Happy BoJo Day!

With separate forums for other sports, TV and films and General chat you can talk about whatever takes your fancy
User avatar
NvH
The Ton Club
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:16 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by NvH » Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:18 pm

Tommy Thompson votes Labour. He's one of the thickest people I've ever come across.

Just saying, like.

User avatar
Paddy McGinty
International
Posts: 24383
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 11:01 am
Contact:

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by Paddy McGinty » Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:52 pm

NvH wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:17 pm
Paddy McGinty wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:52 am
You can see now why it pays to keep the masses uneducated.........
This is probably the first general election where the people from shithole towns have voted Conservative. As they want to leave the EU and only the Conservatives would respect the vote (I voted remain but democracy is important to me. It's just one of many reasons that Western Civilization is not just different from Middle Eastern and African civilization but better).

I suppose you also called them uneducated when they kept voting Labour despite their poor towns and cities not getting any wealthier? Of course not.
They did better when Labour was in power, NHS was a lot better in the Blair years (but I'm no fan of his private initiatives), you seem to forget that the Tories have been in power for a decade.......... are the poor ex-labour voters all living in mansions now? :DDD: :DDD:

It was under Tory rule that they became so desperate that they voted to leave the EU. Their plight was not being in the EU but being uneducated and under the austerity of the Tory government.

Your memory is very hit and miss....... :DDD:
"What a Fecking Catastrophe!!"

User avatar
NvH
The Ton Club
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:16 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by NvH » Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:10 pm

Paddy McGinty wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:52 pm
NvH wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:17 pm
Paddy McGinty wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:52 am
You can see now why it pays to keep the masses uneducated.........
This is probably the first general election where the people from shithole towns have voted Conservative. As they want to leave the EU and only the Conservatives would respect the vote (I voted remain but democracy is important to me. It's just one of many reasons that Western Civilization is not just different from Middle Eastern and African civilization but better).

I suppose you also called them uneducated when they kept voting Labour despite their poor towns and cities not getting any wealthier? Of course not.
They did better when Labour was in power, NHS was a lot better in the Blair years (but I'm no fan of his private initiatives), you seem to forget that the Tories have been in power for a decade.......... are the poor ex-labour voters all living in mansions now? :DDD: :DDD:

It was under Tory rule that they became so desperate that they voted to leave the EU. Their plight was not being in the EU but being uneducated and under the austerity of the Tory government.

Your memory is very hit and miss....... :DDD:
How did they do better? I live not too far away from very deprived towns and villages that have been that way as long as I can remember. Labour did nothing for them. As for the mansions, that's a strawman not worthy of a response.

It was originally Labour who were against the EEC btw. That was despite Britain being one of the poorest countries in Western EUrope at the time and therefore any common market would have been (and was) beneficial to them. People hate Thatcher but she sure did a better job than Callaghan on the economy. Even Major's govt already had 3 years of solid economic growth before Blair took over (although I did agree with that decision as we needed a change).

We've only had 1 referendum on the EU in my lifetime, so it's stupid to associate it with Tory rule. As I've pointed out in this and other threads, even those on low-middle incomes are at least as well off under Conservatives as Labour (in fact, slightly better off).

What are the traditional Conservative heartlands? Middle-class, right? And how do people become middle class? Hmm by being university educated and having a good job and a decent home in a nice neighbourhood. And Labour voters have the nerve to call us stupid? Jeremy Corbyn got two E grades at A-level, now that's what I call stupid. Do you know how difficult it is to do that badly? Compare his education and intellect with Johnson.

As for the improvements in the NHS, I may concede that point (I have no evidence for it, but they did increase spending), unfortunately Gordon Brown sold a shitload of our gold reserves when gold was at a low price. Labour also often overspent on the budget, so I guess the future generations will have to pay for his largesse. Not difficult to improve public spending when you spend more than you bring in.

User avatar
Paddy McGinty
International
Posts: 24383
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 11:01 am
Contact:

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by Paddy McGinty » Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:44 pm

NvH wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:10 pm
Paddy McGinty wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:52 pm
NvH wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:17 pm
Paddy McGinty wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:52 am
You can see now why it pays to keep the masses uneducated.........
This is probably the first general election where the people from shithole towns have voted Conservative. As they want to leave the EU and only the Conservatives would respect the vote (I voted remain but democracy is important to me. It's just one of many reasons that Western Civilization is not just different from Middle Eastern and African civilization but better).

I suppose you also called them uneducated when they kept voting Labour despite their poor towns and cities not getting any wealthier? Of course not.
They did better when Labour was in power, NHS was a lot better in the Blair years (but I'm no fan of his private initiatives), you seem to forget that the Tories have been in power for a decade.......... are the poor ex-labour voters all living in mansions now? :DDD: :DDD:

It was under Tory rule that they became so desperate that they voted to leave the EU. Their plight was not being in the EU but being uneducated and under the austerity of the Tory government.

Your memory is very hit and miss....... :DDD:
How did they do better? I live not too far away from very deprived towns and villages that have been that way as long as I can remember. Labour did nothing for them. As for the mansions, that's a strawman not worthy of a response.

It was originally Labour who were against the EEC btw. That was despite Britain being one of the poorest countries in Western EUrope at the time and therefore any common market would have been (and was) beneficial to them. People hate Thatcher but she sure did a better job than Callaghan on the economy. Even Major's govt already had 3 years of solid economic growth before Blair took over (although I did agree with that decision as we needed a change).

We've only had 1 referendum on the EU in my lifetime, so it's stupid to associate it with Tory rule. As I've pointed out in this and other threads, even those on low-middle incomes are at least as well off under Conservatives as Labour (in fact, slightly better off).

What are the traditional Conservative heartlands? Middle-class, right? And how do people become middle class? Hmm by being university educated and having a good job and a decent home in a nice neighbourhood. And Labour voters have the nerve to call us stupid? Jeremy Corbyn got two E grades at A-level, now that's what I call stupid. Do you know how difficult it is to do that badly? Compare his education and intellect with Johnson.

As for the improvements in the NHS, I may concede that point (I have no evidence for it, but they did increase spending), unfortunately Gordon Brown sold a shitload of our gold reserves when gold was at a low price. Labour also often overspent on the budget, so I guess the future generations will have to pay for his largesse. Not difficult to improve public spending when you spend more than you bring in.
What a load of drivel, we've had two referendums now, not one. Poor people are not better off under a tory Government. They've had their benefits eroded and many have to visit food banks even though they are working. Hardly any can get a foot on the housing ladder even though mortgages are at an all time low.

Maggie sold almost all our assets off to make a quick buck for a few investors, where's all that revenue now? Instead of investing in our country she sold it off, one of the biggest cons in history. Look at the private rail companies now, expensive and absolutely shit yet all the while the shareholders are drawing profits while the taxpayer continues to bail them out. You need to get a grasp of what's actually going on around you.

Gordon Brown was unlucky to inherit the result of Thatchers deregulation of the financial sector, something Mogg and his friends wish to resume.
"What a Fecking Catastrophe!!"

User avatar
NvH
The Ton Club
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:16 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by NvH » Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:51 pm

Paddy McGinty wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:44 pm
NvH wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:10 pm
Paddy McGinty wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:52 pm
NvH wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:17 pm
Paddy McGinty wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:52 am
You can see now why it pays to keep the masses uneducated.........
This is probably the first general election where the people from shithole towns have voted Conservative. As they want to leave the EU and only the Conservatives would respect the vote (I voted remain but democracy is important to me. It's just one of many reasons that Western Civilization is not just different from Middle Eastern and African civilization but better).

I suppose you also called them uneducated when they kept voting Labour despite their poor towns and cities not getting any wealthier? Of course not.
They did better when Labour was in power, NHS was a lot better in the Blair years (but I'm no fan of his private initiatives), you seem to forget that the Tories have been in power for a decade.......... are the poor ex-labour voters all living in mansions now? :DDD: :DDD:

It was under Tory rule that they became so desperate that they voted to leave the EU. Their plight was not being in the EU but being uneducated and under the austerity of the Tory government.

Your memory is very hit and miss....... :DDD:
How did they do better? I live not too far away from very deprived towns and villages that have been that way as long as I can remember. Labour did nothing for them. As for the mansions, that's a strawman not worthy of a response.

It was originally Labour who were against the EEC btw. That was despite Britain being one of the poorest countries in Western EUrope at the time and therefore any common market would have been (and was) beneficial to them. People hate Thatcher but she sure did a better job than Callaghan on the economy. Even Major's govt already had 3 years of solid economic growth before Blair took over (although I did agree with that decision as we needed a change).

We've only had 1 referendum on the EU in my lifetime, so it's stupid to associate it with Tory rule. As I've pointed out in this and other threads, even those on low-middle incomes are at least as well off under Conservatives as Labour (in fact, slightly better off).

What are the traditional Conservative heartlands? Middle-class, right? And how do people become middle class? Hmm by being university educated and having a good job and a decent home in a nice neighbourhood. And Labour voters have the nerve to call us stupid? Jeremy Corbyn got two E grades at A-level, now that's what I call stupid. Do you know how difficult it is to do that badly? Compare his education and intellect with Johnson.

As for the improvements in the NHS, I may concede that point (I have no evidence for it, but they did increase spending), unfortunately Gordon Brown sold a shitload of our gold reserves when gold was at a low price. Labour also often overspent on the budget, so I guess the future generations will have to pay for his largesse. Not difficult to improve public spending when you spend more than you bring in.
What a load of drivel, we've had two referendums now, not one. Poor people are not better off under a tory Government. They've had their benefits eroded and many have to visit food banks even though they are working. Hardly any can get a foot on the housing ladder even though mortgages are at an all time low.

Maggie sold almost all our assets off to make a quick buck for a few investors, where's all that revenue now? Instead of investing in our country she sold it off, one of the biggest cons in history. Look at the private rail companies now, expensive and absolutely shit yet all the while the shareholders are drawing profits while the taxpayer continues to bail them out. You need to get a grasp of what's actually going on around you.

Gordon Brown was unlucky to inherit the result of Thatchers deregulation of the financial sector, something Mogg and his friends wish to resume.
Okay, this is a more sensible post (despite the deliberate misquoting of my words). Rightly so as it was the only "centrist" Labour govt we have ever had so it didn't really annoy me when they won in 97 and 2001. It was no victory for the left, that's for sure!

We've had one referendum on the EU in my lifetime, that's what I said. The first one was only a couple of years after we joined. 1975, where Labour took no official position (a bit like in 2016 where Corbyn was hardly enthusiastic about remaining), although they were generally against it. The Conservatives, SDLP and Liberals were for it, while Plaid Cymru and the SNP were against staying in. Amusing how things change. Tony Benn said we'd lost 1/2 million jobs as a result of joining the common market. Thirty years later you had people in the same party saying we'd lose 1 million jobs if we left. Of course these people could never explain WHICH jobs were or would be lost.

My point about people on low-middle incomes being as well off (or better) under this govt. than a Labour govt. has been documented in one of the threads with evidence. I didn't just pull it out of my arse, neither was I talking about people in poverty (although there were plenty of people in poverty during Labour's time in charge too - the gap between rich and poor didn't narrow). I meant that if you earn an average or below average salary, you will pay slightly less in PAYE+NI than under the Lib Dems and Labour. So the Conservatives are not just for billionaires or even millionaires.

As for the increase in public spending, It's easy to spend more money on services when you spend money you don't have. It's like having a credit card and buying a load of goods you know you'll never actually have to pay for. Brown also cost the country billions with his sale of half of our gold reserves. But I'll give you credit that in England at least (not sure I can say the same for Wales), the hospitals did improve even if our schools are still shit.

I suppose you've forgotten all about the stealth taxes that Labour snuck in? The council tax hikes which gave people a massive increase in their council tax bill over a decade for umm no improvement in services whatsoever. Also the way it's done is extremely unfair. On the size of your house (which you live in) and the neighbourhood rather than your means. People hated the Poll Tax but for my family it was better (I'm not saying it's a good idea, just that not everything is so clear).

Gordon Brown inherited a growing economy and falling unemployment. Nobody in their right mind can say that Cameron inherited a better UK than he did (memos from the previous govt' workers saying "sorry the money has all gone!") didn't help endear Labour to people at the time.

Brown had 10 years as chancellor to reverse Thatcher's deregulation (not that all of her policies were aiding the financial sector, some did and other didn't) and didn't. In fact, he admitted to listening to the bankers when he first became chancellor when they said they wanted less regulation, not more. So he actually made the situation worse.

He also made a monumental blunder when he set up the Financial Services Authority (he even admits this himself). It did nothing to stop the largesse in the financial sector and frankly wasn't manifestly set up to do anything of the sort. It was useless at helping consumers who had been missold PPI and other financial services by the banks. In fact, its record as one of the worst regulatory bodies ever to have existed will stand for some time. It's a shame because his decision to defer to the Bank of England when setting interest rates was an excellent one which stopped a repeat of Black Wednesday.

I agree with you that our energy companies should never have been sold off. We're getting ripped off. However, I remember British Rail and have read all about British Leyland *shudder* and believe business professionals are far more qualified to run big business than politicians. So generally I'm for privatisation except for essentials like water, electricity, etc.

All that being said, I do believe Blair and Brown took a moderate, rational approach to government, which is far more than we'd get with Corbyn. So the choice was too easy this time.

User avatar
DavidOwen67
International
Posts: 11032
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:29 am
Location: Nantwich
Contact:

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by DavidOwen67 » Tue Feb 11, 2020 5:11 pm

Still no new hospitals springing up down our way.

Rout
International
Posts: 8260
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by Rout » Tue Feb 11, 2020 5:59 pm


NvH wrote:
Paddy McGinty wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:44 pm
NvH wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:10 pm
Paddy McGinty wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:52 pm
NvH wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:17 pm


This is probably the first general election where the people from shithole towns have voted Conservative. As they want to leave the EU and only the Conservatives would respect the vote (I voted remain but democracy is important to me. It's just one of many reasons that Western Civilization is not just different from Middle Eastern and African civilization but better).

I suppose you also called them uneducated when they kept voting Labour despite their poor towns and cities not getting any wealthier? Of course not.
They did better when Labour was in power, NHS was a lot better in the Blair years (but I'm no fan of his private initiatives), you seem to forget that the Tories have been in power for a decade.......... are the poor ex-labour voters all living in mansions now? :DDD: :DDD:

It was under Tory rule that they became so desperate that they voted to leave the EU. Their plight was not being in the EU but being uneducated and under the austerity of the Tory government.

Your memory is very hit and miss....... :DDD:
How did they do better? I live not too far away from very deprived towns and villages that have been that way as long as I can remember. Labour did nothing for them. As for the mansions, that's a strawman not worthy of a response.

It was originally Labour who were against the EEC btw. That was despite Britain being one of the poorest countries in Western EUrope at the time and therefore any common market would have been (and was) beneficial to them. People hate Thatcher but she sure did a better job than Callaghan on the economy. Even Major's govt already had 3 years of solid economic growth before Blair took over (although I did agree with that decision as we needed a change).

We've only had 1 referendum on the EU in my lifetime, so it's stupid to associate it with Tory rule. As I've pointed out in this and other threads, even those on low-middle incomes are at least as well off under Conservatives as Labour (in fact, slightly better off).

What are the traditional Conservative heartlands? Middle-class, right? And how do people become middle class? Hmm by being university educated and having a good job and a decent home in a nice neighbourhood. And Labour voters have the nerve to call us stupid? Jeremy Corbyn got two E grades at A-level, now that's what I call stupid. Do you know how difficult it is to do that badly? Compare his education and intellect with Johnson.

As for the improvements in the NHS, I may concede that point (I have no evidence for it, but they did increase spending), unfortunately Gordon Brown sold a shitload of our gold reserves when gold was at a low price. Labour also often overspent on the budget, so I guess the future generations will have to pay for his largesse. Not difficult to improve public spending when you spend more than you bring in.
What a load of drivel, we've had two referendums now, not one. Poor people are not better off under a tory Government. They've had their benefits eroded and many have to visit food banks even though they are working. Hardly any can get a foot on the housing ladder even though mortgages are at an all time low.

Maggie sold almost all our assets off to make a quick buck for a few investors, where's all that revenue now? Instead of investing in our country she sold it off, one of the biggest cons in history. Look at the private rail companies now, expensive and absolutely shit yet all the while the shareholders are drawing profits while the taxpayer continues to bail them out. You need to get a grasp of what's actually going on around you.

Gordon Brown was unlucky to inherit the result of Thatchers deregulation of the financial sector, something Mogg and his friends wish to resume.
My point about people on low-middle incomes being as well off (or better) under this govt. than a Labour govt. has been documented in one of the threads with evidence. I didn't just pull it out of my arse, neither was I talking about people in poverty (although there were plenty of people in poverty during Labour's time in charge too - the gap between rich and poor didn't narrow). I meant that if you earn an average or below average salary, you will pay slightly less in PAYE+NI than under the Lib Dems and Labour. So the Conservatives are not just for billionaires or even millionaires.
Because its classic Conservative/Republican tactics to cut taxes. Your figures show the average man will be pennies better off on relative terms. Virtually unnoticeable to most people. But the super rich will benefit much more.

The country is on its arse financially because there isnt enough money to go around anymore because a small few have so much of it. Money is finite.

Cutting taxes given the state of every single department that require tax money is insanity. Rich people dont care if public services are underfunded because they dont need or use them. They have private health, use private schools, have their own security and so on. So they buy votes on tax cuts, but it's not them that suffer. It's you when you need the health service or when your house gets broken into and the cops dont have the man power to even visit your house.

"Better off" to me is not saving a few pennies on your wage but every public service being a lot lot worse.
Last edited by Rout on Tue Feb 11, 2020 5:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ILAD
Superleague Player
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:02 pm

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by ILAD » Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:54 pm

*your
Des Jacklin: ‘People say the BDO can’t compete with the PDC, but that is the biggest load of crap in the world’

Rout
International
Posts: 8260
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by Rout » Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:58 pm

ILAD wrote:*your
Is that you wookiee?

Rout
International
Posts: 8260
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by Rout » Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:39 pm

NvH wrote:
Sat Feb 08, 2020 3:24 am
If we move to our island, and we tax people's income at anything above 50%, people will simply move to a country where they aren't taxed so badly.

This is utter rubbish. The countries that always come out on top of studies and research of the happiest places to live are in Scandanavia. Sweden, Denmark and Finland all have more Billionaires per capita than us and the USA. They all also have higher rates of income tax in the top band. Between 55-60%, and the amount you need to earn to fall into that top band is lower than our and the USA. Their lowest rates of income tax are much higher than ours too. And anyone who has ever been to these places will tell you their public services and standard of living puts ours to shame.

You do realise that from 1945-1979 our system didn't really change, right? From Attlee to Callaghan, (even under Conservative govt's like Ted Heath) we kept our socialist ways and we were so broke in the 1970s that we needed a bailout from the IMF as if we were fekkin Greece!

In 1945 the rate was 90%+, by the early 70s it had dipped to 75%. So again, untrue. Also, recessions and income tax rates are not in total co-ordination.

Billionaires have such little impact on my life, the same as some kid in Africa. They're at opposite ends of the scale, but neither one affects me in the slightest.

This would only be true if money was infinite. Its not. There's only so much to go around. Think of a game of monopoly. The end game is that one person ends up with everything and everyone else nothing. Its not one guy gets richer and everyone else gets richer through "trickle down" economics like you keep getting lied to about, is it? The basic principle is exactly the same. If a small few people have half the worlds wealth, thats less for everyone else. Really, really simple.
Replies in bold. Probably totally pointless, but hey ho.

ChrisW
International
Posts: 27981
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:14 pm
Location: Maastricht

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by ChrisW » Tue Feb 11, 2020 10:40 pm

I understand now with the monopoly comparison.

User avatar
NvH
The Ton Club
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:16 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by NvH » Wed Feb 12, 2020 5:32 am

Rout wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:39 pm
NvH wrote:
Sat Feb 08, 2020 3:24 am
If we move to our island, and we tax people's income at anything above 50%, people will simply move to a country where they aren't taxed so badly.

This is utter rubbish. The countries that always come out on top of studies and research of the happiest places to live are in Scandanavia. Sweden, Denmark and Finland all have more Billionaires per capita than us and the USA. They all also have higher rates of income tax in the top band. Between 55-60%, and the amount you need to earn to fall into that top band is lower than our and the USA. Their lowest rates of income tax are much higher than ours too. And anyone who has ever been to these places will tell you their public services and standard of living puts ours to shame.

You do realise that from 1945-1979 our system didn't really change, right? From Attlee to Callaghan, (even under Conservative govt's like Ted Heath) we kept our socialist ways and we were so broke in the 1970s that we needed a bailout from the IMF as if we were fekkin Greece!

In 1945 the rate was 90%+, by the early 70s it had dipped to 75%. So again, untrue. Also, recessions and income tax rates are not in total co-ordination.

Billionaires have such little impact on my life, the same as some kid in Africa. They're at opposite ends of the scale, but neither one affects me in the slightest.

This would only be true if money was infinite. Its not. There's only so much to go around. Think of a game of monopoly. The end game is that one person ends up with everything and everyone else nothing. Its not one guy gets richer and everyone else gets richer through "trickle down" economics like you keep getting lied to about, is it? The basic principle is exactly the same. If a small few people have half the worlds wealth, thats less for everyone else. Really, really simple.
Replies in bold. Probably totally pointless, but hey ho.
No, not pointless. You make some good arguments. Although I think there's been a little misunderstanding.

1) It's not bollocks! Ever heard of the brain drain from Europe to the US? Not as bad as it once was, but it's certainly helped the US become a nation of entrepreneurs. And their scientific research is second to none, not to mention silicon valley, a place with which there is little to compare with in Europe. Our best and brightest have been emigrating there for sometime.

Norway is wealthy because for such a tiny nation, it has large oil reserves (you didn't mention Norway but as it's richer than all three countries you mentioned I thought I'd help you out). It's rather easier to have a high GDP per capita when you have a tiny population too. Ireland has low taxes, very generous business rates, all the things you hate. Have you seen its economic growth over the last 5 years? 8.5% a year on average. This is insane for a developed country. So both have completely different systems and both are extremely wealthy. But one has natural resources the other doesn't...

I'll ignore Finland because it's not on the same level as the other Nordic nations - it's more on the level of Germany, UK + France. And because it isn't actually on the Scandinavian peninsula (sorry, couldn't help myself) :P

Sweden is actually struggling a little right now, its currency falling out of its arse and unprecedented levels of violence in places like Malmo (a woman shot dead in the street there recently). I'm going to refrain from saying why I think they're starting to struggle because it's not worth turning this debate into a massive argument. But it is looked down upon by Denmark, make no mistake about that.

Denmark is your best example. Friend of mine works in computer science and earns the equivalent of £7,000 a month. But you know where he shops for his food? Lidl, Aldi, etc. Not because he loves them but because everything is so damn expensive there.

And I, who earn nowhere near as much as he does can afford to shop at Waitrose and M&S from time to time. So yeah you can earn a hell of a lot in Denmark and Norway, but you won't necessarily see an increase in your standard of living. But I do love Denmark, Copenhagen in particular.

But people DO leave countries when income tax amounts get excessive. People do leave when they feel they are being targeted by the politics of envy. People aren't happy when those who are millionaires are telling us to pay more (when they probably pay no tax at all) to help some Africans or Syrians. And we definitely aren't happy when those same rich guys want to increase taxes so that we can never aspire to be where they are!

2) The welfare state was created in the wake of WWII and wasn't seriously tampered with until Thatcher came along. So I stand by my claim of our system being very similar from 1945-1979. It got watered down when the public made it clear they aren't prepared to pay such high taxes. People like to have a better standard of living. Interestingly, Blair did not reverse her reforms.

A lot of people suffered under Thatcher's reforms, but many of us also benefited.. Plenty of people owned a home for the first time, things that used to be unaffordable suddenly weren't.. Yes, many people lost their jobs, but another chunk of the working class were upwardly mobile. The 70s were utterly dreadful for this country so of course the policies needed changing.

3) I've never ever suggested that trickle down economics works. In theory it would, but in practice of course the millionaires spend a much smaller percentage of their income each month than we do. So our money is recycled (for want of a better word) back into the economy, while only a small % of theirs is.

After all, how much money does anyone need for grocery shopping in a week? But no, it''s not quite Monopoly. But I grant you, that's a very good point about there not being an infinite amount of money (unless you want to introduce "people's QE" like Corbyn did at the Labour leadership contest, which is a horrible trick giving people false hope while effectively stealing from savers).

4) Not related to a single point, but to something you've alluded to several times. What on earth is good about people who are struggling on low incomes paying MORE tax? Are you seriously suggesting that things to help the working poor like lower NI contributions and a higher personal allowance are BAD things? Because I can never agree with you there.

User avatar
NvH
The Ton Club
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:16 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by NvH » Wed Feb 12, 2020 5:39 am

BTW our services are not that bad. Example: I was in hospital for a few days a year ago (pretty much to this day), I had plenty of doctors, nurses and other staff at hand. The paramedics were great with me too. I won't go into details but they may have saved my life in a short space of time too. so I was discharged in less than 48 hours. The hospital worked just as well (I'd say better than) as it did under Labour.

And yes, it was the NHS not a private hospital :P

User avatar
Paddy McGinty
International
Posts: 24383
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 11:01 am
Contact:

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by Paddy McGinty » Wed Feb 12, 2020 12:34 pm

NvH wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 5:39 am
BTW our services are not that bad. Example: I was in hospital for a few days a year ago (pretty much to this day), I had plenty of doctors, nurses and other staff at hand. The paramedics were great with me too. I won't go into details but they may have saved my life in a short space of time too. so I was discharged in less than 48 hours. The hospital worked just as well (I'd say better than) as it did under Labour.

And yes, it was the NHS not a private hospital :P
So based on one visit to the hospital in your mind the NHS is fine and hunky dory.

All the Hospital performance in England is at its worst level on record, data shows. Key targets for cancer, hospital care and A&E have been missed for over three years - with delays for hospital care and in A&E hitting their highest levels since both targets were introduced.

Not that bad eh? Some of your replies above are bordering on the delusional.

While Gordon Brown could have sold at a better price, for the vast majority of governments across established economies, there is no real point to holding gold. The purpose of foreign exchange reserves is not for the state to manage wealth on behalf of the country. People should do this for themselves. In my view and others he was right for diversifying the countries assets.

The sell off of British assets by Thatcher was a lot worse.
"What a Fecking Catastrophe!!"

User avatar
NvH
The Ton Club
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:16 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by NvH » Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:59 pm

Paddy McGinty wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 12:34 pm
NvH wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 5:39 am
BTW our services are not that bad. Example: I was in hospital for a few days a year ago (pretty much to this day), I had plenty of doctors, nurses and other staff at hand. The paramedics were great with me too. I won't go into details but they may have saved my life in a short space of time too. so I was discharged in less than 48 hours. The hospital worked just as well (I'd say better than) as it did under Labour.

And yes, it was the NHS not a private hospital :P
So based on one visit to the hospital in your mind the NHS is fine and hunky dory.

All the Hospital performance in England is at its worst level on record, data shows. Key targets for cancer, hospital care and A&E have been missed for over three years - with delays for hospital care and in A&E hitting their highest levels since both targets were introduced.

Not that bad eh? Some of your replies above are bordering on the delusional.

While Gordon Brown could have sold at a better price, for the vast majority of governments across established economies, there is no real point to holding gold. The purpose of foreign exchange reserves is not for the state to manage wealth on behalf of the country. People should do this for themselves. In my view and others he was right for diversifying the countries assets.

The sell off of British assets by Thatcher was a lot worse.
I can only judge on what's in front of me but yes it's anecdotal. And that is taking into account that most of the improvements to the NHS were in England and not Wales. Our waiting times remained pretty bad (although again, I've never experienced anything like this in my life. Whenever I've needed treatment, I've had it). Yes, Labour improved NHS spending massively during their second term, but it wasn't difficult when they were spending more money than they were bringing in. They were treating the country like someone with a high limit credit card who has no intention of paying it back.

Why is there no point in having gold reserves? Certainly makes more sense than selling them on the cheap. Nothing wrong with having assets just in case. Actual assets that are worth something.

The assets that Thatcher sold off were worth very little in the main. If they were so lucrative, why are the train companies still failing? And selling off our car industry (lol do you remember how bad British cars were?) was absolutely the correct decision. We were being embarrassed by the French, Germans and Japanese.

The only mistakes in that area were privatising utility companies like water, gas, electricity, etc. Because the consumer has been screwed big time.

However, most of the assets you speak of were anything but. Just an unnecessary expense.

For example, the coal mines. Firstly, it was a stupid and dangerous job. Secondly, it was bad for the environment (not stating for a minute that she cared about the environment, just stating a fact). Thirdly, it was rarely cost effective to extract the coal (given the machinery, manpower required vs the value of coal by the 80s/90s). Finally, it was running out. Some miners bought out Tower Colliery which isn't too far from me with their redundancy money. The coal lasted little more than a decade.

Anyway, whatever the rights and wrongs of Brown's policies as chancellor (and whatever assets he "diversified"), he left our country in a right mess as PM. Over 56 quarters of consistent economic growth down the pan which we're still recovering from. And all because he made some ridiculous blunders (which has since admitted to) early in his time in office.

And even if I give Brown and Blair some credit for being centrist, and making some wise decisions, we aren't being offered Blair now are we? We were offered Corbyn and his vile anti-semite supporters and gave him a big "fek you". I wonder what socialists like him think of Venezuela these days? They used to praise Venezuela with regularity in the Grauniad. They've gone awfully quiet on that subject for some reason :)

Rout
International
Posts: 8260
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by Rout » Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:50 pm

Which property do you think pays the most council tax?

A 3-bed semi in Hartlepool on sale for £107k

Or

A 10-bed townhouse on Berkeley Sq, Westminster worth £82.5m

User avatar
Paddy McGinty
International
Posts: 24383
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 11:01 am
Contact:

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by Paddy McGinty » Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:06 pm

NvH wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:59 pm
Paddy McGinty wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 12:34 pm
NvH wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 5:39 am
BTW our services are not that bad. Example: I was in hospital for a few days a year ago (pretty much to this day), I had plenty of doctors, nurses and other staff at hand. The paramedics were great with me too. I won't go into details but they may have saved my life in a short space of time too. so I was discharged in less than 48 hours. The hospital worked just as well (I'd say better than) as it did under Labour.

And yes, it was the NHS not a private hospital :P
So based on one visit to the hospital in your mind the NHS is fine and hunky dory.

All the Hospital performance in England is at its worst level on record, data shows. Key targets for cancer, hospital care and A&E have been missed for over three years - with delays for hospital care and in A&E hitting their highest levels since both targets were introduced.

Not that bad eh? Some of your replies above are bordering on the delusional.

While Gordon Brown could have sold at a better price, for the vast majority of governments across established economies, there is no real point to holding gold. The purpose of foreign exchange reserves is not for the state to manage wealth on behalf of the country. People should do this for themselves. In my view and others he was right for diversifying the countries assets.

The sell off of British assets by Thatcher was a lot worse.
I can only judge on what's in front of me but yes it's anecdotal. And that is taking into account that most of the improvements to the NHS were in England and not Wales. Our waiting times remained pretty bad (although again, I've never experienced anything like this in my life. Whenever I've needed treatment, I've had it). Yes, Labour improved NHS spending massively during their second term, but it wasn't difficult when they were spending more money than they were bringing in. They were treating the country like someone with a high limit credit card who has no intention of paying it back.

Why is there no point in having gold reserves? Certainly makes more sense than selling them on the cheap. Nothing wrong with having assets just in case. Actual assets that are worth something.

The assets that Thatcher sold off were worth very little in the main. If they were so lucrative, why are the train companies still failing? And selling off our car industry (lol do you remember how bad British cars were?) was absolutely the correct decision. We were being embarrassed by the French, Germans and Japanese.

The only mistakes in that area were privatising utility companies like water, gas, electricity, etc. Because the consumer has been screwed big time.

However, most of the assets you speak of were anything but. Just an unnecessary expense.

For example, the coal mines. Firstly, it was a stupid and dangerous job. Secondly, it was bad for the environment (not stating for a minute that she cared about the environment, just stating a fact). Thirdly, it was rarely cost effective to extract the coal (given the machinery, manpower required vs the value of coal by the 80s/90s). Finally, it was running out. Some miners bought out Tower Colliery which isn't too far from me with their redundancy money. The coal lasted little more than a decade.

Anyway, whatever the rights and wrongs of Brown's policies as chancellor (and whatever assets he "diversified"), he left our country in a right mess as PM. Over 56 quarters of consistent economic growth down the pan which we're still recovering from. And all because he made some ridiculous blunders (which has since admitted to) early in his time in office.

And even if I give Brown and Blair some credit for being centrist, and making some wise decisions, we aren't being offered Blair now are we? We were offered Corbyn and his vile anti-semite supporters and gave him a big "fek you". I wonder what socialists like him think of Venezuela these days? They used to praise Venezuela with regularity in the Grauniad. They've gone awfully quiet on that subject for some reason :)
You write a lot but most of it is untrue and subjective. I remember how great British cars were, the Jaguar, Rolls Royce, Bentley, Lotus , Morgan, Aston Martin etc. Not forgetting the Triumph, BSA, Norton, Royal Enfield on the motorcycle front. You mention one brief moment in history but forget the many years we dominated. The French car manufacturers had a similar problem but instead of putting people on the doll, invested in their car industry and now they are amongst the top three car groups in the World.

The problem with this country is that it doesn't invest in it's industry and people, preferring to sell off it's assets to foreign investors.
"What a Fecking Catastrophe!!"

J Y Kelly
The Ton Club
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:16 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by J Y Kelly » Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:34 pm

Anyone under 30 who votes Conservative has no soul

Anyone over 30 who votes Labour has no brain
There's a homo fae Fife whom plays the game
and oh what a bummer , Stevie's the name
No man sais he , shall stand in his way
He'll make them bend over, because he is a gay

User avatar
NvH
The Ton Club
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:16 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by NvH » Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:56 pm

I'm talking about British Leyland, our state owned car industry (which I think you know damn well). and not the great luxury vehicles our finest marques have produced over the decades.

Lotus were run by an individual genius in Colin Chapman and the state had nothing to do with their achievements. Nor can they take credit for Jaguar, Aston Martin, Rolls Royce and Bentley, even if they did acquire Jaguar for about a decade. Jaguar's glory years were certainly not under British Leyland!

The govt' can, however take "credit" for Triumph motorcycles, Austin cars, Mini, Morris, Cooper, Rover, etc. All deathtraps light years behind their German and Japanese counterparts. Land Rover was a good brand but they again were owned by British Leyland for a short period of time and it was hardly their golden era. It was quite correct for the govt' to cease investment in a failing industry.

Until the credit crunch, we had been outperforming France and their more "social model" for 20-25 years btw. I remember how far Germany was once ahead of us, but since the early 90s that gap had closed massively. If it wasn't for Brown we'd be well ahead of both.

I love France but it is not a country we need to aspire to be more like. Although the success of the French car industry is also down to individual brilliance rather than state control. I don't believe any of their major car companies are currently owned or were indeed formed by the govt.

But you know my position by now. If a company can't stand on its own two feet, it should be put to sleep. The govt. should not prop up failing industries, that is not their role. Only for essentials should they be stepping in to help the consumer. It's bad enough when failing football clubs get bailed out again and again (92+ professional clubs with our population?! Madness! There are only 32 NFL teams in a population 5 times the size of ours).

One industry we can be proud of is Formula 1, as almost all of the teams are based here or rely heavily on British ingenuity. So we don't only have possibly the best driver of all-time (or at the very least in the top 5 with Fangio, Clark, Prost and Senna), but we dominate the engineering and aerodynamics in the sport too.

The govt does nothing for F1, even when we were in danger of losing the British Grand Prix. I don't blame the govt' for that, but the likes of Ross Brawn, Colin Chapman and Adrian Newey have proved what can be done without any interference from the state. We're world leaders. Even Mercedes' success has very little to do with Germany as their hybrid engine division is based in Brixworth and the chassis is built in Brackley.

That's one thing we can all be proud of in the UK. Our creativity and ingenuity. Tim Berners-Lee another example. The govt. contributed very little to that other than a tiny amount of money given to CERN every year. Almost everything that is great about this country has been achieved by the individual, not the state. We've had a massive amount of inventors for the size of our country. Many nobel laureates too (2nd only to the USA). I'd personally trust the govt. with very little of our money, but each to their own.

User avatar
NvH
The Ton Club
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:16 am

Re: Happy BoJo Day!

Post by NvH » Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:17 pm

Rout wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:50 pm
Which property do you think pays the most council tax?

A 3-bed semi in Hartlepool on sale for £107k

Or

A 10-bed townhouse on Berkeley Sq, Westminster worth £82.5m
I assume that's in response to my comment on how council tax isn't always fair. But it's an extreme example with an obvious answer. It isn't always as obvious as that, as you well know.

My point is that PEOPLE should be taxed, not property. The Lib Dems idea of a local income tax was a better one. Sometimes you live in a larger house because you inherited it from parents who already paid their stamp duty on the home and their taxes on the income you inherit from them. Why should the money/property be taxed twice?

Post Reply

Return to “General Non Darts Discussion”