+ Visit Rotherham United FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 12 of 15 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 141

Thread: Ot government cuts

  1. #111
    Join Date
    Dec 2023
    Posts
    1,602
    Quote Originally Posted by frogmiller View Post
    Very sad indeed.

    I've just watched them read out the results. Some Labour MPs cheered

    The Labour Party said themselves in a report that it could cost the lives of 4000 elderly. So in effect they'd cheered that as if it's a great victory.
    I'd hope they're cheering the degree of unity they found to get a vote through, but it's massively distasteful given what it's about.

    They've got the optics of this very wrong from the start. The pension triple lock (*******s name, but anyway) has thankfully meant that pensioners are better off in real terms by about £800 per annum against what a standard uplift would have given them since the triple lock was introduced (and rising slightly more next year because of one of the levers), and that needed to be front and centre of their rhetoric around this.

    They also failed by allowing this to become a standalone point and not as part of a well-articulated series of changes.

    First real test of the government and they've messed up pretty badly, whilst targeting what should have been a far easier sell if done correctly.

  2. #112
    Join Date
    Aug 2024
    Posts
    2,000
    If anyone genuinely can't or couldn't work I don't begrudge them their benefits but to take off pensioners who have worked who are now going to struggle through the winter their energy allowance it's like going back to the dark ages. It's beyond belief in this modern world they shouldn't be in power full stop!

  3. #113
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    14,192
    Quote Originally Posted by frogmiller View Post
    Very sad indeed.

    I've just watched them read out the results. Some Labour MPs cheered

    The Labour Party said themselves in a report that it could cost the lives of 4000 elderly. So in effect they'd cheered that as if it's a great victory.
    Plus 4000 less to be treat by the NHS. Not as daft as he looks this stazi bloke

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Aug 2024
    Posts
    2,000
    Quote Originally Posted by RU66 View Post
    If anyone genuinely can't or couldn't work I don't begrudge them their benefits but to take off pensioners who have worked who are now going to struggle through the winter their energy allowance it's like going back to the dark ages. It's beyond belief in this modern world they shouldn't be in power full stop!


    I'm on pensions less than the national living wage annually but losing the energy allowance won't effect me the same as some who it does.

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    24,919
    While agreeing that the fuel payment cuts are disgraceful I think this is what we can come to expect from a right wing labour pm like starmer. Also, interesting that the op seemed to think it should be a useful thread title re govt curs, where was this posters comments about cuts when the tories were I power. The tories are traditionally the party who makes cuts to ordinary people's lives in order to fund tax cuts for the rich.

  6. #116
    Apparently this has saved 'the government' (taxpayers) £1.2 billion.

    Meanwhile, today, thick as mince Lammy has agreed 'the government' will send half that amount - £600 million - to the military industrial complex to help continue the pointless deaths of Ukraine civilians.

    General McGregor reports that at least 600,000 have so far perished.

    Pure evil.

  7. #117
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    42,107
    Quote Originally Posted by Eternal Optimist View Post
    Apparently this has saved 'the government' (taxpayers) £1.2 billion.

    Meanwhile, today, thick as mince Lammy has agreed 'the government' will send half that amount - £600 million - to the military industrial complex to help continue the pointless deaths of Ukraine civilians.

    General McGregor reports that at least 600,000 have so far perished.

    Pure evil.
    Is that on top of the £3bn already promised?

  8. #118
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    8,639
    Quote Originally Posted by howdydoo View Post
    Rich people and big companies deserve tax breaks.

    Read this -

    Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

    The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
    The fifth would pay £1.
    The sixth would pay £3.
    The seventh would pay £7.
    The eighth would pay £12.
    The ninth would pay £18.
    And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59. 
    So, that's what they decided to do.

    The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.

    The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. 

    So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

    And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
    The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
    The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
    The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
    The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
    And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving). 
    Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free. 

    But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"
    "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

    "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

    "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. 

    The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill! 

    And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
    The problem at the moment is that the bill comes to £110, but the customers still want to pay £100.

    And they are complaining because the beer has been watered, they're getting Bells instead of Lagavulin 16 and there are no pork scratchings.

  9. #119
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    8,639
    Quote Originally Posted by howdydoo View Post
    Mick Lynch wants a progressive wealth tax with the richest paying the same as everyone else on PAYE, 47%.

    That would bring in hundred of billions, it is time for the richest to pay what everyone else has been paying their whole lives.


    Seems he has a better grasp of what’s needed than most.
    Two questions:

    1. How are you going to assess wealth? The schemes used to hide income work just as well for assets.
    2. If you tax wealth, why aren't the 'drinkers' going to 'drink elsewhere' as per the story you put up above?

  10. #120
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    8,639
    Quote Originally Posted by flourbasher View Post
    So what’s your plan when many reoffend and the spaces are full again in a very short space of time
    I don't have a plan. It's about choosing the lesser of two evils, with keeping people in prison when there isn't a bed for them being the greater.

Page 12 of 15 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •