Football Lads Alliance
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
hedgehog50  Croydon 13 Oct 17 8.24am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Park Road
I just find it refreshing that you can still find some professional journalism and incite in these biased times The Spectator is a fine media organ.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| hedgehog50 Croydon 13 Oct 17 8.26am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Surely there is someone on here that can wax lyrical about the need for both direct and indirect tax for fiscal policy reasons and the regressive effect of a flat rate income tax. There are reasons why the tax structure is how it is and is similar in almost all countries. Yes, we have to have VAT because the EU tells us to - and we have to ensure the rate does not fall below 15%. Still we shall be free of their diktats soon.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 13 Oct 17 8.28am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
Ooh, passion. My circumstances, and my financial situation which you don't know, are irrelevant. The poll tax is a regressive tax, simple as that. And people with more should pay more, moving everyone upwards and not just the wealthi(er). It's sensible for a peaceful and smooth functioning society without the chaos, anarchy, crime and looting. I agreed with the poll tax riots, but not the Duggan riots for a pair of trainers or a tv because of said drug dealer. Absolutely stupid and selfish someone at 18 on a couple of quid an hour in their parents or in a bed sit should pay equal to someone who moved into an expensive house on a good wage knowing then the rates were high. Just selfish. So you 'agree with riots' if you don't like a law that a democratically elected parliament has passed.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Stirlingsays Online 13 Oct 17 8.29am |
   |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
Now I am no fan of Blair nor Brown (as PM) but those last two assertions are just not true. The fait accompli of both had its nascence under The Tories back in the 90's. Labour could have delayed for seven years Eastern Euro immigration but chose not to but it still would have happened in 2011 at the latest. The Tories got us in, and they got us out....just under a different guise. Now, we have always had Tories who are remainers...pro EU Tories....that's a significant part of the leadership even now. Everyone knows you are disingenuous with your points here. The Tories always wanted the trading element. They knew that within the EU there was a unionist element. They never agreed to binding controls on it. You continually push your narrative yet the person who signed up to Maastricht ....Thatcher....she regretted it. Where are your remainers regrets in signing EU controlling legislation?
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 13 Oct 17 9.25am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
No one likes paying taxes, but Income Tax is probably the fairest if levied equally, ie: everyone pays the same percentage of their income. If you have acquired assets, good luck to you, shouldn't be taxed. VAT isn't very fair, a millionaire and a poor person pay the same tax on an article. More of a problem is what is done with the tax collected, so much waste, daft projects, needless quangos, numerous 'parliaments', incompetence etc. Edited by hedgehog50 (12 Oct 2017 5.52pm) Oddly another situation where I agree with you (although I'd say everyone earning over a tax threshold pays the same percentage). Its our society, we should all, as much as possible, contribute an equal share of the burden of society. Having worked within both private and public sector, neither are particularly efficient in how they spend money - but the private sector lacks the serious resource that a government has. Neither particularly punish incompetence. In the private sector you usually just get replaced, and put on another project (to make the same mistakes), in the public sector you get promoted into a position where you're less likely to cause problems.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 13 Oct 17 9.28am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
The Tories got us in, and they got us out....just under a different guise. Now, we have always had Tories who are remainers...pro EU Tories....that's a significant part of the leadership even now. Everyone knows you are disingenuous with your points here. The Tories always wanted the trading element. They knew that within the EU there was a unionist element. They never agreed to binding controls on it. You continually push your narrative yet the person who signed up to Maastricht ....Thatcher....she regretted it. Where are your remainers regrets in signing EU controlling legislation? Oddly I think it was UKIP that got us out. The Tory party would never have proposed a referendum if it wasn't for the effect that UKIP was having in terms of Conservative seats. Whilst I don't like UKIP's politics or its leader, they showed exactly how democracy could work by representing issues of the public, rather than the agenda of the party - and have been the biggest argument as to how unfairly biased the political 'democracy' of the UK is towards two parties (and to a lesser extent the Liberal Democrats) - as well as how unwilling those factions are to give up that power.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 13 Oct 17 9.32am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Oddly another situation where I agree with you (although I'd say everyone earning over a tax threshold pays the same percentage). Its our society, we should all, as much as possible, contribute an equal share of the burden of society. Having worked within both private and public sector, neither are particularly efficient in how they spend money - but the private sector lacks the serious resource that a government has. Neither particularly punish incompetence. In the private sector you usually just get replaced, and put on another project (to make the same mistakes), in the public sector you get promoted into a position where you're less likely to cause problems. Yeah, I agree with all you say here, except maybe the tax threshold. A person just over the threshold pays tax and someone just under does not, hard on the former. If you are earning very little you will pay very little tax. But I accept it is difficult as it is a disincentive to work even for low wages and they then probably need support from benefits etc
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Kermit8  Hevon 13 Oct 17 9.34am |
|
|---|---|
|
20% tax for all?
Equal 'yes' but fair? Not a chance.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 13 Oct 17 9.36am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
20% tax for all? Hmmmm..some lawyer from a privileged background (or not) on £1million per annum gets to keep £800,000 of it - £66k a month thank you very much - and a shop worker with kids on £15000 gets to keep £12,000 and £1k a month. Equal 'yes' but fair? Not a chance. There is no truly 'fair' system. Thought you were in favour of 'equality'? Indirect tax is less fair as the rich and poor pay the same tax for the same service or item.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays Online 13 Oct 17 9.40am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Oddly I think it was UKIP that got us out. The Tory party would never have proposed a referendum if it wasn't for the effect that UKIP was having in terms of Conservative seats. It's true that there are plenty of leavers from the left, but Ukip would have never had got going without its core conservative base. But sure, it's true that an anti 'this version of the' EU position isn't a right/left stance....it was my glib comment. Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Whilst I don't like UKIP's politics or its leader, they showed exactly how democracy could work by representing issues of the public, rather than the agenda of the party - and have been the biggest argument as to how unfairly biased the political 'democracy' of the UK is towards two parties (and to a lesser extent the Liberal Democrats) - as well as how unwilling those factions are to give up that power. Outside of the main Ukip policy I don't think most people are interested enough to create space for a new party....this has always been the problem for the Lib Dems as well.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays Online 13 Oct 17 9.43am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
20% tax for all?
Equal 'yes' but fair? Not a chance. A lawyer and a shop worker are nothing like as equal in terms of commercial worth, nor are they anything like as equal in terms of work to gain that status. But outside of that, sure I agree with the basic point. Edited by Stirlingsays (13 Oct 2017 9.43am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Kermit8 Hevon 13 Oct 17 9.51am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
A lawyer and a shop worker are nothing like as equal in terms of commercial worth, nor are they anything like as equal in terms of work to gain that status. But outside of that, sure I agree with the basic point. Edited by Stirlingsays (13 Oct 2017 9.43am)
Also, an extra £3k a year to a shop worker is going to have a much more significant impact than a lawyer ending up with £700k a year net rather than £800k. The latter wouldn't notice.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.