Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
Don't know the resident socialists on the Forum who post under many guises will cope with your last sentence Philip.
Watty
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i very much doubt if the p.m. himself really knows what he believes in, p.r. professionals force themselves to believe in what their clients peddle.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
I agree Phillip. Unfortunately Mr Cameron sees society as his group of chums and social ownership is pretty much distributed amongst themselves.
The rest of us just have to live with this big society stuff as he sells off the rest.
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
Evidence Darren , not just prejudice.
Watty
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Back to the thread ....# 95....# 103.....spot on ....
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Barry, repaying the Public Debt has to be an essential economic policy for our Country.
The only way for this to come about, and to prevent a new Debt building up, is to bring about accountability.
The current centralised State does not practise accountability, and as I've mentioned in the past, we are paying tens of billions a year on interest to service the Debt.
And whenever a slice of Debt is paid off, an even larger amount of Debt is taken on. And the interest goes up and up....
The people presently holding the reins of authority simply have no intention of appreciating any form of productive incentive that would create employment and income, thus they are not allowing millions of people to exit the state of benefit-dependency and improve their life-style and income.
One reason why Labour got in, is because they promised British jobs for British people. They lied.
This was a right-wing policy, and they got the vote. But they did the exact opposite.
Your 100% "the Government should mind their own business" theory is a loser, Barry, because the masses of people in reality want a Government that represents the interests of our Country and People, that puts limits on what the free enterprise managers can do. A large part of our industry and agriculture has been taken out of the sphere of British employment, and either transferred abroad, or given to seasonal workers from elsewhere.
That is where the benefit system becomes over-burdened and the retail economy slides downwards, and it is where the Public Debt spirals out of control.
What we need is local economic administrative authority in each district and county to get people into the available spheres of employment, offering training courses and monitoring how employers recruit people.
However, it seems the Conservative party is now heading us all towards the next phase: mass Bulgarians coming soon!
It's over, Barry! That party has left us with only one certainty: they will not get in again!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
before barry interjects with the difference between debt and deficit here is the difference explained courtesy of the pinko, fifth columnist, fellow travelling bbc website.
Debt or deficit?
Deficit - or budget deficit - is the gap between the amount the government spends in a year and the amount it raises through things like tax. It is the amount the government has to borrow in a year.
Debt is the total amount that the government has had to borrow through successive deficits. It is the total amount that the government owes.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Alexander - you really do not know what you are talking about. Stick to student debating.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
Paul, I feel that the Autumn statement is evidence enough. Surely the capping of benefits in relation to inflation (inflation, by defintion, making it a cut) is an example of prejudice in itself - a pre judgement based on an ignorant assumption of a lifestyle.
Perhaps prejudice is acceptable if you have money?
If Mr Cameron/Osborune can generalise, then surely these assumptions can be inverted, it would be undemocratic to suggest otherwise?
Of course I would be happy to claim ignorance, providing we could also write off the decisions of our government (past and present) as ignorant.
Prejudice is unfortunately prevalent in our society and not always negative. We must for instance hold a preconceived outlook (positve or negative) towards the HoL or the Royal Family; unless we start to site tradition as justification, in which case I suggest that any response to this post be sent to me via stagecoach.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Glad to see you are back on the beer Darren.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Let's face the truth, Barry: when a goat sees itself in a mirror, it will ram its reflection.
The goat doesn't realise it is encountering its own self rather than a rival.
Face up to it, the Debt is there, the annual budget deficit is there, borrowing beyond restraint and beyond declared intentions is there. You KNOW the Government has failed completely in its declared intentions, and has only added to public and private Debt, and has no economic growth to boast of.
Unemployment is the same as it was in 2010, and now your party certainly cannot bank on another coalition with the Libs, who are on their way out.
Barry, text-book strategy as you recommend to read has been applied and has failed over the decades, and what you are saying is practically "read Napoleon's march on Moscow and do as he did".
How's about marching West instead, following the afternoon sun, and reaching Russia's Church, perhaps walking just one mile.
"Alexander - you really do not know what you are talking about."
But what if I do know, Barry? Let's suppose it was done. What then?
Barry, you want me to read books on economy, to instruct me by way of this "strategy" of others.
You know what? I could run rings round their strategy without even getting up from my hind!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Alexander. Once again you do not know what you are talking about. You clearly have not read what I recommended and your ignorance of economics and economic history is clearly displayed.
Deficit has to be tackled by spending cuts and then you will start repaying debt. Growth is also needed of course as part of the deficit reduction and spending cuts are essential for that to reduce the public sector burden to enable growth.
Remember, every penny of public spending ultimately has to be taken from the private sector and it can only be the private sector that will generate the economic growth we need. Governments get in the way of that and make it harder.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
It is absolutely true that money spent has to come from the private sector. It is also true that this money is not always spent well or efficiently. But the fact of the matter is that it is a necessary mechanism, one which defines what sort of country we are.
The sad thing is that it is a small group that control everything (public and private) and their agenda is one of self interest. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that our government and by association, the CEOs of the companies are not representative of the electorate.
We should have faith in the fact that so many (and not necessarily those it directly affects) oppose the actions of this government. We should also look at the reaction of the public towards Starbucks.
It is often raised on this forum that it is our obligation to pay as little tax as possible and Starbucks certainly achieved that. However it is the damage they have done to their own image that has made them cough up a small amount of what they owe. And before we have cries of 'what they owe?' we must remember this is a company that has put smaller shops out of business, pays the lowest wage possible and allows 'our' government to top up difference in tax credits (we come full circle).
People decide what is 'fair' and these types of actions are not. They may be legal but then again it is only our persistence that will change this. It is important that our government is representative of us and not a group that only has a personal agenda.
Oh and Peter, in vino veritas.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
post 113 sums it up
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
dt1,you mention starbucks,20 million in corperation tax over the next 2 years.a tidy sum in my books,but would like to see that doubled in actull realalaty.other big companys like google and amozon to do the same.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
was peoples pressure that made starbucks cough up, purely because people voted with there feet
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 113....agree we cannot have the `big` companies telling HMRC what tax they will pay..........Ossie must get a grip on
tax evasion and avoidance.....
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
he says he will, but will he realy??
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
there will never be enough hmrc staff suitably able to deal with the legal teams of the multi-nationals, they will always dictate how much they pay.
lowering the rate of corporation tax will have little effect either.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#113 - 'a small group'..... a bit of the lefty inferiority complex coming out there. We are a long way from a couple of hundred years ago when just a few families owned and controlled just about everything and it is the Conservatives who have acted to extend ownership and control outside that small group. Recently, from right to buy, to share ownership and encouraging free enterprise Then we have more historical actions, reform acts, universal suffrage, grammar schools and so on.
Oddly - but typically. The left with their so called equality and fairness agenda have not achieved anything of the sort. They reduce social mobility by destroying grammars, by destroying the economy, by damaging businesses, by reducing incentives to save, invest and take ownership.
