You can write one law
Discussion
Kermit power said:
Are you sure about that? As far as I'm aware, things like rent, food and children's clothes are all tax exempt, and I would expect lower-paid people to be paying a larger proportion of their income on good in those brackets rather than more highly taxed ones? This is doubly true if you include the reduced rate of VAT on energy bills.
I still see no just reason for the more highly paid to be taxed a higher percentage of their salary. Apart from anything else, reducing the tax burden generally means more discretionary spending, so more jobs and fewer people on low pay in the first place.
Hmm I’m not so sure, trickle down economics hasn’t worked too well so far. Personally pretty much all of the money I have left goes on travel which removes it from the U.K.I still see no just reason for the more highly paid to be taxed a higher percentage of their salary. Apart from anything else, reducing the tax burden generally means more discretionary spending, so more jobs and fewer people on low pay in the first place.
I don’t mind paying a bit more tax on the upper end of my earnings but the current marginal rates are insane. It’s all needs simplifying and NI done away with.
£0-12,500 = 0% (same as now pretty much)
£12.5k-50k = 30% (slightly less than now thanks to NI)
£50-100k = 45% (slightly more than now)
£100k+ = 50% (this is where marginal rates go schizo)
No f
king around with peoples pension annual allowances or income tax personal allowance. Base child benefit on household income not one person earning over £50k. Basically make things very clear and very simple.Several comments on owners not clearing up dog st. Why is it that we think cats roaming about are acceptable whereas dogs aren't? Any animal is the responsibility of the owner at all time, so the owner has to be with it or limit it's movements.
My law is that any cat found unaccompanied is to be taken to a pound. If the owner shows up then they are fined, if they don't the cat is re-homed. Any cat when outside the owners house will have a 2" cork inserted up its rectum with a mallet to stop them sg on my lawn.
t. Why is it that we think cats roaming about are acceptable whereas dogs aren't? Any animal is the responsibility of the owner at all time, so the owner has to be with it or limit it's movements.My law is that any cat found unaccompanied is to be taken to a pound. If the owner shows up then they are fined, if they don't the cat is re-homed. Any cat when outside the owners house will have a 2" cork inserted up its rectum with a mallet to stop them s
g on my lawn.Free pass to vandalise a car blocking a crossing a la Street Fighter bonus stage
Not sure whether I've actually stated this on another thread, or whether I've been cautious about writing this online because I'm very likely to actually do it every time I cross the road from the station.
Not sure whether I've actually stated this on another thread, or whether I've been cautious about writing this online because I'm very likely to actually do it every time I cross the road from the station.
p1stonhead said:
Konrod said:
Several comments on owners not clearing up dog st. Why is it that we think cats roaming about are acceptable whereas dogs aren't?
Dogs exclusively walk and therefore st. Why is it that we think cats roaming about are acceptable whereas dogs aren't?t, where humans walk when out in public.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_dogs_in_Mosco...
wiki said:
According to Alexei Vereshchagin, a graduate student of Poyarkov's who has studied them, the dogs generally go out of their way to avoid conflict with humans, and defecation in busy areas or onto pavements is rare.
wiki said:
One technique such a pack uses involves deploying its smaller, cuter members, having realized that these dogs have more success in begging food from people.[3]
I found it pretty interesting 
Mothersruin said:
Religion.
Children are not allowed to have any exposure to religion until they are 18.
Then they are allowed a visit from a single representative of each one who can explain why their doctrine is less nuts than the others.
If they then decide to follow one, it holds the same legal weight as supporting a football team. None.
Understand the argument but how would you go about decoupling much of the teaching of history that shows religion as a driving force that created entire countries and civilisations? How would you teach kids about the evolution of the British Monarchy without exposing them to religion.Children are not allowed to have any exposure to religion until they are 18.
Then they are allowed a visit from a single representative of each one who can explain why their doctrine is less nuts than the others.
If they then decide to follow one, it holds the same legal weight as supporting a football team. None.
And how would you deal with Christmas, Easter, etc?
StevieBee said:
Mothersruin said:
Religion.
Children are not allowed to have any exposure to religion until they are 18.
Then they are allowed a visit from a single representative of each one who can explain why their doctrine is less nuts than the others.
If they then decide to follow one, it holds the same legal weight as supporting a football team. None.
Understand the argument but how would you go about decoupling much of the teaching of history that shows religion as a driving force that created entire countries and civilisations? How would you teach kids about the evolution of the British Monarchy without exposing them to religion.Children are not allowed to have any exposure to religion until they are 18.
Then they are allowed a visit from a single representative of each one who can explain why their doctrine is less nuts than the others.
If they then decide to follow one, it holds the same legal weight as supporting a football team. None.
And how would you deal with Christmas, Easter, etc?
The made up stuff in the bible etc can wait!
You can teach about religion without teaching that it’s true.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff