working in a brutally authoritarian state on it.
Guest Posted 19 May 2017 Posted 19 May 2017 3 hours ago, Jon the Hat said: The poor things will bugger of to take their income and tax to another country which doesn't tax over 40% of the their earnings. There are probably 10-15 peope in my organisation earning between £250-£750k a year who can choose where in Europe they are based, and if even 2 of them chose to move, it would cost the treasury £250k in tax a year. Which is why this is a very bad plan. Im sorry but the extremely well off cannot hold society to ransom with threats of leaving. You're happy for nurses to pay a 9% tax simply for training for a pretty low paid job but won't accept 5% on the very wealthy. Let them go - or are you telling me the company will leave one of the world's richest economies and not fill the vacant posts?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.