Subsidies.
- 1 January 2012 13:10144982I agree with BarryW,
Some subsidies are a curse and very unjust but again in this unjust and unbalanced country, if the subsidies below were stopped, it would be the poorest who would yet again bear the brunt.
Information below from Kevin Cahill, author of Who Owns Britain.
He states that 69% of the land here is owned by 0.6% of the population. It is this group that takes the major subsidies. According to the government's database, £Billions is shared between just 16,000 people or businesses. Some examples below.
Subsidies to the Captains of British enterprise and aristocrats.
The Duke of Devonshire gets £390,000,
The Duke of Buccleuch £405,000,
The Earl of Plymouth £560,000,
The Earl of Moray £770,000,
The Duke of Westminster £820,000.
The Vestey family takes £1.2m.
"You'll be pleased to hear that the previous owner of their Thurlow estate, Edmund Vestey, who died in 2008, managed his tax affairs so efficiently, that in one year his businesses paid just £10.
Asked to comment on his contribution to the public good, he explained: "We're all tax dodgers, aren't we?"
Matt Ridley, Chairman of Northern Rock, who helped precipitate the economic crisis that has impoverished so many. This champion of free market economics and his family received £205,000 from the taxpayer last year for owning their appropriately named Blagdon estate
Prince Bandar, the Saudi Arabian fixer at the centre of the Al-Yamamah corruption scandal, receives £270,000 a year for his Glympton estate in Oxfordshire.
It has already been decided that these levels of subsidies will remain safe until at least 2020
George Monbiot,
States.
"For the past year, while researching my book about Rewilding.
I've been puzzling over why these bodies fetishize degraded farmland ecosystems and are so reluctant to allow their estates to revert to nature. Now it seems obvious. To receive these subsidies, you must farm the land."
He goes on to say.
"As for the biggest beneficiary, of these subsidies, it is shrouded in mystery.
It is a company based in France called Syral UK Ltd. Its website describes it as a producer of industrial starch, alcohol and proteins, but says nothing about owning or farming any land. Yet it receives £18.7m from the taxpayer.
It has not yet answered my questions about how this has happened, but my guess is that the money might take the form of export subsidies: the kind of payments that have done so much to damage the livelihoods of poor farmers in the developing world."
Now the crunch.
Are these Government subsidies?
No.
They are EU, Common Agricultural Policy(CAP) subsidies, paid to the Big Farmers, who swallow €55bn (£47bn) a year, or 43% of the European budget.
Our Government has, in one respect, lobbied the European commission, so far unsuccessfully, for "a very substantial cut to the CAP budget".
Which, on the face of it, sounds sensible but hold the enthusiasm.
It has also demanded that the EC drop the only sensible proposal in the draft now being negotiated by member states:
Which is "that there should be a limit to the amount a landowner can receive."
Our government warns that capping the payments "would impede consolidation" of landholdings.
It seems that 0.6% of the population owning 69% of the land isn't inequitable enough."My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum" - 1 January 2012 13:14144985seems to me that the scrounging aristocrats do not want to do a decent days work anymore.
we shall have wait for a comment from posh barry or his press secretary. - 1 January 2012 17:14145002To an extent in relation to the topic here, there are aristocrats who own and live in large listed properties, mansions of historical interest with many rooms, for example 30-40 or more.
They cannot afford the upkeep of the masonry, and receive a 999 year lease from the State, guaranteeing funds for the properties' upkeep and a free and easy life for the aristocrats.
These properties usually have a large land estate attached.
The subsidies mentioned by Gary are privileges for the privileged, ensuring a free and easy life.
Another indirect example is the Duchy of Cornwall, which seems to be tax-exempt, equating to a subsidy.
Somewhere in recent history the aristocracy in Britain assured themselves a free ride, the solution being subsidies.
They have connections to the upper house and the head-family, so it is unlikely their privileges will be questioned as long as the aristocracy has allies in the economic circles of bankers and top chief executives, who also guarantee themselves a free ride.
Much depends on the lower house not wanting to ruin the gravy-train. The idea of being promoted to "sir", "baron" "baroness", or receiving a place in the EU gravy-train on leaving the lower house brings with it a lucrative chance for a free ride till death us fo depart.Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - 1 January 2012 20:14145015That really is a pile of old left wing bull****
It stretches the definition of subsidy to an absurd degree. Only someone who thinks we should all be serfs to an all powerful the state could possibly relate to all that rubbish. - 1 January 2012 20:21145018a bit disrespectful there barry, alex always puts a lot of work into his posts.
i think his efforts deserve better than insults. - 1 January 2012 20:24145020Abuse always comes in handy if the arguments are a bit ropey.........
- Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
1 January 2012 20:33145024Barry - the point, irrespective of the notable bias in the reportage surely is that the CAP is hugely and fundamentally flawed.
The CAP is open to abuse, whether it is "set aside" payments, or guaranteed pricing for produce or any other daft scheme they come up with, their will always be individuals and firms that milk it for all it can provide. The real losers from the CAP and CFP are the consumer who ends up paying well over the odds for produce; oh and the honest farmers."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi - 1 January 2012 20:40145026And while we have these subsidies, people who genuinely need support are asked to cut back.
http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.com/2012/01/beautiful-words-to-soothe-abuse.html?spref=fb - Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
1 January 2012 20:44145027For some more info on who gets how much and for what try these links
http://farmsubsidy.org/GB/
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/funding/index_en.htm click on the GB flag and then use the search facility to look up whatever you want - e.g. in Dover 12 entities received £962,837.59 in payments from the RPA in 2010"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi - Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
1 January 2012 23:04145043Bern, how true #8.
My daughter-in-law who has been on deserved and needed disability allowance for years has just had a FIVE minute tick box assessment and been refused any further benefit, she is appealing. Until recently she had managed to work part time in spite of having curvature of the spine, one leg a lot shorter than the other, permanent pain and other problems linked to the encephalitis she had a few years ago.
The following day she heard she had been given a care package from the council after assessment by two different people over a couple of days. Councils do not give out care packages unless they are genuinely needed.-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
------------------------------------------------------------------- - 1 January 2012 23:52145046Barry, of recent the Government has plainly told us common people that we can look forward to 13 years of hardships.
The analysts say unemployment will rise, which it does.
Incomes are going down, and only the rich are getting richer.
Do we have anything to lose, Barry?
If we all have to go down into worsening misery, then the privileged should come down with us! It seems they are living off subsidies of various sorts, as Gary's post indicates.Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - 2 January 2012 00:24145047
- 2 January 2012 04:34145049The Daily Mail online 26 September 2011 reports:
The Queen was paid more than £224,000 in EU subsidies for her Windsor farm estate last year, according to figures obtained by The Mail on Sunday
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2041502/Queens-Windsor-estate-gets-224k-annual-farming-subsidy-EU.html#ixzz1iGf8n6mI
Various British papers have recently reported that aristocrats owning land in Britain grab our money via the EU.
We working class pay the EU, the EU gives it to the aristocrats.
Needless to say, Mrs. Windsor does not hesitate to claim the EU subsidies. At least Nigel Farage knows now why we pay £50 million every day to the EU.
I can just imagine the kind of laughter and mocking that goes on in the palace when they count the money they get and we cry out to Cameron to stop skinning us alive.
They must really enjoy it at the palace, but then I suppose they have nothing better to do than being cynically bored.Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - 2 January 2012 08:19145052Ross - the CAP is a farce I agree, but even so this whole thread is an insult to anyone's intelligence. By all means have a thread about the inadequacies of CAP but this is just silly in the extreme. It is not worth a proper response.
Howard - my reference was not only to Alex but the whole thread. - 2 January 2012 11:01145078You don't increase the wealth of the poorest by destroying the wealth of the rich. The USSR was proof enough of that.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
- 2 January 2012 11:24145082Couldn't agree more Peter and although I am a Conservative, I still think the less well off should be able to keep a little more of what they have (if they have anything) and a little extra too.
Roger - 2 January 2012 12:06145096#15 - no-one has suggested that, I don't think. I certainly wouldn't. But there are better, more dignified, fairer ways to manage the support for people who need it, and part of that process might be to actually demonstrate fairness.
- Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
2 January 2012 12:24145099bern;
spot on girl !!!!!!!!!!!!!
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 2 January 2012 12:38145103Unfortunately Bern, fairness tends to be in the eye of the recipient. "I receive benefits- that's fair." or "I pay tax so some people can get something for nothing- that's unfair". You will never find a universally agreed definition of what is 'fair'.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
- Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
2 January 2012 12:45145108PETER;
I think if you look at gary c's posting very well thought out
then look at jan's posting on her daughter
probably answers your postALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS