|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Aug 23, 2018 13:43:57 GMT
Taxation is theft.
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Aug 23, 2018 14:06:10 GMT
Thatchers ideology left us with a strong economy. Socialism leads to economic ruin as illustarted here. Thatcher's ideaology destroyed 30% of British Manufacturing, shut down the coal industry and destroyed the pottery industry putting nearly 4 million on the dole. EXACTLY the same policies The Tories used in the 1920s..massive cuts in spending alongside massive hikes in interest rates destroying millions of jobs. Some posters need to read their Economic & Social History. It isn't just Labour that fuck things up. If it was tory idealogy that destroyed the coal industry why did the remaining pits get shutdown under labour ? I don't need to read economic history on that one, I was working for British Coal in the 80's and had access to all the productivity figures. I agree it isn't just labour that fuck things up. I despise most politicians, particularly those who are more extreme and exclusively believe that their way is the right way, they are dangerous. Corbyn is one.
|
|
|
Post by Rick Grimes on Aug 24, 2018 12:40:10 GMT
I’m not in favour of socialism because it requires a lot of state intervention and I believe that state intervention should be kept to the absolute minimum.
Equality of outcome is unrealistic, undesirable and unachieveable. I’ve yet to come across anyone who argues for equality of outcome that has any proper understanding of economics.
I’m all for equality of opportunity but that doesn’t seem to be what socialists are ‘fighting’ for in general.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 24, 2018 13:07:25 GMT
Good old Capitalism eh? Where people die of starvation whilst others live in solid gold palaces.
The end game here appears to be to widen the gap as far as the elastic will allow.
One day that elastic will snap.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Aug 24, 2018 13:30:41 GMT
Socialism- nice idea in theory, not so good in execution. Karl, the world isn't fair. Oh Karl the world isn't fair It isn't and never will be They tried out your plan It brought misery instead If you'd seen how they worked it You'd be glad you were dead Just like I'm glad I'm living in the land of the free Where the rich just get richer And the poor you don't ever have to see It would depress us, Karl Because we care That the world still isn't fair
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Aug 24, 2018 16:47:51 GMT
Good old Capitalism eh? Where people die of starvation whilst others live in solid gold palaces. The end game here appears to be to widen the gap as far as the elastic will allow. One day that elastic will snap. That sounds a lot like Venezuela.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Aug 24, 2018 16:59:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 24, 2018 17:41:47 GMT
I’m not in favour of socialism because it requires a lot of state intervention and I believe that state intervention should be kept to the absolute minimum. Equality of outcome is unrealistic, undesirable and unachieveable. I’ve yet to come across anyone who argues for equality of outcome that has any proper understanding of economics. I’m all for equality of opportunity but that doesn’t seem to be what socialists are ‘fighting’ for in general. What's wrong with state intervention? I'll start you off with the Railways. Tell me how the private sector has improved the Railways?
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Aug 24, 2018 18:23:51 GMT
It's not the Government, red or blue, that is ruining the NHS it's the employment of middle managers, managers, senior managers who actually contribute very little but cost a fucking fortune. People who say they would pay higher taxes quite happily should look closely how their current taxes are currently spent before giving them more. Governments come and go but the fuckers running the NHS are unaccountable. For example surgeons could cut waiting lists by actually doing a full shift and not taking people off at the last minute or adding someone off their private list at the last minute. Top tip if you're really worried about an ailment book a private consultation, (£120?) and if something is seriously or urgently wrong you can still have the procedure on the NHS! Anesthetists should also be told to fucking tighten up too. I worked with four surgeons, on their waiting lists, for a year and it as a nightmare! They basically do what they fancy. Saying that one managed his own waiting list and has a three week waiting list. So as the Americans would say go figure! He was actually conscientious and put his patients first! As for Socialism go and read Animal farm!
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Aug 24, 2018 19:04:33 GMT
I’m not in favour of socialism because it requires a lot of state intervention and I believe that state intervention should be kept to the absolute minimum. Equality of outcome is unrealistic, undesirable and unachieveable. I’ve yet to come across anyone who argues for equality of outcome that has any proper understanding of economics. I’m all for equality of opportunity but that doesn’t seem to be what socialists are ‘fighting’ for in general. What's wrong with state intervention? I'll start you off with the Railways. Tell me how the private sector has improved the Railways? It hasn’t & Ill raise you prisons...
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 24, 2018 22:02:36 GMT
I’m not in favour of socialism because it requires a lot of state intervention and I believe that state intervention should be kept to the absolute minimum. Equality of outcome is unrealistic, undesirable and unachieveable. I’ve yet to come across anyone who argues for equality of outcome that has any proper understanding of economics. I’m all for equality of opportunity but that doesn’t seem to be what socialists are ‘fighting’ for in general. What's wrong with state intervention? I'll start you off with the Railways. Tell me how the private sector has improved the Railways? Are you serious? Do you remember British Rail? The original omnishambles.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 24, 2018 22:44:18 GMT
What's wrong with state intervention? I'll start you off with the Railways. Tell me how the private sector has improved the Railways? Are you serious? Do you remember British Rail? The original omnishambles. Blimey, this old chestnut! Yes I do. It was an age where you didn't have to remortgage your house to get to Chipping Sodbury before 10am and we weren't paying huge subsidies to terrible failing private sharks for the pleasure of our (£300) return out of the public exchequer for the privilege. The good old days eh?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 22:48:18 GMT
There's your difference, the ideal of socialism is based on fairness and sharing of unavoidable burdens between all. The NHS is a great example of it working. Venezuela is an example of arseholes using the guise of socialism to keep themselves rich. See Stalin and 'communism'. Honestly, for me, the idea of paying higher taxes in order to have better public services and infrastructure has almost no downside. I don't get why so many campaign for lower taxes, when all it tends to mean is more income spent on privatised industry. See the USA and the ridiculous money their people spend on healthcare. As with everything, there's a nuance to it, but too many people are insanely focused on GDP and specifics of the economy. See Scandinavia, Sweden have a higher spend as a percentage of GDP on healthcare, on education, and overall. They're top 10 in happiest people, which surely is the most important measure. the top 4 are all Scandinavian countries, with 'very' high public spending and higher tax rates. The USA, with very low public spending, and lower taxes, is 18th in happiness. Which, considering how much money it has, is utter shite. I worked hard all my life from 16 to 42, never a day on the club or the dole, paid a fair lick in tax and NI as I earned a good wage by S-O-T standards. I paid my union contribution as well, then later opted out and paid a charity instead. As soon as I needed help this country labelled me a slacker, idle, worthless and a scrounger. The government, My friends (ex friends) and even members of my own family looked down on me. I have not received one penny for the last 10 years, my opticians, dentist and prescription entitlements have all been stopped. Mt wife keeps me to my shame. I hate this country and most of the bastards that run it. They would let me die in a park and expect me to say nothing. If I committed a crime they would have to pay to keep me in jail and sort my medicine out. But despite my doctors saying I'm unfit for work I can't claim 1p not unless I lie and declare myself fit or work to claim dole money. Something I've never done despite being made redundant 7 times. The Tories just laugh at me, Labour don't give a shit because I'm not a woman and I'm not black. Fuck 'em all. they wouldn't understand what it does to a man when you take his pride away. Socialism is dead, it was a dream hatched after the war that lived in the mind of decent men and women who knew first hand what suffering and want looked like. Now it is a banner for the nouveau riche who claim the ideology but have long been apart from any need or wanting. They care more about immigrants, transgenders and dolphins than what they care about the men who fought, died and worked for this country. Hang your heads in shame Labour Party, you have abandoned your people.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 22:55:33 GMT
I’m not in favour of socialism because it requires a lot of state intervention and I believe that state intervention should be kept to the absolute minimum. Equality of outcome is unrealistic, undesirable and unachieveable. I’ve yet to come across anyone who argues for equality of outcome that has any proper understanding of economics. I’m all for equality of opportunity but that doesn’t seem to be what socialists are ‘fighting’ for in general. So would you close all private schools and force the best teachers to work in the inner Cities? That is the equality of opportunity. Would ALL University places be granted on merit and fully funded by the state so a poor child with a brain gets the same chance as a rich one? How would you end nepotism? No, there is no way to make opportunity equal, all we can do is give each child the best available for them without restrictions of cost as they are the future and without them all we have done was for nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Dutchpeter on Aug 25, 2018 0:02:02 GMT
We live in a country where the Tories keep the workers down, and Labour are against aspiration. We get talked down to by middle class socialists, who will not give up their entrenched privileges. Anyone who’s studied post war British history, will realise that progress came from a combination of moderate socialism and one nation Toryism. The big mouth socialists on this forum probably aren’t even working class, and probably hate the working class from their comfortable privilege.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 25, 2018 4:11:21 GMT
Are you serious? Do you remember British Rail? The original omnishambles. Blimey, this old chestnut! Yes I do. It was an age where you didn't have to remortgage your house to get to Chipping Sodbury before 10am and we weren't paying huge subsidies to terrible failing private sharks for the pleasure of our (£300) return out of the public exchequer for the privilege. The good old days eh? Better now than then - without question But still far from where it needs to be
|
|
|
Post by Rick Grimes on Aug 25, 2018 9:24:05 GMT
I’m not in favour of socialism because it requires a lot of state intervention and I believe that state intervention should be kept to the absolute minimum. Equality of outcome is unrealistic, undesirable and unachieveable. I’ve yet to come across anyone who argues for equality of outcome that has any proper understanding of economics. I’m all for equality of opportunity but that doesn’t seem to be what socialists are ‘fighting’ for in general. What's wrong with state intervention? I'll start you off with the Railways. Tell me how the private sector has improved the Railways? If you re-nationalise railways how is the government going to fund it? Taxpayers money?
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 25, 2018 9:35:12 GMT
What's wrong with state intervention? I'll start you off with the Railways. Tell me how the private sector has improved the Railways? If you re-nationalise railways how is the government going to fund it? Taxpayers money? That or borrow the cash. And that fundamentally is the problem with socialism; despite the best of intentions they have no idea how to generate wealth in the economy. Instead they indulge themselves in spending. Sooner or later either the cash runs out as tax revenues collapse or the cost of borrowing becomes exorbitant. At which point the shit well and truly hits the fan.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 25, 2018 9:55:17 GMT
You generate wealth by taxing things correctly
Take Amazon, they more than halved its declared UK corporation tax bill from £15.8m to £7.4m year-on-year in 2016.
'The cut came despite turnover at the UK business, which handles the packing and delivery of parcels and functions such as customer service, rising from £946m to £1.46bn'.
Corporate tax avoidance is widespread and cost economies billions and ultimately it is the poor that feel the brunt.
Capitalism truly does work for the few not the many
|
|
|
Post by Rick Grimes on Aug 25, 2018 9:56:04 GMT
If you re-nationalise railways how is the government going to fund it? Taxpayers money? That or borrow the cash. And that fundamentally is the problem with socialism; despite the best of intentions they have no idea how to generate wealth in the economy. Instead they indulge themselves in spending. Sooner or later either the cash runs out as tax revenues collapse or the cost of borrowing becomes exorbitant. At which point the shit well and truly hits the fan. Yeah exactly. If it’s through taxation then I’d be opposed to it. Let’s take the example of a person or family that is already on the breadline that don’t even use railways, why should money that is taken in tax from people like them be used to fund the railways? Borrowing the money is just a bad idea for obvious reasons.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 10:05:55 GMT
The NHS is a fucking shambolic wasteful inefficient mess. I guess in that regard it is indeed a good example of socialism in action. The daughter of a colleague of mine is a junior doctor and doing her 4 month stint as a GP. She hates it and is already decided she won't go down that route once she's trained. The reasons she gives is that despite her Indian heritage she only speaks English and some patients make the assumption that she'll speak on their language, making a fuss when she doesn't. The other is the amount of people who demand a £7 minimum charge prescription for minor medication e.g. paracetamol and refuse to buy it themselves. That's a disgrace, but then, so is the £7 minimum charge. Paracetamol cost literally 'pence', quite how that becomes £7 I'm unsure.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 25, 2018 11:25:19 GMT
Ok, since this also is a political issue and no answers in the thread "Use value Market value", I put it here:
When it comes to renting an appartment: "Use value" (rent decided during discussions between the owner of the buildings and the tenants/their organization called 'hgf' rather) or "Market value" (rent decided by the owners alone)?
Why?
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Aug 25, 2018 16:42:21 GMT
You generate wealth by taxing things correctly Take Amazon, they more than halved its declared UK corporation tax bill from £15.8m to £7.4m year-on-year in 2016. 'The cut came despite turnover at the UK business, which handles the packing and delivery of parcels and functions such as customer service, rising from £946m to £1.46bn'. Corporate tax avoidance is widespread and cost economies billions and ultimately it is the poor that feel the brunt. Capitalism truly does work for the few not the many I'd take Amazon getting away with some taxes versus the shitstorm going down in Venezuela though. I hate corruption, it fucks everything up for socialists and capitalists. So does short-termism, but we're all guilty of that. Maybe if Chavez and Maduro had run things more like the Saudis (who as I understand it are basically running a socialist dictatorship too) then they wouldn't have destroyed Venezuela.
|
|
|
Post by lancer on Aug 25, 2018 17:42:37 GMT
There's your difference, the ideal of socialism is based on fairness and sharing of unavoidable burdens between all. The NHS is a great example of it working. Venezuela is an example of arseholes using the guise of socialism to keep themselves rich. See Stalin and 'communism'. Honestly, for me, the idea of paying higher taxes in order to have better public services and infrastructure has almost no downside. I don't get why so many campaign for lower taxes, when all it tends to mean is more income spent on privatised industry. See the USA and the ridiculous money their people spend on healthcare. As with everything, there's a nuance to it, but too many people are insanely focused on GDP and specifics of the economy. See Scandinavia, Sweden have a higher spend as a percentage of GDP on healthcare, on education, and overall. They're top 10 in happiest people, which surely is the most important measure. the top 4 are all Scandinavian countries, with 'very' high public spending and higher tax rates. The USA, with very low public spending, and lower taxes, is 18th in happiness. Which, considering how much money it has, is utter shite. The NHS is a fucking shambolic wasteful inefficient mess. I guess in that regard it is indeed a good example of socialism in action. The NHS is a wonderful idea for any society to copy. The only problem with our NHS is the abuse of it by those that should use their own money to get what they want. IVF women who feel they have a human right to have a baby using other peoples money to have their babies while wanting a big house, big car and foreign holiday, immigrants who can travel from around the world to give birth to their children in our hostpitals, women in the army who want breast reduction so they can get into their webbing, and any amount of other life style choices ,
|
|
|
Post by lancer on Aug 25, 2018 17:47:10 GMT
Thatchers ideology left us with a strong economy. Socialism leads to economic ruin as illustarted here. Thatcher's ideaology destroyed 30% of British Manufacturing, shut down the coal industry and destroyed the pottery industry putting nearly 4 million on the dole. EXACTLY the same policies The Tories used in the 1920s..massive cuts in spending alongside massive hikes in interest rates destroying millions of jobs. Some posters need to read their Economic & Social History. It isn't just Labour that fuck things up. Thatcher's ideaology destroyed 30% of British Manufacturing, shut down the coal industry. I'm an ex miner. Harold Wilson- Labour PM, closed twice as many pits as Thatcher did.I'm not praising Thatcher, just stating facts.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 26, 2018 6:42:11 GMT
You generate wealth by taxing things correctlyTake Amazon, they more than halved its declared UK corporation tax bill from £15.8m to £7.4m year-on-year in 2016. 'The cut came despite turnover at the UK business, which handles the packing and delivery of parcels and functions such as customer service, rising from £946m to £1.46bn'. Corporate tax avoidance is widespread and cost economies billions and ultimately it is the poor that feel the brunt. Capitalism truly does work for the few not the many Yes - that's how wealth is created.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 6:48:37 GMT
You generate wealth by taxing things correctlyTake Amazon, they more than halved its declared UK corporation tax bill from £15.8m to £7.4m year-on-year in 2016. 'The cut came despite turnover at the UK business, which handles the packing and delivery of parcels and functions such as customer service, rising from £946m to £1.46bn'. Corporate tax avoidance is widespread and cost economies billions and ultimately it is the poor that feel the brunt. Capitalism truly does work for the few not the many Yes - that's how wealth is created. It was a direct response as to how you generate the wealth wealth to nationalise the railways, dumbo.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 26, 2018 7:18:28 GMT
Yes - that's how wealth is created. It was a direct response as to how you generate the wealth wealth to nationalise the railways, dumbo. You are truly confused. What you answered is how you hope to raise the cash to nationalise the railways. Raising cash is not the same as generating wealth. A distinction you seem unaware of. Taxation is not wealth creation. Actually, used badly, it destroys wealth creation. Dumbo is as dumbo does.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 7:25:02 GMT
It was a direct response as to how you generate the wealth wealth to nationalise the railways, dumbo. You are truly confused. What you answered is how you hope to raise the cash to nationalise the railways. Raising cash is not the same as generating wealth. A distinction you seem unaware of. Taxation is not wealth creation. Actually, used badly, it destroys wealth creation. Dumbo is as dumbo does. You're being a pedantic twat, it was fairly clear the point I was making. It is fairly easy to create enough revenue (if you want to be exact) through a proper redistribution of wealth using the taxation system. I get you don't want to do it but it's fairly easy to do if you have the will. Keep reading the Daily Mail though for your information on the evils of the redistribution of wealth.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 26, 2018 7:26:02 GMT
It was a direct response as to how you generate the wealth wealth to nationalise the railways, dumbo. You are truly confused. What you answered is how you hope to raise the cash to nationalise the railways. Raising cash is not the same as generating wealth. A distinction you seem unaware of. Taxation is not wealth creation. Actually, used badly, it destroys wealth creation. Dumbo is as dumbo does. You might simply have different views on what wealth is? 🤔 But ... I think you talk of different things, differ wealth from welfare.
|
|