howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
What joy there is under a two-party democracy. While the Red one bankrupts on the macro-scale the Blue does it's best on the micro.
At last, a fabulous tale, this time not from the point of view of one Robin Hood. Perhaps this time we get the fable retold from the the angle of the Robbin' Hoods' point of view?
Purple Reign, purple reign?
Fair 's fair though, those who would encourage the beggaring of our neighbours are not above doing the same at home.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,915
yes cuts cuts cuts
not only 4 million on the scrapheap, but also council services going down the pan, can't be must more minimal for a lot of dosh, can they?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i think the future will see local authorities looking for more outside revenue to make up funding shortfalls.
charging for services that are currently free and looking for more parking revenue, enforcement officers can also help to boost the coffers.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
The doubling of council tax over the last 14 years is not what the voters, voted for
The wages pension and working practises of the public sector cannot continue
People retiring at 50, private medical privileges, big redundancy packages,
Full pay when sick from day one, encouraging the abuse of the system,
Out of reality employment contracts, and expecting the taxpayers to keep pickup the bill,
We should sack until we get back to £600 a year council tax just like, France Spain and Germany.
And giving tax cuts to the rich, and aid to other countries is madness,
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,915
tax cuts to the rich is a scandal keith b
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
KeithB:
Bernard Jenkin, chair of the Commons public administration committee, and Barry W, will tell you that we must not touch the incomes of the super-rich, that we must reduce the tax these people pay, and cut even deeper into the spending that covers the economy of the rest of the populace.
And that we must continue giving subsidies to large aristocratic landowners.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
The conservative will have to learn that representing the rich and big businesses only, will not get them elected.
Only by shearing out the wealth in the grater economy, and representing the British people, will they get power .
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i have every confidence in our communities minister who will step in to save the day.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
That's right, Keith. That's the original meaning of Commonwealth.
Even Oliver Cromwell never managed to achieve it.
The wealth must be shared out through a new Law.
Currently there are no political parties advocating this, and yet it is an essential requirement to economic recovery of the Country and its People.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
The rich must be left alone,or they will go taking their cash with them.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
What a despicable lot, these rich!
They would take their cash with them, and all those shares, bonds, hedge-funds, and whatever hokus-pokus has been devised in the form of paper finances!
They would "emigrate abroad" with half the Country's financial wealth and leave the poor children in Britain behind to a totally collapsed society where there is no money, to starve to death!
They'd carry their bags of paper-rubbish with figures printed on them to some "other country" and deposit it in a bank there! Despicable!
I'm sure we'd find a way to cancel their rubbish paper-values and print new money, so-by effectively confiscating their surplus wealth.
At the end of the day, the super-rich can't take the houses and fields away, or the industrial complexes and the ports and railway tracks, can they?
So if they emigrate with the "wealth", we could then move into their palaces and mansions, and start farming their massive aristocratic estates.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
The economies of scale of an East Kent Council beckon............
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
defitnly going for bust this country is,maybe cap in hand with begging bowl in hand to the imf soon.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
I see so much rubbish written here I really do not know where to start...
Keith B 'sharing out the wealth' - in other words give money to people for nothing, madness. Pity that because in an earlier post you spoke a lot of sense apart from the first part of the last sentence in #5.
Alex again misrepresenting and ignoring what I actually say because the facts are inconvenient.
Increase the higher rate of income tax on the rich and you decrease the amount of tax paid by them. The top 1% of earners, last year contributed 27% of the total income tax collected and the top 10% 55% of the income tax.
If you want to drive this economy further into recession and create the 4million plus out of work that KeithS is so keen to see then the best way to do it is to 'punish' the rich.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
barry,we are all doomed,begging bowls in brussels.unless osbourne gets his finger out.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,915
here we are again looking at the country in a mess, it's now about what do we do to change things.
Many posters are givintg a socialist view(distribution of wealth) but a few stick out on the leave the rich to be paid millions whether they fail or not!!!!!
Without doubt we need to address the widening gap between the rich and poor.
We also need to decide will big cuts and 4 million unemployed be the best way forward?
on the benefits front, most posters(if not all) agree the system needs an overhaul, and it should not be seen as an easy route to avoid work, and to get it must be justified,
but we must not trample on those unable to speak for themselves in this process.
So theres a lot to do by this cobbled together lot
but sadly instead of this mr cameron will today go to the commons
when it opens parliament today he will be trying to convince the right wing of his party that he should remain leader
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Socialism is the route to poverty for all and offers no solutions to our problems. In fact it is socialist policies of high spending redistributive big government policies that are the cause of our problems here and in the Eurozone.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Thats a surprise, Keith mentions 4m unemployed, has this happened before?
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
I'm afraid the plain fact of the earning gap widening so much over the last thirty years or so:with those at the top (CEOs etc.) getting vastly more than those on the 'shop-floor', - without the least increase in their productivity -, is evidence enough that people are being paid for doing precisely nothing.
That these are relatively few in number is off-set by the sums involved.
Add to this the other fact:That none who gain great wealth do so without; a)the efforts of many, b)the buying power of the majority.
Argue all you like that it is perfectly sound for money to be concentrated in the hands of the few, but when this leads to the majority having little or no money the machine of the economy shall grind to a halt.
Think how useless is the 'stored-energy' of the mountain lake while there is no gradient for the out-flow. All leisure and pleasure, but no progress and no growth.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
