grrrrr, those pesky pensions, healthcare and schools. I bet you'd be happier without roads, street lighting and a police force as well. No army, obviously, without taxes to pay for it.
A different view on the economy
- Thread starter The Baker
- Start date
grrrrr, those pesky pensions, healthcare and schools. I bet you'd be happier without roads, street lighting and a police force as well. No army, obviously, without taxes to pay for it.
D
Doggit
How much did Gordon Brown raise pensions by, 20p I think it was. He also raided the penision funds and thereby reduced them ever since. He also turned a blind eye to allowing the unemployed to get classed as disabled, and that kept the unemployment figures down. They pay into the NHS, and then add targets, so that needs more managers.
I could go on, but it would be a waste of time.
I could go on, but it would be a waste of time.
Last edited by a moderator:
That makes literally no sense.
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,606
- Reaction score
- 550
- Country
http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/...the-biggest-borrowers-over-the-last-70-years/
The problem is people just repeat what they read in their favourite newspapers like the DM and be damned with facts. The tories have done well to sell themselves as the party of low taxes and spending. Yet this neo liberalism has caused all the problems you now rail against and then want more of it!
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,606
- Reaction score
- 550
- Country
So no defence spending, no street lights,no police - is that the anarchy you want?
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,606
- Reaction score
- 550
- Country
You are a bit lost on the issue of ta laws. We have people who can become non doms and that costs to do that but the benefits are outsized. Anyone can understand non doms, offshore etc but not everyone can take advantage of it.
Why is it then the Government has sold its buildings to a offshore based property fund and then leased them back? You think I or you could take advantage of that?
As to the government in power - they will always pander to the people who finance and fund them - which at the moment is the rich financial industry supporting the tories.
You want better government then stop business and funding getting near politicians and civil servants.
D
Doggit
We've done this one before Kank, the Tories end up borrowing more, to get us out of the shyte that Labour got us in to by the spend and tax polices that don't ever work.
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,606
- Reaction score
- 550
- Country
No. Doggit. Read that link with data from the UK government. The Tories have to borrow more because they cut services and taxation which due to fiscal drag they then need to make up the shortfall by borrowing more.
You really do drink the Tory Kool aid. I am no hardcore labour supporter - I am more interested in good economic policy and facts.
As to tax cutting and austerity work? Can you provide me one example where austerity has worked - the state of kansas did that and now its bankrupt.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ter-zorn-perspec-0518-jm-20160517-column.html
Being sold the NOW debunked trickle down economic theory which was Thatcherism.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-...g-sold-the-trickle-down-economics-con/7406844
Some people simply are stupid enough to be sold the same con time and time again.
Problem is, K, that all of the economic theories are just that: theories.
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,606
- Reaction score
- 550
- Country
But the reality is we have implementations of these disasterous policies- theories or not. Please look into the horrible situation Kansas finds itself in and now and the now Brownback is wanting Trump to replicate his failed experiment on a national scale.
Look, I can understand that people would like to pay less tax and that their is wastage and poor procurement but the idea that neo liberal unfettered market capitalism is sacrosanct is just as dangerous as communism.
We need a mixed economy, where you look at the most efficient way to supply the goods and services required by an economy - which wil be a mix of public provision and private provision.
Take for example - trains. A market that operates effectively is one where there is competition between suppliers and buyers and that there is entry and exit of companies. Look at Porters 5 forces. Now we don't have entry or exit of train operators, they don't own their trains, neither do they own or maintain the track - so where is the competition to drive down prices?
Contrast that to say our supermarkets where we have seen the entry of Aldi, Lidl bringing in competition.
But my point, K, is that whatever theory you subscribe to, it will benefit some, and disadvantage others.
What is your perfect solution, is not someone else's.
And as long as competing theories get voted in and out, we will continue to flip-flop from inefficiency to inefficiency.
What is your perfect solution, is not someone else's.
And as long as competing theories get voted in and out, we will continue to flip-flop from inefficiency to inefficiency.
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,606
- Reaction score
- 550
- Country
I can understand where you are coming from but it seems you are falling into a fallacy where its a zero sum game and the benefits and losses from one theory as compared to another equalise out ergo - some win and some lose.
That's is where I disagree because I am looking at the macro level. So are you arguing that one set of policies where a few benefit and the majority do not is equal to another policy where the majority benefit and few do not.
Similar threads
