Indeed. To many BS studies with no actual use in the real world. The blame firmly at the door of to many (& probably well meaning)universities who teach them to the detriment of real trades like engineering & Construction etc.

Pro USA & Israel

20 years ago we would sell them a house it was called sub prime.

30 years ago people used to queue for unemployment benefit nowadays the queue for food.

"Everything is air-droppable at least once."

"When the going gets tough, the tough call for close air support."

The study was carried out on behalf of the UN. This isn't the same as the UN espousing its own ideology, which is at times suspect, i agree. This is an empirical assessment of the validity of claiming austerity was an economic necessity, which it was not.

As I said specifically, those who are exceedingly comfortable and corporations should pay more tax, NOT those that struggle themselves. Progressive taxation is the only effective taxation in my opinion.

Taxing the wealthy brings in more tax revenue, undoubtedly. The threats of the wealthy leaving the UK if taxed too highly have never materialised in significant numbers when taxes on them specifically have been raised.

If you're referring to the Gilets Jaunes protests in France recently, those were actually more of a right wing protest against fuel tax rises to begin with, but grew to encompass the entire political spectrum, protesting against rising living costs generally.
The issue here was that Macron tried to impose a regressive tax (flat rate so takes a higher proportion from lower income people) to tackle environmental problems, which are in fact predominantly the product of large corporations (100 companies produce 70% of global emissions).
This is the case of people less able to pay being asked to pay more to deal with the problems caused by those who would be able to pay.
Where this differs from what I suggested is that I'd like to see those who have the ability to pay, to pay the most.

A distinction without a difference.

If petrol companies select and pay scientists for reports on climate change, do you take its conclusions seriously?

If you create a business environment where investment doesn't make reasonable profits in comparison to competition you get less investment.....That is factual.

Evidence please.

[Link]

I said socialist government, which was obviously led by François Hollande.

The socialist government's failure in France was the reason Macron got elected in the first place. I've always said that the socialists are much worse than the capitalists because the socialists lie about what is possible and the poorer end up poorer and more desparate.....A government's remit to to create jobs by working with business not against it....It can only use good long term decisions to attract the better and higher paying jobs into its economy....This is on a long term basis and can't be done in five/ten years.

The socialists wrecked the economy and one of their flagship policies was high taxes for high earners and corporations......Investment died in the country along with tax take and Macron claimed to be the economic solution.

However, Macron is an opportunist and France's problems are long term.

Edited by Stirlingsays (21 Dec 2018 3.25pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

to reward the an underclass with generous welfare to reproduce, thus inflating house prices....thus making life even more difficult for young workers....who then reproduce in ever smaller numbers.....the whole scheme is an eugenics of the middle classes. Totally criminal.

want to live in Battersea ? forget getting a career in the city, just push out a sprog when you are aged 17.

Eze Peasy at Anfield....

Including the old people in care homes where all the staff are immigrants? Including the patients in NHS hospitals who are in the care of immigrants? Including all the people who ride to work on a bus driven by an immigrant? Including all the people who eat vegetables picked by immigrants? etc etc