2024 UK politics - now with Labour in charge
Comments
-
I certainly don't think so. Elitist implies that one group of people is better than another. If you are in the lower group you could be envious of the elite, but that is separate from believing that elitism is bad. I am opposed to elitism because it stifles opportunity for talented people to achieve what they are able while at the same time maintaining other people in a position for which they are poorly qualified. I don't see how anybody could see elitism as being good for the whole, it is only sustained by the elite protecting their status.
0 -
If he is happy for the elites to be elite and to do their elite thing, but simply doesn't want to be involved, then I can just about get it although I think it's a bit bigoted. Also, it's a big cliche, but I do think some people who bang about not being elite should go somewhere properly poor reassess their elite status.
0 -
Not your most helpful contribution of all time, if I may be so bold!
Benchmarking remuneration policies from private sector to public sector is one reason.
Being able to demonstrate that public sector employees are "paying their way" is another.
Equal treatment of public sector workers vs private sector workers re tax-system incentives to behave in a particular way e.g. additional pension contributions or charitable donations probably counts too.
And doubtless there are many benefits-related mechanics that relate to gross earnings where fairness and transparency from public sector to private sector workers rely on both being paid gross and then paying income tax etc.
0 -
My dad was born during ww2 in Stockport. I think he understood poor.
The rest is just ignorance in the truest sense, not bigotry. We used to visit family in "The North" and they'd ask us what people ate in the south.
(Our inside joke, not involving my dad, was we eat muesli.)
Perhaps it was a different time.
0 -
When he was sheltering you from the elites, I imagine that you were living a considerably better life than much of the world.
0 -
Going off at a tangent, there's plenty of discussions elsewhere on social media along the lines of:
Self-appointed "progressive" but not very well off type: The rich in the UK should pay more tax for redistribution to reduce inequality.
Realist: Why restrict this to the UK? Why not do this globally? There's lots of really rich foreigners who abuse tax havens to avoid paying their fair share.
Progressive type: That's a great idea.
Realist: You'll have to pay more tax as even being "poor" in the UK means you are very well off in global terms.
Pressive type: [resounding silence]
0 -
Completely true.
Capable man, but only as an adult did I realise how superficial some of the politics were.
0 -
Nope, you are. Round and round you go...
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I love the way you present your opinions as facts.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Maybe not from your point of view, but there is definitely a class/envy type motivation within Labour. Even if it is Starmer etc showing to the hard left that they are 'proper' socialists.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The idea of applying VAT to something (or not) depending on whether there is a free alternative available is one of the more amusing ideas I've seen.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I do like the idea of making free things available that are currently subject to VAT. Biscuits, for example.
0 -
Everyone likes free stuff, but most of us realise it generally doesn't happen like that.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Indeed. Anyone doubting the absurdities of VAT should read some of the VAT Notices. The only logic I can apply is that they are a timeline of different political requests to give a tax break to this or that particular project. Some poor HMRC civil servant then has to try to define the thing that is exempted.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Try the cross border stuff and it becomes even more fun.
It's symptomatic of something that has evolved over many years with lots of different decision makers and priorities to become a 'patchwork quilt'. Corporate tax is similar. And the complexity these days is off the scale.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
It's not that novel a concept
Consider bottled water analogous to private education and that drawn from your tap at much lower cost, the bog standard alternative.
Same 'product' one attracts vat, the other doesn't
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Enjoying your further concessions on the strawman demand for consistency
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Cheers
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Your earlier post referred to free universally available education, not a cheaper version. You can't charge any VAT on something if its free.
Different issue and not a concession. Don't conflate things in an effort to look like you've made a valid case.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Double post
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Posting it twice wouldn't have improved the state of it
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Pretending to miss the point again.
Standard Stevo.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
In your humble opinion, of course.
Are you even trying to argue your point now?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Another valuable contribution to the thread.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
No further argument is required. The point is made clearly.
That's why you didn't even attempt a rebuttal but chose non-sequitor a instead about free stuff not having VAT charged.
Transparent, but yet somehow all you can muster.
Poor.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.1 -
Suspect you are just trolling now. We will have to agree to disagree and you can get back under your bridge.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Agree - I have fed him enough now.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The forum code should allow for some sort of digital side room where two people can indulge in having the last word while the rest of us get on with our day.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
What I'm most enjoying is that neither seems to have come up with a good idea for or against it.
0
