Re: Be fair
It's as fair as paying the same amount for a mars bar.
But no discussion of tax should use the word "fair" without words like "not" or "un-" in front of it.
164 posts • joined 6 Aug 2009
It's as fair as paying the same amount for a mars bar.
But no discussion of tax should use the word "fair" without words like "not" or "un-" in front of it.
I wonder how your comment managed a downvote?
You're not saying you watch the BBC but don't pay for it. You're simply saying you don't watch it because it has nothing for you, therefore you don't pay it. I guess for some people even that is heresy.
"Is the answer that you want it, and you want me to help you pay for it? It is. Isn't it?"
Yes, it is.
But to admit that would make them feel like BAD people which would induce congitive dissonance because people who think like them are GOOD!
Can you imagine a programme like Watchdog on a paid-for-by-adverts tv channel?
Wasn't The Cook Report on ITV a bit like that?
"From what I can see, markets seem to need speculators in order to fail catastrophically."
Nonsense, when Nixon blamed speculators for him having to cease redemption of dollars into gold he was outright lying. It was because the US had been printing more dollars than there was gold to back them, breaking the promise of Bretton Woods and the US was being called on it by France and other nations by redeeming their gold - emptying the coffers of the US.
People who blame "the speculators" are more often than not trying to shift the blame from their own malfeasance or incompetence.
"'Drop the Dead Donkey'
Another satire that has been apparently overtaken by real life."
Yep - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8-4uSlg3J8
@ Lee D
Taxes are only ever levied for one reason - to raise revenue for the government so they can spunk it around and claim it's for the good of all.
The sin taxes you mention are simply an excuse that they know most people will swallow.
When they eventually privatise it, which they will because the telly tax is indefensible, instead of the government getting the cash they need to simply give every taxpayer an equal share. It belongs to us after all - yes even people like me who don't pay the tax.
Sorry guys but that's what tax is, everyone gets what tax pays for :)
"remember, citizens, THEFT is A CRIME. And we're all the victims, etc."
Indeed, and yes we know those radio signals are being transmitted into your house whether you asked for them or not, but if you dare tune into them without paying....
"Feminism is about trying to make the world more equal for all."
If that truly is your goal (in terms of equal opportunity rather than equal outcome of course) then perhaps it's time to start calling yourselves "Equalists" and practice "Equalism".
One might almost call it "Individual Rights".
"It's a great example. The data tells you there is 100 per cent LTE coverage for where the people actually are. If they stray out of range, then it falls below 100 per cent," he said.
I'm not sure an app of any form was required to find that out.
"All MPs should be paid the average income of their constituencies. That is the only way to get them to concentrate on raising the average salary of all.
Please note this is NO WAY NEAR £150K."
Hey that's my idea! I'm delighted someone else has thought of it too :)
Though I would suggest the median *private-sector* income of their constituents as the benchmark or they would just goose their numbers by spamming high paid public sector jobs in their areas.
"Yes indeed, I can think of several fools who "know" that climate change is a conspiracy."
Conspiracy or not (I suspect probably not initially) it's the perfect excuse for certain types of people and politicians to do what they always want to do: tax us and tell us what we can and cannot do all the time.
So they big it up as much as possible so that they can get their bossyness (sp?) fix in.
Who would have thought it?
The most worrying thing about this is the amount of comments supporting the krauts in this.
Krauts? Whoops is that a hate crime.
"If your alternative to our arrangement is the Merkin Model then for my money we'll just stay as we are, thank you very much."
But a great many of us Brits don't want to stay where we are thank you very much. However we are forced to under the threat of violence (ultimately jail if you are stubborn). The only way to avoid is is not to watch TV even if you are not watching BBC.
Thankfully it's a ton easier now with Netflix etc to get by and I don't pay those b'stards a penny.
"I pay tax towards all sorts of services that I don't currently use, that doesn't make those taxes illiberal."
Actually all taxes are illiberal so perhaps I should just have stated "End this f*cking tax now!"
I think there are on average about 150,000 prosecutions a year for the telly tax. It's 10% of all prosecutions in the type of court where this thing is done apparently. It was a while since I saw the story but it's around those numbers as I recall.
So not a rather small number by any measure.
The bastards target whoever they think might be vulnerable, whether female or not.
End this insanely illiberal tax now.
"You want to believe that Brexit will make things better for ordinary working folk"
Or if you want to believe that staying in the EU makes things better for ordinary working folk.
Some things really are a valid opinion.
"Auto regulations have saved countless lives and prevented countless injuries. "
Including mine. If that steel bar which you see at the bottom of lorries at the back wasn't there (I think thanks to a law mandating them) I would probably have been decapitated when I drove my car into the back of one. The car body would have carried on under the lorry while the top would have been sheared off taking my head with it.
I'm very very free market but some things are just necessary.
"You really ought to move to a country where even the illusion of democracy has been erased, which, if I read the signs correctly, may include the US as of 2017."
So you think they are going to succeed in overturning Donald Trump's outstanding electoral college win?
"the genocide they commit against Palestinian children on a daily basis"
I doubt that committing genocide every day is sustainable, surely they would run out of children to murder?
Or you're just talking crap.
Oh you beast!
I see a lot of "hah you STUPID Brexiteers!" in these comments, with lots of upvotes.
The reasonable people (the vast majority) who voted both leave and remain are fully aware that the EU decision was a balance of pros and cons and most people had slightly different weightings for these to make their decision.
This is clearly a pro for the EU and even as a proud and happy Brexiteer I cheer for this ruling.
Vapid point-scoring in comments isn't going to change the result, or change people's mind, or make people think better of you.
Changing my name to Zebediah Zakariah as we speak...
"(and you wonder why the Sun was so pro-Brexit)"
Yes of course! The Sun wanted to leave the EU just to get rid of the BBC!
I'm glad we have people like you to enlighten us as to the deeper motivations of these evil corporations, how could we have been so silly to fall for such a ruse?
"What you propose is a race to the bottom."
Completely wrong, what I describe is competition. The same competition that has raised wealth and living standards across the entire world that has any measure of a free market. Even the Chinese have accepted it as the road to wealth.
You are right about one thing, cheap does not always mean good. But if you sell the *same quality* product at a lower price because you have structured your business in a superior way to your competitors, and in such a way that the government doesn't punish you for it then that is *a good thing*.
Honestly it's amazing how tough this is to get into people's heads. I'm not saying you're stupid, but you are clearly ideologically incapable of understanding the free market.
Utter crap. What you describe is a protection racket.
I'm English, the Obamacare example was simply the most recent one that sprang to mind, probably due to me listening to Peter Schiff a lot (the one who got it bang on about the sub-prime crisis way before it happened).
I have no idea whether it really is cheaper/easier to hire full timers rather than part timers, but it's got naff all to do with their political leanings and everything to do with lowering labour costs. Which, as in my answer to the other chap, makes products cheaper for the consumer all else being equal. This is a good thing.
The rest of your reply is interesting, you believe right-wingers do things that are in their best interests, but left-wingers don't and that this is a plus for the left-wingers? The road to hell is paved with good intentions, perhaps those you call right-wingers understand that by pursuing their best interest they also help others. Building a good business not only employs people, but provides value for the customers who choose (voluntarily) to purchase the products. Win-win all the way.
You are right, it IS in everyone's best interests to live in a cooperative society. Which is why I don't understand why left-wingers are so set against businesses and free-market capitalism which are the essence of voluntary cooperation which benefits all.
You didn't fix it, you ruined it. But at the same time still agreed with the point I made - thanks.
Companies will do what they can within the law to pay the least amount for the same labour. Yes. Good.
Good because companies that do that are then able to undercut their competition, which means lower prices for the same good or service for the consumer. Excellent, that's what we want - we want cheaper products.
Unless of course you are prepared to pay a higher price for the same quality of product? (You will probably say you would, but we both know you would be lying if you did).
I'm glad you admit that taxation is violence, but what do you think it is if it's not theft? An organisation with the monopoly on violence tells you to give it a portion of your earnings or it will throw you in a cell for years, and if you dare to defend yourself it will cause great harm up to and including death upon you. You think that's a "social contract"?
What social contract? When was this contract put in front of me to sign? When was I given the opportunity to negotiate terms? Was it when I was a child, and first received state services such as schooling? But contracts signed by children are unenforceable. Was it my parents? Parents have no authority to sign up their children into slavery.
There is no social contract - stop making bullsh*t up to excuse the fact you want other people's money, and will threaten them with violence if you don't get it. That's what we call a gangster. Social contract my arse.
"It's reminiscent of Marx ""From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" which sounds great in theory, but only works if people don't game the system, and people will always game the system."
Exactly, this silly idea requires that someone somewhere assess both people's abilities and people's needs. It's not surprising that the people making these decisions discover that they, their families and their associates need more than anyone else...
It's also a philosophy that the current leader of the Labour Party believes in (if I recall, I heard him praise it in a YouTube clip of an Oxford Union debate). Yet I don't see him actually doing it, nor any other of the champagne socialists. There's nothing stopping them voluntarily spreading their wealth about.
Do you pay tax?
Do you know what happens if you don't pay tax?
"Unfortunately the right-winger types tend to dislike the notion of employing 40 people for 20 hours a week rather than 20 people for 40 hours a week, and understandably so, because in the politco-economic system we currently have, it's more expenive to do the former rather than the latter."
Nonsense - on what do you base that claim? Under current legislation it's more of a problem to employ full time workers than part time ones. In the US lots of companies are hiring 2x part time workers rather than 1x full time worker so that they don't have to pay Obamacare fees for example.
Unfortunately most left-winger types tend to dislike looking deeper into the claims they make because vague generalisations that disparage the people with political views different to them are much more fun to post...
I base the above statement on your previous post.
Yes, although I struggle with the morality of state welfare (because it uses violence to extract wealth from workers to fund it), the reality is welfare isn't going anywhere for a long time.
This method makes things entirely simple and understandable, and also no more prostrating yourself to government workers to get it. And if people want to better themselves, they can take a risk to do something they might not otherwise have justified being able to take. Start a business perhaps, or a job you always wanted to do but didn't think you would make it.
Some people would simply live off the minimum true, but most people actually earn over minimum wage, which means they are prepared to do more than the minimum to make life better for themselves.
"What are people doing that needs fibre?"
There's probably a few households with several people all watching separate Ultra-HD Netflix streams (25Mb/s each) needing a big pipe it's a bit of an edge case.
Downloading big Steam games of 30GB or more are much nicer with a big pipe but it's not crucial.
Aside from them I can't think of much else the average household needs 1Gbps for.
@ Ben Tasker
Your thinking is backwards, the court isn't saying that elites can't just dictate and must put it to a vote, the court is saying that a fully democratic referendum can be disregarded if the MP's (who one might call elites) vote against it.
The same MP's that voted to have a referendum, and agreed to abide by the result.
Democracy seems to be the only really practical alternative to violence to attain one's aims, at least in the Western world at this point in time.
There are many people who believe when Ted Heath entered us into the Common Market back in the day that he committed an act of treason (http://www.vernoncoleman.com/euillegally.html), but the public did not rise up in violence to change this, they simply stood up and argued against the Common Market/EU and hoped for change.
They/we eventually, after decades, forced the government to give us our say, and despite the massive status quo advantage, and of nearly all the establishment, the civil service, the media, IMF etc etc against us we stuck up our two fingers and said "OUT". The finest display of democracy I have seen in my lifetime, and the one and only time my side has ever won.
This vote was not advisory, whether they think it was or not, and if they screw us on this one it proves that you CANNOT change things through the democratic process.
That leaves only violence - and it would be fully legitimate violence. I'm sharpening my pitchfork as we speak.
"I've got some news for you. There's no such thing as a free lunch. If you save your money with a bank, you are lending it, at risk. The risk being the bank going pop, and you losing your money."
That's not news to me, I agree entirely, and it can't be said often enough that money in the bank is actually a loan to the bank and you no longer own the money - just a claim on it.
However as I mentioned some of my savings are in gold, but some of my family members, who mocked me when I mentioned the yellow metal, have the majority of theirs in bank deposits or sterling denominated shares. Although I feel a little smug about it, I take no pleasure in them being 10-15% less wealthy than they were not so long ago.
I can't agree with your assessment of QE saving the banking system but it's a bit late so don't feel I can go into detail without messing up my post. Yes, QE can theoretically be clawed back when the cash comes back to the central bank. But really, do you think that will ever happen? It's not happened in 25 years of doing it in Japan where it was invented. I can't think of a single instance where a CB has removed the QE from the system. QE is de facto money printing.
And that's an easy way out, a way that has been tried, tested, and failed from ancient Greece, through Rome, via the Wiemar Republic and a thousand other realms in between and on to us today. It will fail again ultimately, and the longer we stretch it out the worse it will be, we should have let it all go to pot in 2008 and rebuild, because now it's going to be even worse when it goes.
"Which seems to have developed arthritis these last few years."
It's been tied behind his back by the central planners in the central banks of the world.
"You might want an over valued currency"
No, I would like a correctly valued currency, the problem is what sets the value and that, quite simply, is the supply of money. The supply of which is controlled, ultimately, by the central banks, who respond (whether they openly admit it or not) to the government.
While it does make British exports cheaper, if you are in manufacturing that means the cost of imported raw materials has gone higher as well.
But the "weak currency = jobs" myth is just that - mythical. West/reunified Germany had an immensely strong currency in the Deutschmark and had no shortage of jobs and manufacturing. It was so strong the French devised the Euro to stop being so embarrassed by Fritz next door because the Franc was constantly devaluing. Switzerland is a modern example of very strong currency and plenty of employment. Please don't propagate that falsehood anymore.
A weak pound is exactly what the government wants (pity we mere voters want the opposite) because it reduces the real value of the vast debt they have heaped up over ours heads and those of our children.
Carney took full advantage of the cover of Brexit to lower interest rates (after bullshitting that he was about to raise them for the last year or so) AND start up the printing presses with more QE. He's done absolutely everything he can to trash the pound at it's most vulnerable point in years.
So we poor saps who cherish our savings are once again looted by the invisible hand of inflation (no relation to Adam Smith's invisible hand of awesomeness).
Fortunately I invested in a bit of gold and Brexit actually had a net positive effect on my finances. Real money people - real money.
Brexit not causing disaster? Surely not?
"Vote Leave and Remain had no right to make policy promises about anything at all as they weren't running for government"
Absolutely correct, though the tone of your post seems to suggest that they did make promises, rather than suggestions of what could be done after Brexit. The only promise I recall them making was that after Brexit then we would be in control of our own immigration policy, and that we would not have to send £350m gross to the EU every week, which is entirely true.
Ah the controversial £350m number, personally I think it would have been better to use the ~£200m net figure or whatever it is but then I don't calculate the tax I get taken from me every year by looking at the gross number and removing what I think I get back in public services - and I bet you don't either. And apart from the rebate any money that comes back is spent by the EU, we don't get to choose what it gets used for.
The funny thing is whenever remoaners say the Leave campaign lied this is the only point they ever come up with, whereas on the remain side the list is long (World War 3, housing crash, economic crash, 3 million jobs at risk, no more CLOUT! oh god how will we survive without CLOUT!?)
Yet another idiot trying to suggest that anyone who voted Brexit was a foaming at the mouth racist with an IQ in the single digits. That's as stupid as saying all remain voters are foaming at the mouth Brit-haters who can't wait for our culture to be obliterated and replaced with a Brave New EU World.
A lot is said in the media about not forgetting the 48% who voted to remain. Well I think it's about time that 48% started to make the effort to understand the majority 52% in this country instead of condemning them. Set aside your prejudice and bigotry for once and listen.
It boggles the mind that some people downvoted your completely sensible suggestion.
"Considering the current inclinations of the great Yank electorate, I reckon it's touch-and-go that we'll make it to Christmas."
That's right - *Hillary* leading in the polls what the hell are they thinking...
My Virtualbox VM host and Teamspeak server will be migrated to Linux now. This update decided to ignore the "Notify to schedule restart option" and just went ahead and did it, dirtily shutting down the VM. It was at 3am so no real harm done but that's it for me, no need to have a Win 10 as a simple server host I'll knuckle down and put Linux on it one evening.
Desktop may still be a bit further off due to the games I'm playing at the moment.
systemd'oh! DNS lib underscore bug bites everyone's favorite init tool, blanks Netflix
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017