|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 2, 2024 15:41:18 GMT
Labour has taxed the ‘ working people’ albeit indirectly . Small business owners like Zany can see it and feel it but the ones at the bottom of the pile such as Mr AngryBenn and the cut and paste monkey can hardly feel any pain at all. This is the essence of the Labour Party. I don't want the pain switched to our poorest. I want it switched to our richest. For me there is a price for living in this beautiful temperate country and it should be based on ability to pay. If you got rich here its because you are living in a safe, healthy, educated, lawful, temperate, well off country. If you don't want to pay for that then feel free to setup in Mexico, but put a bit aside to pay the ransom for your children and the armed guards on your gates. Interesting notion. Doesn't the market value of being in the uk show up in the price of its land (ie the market price of being here)? If that's the value government provides, then wouldn't it make sense for the market payments for land to go to government? |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Nov 2, 2024 16:09:27 GMT
You used the word ''endured '' endure /ɪnˈdjʊə,ɛnˈdjʊə/ verb 1. suffer (something painful or difficult) patiently. "it seemed impossible that anyone could endure such pain" And you used the word "coasted". And they are not the same.
Coast:
to progress or succeed without any effort or difficulty
ie the exact opposite of what you just posted.
So you were factually incorrect. Yet again.  I can argue semantics all day long but it's boring and I've better things to do and there's nothing made up in my post , it's all factual You ''endured'' ie suffered patiently two sides of the same coin You and Bean try to argue ''understaffing '' and so called recruitment difficulties - why then are some 300 completely new public sector jobs being ''invented'' every day ? In my view at least a third of all 6 million public sector workers could be fired without anyone noticing any difference |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 2, 2024 16:34:49 GMT
I don't want the pain switched to our poorest. I want it switched to our richest. For me there is a price for living in this beautiful temperate country and it should be based on ability to pay. If you got rich here its because you are living in a safe, healthy, educated, lawful, temperate, well off country. If you don't want to pay for that then feel free to setup in Mexico, but put a bit aside to pay the ransom for your children and the armed guards on your gates. Interesting notion. Doesn't the market value of being in the uk show up in the price of its land (ie the market price of being here)? If that's the value government provides, then wouldn't it make sense for the market payments for land to go to government? Maybe, though I don't think the two are linked in that way. Land in America and Europe is much cheaper as a rule, but their economies equal our better ours. We do have a peculiar situation in which our richest historically acquired land, and land is all many of them have left now that they no longer pillage other countries for wealth. So they want land to keep a high value so they can sell a few acres for building for a few million quid and eek out the estates life. Oxford and Cambridge colleges alone own 126,000 acres (4 times the size of greater Manchester) Estimated value £21Bn, but that's with its current use, as each piece becomes building land it becomes 38 times more expensive. You begin to see why they want building land restricted. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 2, 2024 17:26:31 GMT
That values Oxbridge's land holdings at around £170K per acre. Just for comparison, we bought an acre of farmland in rural France in 2022 for the equivalent of £65K.
With planning permission I'd expect it to sell for 5 or 6 times what we paid, not 38 times. We paid £120K for a half-acre plot with building permits ten years ago.
There's something very odd about land prices in Britain which has nothing to do with scarcity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 2, 2024 17:49:43 GMT
Interesting notion. Doesn't the market value of being in the uk show up in the price of its land (ie the market price of being here)? If that's the value government provides, then wouldn't it make sense for the market payments for land to go to government? Maybe, though I don't think the two are linked in that way. Land in America and Europe is much cheaper as a rule, but their economies equal our better ours. I think you may have misinterpreted what i was saying. I didn't say any particular piece of land must be more expensive than another, but rather that any (all) value the government adds will appear in the value of the territory it governs - ie the market value of being in that governance |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Nov 2, 2024 18:05:44 GMT
Yep, you're wrong. I don't deliver equality and diversity courses. There is a course which is compulsory, but it's delivered as an online course which takes about half an hour. The cost is negligible. The training I do is mostly technical, council tax, council tax support and housing benefit are my specialities. I have also delivered training for other council services such as parking and schools admissions, plus some additional customer care training. I hope you don't see any of that as "bunce". As for your comment about lack of accountability, again showing your ignorance. I'll be honest, I'm not sure if you're just on a wind up here? Training for parking? What on earth does that mean? You train council traffic ''wardens''/using ticket machines for council workers/emptying ticket machines/how to lower a barrier? That's certainly bunce if a car park worker can't learn the role in a 10 minute explanation on their first morning . So you train on house related benefits - again that can't involve anything more than following a simple crib sheet and signposting if necessary. Customer care training? Maybe that's why it takes an ignored email then three phone calls and speaking to five staff to order a recycling bin from my local council ? Whichever council you work at must have money to burn . Only ones on a wind up are those who like to pretend the average public sector worker is wholly productive , accountable , fully deserving of their gold plated pensions, all working their socks off , underpaid , understaffed and unappreciated and that they are not completely funded by the hard pressed private sector You know nothing. You claim that your position is not based on ignorance. But the more you say the less you appear to know. You're just on a wind up. Fair play, you had me going for a while. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 2, 2024 18:12:57 GMT
Interesting snippet from the OBR assessment of the Budget - the Tax Burden is now going to be higher than it was in 1945 at the end of WW2. Must admit - I'm left wondering what we are getting for this investment. I'm not surprised, the NHS provides vastly more services than it did at its conception. I guess the ever repeated question is what (Aside from diversity managers and efficiency) you would be willing to give up. I do wonder how much could be saved by letting the elderly die when their time is up. My mum is 93, she no longer remembers any of her family, she is perpetually confused and scared, asking to see my Dad who died 6 years ago. She feels ill all the time and has permanent sores on her legs and now a bad reaction to antibiotics. My God, I hope by the time I reach that age we have become civilised enough not to let people suffer like this. Well the NHS has been a financial disaster zone since it's inception - perhaps after 75 years it's time to have a look at what works in other countries. But we all know that is not going to happen - Labour have just shovelled in yet another £22 Billion with no thought of reform or productivity targets. Looks like we will just have to live with a second rate service. It's not surprising that a lot of Doctors and Nurses are fleeing to Australia with it's health system that costs less than the NHS yet performs better. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Nov 2, 2024 18:15:27 GMT
Labour have just shovelled in yet another £22 Billion with no thought of reform or productivity targets. Did you actually watch the budget? That's just factually wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 2, 2024 18:15:34 GMT
That values Oxbridge's land holdings at around £170K per acre. Just for comparison, we bought an acre of farmland in rural France in 2022 for the equivalent of £65K. With planning permission I'd expect it to sell for 5 or 6 times what we paid, not 38 times. We paid £120K for a half-acre plot with building permits ten years ago. There's something very odd about land prices in Britain which has nothing to do with scarcity. Hey Dan Good to see you. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 2, 2024 18:19:23 GMT
Maybe, though I don't think the two are linked in that way. Land in America and Europe is much cheaper as a rule, but their economies equal our better ours. I think you may have misinterpreted what i was saying. I didn't say any particular piece of land must be more expensive than another, but rather that any (all) value the government adds will appear in the value of the territory it governs - ie the market value of being in that governanceI did get you, though I wandered off down a different path. Do I think a country/governments worth is based on the value of all its land, yes in a way among many other things, mostly trust. Our credit score mostly. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Nov 2, 2024 18:23:13 GMT
Yep, you're wrong. I don't deliver equality and diversity courses. There is a course which is compulsory, but it's delivered as an online course which takes about half an hour. The cost is negligible. The training I do is mostly technical, council tax, council tax support and housing benefit are my specialities. I have also delivered training for other council services such as parking and schools admissions, plus some additional customer care training. I hope you don't see any of that as "bunce". As for your comment about lack of accountability, again showing your ignorance. I'll be honest, I'm not sure if you're just on a wind up here? Training for parking? What on earth does that mean? You train council traffic ''wardens''/using ticket machines for council workers/emptying ticket machines/how to lower a barrier? That's certainly bunce if a car park worker can't learn the role in a 10 minute explanation on their first morning . So you train on house related benefits - again that can't involve anything more than following a simple crib sheet and signposting if necessary. Customer care training? Maybe that's why it takes an ignored email then three phone calls and speaking to five staff to order a recycling bin from my local council ? Whichever council you work at must have money to burn . Only ones on a wind up are those who like to pretend the average public sector worker is wholly productive , accountable , fully deserving of their gold plated pensions, all working their socks off , underpaid , understaffed and unappreciated and that they are not completely funded by the hard pressed private sector Half the fucking traffic wardens down here wouldn't be able to write their name un-assited... |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 2, 2024 18:23:53 GMT
Training for parking? What on earth does that mean? You train council traffic ''wardens''/using ticket machines for council workers/emptying ticket machines/how to lower a barrier? That's certainly bunce if a car park worker can't learn the role in a 10 minute explanation on their first morning . So you train on house related benefits - again that can't involve anything more than following a simple crib sheet and signposting if necessary. Customer care training? Maybe that's why it takes an ignored email then three phone calls and speaking to five staff to order a recycling bin from my local council ? Whichever council you work at must have money to burn . Only ones on a wind up are those who like to pretend the average public sector worker is wholly productive , accountable , fully deserving of their gold plated pensions, all working their socks off , underpaid , understaffed and unappreciated and that they are not completely funded by the hard pressed private sector You know nothing. You claim that your position is not based on ignorance. But the more you say the less you appear to know. You're just on a wind up. Fair play, you had me going for a while. I wonder how many people in the private sector would think it acceptable to describe their jobs in the way public workers are supposed accept. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Nov 2, 2024 18:30:20 GMT
You know nothing. You claim that your position is not based on ignorance. But the more you say the less you appear to know. You're just on a wind up. Fair play, you had me going for a while. I wonder how many people in the private sector would think it acceptable to describe their jobs in the way public workers are supposed accept. People in the private sector are not as thin skinned zany...Whatabout calling carpenters chippys, electricians sparks or plumbers honey dippers? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 2, 2024 18:39:25 GMT
Seems the public have spoken...  |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 2, 2024 18:41:26 GMT
Labour have just shovelled in yet another £22 Billion with no thought of reform or productivity targets. Did you actually watch the budget? That's just factually wrong. Tell that Kings Fund - they seem to disagree with you. In her budget speech, the Chancellor spoke about a £22.6 billion cash injection for the NHS – this is the difference between the £177.9 billion day-to-day spending (DHSC RDEL) in 2023/24, and the new planned spending of £200.5 billion by 2025/26. This represents a 3.4% average annual increase in real terms compared to 2023/24. Within this, NHS England’s budget will rise by 4.0% over the period ).
link
|
|
