|
|
Post by Toreador on Feb 5, 2023 22:11:48 GMT
Because they work for a living unlike the lazy arseholes in the UK who seem to think that the world and their dog owes them a living whilst they sit on their fat ases doing jack shit.. Sorry mate, I've lost your point here? These countries have higher standards of living than the UK and higher taxes than the UK. Productivity is low in the UK, I agree there, but what is the link to higher taxes? Possibly higher wages, house prices and other differences. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 5, 2023 22:14:37 GMT
It doesn't, but you can keep repeating it does with no knowledge about it. This faux browbeating from a position of total weakness is quite funny Long term investment does not save enough tax to be worth it and pays no better than short term. But in any case the main drivers for investment are quick returns and security. so investment in house building is safe and gets a quick guaranteed return. But investing in nanobot technology is long term and risky. So you guess where the money goes. What if the government provided the money, but others made the decisions? A government bank. I don't think any UK government has ever done what I'm suggesting, perhaps you can give me examples. The soviet union is a good example of your model going quite badly. The government was given the power to decide what would be funded and the government quickly (and predictably) became entirely incompetent and corrupt. Yet many countries like Germany invest in business quite successfully. And to be honest, using the Soviet Union as an example is not very persuasive. Like using Genghis Khan as an example of capitalism failing. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 5, 2023 22:16:37 GMT
Higher taxation does not necessarily make people or society poorer, because people have better public services, better public transport, CHEAPER public transport, better pensions. Who are you trying to kid? - we have the highest public spending in decades and no government service is any better (and most are worse) at providing a service to the customer. The NHS has record amounts being spent and it's falling apart in front of us. The idea that all we need to do is chuck a few more billions at the public sector is laughable.. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 5, 2023 22:21:51 GMT
They don't piss tax payers money against the wall to the lesser extent that the UK does...Take Sweden for instance yep they are woke but the swedes still enjoy free child care for those mothers who want to work and they have a health system that works... Child care in this country is a disgrace and a barrier to working for many. I think that we can both agree there. But then the point is how would we be able to replicate it without having higher taxes to pay for it? Well as the Nordic countries have been mentioned I assume you would support Nordic levels of taxation - so raising the VAT rate to 25% would be a good idea? |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 5, 2023 22:22:39 GMT
Higher taxation does not necessarily make people or society poorer, because people have better public services, better public transport, CHEAPER public transport, better pensions. Who are you trying to kid? - we have the highest public spending in decades and no government service is any better (and most are worse) at providing a service to the customer. The NHS has record amounts being spent and it's falling apart in front of us. The idea that all we need to do is chuck a few more billions at the public sector is laughable.. You keep repeating that without once admitting it due to Covid and the war. Just before Covid in 2019 UK spending was the same as in 2014. I thought given long enough you might say this yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 5, 2023 22:24:19 GMT
Who are you trying to kid? - we have the highest public spending in decades and no government service is any better (and most are worse) at providing a service to the customer. The NHS has record amounts being spent and it's falling apart in front of us. The idea that all we need to do is chuck a few more billions at the public sector is laughable.. You keep repeating that without once admitting it due to Covid and the war. Just before Covid in 2019 UK spending was the same as in 2014. I thought given long enough you might say this yourself. It's 2023 - Covid is over. You cannot keep blaming the failures of the public sector on covid forever. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 5, 2023 22:34:01 GMT
You keep repeating that without once admitting it due to Covid and the war. Just before Covid in 2019 UK spending was the same as in 2014. I thought given long enough you might say this yourself. It's 2023 - Covid is over. You cannot keep blaming the failures of the public sector on covid forever. So you don't deny my words. And I can claim the huge costs of Covid and paying 30% of peoples electricity bills is the reason that government spending is at an all time high. You and I both know that's true, but are you honest enough to admit it? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 5, 2023 22:48:13 GMT
It's 2023 - Covid is over. You cannot keep blaming the failures of the public sector on covid forever. So you don't deny my words. And I can claim the huge costs of Covid and paying 30% of peoples electricity bills is the reason that government spending is at an all time high. You and I both know that's true, but are you honest enough to admit it? Public spending was rising before Covid and Ukraine - only WW2 has seen higher public spending  |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Feb 6, 2023 10:28:33 GMT
What if the government provided the money, but others made the decisions? A government bank. We already have banks. I can see some role for a government 'people's deposit' function, but not much else You aren't suggesting the government taxes people and they get their money back by taking out a loan? lol Yet many countries like Germany invest in business quite successfully. And to be honest, using the Soviet Union as an example is not very persuasive. Like using Genghis Khan as an example of capitalism failing. The word invest is really a misnomer here. A government can't really invest because the government can't fulfil the role of an investor. A government hands out favours to its clients, it can't act in its own interests because there is no person who is the government. Germany has a low debt level (as a government goal) and has used its cost advantage (not providing its own defence) to become a net beneficiary of the EU machine. These chickens will come home to roost in the sense that these advantages will dissolve as those currently paying for them will eventually find a way not to. Btw Germany's real economic miracle is now decades in the past and was not marked by government intervention but by government having a deliberate policy of getting out of the way (ie extreme economic liberalism). The comparison with the soviet union is not unwarranted. If you pursue your philosophy of loading up our national debt so you can invest in your dreams, you will eventually create something like the soviet union. We are already halfway there so you wouldn't have to disempower the people much more to take us over the cliff. You can see this trend in much left wing thought - the tactic is to argue for a situation where people have less choice and the cumulative effect of these steps is to increase compliance because nobody can argue or offer an alternative. You turn the population into helpless vegetables and insist they sit quietly at your table or they wont get fed. |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Feb 6, 2023 10:34:12 GMT
Child care in this country is a disgrace and a barrier to working for many. I think that we can both agree there. But then the point is how would we be able to replicate it without having higher taxes to pay for it?Spend the money on what it was intended for... People only have babies they can afford rather than as many as they want and expect the taxpayer to fund and look after |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 6, 2023 11:27:19 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Feb 6, 2023 11:32:32 GMT
It does seem rather bewildering why people who can't afford to feed or clothe their kids blame the system, it's not the fault of the system that people had kids which they can't afford.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Feb 6, 2023 12:48:20 GMT
It does seem rather bewildering why people who can't afford to feed or clothe their kids blame the system, it's not the fault of the system that people had kids which they can't afford. Doesn't that depend on whether "the system" is depressing income and wages? |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 6, 2023 12:50:30 GMT
It does seem rather bewildering why people who can't afford to feed or clothe their kids blame the system, it's not the fault of the system that people had kids which they can't afford. Doesn't that depend on whether "the system" is depressing income and wages? Many of these single mums use it as a career choice……..Several kids and all by different fathers FFS. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Feb 6, 2023 13:04:42 GMT
It does seem rather bewildering why people who can't afford to feed or clothe their kids blame the system, it's not the fault of the system that people had kids which they can't afford. Doesn't that depend on whether "the system" is depressing income and wages? That's why the introduced 'family tax credits', it ensures no one falls below the 'poverty line', so you have to ask yourself are some people living beyond their means.
How much money do you need to be above the poverty line UK?
A single person needs to earn £25,500 a year to reach a minimum acceptable standard of living in April 2022. A couple with two children needs to earn £43,400 between them.
Why wouldn't a 'couple' be in more than £43,000 'combined'?
Single parents also claim single parent tax credits, plus child benefit and other perks, I think the system if any thing is rather over generous with tax payers money supporting other people's children.
|
|
