Political round up.............

by No name Bertie Wed 03 Aug 2022, 9:36 am

First topic message reminder :

ps the Best leaders surround themselves with the best people. Not so good leaders surround themselves with those that are not going to challenge them. So maybe the reason why it appears that there is a poor selection of candidates is partly due to Boris Johnson. Another reason may be that the leadership qualities and the general competence levels of elected mps has declined.

by Duty281 Wed 21 Sep 2022, 3:42 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
GSC wrote:You know he's flailing when the nukes get threatened again. His votes have no credibility internationally and he knows it.

His invasion has been a disaster and probably set Russia back decades. it's probably more a matter of when he's finished than if.

Could easily see Putin using nukes if he knows the game's up. Just depends on if anyone in Russia's interior can prevent him from doing so, or if they hold him in some sort of North Korean awe and will let him do as they please.

Putin needs to be taken out.

Mister Putin said, "We will bury you"
I don't subscribe to this point of view
It'd be such an ignorant thing to do
If the Russians love their children too

I'd like to build the world a home
And furnish it with love
Grow apple trees and honey bees
And snow white turtle doves

I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony
I'd like to hold it in my arms
And keep it company

I'd like to see the world for once
All standing hand in hand
And hear them echo through the hills
For peace through out the land

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 21 Sep 2022, 3:44 pm

But would you buy it a Coke?

by Derek Smalls Wed 21 Sep 2022, 3:48 pm

I'd buy it if it came from Kwasi Kwarteng-thats the gourmet sheeyit he was on at the queen's funeral.

by Samo Wed 21 Sep 2022, 4:01 pm

We use an AMS (Additional Member System) in Scotland which is a mix of PR and FPTP. You vote for a regional candidate and a national party. The regional candidate is decided via FPTP but those votes are also used to calculate how many additional members a party gets. So for example the SNP get the most seats via the regional list, and based on the overall % of votes cast may disqualify them from any additional members from the national list, whereas the Tories could get a lot fewer regional seats, but if they have a high enough vote percentage nationally they'll get additional members.

It sounds a lot more complicated than it is, but it does mean votes mean a lot more than a full FPTP system. The Green Party cant field candidates all over the country so only received around 1% of regional votes. However because they received 8% of the national vote they won some seats that way.

We also use the STV (Single Transferable Vote) system in local elections. You vote for candidates in order of preference (1-5 for example, but you dont have to rank every candidate on your paper if you dont want to) and then the votes are counted based on 1st vote preference. Once a quota of votes has been recieved that candidate is elected. If seats remain open after counting the first preference votes, the candidate with the lowest number of 1st preference votes is eliminated and all their 2nd preference votes are counted. This continues until all seats are filled. This would only work at a national level if you drastically cut the number of constituencies but kept the same number of MSPs.

Neither are full blown PR, but are more representative than full blown FPTP.

by No name Bertie Wed 21 Sep 2022, 6:00 pm

GSC wrote:You know Putins's flailing when the nukes get threatened again. His votes have no credibility internationally and he knows it.

His invasion has been a disaster and probably set Russia back decades. it's probably more a matter of when he's finished than if.

You are absolute correct. Putin is flailing and it is only a matter of time when he's finished. And we all have to accept double digit inflation because that is the price we all must pay for our security. And this is not a cartoon narrative but the truth. Over the past 6 months my personal inflation has gone up by 30% and I must blame Putin and trust Liz Truss.

by Derek Smalls Wed 21 Sep 2022, 6:06 pm

Your sense of humour may be a bit too dry there, Bertie!

by **navyblueshorts** Thu 22 Sep 2022, 9:06 am

No name Bertie wrote:
GSC wrote:You know Putins's flailing when the nukes get threatened again. His votes have no credibility internationally and he knows it.

His invasion has been a disaster and probably set Russia back decades. it's probably more a matter of when he's finished than if.
You are absolute correct. Putin is flailing and it is only a matter of time when he's finished. And we all have to accept double digit inflation because that is the price we all must pay for our security. And this is not a cartoon narrative but the truth. Over the past 6 months my personal inflation has gone up by 30% and I must blame Putin and trust Liz Truss.

That's not what he said though, is it? It's you that brought Truss into the narrative for your own ends.

by Samo Thu 22 Sep 2022, 4:17 pm

Must admit, I’m a big fan of watching JRM getting his arse ripped to tissue paper in the commons over fracking, from both benches. Lots of Tory MP’s very unhappy with the prospect and the way this has been handled.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 10:27 am

This is a monumental change of direction from Truss/Kwarteng with aggressive tax cuts. A return to the Thatcherite right, away from the bloated centre.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 1:31 pm

Massive tax break for the super-rich. Not that they will benefit much because all the extra money they will get will actually trickle down to the very poor. FACT.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 1:46 pm

British social attitudes survey showing that 51% support PR, related to what we were discussing before.

I applaud Truss for this change of direction. She's made a good start to her Premiership, and is signalling a clear change of direction, away from the centrism and high-tax, high-regulation that we've had to endure under Cameron/May/Johnson. This is a return to proper Conservative, free-market principles. What a great day it is for this country. This should have been done six years ago.

We now get to watch Labour tie themselves in knots with their tedious opposition. Labour previously spoke out against the high-tax burden being created under Sunak and Johnson, but now they'll pivot and want a return to those days.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 1:47 pm

Duty281 wrote:British social attitudes survey showing that 51% support PR, related to what we were discussing before.

I applaud Truss for this change of direction. She's made a good start to her Premiership, and is signalling a clear change of direction, away from the centrism and high-tax, high-regulation that we've had to endure under Cameron/May/Johnson. This is a return to proper Conservative, free-market principles. What a great day it is for this country. This should have been done six years ago.

We now get to watch Labour tie themselves in knots with their tedious opposition. Labour previously spoke out against the high-tax burden being created under Sunak and Johnson, but now they'll pivot and want a return to those days.

Interesting - because I'm even more ashamed to be British today than I was previously.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 1:49 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:British social attitudes survey showing that 51% support PR, related to what we were discussing before.

I applaud Truss for this change of direction. She's made a good start to her Premiership, and is signalling a clear change of direction, away from the centrism and high-tax, high-regulation that we've had to endure under Cameron/May/Johnson. This is a return to proper Conservative, free-market principles. What a great day it is for this country. This should have been done six years ago.

We now get to watch Labour tie themselves in knots with their tedious opposition. Labour previously spoke out against the high-tax burden being created under Sunak and Johnson, but now they'll pivot and want a return to those days.

Interesting - because I'm even more ashamed to be British today than I was previously.

That's a good sign then. We should stop appeasing people who are ashamed of this magnificent country of ours and push on with making it even better.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 1:53 pm

Duty281 wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:British social attitudes survey showing that 51% support PR, related to what we were discussing before.

I applaud Truss for this change of direction. She's made a good start to her Premiership, and is signalling a clear change of direction, away from the centrism and high-tax, high-regulation that we've had to endure under Cameron/May/Johnson. This is a return to proper Conservative, free-market principles. What a great day it is for this country. This should have been done six years ago.

We now get to watch Labour tie themselves in knots with their tedious opposition. Labour previously spoke out against the high-tax burden being created under Sunak and Johnson, but now they'll pivot and want a return to those days.

Interesting - because I'm even more ashamed to be British today than I was previously.

That's a good sign then. We should stop appeasing people who are ashamed of this magnificent country of ours and push on with making it even better.

It's not magnificent, it's half-way decent. Anyone who thinks it's magnificent must have a huge pair of rose-tinted glasses. It's tainted, as are many countries by greed and a lack of compassion - basically, we have a system that rewards the worst of human nature - and then we congratulate ourselves for it. Humankind is incapable of producing a magnificent country.

Edit - I might even argue that it's thinking that we are magnificent that is a significant factor in preventing us being magnificent.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 2:02 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:British social attitudes survey showing that 51% support PR, related to what we were discussing before.

I applaud Truss for this change of direction. She's made a good start to her Premiership, and is signalling a clear change of direction, away from the centrism and high-tax, high-regulation that we've had to endure under Cameron/May/Johnson. This is a return to proper Conservative, free-market principles. What a great day it is for this country. This should have been done six years ago.

We now get to watch Labour tie themselves in knots with their tedious opposition. Labour previously spoke out against the high-tax burden being created under Sunak and Johnson, but now they'll pivot and want a return to those days.

Interesting - because I'm even more ashamed to be British today than I was previously.

That's a good sign then. We should stop appeasing people who are ashamed of this magnificent country of ours and push on with making it even better.

It's not magnificent, it's half-way decent. Anyone who thinks it's magnificent must have a huge pair of rose-tinted glasses. It's tainted, as are many countries by greed and a lack of compassion - basically, we have a system that rewards the worst of human nature - and then we congratulate ourselves for it. Humankind is incapable of producing a magnificent country.

Edit - I might even argue that it's thinking that we are magnificent that is a significant factor in preventing us being magnificent.

It's magnificent, I'm sorry you can't see it. A liberal democracy, enshrined with free speech and the rule of law. One of the most racially harmonious places on planet earth, one of the few places on earth that lets the LGBT folk get on with their life and celebrate their love in peace. Plus religious diversity.

A stunning landscape, so much bucolic greenery, no extreme weather events, a beautiful island in the silver sea. And one of the best languages on earth.

A leading innovator of science, technology, literature, sport and the arts. A place where you free to pursue whatever dreams you fancy, and indulge in whatever strange hobbies you like.

And compassionate. And tolerant.

I love this place. Don't be ashamed. Lift your head. Be proud.

by Derek Smalls Fri 23 Sep 2022, 2:04 pm

It's bathetic that we are involved in a war to sustain Putin's reliance on oligarchs, yet London is the tax haven centre of the world, just set up an account in any old name, direct funds to Guernsey or Jersey,then you're away to do your business in Eastern Europe without any investigation.. meanwhile, HMRC skim millions every year by picking on small businesses who fill in their tax late,etc., as they are easy targets.
Johnson getting tough on the Russians in the UK was the worst kind of belated cant and hypocrisy.
It's almost as if we learnt no lessons about arming the world with weapons and then getting all uppity when these naughty people do bad things. But never mind, we're fighting the new Hitler for democracy's sake-again.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 2:09 pm

It's not magnificent. It's simply a decent of example of what we as a species can do - which is very limited. Am I proud of the need for food banks, of the homeless, of the people who can't get operations, the crime rates, the greed, the political and economic corruption? No, not really.

Compassion and tolerance - again, it's way below what it should be.

As for the greenery - that's nature, not mankind.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 2:24 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:It's not magnificent. It's simply a decent of example of what we as a species can do - which is very limited. Am I proud of the need for food banks, of the homeless, of the people who can't get operations, the crime rates, the greed, the political and economic corruption? No, not really.

Compassion and tolerance - again, it's way below what it should be.

As for the greenery - that's nature, not mankind.

Come on, Julius, don't be so down-hearted. We're going up as a species, up as a country.

Better to be born now than virtually any other time in history. Better to be born and live here than most other countries.

Ashamed, really?

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 2:30 pm

We're clearly not going up as a species or as a country. What evidence is there for that? I think you're equating advances in technology, which lead for many to a physically more comfortable life-style, with an advancement of the 'goodness' of us as a species.

I don't live my life in a down-hearted way, but I don't try to pretend we're something we're not.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 2:37 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:We're clearly not going up as a species or as a country. What evidence is there for that? I think you're equating advances in technology, which lead for many to a physically more comfortable life-style, with an advancement of the 'goodness' of us as a species.

I don't live my life in a down-hearted way, but I don't try to pretend we're something we're not.

Well, yes, I'm saying our living standards are going up, thanks to technology, which equates to a better quality of life.

As a country we've become far more racially equitable and accepting of the LGBT folk over the past 70 years. That's good, isn't it? We're more accepting, inclusive, tolerant and compassionate in this wonderful land of ours.

You sound pretty down-hearted. Not as miserable as super_realist, granted, but still fairly down. Have a bag of Skittles and cheer up. We'll never reach Utopia, but that doesn't mean we can't be proud of how far we've come.

Ashamed, really? Is that a term you stick to. Ashamed of Britain in particular, or the world in general?

by Derek Smalls Fri 23 Sep 2022, 2:53 pm

Perhaps of the corporate takeover of media and government leading to perpetual deregulation, lowering worker's rights and environmental standards.
Sexual tolerance? After a long struggle.Perhaps of the decades long campaign by the Mail and Express to demonise the working class, ethnic minorities,single mothers, gay people, and now judges and the judiciary as enemies of the people.
I'm proud of the city and county within the United Kingdom that I am from, but I lament the lack of proper progress that we have made in throwing off the class snobbery that so enobles the ruling class to get its own way.

by Samo Fri 23 Sep 2022, 2:58 pm

Both things can be true. Theres a lot to be proud of about Britain, however I think the fact that we have record levels of relative poverty and millions of homes facing the very real choice of heat vs eat this winter - whilst also being one of the richest countries in the world is nothing to be proud of, and overshadows most of the good.

Its actually pretty Frak disgusting.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 3:18 pm

Derek Smalls wrote:Perhaps of the corporate takeover of media and government leading to perpetual deregulation, lowering worker's rights and environmental standards.
Sexual tolerance? After a long struggle.Perhaps of the decades long campaign by the Mail and Express to demonise the working class, ethnic minorities,single mothers, gay people, and now judges and the judiciary as enemies of the people.
I'm proud of the city and county within the United Kingdom that I am from, but I lament the lack of proper progress that we have made in throwing off the class snobbery that so enobles the ruling class to get its own way.

We have some of the best worker's rights and environmental standards in the world, have done for decades.

I agree more needs to be done for social mobility. Hopefully Truss pushes ahead with building new grammar schools.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 3:20 pm

Samo wrote:Both things can be true. Theres a lot to be proud of about Britain, however I think the fact that we have record levels of relative poverty and millions of homes facing the very real choice of heat vs eat this winter - whilst also being one of the richest countries in the world is nothing to be proud of, and overshadows most of the good.

Its actually pretty Frak disgusting.

I'm not sure we have record levels of relative poverty. The JRF says 24% were in relative poverty in 94/95, but it was 22% in 19/20.

https://www.jrf.org.uk/data/overall-uk-poverty-rates

The energy situation is lamentable, so it's good to see government initiatives aimed at helping the poorest.

by Samo Fri 23 Sep 2022, 3:22 pm

Bet you said that with a straight face.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 3:25 pm

Samo wrote:Bet you said that with a straight face.

Which bit?

by Samo Fri 23 Sep 2022, 3:37 pm

Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:Bet you said that with a straight face.

Which bit?

"government initiatives aimed at helping the poorest."

Tax cuts for high earners and giving £150bn of public money to energy companies instead of investing into better infrastructure - of any kind - is not helping the poorest.

Someone earning £20k a year will be £167 better off. Someone earning £200k a year will be £5220 better off. 10 times the salary and 31 times the tax break. Not to mention anyone earning under £20k will barely get anything.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 3:47 pm

Samo wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:Bet you said that with a straight face.

Which bit?

"government initiatives aimed at helping the poorest."

Tax cuts for high earners and giving £150bn of public money to energy companies instead of investing into better infrastructure - of any kind - is not helping the poorest.

Someone earning £20k a year will be £167 better off. Someone earning £200k a year will be £5220 better off. 10 times the salary and 31 times the tax break. Not to mention anyone earning under £20k will barely get anything.

But giving £650 through a cost of living payment, a £400 energy discount, and the cap on energy bills, plus an extension to the Household Support Fund and reversing the NI rise, is helping the poorest.

by Samo Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:03 pm

Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:Bet you said that with a straight face.

Which bit?

"government initiatives aimed at helping the poorest."

Tax cuts for high earners and giving £150bn of public money to energy companies instead of investing into better infrastructure - of any kind - is not helping the poorest.

Someone earning £20k a year will be £167 better off. Someone earning £200k a year will be £5220 better off. 10 times the salary and 31 times the tax break. Not to mention anyone earning under £20k will barely get anything.

But giving £650 through a cost of living payment, a £400 energy discount, and the cap on energy bills, plus an extension to the Household Support Fund and reversing the NI rise, is helping the poorest.

Most of that is just papering over the cracks of a broken system, and the NI reverse benefits the wealthy more (again) instead of a more targeted approach.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:06 pm

Duty281 wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:We're clearly not going up as a species or as a country. What evidence is there for that? I think you're equating advances in technology, which lead for many to a physically more comfortable life-style, with an advancement of the 'goodness' of us as a species.

I don't live my life in a down-hearted way, but I don't try to pretend we're something we're not.

Well, yes, I'm saying our living standards are going up, thanks to technology, which equates to a better quality of life.

As a country we've become far more racially equitable and accepting of the LGBT folk over the past 70 years. That's good, isn't it? We're more accepting, inclusive, tolerant and compassionate in this wonderful land of ours.

You sound pretty down-hearted. Not as miserable as super_realist, granted, but still fairly down. Have a bag of Skittles and cheer up. We'll never reach Utopia, but that doesn't mean we can't be proud of how far we've come.

Ashamed, really? Is that a term you stick to. Ashamed of Britain in particular, or the world in general?

"Ashamed to be British" was just a turn of phrase. I'm neither ashamed nor proud of Britain, as I don't believe in the concept of either. My nationality is down to pure luck.
The world in general - the fact is there are wars, poverty, crime, greed, corruption. And there is kindness, compassion and selflessness. But far too little of the latter and certainly not enough of it to prevent the former. In general, I don't think the human race is particularly impressive. Every single person could be more giving and less selfish. But that is not how we have evolved, it's not our nature to be endlessly kind and compassionate. Can you imagine how much better things would be if we were?

That doesn't make me miserable or down-hearted in my day to day existence. I'm generally in decent spirits in my life, much like everyone else.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:09 pm

Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:Bet you said that with a straight face.

Which bit?

"government initiatives aimed at helping the poorest."

Tax cuts for high earners and giving £150bn of public money to energy companies instead of investing into better infrastructure - of any kind - is not helping the poorest.

Someone earning £20k a year will be £167 better off. Someone earning £200k a year will be £5220 better off. 10 times the salary and 31 times the tax break. Not to mention anyone earning under £20k will barely get anything.

But giving £650 through a cost of living payment, a £400 energy discount, and the cap on energy bills, plus an extension to the Household Support Fund and reversing the NI rise, is helping the poorest.

Helping the rich more than helping the poor, in the hope that somehow the former will also do the latter (despite a lack of evidence), seems morally corrupt to me. Why not help the poor the most and hope that will also help the rich?

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:09 pm

Samo wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:Bet you said that with a straight face.

Which bit?

"government initiatives aimed at helping the poorest."

Tax cuts for high earners and giving £150bn of public money to energy companies instead of investing into better infrastructure - of any kind - is not helping the poorest.

Someone earning £20k a year will be £167 better off. Someone earning £200k a year will be £5220 better off. 10 times the salary and 31 times the tax break. Not to mention anyone earning under £20k will barely get anything.

But giving £650 through a cost of living payment, a £400 energy discount, and the cap on energy bills, plus an extension to the Household Support Fund and reversing the NI rise, is helping the poorest.

Most of that is just papering over the cracks of a broken system, and the NI reverse benefits the wealthy more (again) instead of a more targeted approach.

I agree it is papering over the cracks of our energy dependence, but they are government initiatives aimed at helping the poorest.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:11 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:Bet you said that with a straight face.

Which bit?

"government initiatives aimed at helping the poorest."

Tax cuts for high earners and giving £150bn of public money to energy companies instead of investing into better infrastructure - of any kind - is not helping the poorest.

Someone earning £20k a year will be £167 better off. Someone earning £200k a year will be £5220 better off. 10 times the salary and 31 times the tax break. Not to mention anyone earning under £20k will barely get anything.

But giving £650 through a cost of living payment, a £400 energy discount, and the cap on energy bills, plus an extension to the Household Support Fund and reversing the NI rise, is helping the poorest.

Helping the rich more than helping the poor, in the hope that somehow the former will also do the latter (despite a lack of evidence), seems morally corrupt to me. Why not help the poor the most and hope that will also help the rich?

How would you envisage helping the poor?

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:16 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:We're clearly not going up as a species or as a country. What evidence is there for that? I think you're equating advances in technology, which lead for many to a physically more comfortable life-style, with an advancement of the 'goodness' of us as a species.

I don't live my life in a down-hearted way, but I don't try to pretend we're something we're not.

Well, yes, I'm saying our living standards are going up, thanks to technology, which equates to a better quality of life.

As a country we've become far more racially equitable and accepting of the LGBT folk over the past 70 years. That's good, isn't it? We're more accepting, inclusive, tolerant and compassionate in this wonderful land of ours.

You sound pretty down-hearted. Not as miserable as super_realist, granted, but still fairly down. Have a bag of Skittles and cheer up. We'll never reach Utopia, but that doesn't mean we can't be proud of how far we've come.

Ashamed, really? Is that a term you stick to. Ashamed of Britain in particular, or the world in general?

"Ashamed to be British" was just a turn of phrase. I'm neither ashamed nor proud of Britain, as I don't believe in the concept of either. My nationality is down to pure luck.
The world in general - the fact is there are wars, poverty, crime, greed, corruption. And there is kindness, compassion and selflessness. But far too little of the latter and certainly not enough of it to prevent the former. In general, I don't think the human race is particularly impressive. Every single person could be more giving and less selfish. But that is not how we have evolved, it's not our nature to be endlessly kind and compassionate. Can you imagine how much better things would be if we were?

That doesn't make me miserable or down-hearted in my day to day existence. I'm generally in decent spirits in my life, much like everyone else.

I understand you, but I disagree. I think the human race is amazing and has achieved so much through collective efforts in the past 10,000 years. We are potentially the most advanced life-form in the entire scope of the universe.

I agree it is not in our nature to be endlessly kind and compassionate, that would be contrary to evolution and wouldn't have seen us arrive at this point, but we are as a species becoming kinder and more compassionate. There are more people out there who display those characteristics than those that don't.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:17 pm

Duty281 wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:Bet you said that with a straight face.

Which bit?

"government initiatives aimed at helping the poorest."

Tax cuts for high earners and giving £150bn of public money to energy companies instead of investing into better infrastructure - of any kind - is not helping the poorest.

Someone earning £20k a year will be £167 better off. Someone earning £200k a year will be £5220 better off. 10 times the salary and 31 times the tax break. Not to mention anyone earning under £20k will barely get anything.

But giving £650 through a cost of living payment, a £400 energy discount, and the cap on energy bills, plus an extension to the Household Support Fund and reversing the NI rise, is helping the poorest.

Helping the rich more than helping the poor, in the hope that somehow the former will also do the latter (despite a lack of evidence), seems morally corrupt to me. Why not help the poor the most and hope that will also help the rich?

How would you envisage helping the poor?

Increasing the limit at which tax and NI have to be paid, instead of scrapping the 45% tax bracket. Increasing the minimum wage. Giving more of an energy rebate to those on lower incomes than to those on higher incomes.
When you wrote "reversing the NI rise, is helping the poorest" - it isn't, because the poorest don't pay any NI anyway.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:18 pm

Duty281 wrote:We are potentially the most advanced life-form in the entire scope of the universe.

Now you really have made me miserable.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:30 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Samo wrote:Bet you said that with a straight face.

Which bit?

"government initiatives aimed at helping the poorest."

Tax cuts for high earners and giving £150bn of public money to energy companies instead of investing into better infrastructure - of any kind - is not helping the poorest.

Someone earning £20k a year will be £167 better off. Someone earning £200k a year will be £5220 better off. 10 times the salary and 31 times the tax break. Not to mention anyone earning under £20k will barely get anything.

But giving £650 through a cost of living payment, a £400 energy discount, and the cap on energy bills, plus an extension to the Household Support Fund and reversing the NI rise, is helping the poorest.

Helping the rich more than helping the poor, in the hope that somehow the former will also do the latter (despite a lack of evidence), seems morally corrupt to me. Why not help the poor the most and hope that will also help the rich?

How would you envisage helping the poor?

Increasing the limit at which tax and NI have to be paid, instead of scrapping the 45% tax bracket. Increasing the minimum wage. Giving more of an energy rebate to those on lower incomes than to those on higher incomes.
When you wrote "reversing the NI rise, is helping the poorest" - it isn't, because the poorest don't pay any NI anyway.

Fair point.

The NI threshold rose in July, taking it from £9,880 to £12,570. The personal allowance has nearly doubled in the last 12 years. I agree the minimum wage should be increased, although the living wage is soon going up anyway. The energy rebate should have been means-tested, in my view, so those on lower incomes would benefit more.

by **Pr4wn** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:39 pm

The same day that caps on bankers' bonuses are scrapped is also a day when this wonderful new government is helping those most in need.

We're through the looking glass here, people.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 4:49 pm

Remaining EU laws are to be torn up by the end of next year as part of the Chancellor's bid to reduce unnecessary costs for British businesses and unleash growth.

Kwasi Kwarteng said the bonfire of red tape would lead to “a simpler system” that was easier for firms to navigate, as he also unveiled a bonanza of tax cuts to boost the flagging economy.

He said government departments have been ordered to review all retained EU regulations by December 2023, by which point they will be “automatically” axed unless they are amended or replaced.

According to official data, the UK has retained 2,417 pieces of EU law since leaving the bloc.

Only 182 of these laws have been amended, 196 have been appealed and 33 have been replaced.

Good. A proper break with the EU. This is the exact stuff Johnson should have been doing.

by **Pr4wn** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:06 pm

Why does someone earning £200k per year need an extra £5k right now? How is this good?

by Derek Smalls Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:10 pm

We'll be the new Thailand and we will certainly all live happily ever after, the shackles thrown off majestically, the red tape sprung back like an Olympian god playing with an elastic band,; the economy will be fired up , and I for one can't wait
I simply never understand why they didn't think of firing the economy up before!

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:18 pm

Pr4wn wrote:Why does someone earning £200k per year need an extra £5k right now? How is this good?

Alternatively, why is it bad that someone gets to keep more of the money they earn?

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:21 pm

Derek Smalls wrote:We'll be the new Thailand and we will certainly all live happily ever after, the shackles thrown off majestically, the red tape sprung back like an Olympian god playing with an elastic band,; the economy will be fired up , and I for one can't wait
I simply never understand why they didn't think of firing the economy up before!

Lady Thatcher did. Threw off the shackles of Keynesian orthodoxy, created wealth and tamed inflation. Since then we've been strangled by increasing taxation, increased regulation and an increased size of the state.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:22 pm

Duty281 wrote:
Pr4wn wrote:Why does someone earning £200k per year need an extra £5k right now? How is this good?

Alternatively, why is it bad that someone gets to keep more of the money they earn?

If it's good that someone gets to keep more of the money they earn, then why have taxes at all? Presumably at a certain point keeping more of your money becomes bad?

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:29 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Pr4wn wrote:Why does someone earning £200k per year need an extra £5k right now? How is this good?

Alternatively, why is it bad that someone gets to keep more of the money they earn?

If it's good that someone gets to keep more of the money they earn, then why have taxes at all? Presumably at a certain point keeping more of your money becomes bad?

It's good because it's the moral thing to do and because private individuals are better placed to spend money than the state.

The state needs some level of general taxation to fund services, but the issue arises when taxes are too high (as they have been) and state spending becomes inefficient, in addition to all the other detriments of a high-tax, highly regulated economy.

by Samo Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:30 pm

Duty281 wrote:Remaining EU laws are to be torn up by the end of next year as part of the Chancellor's bid to reduce unnecessary costs for British businesses and unleash growth.

Kwasi Kwarteng said the bonfire of red tape would lead to “a simpler system” that was easier for firms to navigate, as he also unveiled a bonanza of tax cuts to boost the flagging economy.

He said government departments have been ordered to review all retained EU regulations by December 2023, by which point they will be “automatically” axed unless they are amended or replaced.

According to official data, the UK has retained 2,417 pieces of EU law since leaving the bloc.

Only 182 of these laws have been amended, 196 have been appealed and 33 have been replaced.

Good. A proper break with the EU. This is the exact stuff Johnson should have been doing.

Which laws are you looking forward to them getting rid of?

by Samo Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:36 pm

Duty281 wrote:
Derek Smalls wrote:We'll be the new Thailand and we will certainly all live happily ever after, the shackles thrown off majestically, the red tape sprung back like an Olympian god playing with an elastic band,; the economy will be fired up , and I for one can't wait
I simply never understand why they didn't think of firing the economy up before!

Lady Thatcher did. Threw off the shackles of Keynesian orthodoxy, created wealth and tamed inflation. Since then we've been strangled by increasing taxation, increased regulation and an increased size of the state.

Thatcher had to fix the damage done by the 1972 budget which was the last time we saw tax cuts at this level, and its regarded as one of the worst budgets of modern times and nearly bankrupted the country, only saved after a bail out by the IMF. Not exactly a model worth taking inspiration from.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:45 pm

Duty281 wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Pr4wn wrote:Why does someone earning £200k per year need an extra £5k right now? How is this good?

Alternatively, why is it bad that someone gets to keep more of the money they earn?

If it's good that someone gets to keep more of the money they earn, then why have taxes at all? Presumably at a certain point keeping more of your money becomes bad?

It's good because it's the moral thing to do and because private individuals are better placed to spend money than the state.

The state needs some level of general taxation to fund services, but the issue arises when taxes are too high (as they have been) and state spending becomes inefficient, in addition to all the other detriments of a high-tax, highly regulated economy.

The moral thing to do would then be for the people who get that extra money to willingly pass it on to those more in need, in order to benefit society as a whole. But it's highly doubtful many (or any) will do that. And thus society ends up worse off than if they had been taxed and the money gone to those in need. But hey, why should the rich care about that? We have evolved to be selfish, right? It's not morally wrong, it's just the way we are.

As for taxes being too high - says who? And state spending can be equally as inefficient regardless of the taxation rate.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:45 pm

Samo wrote:
Duty281 wrote:Remaining EU laws are to be torn up by the end of next year as part of the Chancellor's bid to reduce unnecessary costs for British businesses and unleash growth.

Kwasi Kwarteng said the bonfire of red tape would lead to “a simpler system” that was easier for firms to navigate, as he also unveiled a bonanza of tax cuts to boost the flagging economy.

He said government departments have been ordered to review all retained EU regulations by December 2023, by which point they will be “automatically” axed unless they are amended or replaced.

According to official data, the UK has retained 2,417 pieces of EU law since leaving the bloc.

Only 182 of these laws have been amended, 196 have been appealed and 33 have been replaced.

Good. A proper break with the EU. This is the exact stuff Johnson should have been doing.

Which laws are you looking forward to them getting rid of?

The ones that impose regulation on financial services and GDPR should be reformed, at the very least, for a start.

by Duty281 Fri 23 Sep 2022, 5:50 pm

Samo wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
Derek Smalls wrote:We'll be the new Thailand and we will certainly all live happily ever after, the shackles thrown off majestically, the red tape sprung back like an Olympian god playing with an elastic band,; the economy will be fired up , and I for one can't wait
I simply never understand why they didn't think of firing the economy up before!

Lady Thatcher did. Threw off the shackles of Keynesian orthodoxy, created wealth and tamed inflation. Since then we've been strangled by increasing taxation, increased regulation and an increased size of the state.

Thatcher had to fix the damage done by the 1972 budget which was the last time we saw tax cuts at this level, and its regarded as one of the worst budgets of modern times and nearly bankrupted the country, only saved after a bail out by the IMF. Not exactly a model worth taking inspiration from.

She wasn't fixing the damage just done by the 1972 budget, she was fixing the damage of 15 horrific years of Wilson, Heath, Wilson and Callaghan, culminating in the winter of discontent. The IMF bailout was after the oil crisis and stagflation (which is why the present situation is incomparable to Barber who was chancellor of a different economy to the one we have now).

by Sponsored content