Liz Truss Prime Minister
Discussion
wisbech said:
Eh? By definition you become an MP because you want power and influence and money. Been true since 1215. If you want an strong voice in how the country is run, becoming an MP is one of the major paths.
Winston Churchill became an MP because he wanted influence and power. So did Bevan, or Disraeli, or Liz Truss.
How can you be taken seriously when you don’t understand the difference between ‘or’ and ‘and’. Winston Churchill became an MP because he wanted influence and power. So did Bevan, or Disraeli, or Liz Truss.
HighwayStar said:
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said:julian987R said:
They should have just ridden out the storm.
In Liz we Trust.
She shared a platform with a convicted far-right criminal and didn't utter a single word whilst he called another far-right convicted criminal a "hero".In Liz we Trust.
Give your head a wobble.
But low tax policy....sign me up....never going to happen now of course but nore will we get growth.
From labour I would like to see strategic infrastructure projects. Nuclear power, house building, ultra high speed Internet. But is suspect like the current goverment we will get more of the same in a red tie
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:julian987R said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:julian987R said:
They should have just ridden out the storm.
In Liz we Trust.
She shared a platform with a convicted far-right criminal and didn't utter a single word whilst he called another far-right convicted criminal a "hero".In Liz we Trust.
Give your head a wobble.
She shared a platform with a convicted far-right criminal and didn't utter a single word whilst he called another far-right convicted criminal a "hero".
Why are you supporting her?
As for Liz she's seems to have gone a bit mad, I know she'll want to earn money off the back of being PM but given she lasted 6 weeks and managed to push the country underwater in a matter of days her options are limited to who will pay to hear her speak, hence she's sharing
a stage with Bannon rather than attending Blackrock's kick off conference.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Why are you supporting her?
I will write it out for you as you might learn something about life.Truss is a Conservative
Robinson is Nationalist
Corbyn is a Socialist
Hezbollah, Hamas and the IRA are Terrorists
Communists are part of the Labour movement.
Corbyn is used as an example because he is a principled man who has met, shared platforms and helped give voices to some or all of fringe groups listed above.
There are people who don't like Corbyn but, he is not a communist or, a terrorist.
Therefore, it is childish and quite a jump to label Truss a Nationalist and it's going to be quite tiresome if you play the 'R' card every single time there is a post about her on the forum.
Carl_VivaEspana said:
I will write it out for you as you might learn something about life.
Truss is a Conservative
Robinson is Nationalist
Corbyn is a Socialist
Hezbollah, Hamas and the IRA are Terrorists
Communists are part of the Labour movement.
Corbyn is used as an example because he is a principled man who has met, shared platforms and helped give voices to some or all of fringe groups listed above.
There are people who don't like Corbyn but, he is not a communist or, a terrorist.
Therefore, it is childish and quite a jump to label Truss a Nationalist and it's going to be quite tiresome if you play the 'R' card every single time there is a post about her on the forum.
Doesn't answer the question though does it?Truss is a Conservative
Robinson is Nationalist
Corbyn is a Socialist
Hezbollah, Hamas and the IRA are Terrorists
Communists are part of the Labour movement.
Corbyn is used as an example because he is a principled man who has met, shared platforms and helped give voices to some or all of fringe groups listed above.
There are people who don't like Corbyn but, he is not a communist or, a terrorist.
Therefore, it is childish and quite a jump to label Truss a Nationalist and it's going to be quite tiresome if you play the 'R' card every single time there is a post about her on the forum.
She shared a platform with a convicted far-right criminal and didn't utter a single word whilst he called another far-right convicted criminal a "hero".
I don't know why you're bringing Corbyn into the man is completely unfit for public life and public office.
Gecko1978 said:
HighwayStar said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:julian987R said:
They should have just ridden out the storm.
In Liz we Trust.
She shared a platform with a convicted far-right criminal and didn't utter a single word whilst he called another far-right convicted criminal a "hero".In Liz we Trust.
Give your head a wobble.
But low tax policy....sign me up....never going to happen now of course but nore will we get growth.
From labour I would like to see strategic infrastructure projects. Nuclear power, house building, ultra high speed Internet. But is suspect like the current goverment we will get more of the same in a red tie
If we go to a low tax country, how do you see that working with our crumbling infrastructure, wealth inequality etc
NerveAgent said:
If we go to a low tax country, how do you see that working with our crumbling infrastructure, wealth inequality etc
I think we can still have a lower-tax economy AND invest in the infrastructure.But first we need to do two things:
1. Shift taxation away from enterprise, investment and work and move more tax onto wealth accumulation (perhaps whilst lowering the burden overall).
2. Shift spend away from cash and day to day and into capital spend such as infrastructure and education.
The problem with the above two changes - guess who they upset the most?
NerveAgent said:
Out of interest, if we start to see better investment in infrastructure etc and things start to improve, where does that leave the right leaning vote? They only thing they seem to have at the moment is “well they are all the same/worse”.
If we go to a low tax country, how do you see that working with our crumbling infrastructure, wealth inequality etc
My view FWIW if we have high tax (which we do) it should be transparent not only what it is spent on but the benefit we are getting. So HS2 lost of money smaller scope hard for people to see benefit etc. NHS more money health of the nation better or worse etc.If we go to a low tax country, how do you see that working with our crumbling infrastructure, wealth inequality etc
Over time with improvements made I.e. nuclear power high speed Internet etc the initial cost is over an tax can fall you can even privatise maintiance within a frame work of efficency (railways a good example bad execution).
So I am not agaist tax when benefit it clear and defined I am agaist a bottomless pit of spending we have now. A collegeues wife is working on covid inquiry told me results her project presented were rejected as they highlighted some major failings. So the report will never be made public. I would suggest for tax an spend monitoring an independent body reviews results an posts them on X weekly without giverment oversight. So someweeks good news some weeks bad no spin.
Gecko1978 said:
My view FWIW if we have high tax (which we do) it should be transparent not only what it is spent on but the benefit we are getting. So HS2 lost of money smaller scope hard for people to see benefit etc. NHS more money health of the nation better or worse etc.
Over time with improvements made I.e. nuclear power high speed Internet etc the initial cost is over an tax can fall you can even privatise maintiance within a frame work of efficency (railways a good example bad execution).
So I am not agaist tax when benefit it clear and defined I am agaist a bottomless pit of spending we have now. A collegeues wife is working on covid inquiry told me results her project presented were rejected as they highlighted some major failings. So the report will never be made public. I would suggest for tax an spend monitoring an independent body reviews results an posts them on X weekly without giverment oversight. So someweeks good news some weeks bad no spin.
What are we considering high and low tax thresholds? I’m not sure we particularly stand out in rich western economies? Most examples I’ve seen people use tend to be city-states or oil states, fairly irrelevant imo. Over time with improvements made I.e. nuclear power high speed Internet etc the initial cost is over an tax can fall you can even privatise maintiance within a frame work of efficency (railways a good example bad execution).
So I am not agaist tax when benefit it clear and defined I am agaist a bottomless pit of spending we have now. A collegeues wife is working on covid inquiry told me results her project presented were rejected as they highlighted some major failings. So the report will never be made public. I would suggest for tax an spend monitoring an independent body reviews results an posts them on X weekly without giverment oversight. So someweeks good news some weeks bad no spin.
I think when you scratch the surface, you find most low tax, low spend advocates actually want quite a lot of spending. I do agree we should have much more transparency and I think we should focus on getting the basics right. We seem to spend a of time and money pissing around the edges while the core crumbles.
I also think investment is a constant thing. You don’t “fix” everything then get back to cutting everything and living off the past. That’s the mindset that caused this mess imo.
oyster said:
NerveAgent said:
If we go to a low tax country, how do you see that working with our crumbling infrastructure, wealth inequality etc
I think we can still have a lower-tax economy AND invest in the infrastructure.But first we need to do two things:
1. Shift taxation away from enterprise, investment and work and move more tax onto wealth accumulation (perhaps whilst lowering the burden overall).
2. Shift spend away from cash and day to day and into capital spend such as infrastructure and education.
The problem with the above two changes - guess who they upset the most?
The taxation on MNCs, above a certain size, needs to shift to a UK revenue basis. The transfer pricing system is a farce. However, when even a wassock like Nick Clegg gets a post political role with Meta, that’s easier said than put through parliament.
thetapeworm said:
One of my mates bought that L-shaped desk for his home office from Amazon for something like £150.I wonder how much Jenkyns put it through her expenses for?
5 In a Row said:
thetapeworm said:
One of my mates bought that L-shaped desk for his home office from Amazon for something like £150.I wonder how much Jenkyns put it through her expenses for?
I think the point about transparency is a good one. It is of course predicated on people actually bothering to listen, and we all know how ineffective being told that smoking kills or being fat is a bad idea is. But tax is not part of an individual's addictions, so just maybe it'd work? Maybe have the OBR and NAO produce a high level summary each year of public spending and shove it though everyone's letter box. It might at least be an initial reference point for fiscal discussions... E.g. " the deficit is X% of GDP", "total interest payments are Z bazillion", "welfare spending is N times larger than education". It could also summarise income distribution, income tax distribution, so people get a good idea how much they're paying relative to everyone else and where their money is going.
Council tax bills make some minor effort in this direction by saying X is for fire service, Y for education, but it is almost completely pointless as they're not providing any wider context.
Council tax bills make some minor effort in this direction by saying X is for fire service, Y for education, but it is almost completely pointless as they're not providing any wider context.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff