The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

[Blue 1]

I agree with what you say. So shall we expect that footballers take a 50% pay cut or an additional tax hike. Venezuela is an extreme example, but just name one socialist country that has a higher GDP per capita higher than the UK....

For myself, I believe if we need to cut then we all need to cut, no exceptions. Except that health, education, defence, social security etc etc all need to be cut equally. But then all the vested interests start to complain. As an example, how many teachers have been made redundant or had their pay cut. How many nurses have been sacked or had their pay cut. Where have these savage cuts taken place. How many from the BBC have been made redundant. The truth is that the moral outrage brigade have largely been unaffected while the rest of us have had to deal with it.........

Should people with nothing in their budget to cut be pushed into destitution?

 

[harry]

......introduce chimney sweeping to the national curriculum.

I have a mate who was a chimney sweep.

 

[roydo]

it's about people with an obscene amount of money helping people a lot less fortunate in this country

But dont these people already have half of their income taken as tax? And isnt it a fact that something like 30% of all income tax is raised from the top 1% of earners?

It is more about spending the money well, not raising more, because there is a natural limit to what you can raise. #francehighertax

And governments have a pretty poor record of spending our money well. But the idea that taxing "the millionaire bankers" will actually improve things is an absolute nonsense. But it does play well to some peoples gallery. Who lap it up.

 

[bluemangroup]

But dont these people already have half of their income taken as tax? And isnt it a fact that something like 30% of all income tax is raised from the top 1% of earners?

It is more about spending the money well, not raising more, because there is a natural limit to what you can raise. #francehighertax

And governments have a pretty poor record of spending our money well. But the idea that taxing "the millionaire bankers" will actually improve things is an absolute nonsense. But it does play well to some peoples gallery. Who lap it up.

I've not said anything about millionaire bankers. You've just lumped that in to make it seem like its empty rhetoric. I don't see why a 10% increase on tax of those one percent through means various wouldn't work. It's not like we've reached a plateau in terms of what can be raised. And raising more money would mean low wage employees would stop going to food banks like its a normal thing because they were being paid properly.

 

[peteblue]

Nurses are currently in the middle of a 1% pay rise which actually equates to 1% drop against inflation, having had pay freezes for a few years I believe. That's a very important job that isn't being rewarded properly.
I'm also not sure why the haves should continue to keep having irrespective of the financial landscape. Its not about a drastic lurch left ala Venezuela we are talking about, it's about people with an obscene amount of money helping people a lot less fortunate in this country from sliding into a black hole.

No one earning under £30K is being rewarded properly. So do we all agree that all Footballers should have a salary cap of say £50K per Year imposed. If not then don't go on about anyone else........

 

[peteblue]

Should people with nothing in their budget to cut be pushed into destitution?

No mate. I think it's abhorrent. But I also think it's abhorrent that Sterling is being offered £100K per week, and Stevie G on £120K+ and Rooney £250K+ per WEEK.....and yet no football supporter marches about this........

 

[bluemangroup]

No one earning under £30K is being rewarded properly. So do we all agree that all Footballers should have a salary cap of say £50K per Year imposed. If not then don't go on about anyone else........

Why not? And why would a 50k salary in a squillions pound industry make any sense?

 

[roydo]

I've not said anything about millionaire bankers. You've just lumped that in to make it seem like its empty rhetoric. I don't see why a 10% increase on tax of those one percent through means various wouldn't work. It's not like we've reached a plateau in terms of what can be raised. And raising more money would mean low wage employees would stop going to food banks like its a normal thing because they were being paid properly.

Fair enough. I used the bankers line cos it seems to be trotted out at regular intervals. The point is, just putting an extra 10% of tax onto the top earners doent actually work. It doesnt raise squat. It is a well proven fact. So, other than for pretty headlines, why do it?

Why not spend what you raise already, just that little bit better? And no, that doesnt mean "lets cut everything to the bone", it means spending money better. Why is that so wrong?

The Tories top down NHS reform is a classic example. So was Labours NHS IT system thing, or their 999 new fire service system. As is the billions on HS2. the planning for Heathrow, (30 years and counting), the utter waste in quangos and PARTS of the civil service.

 

[peteblue]

Why not? And why would a 50k salary in a squillions pound industry make any sense?

So it's OK for the bankers then is it.........

 

[Billy Dean]

No mate. I think it's abhorrent. But I also think it's abhorrent that Sterling is being offered £100K per week, and Stevie G on £120K+ and Rooney £250K+ per WEEK.....and yet no football supporter marches about this........

Why shouldn't we tax these people more though. Income inequality has been rising ever since the late 70s. The top 1% are getting ever richer in comparison to the rest. We can't do much about that, the least we can do is tax them a bit more.

 

[peteblue]

Fair enough. I used the bankers line cos it seems to be trotted out at regular intervals. The point is, just putting an extra 10% of tax onto the top earners doent actually work. It doesnt raise squat. It is a well proven fact. So, other than for pretty headlines, why do it?

Why not spend what you raise already, just that little bit better? And no, that doesnt mean "lets cut everything to the bone", it means spending money better. Why is that so wrong?

The Tories top down NHS reform is a classic example. So was Labours NHS IT system thing, or their 999 new fire service system. As is the billions on HS2. the planning for Heathrow, (30 years and counting), the utter waste in quangos and PARTS of the civil service.

Exactly. The utter waste of Government spending is a disgrace, and they all do it, they can't help themselves........

 

[roydo]

Why shouldn't we tax these people more though. Income inequality has been rising ever since the late 70s. The top 1% are getting ever richer in comparison to the rest. We can't do much about that, the least we can do is tax them a bit more.

IT DOEST RAISE ANY MORE MONEY.

Sorry for being shouty.

 

[peteblue]

Why shouldn't we tax these people more though. Income inequality has been rising ever since the late 70s. The top 1% are getting ever richer in comparison to the rest. We can't do much about that, the least we can do is tax them a bit more.

That's right. So where will all the footballers go....Spain, Italy.......

 

[bluemangroup]

Fair enough. I used the bankers line cos it seems to be trotted out at regular intervals. The point is, just putting an extra 10% of tax onto the top earners doent actually work. It doesnt raise squat. It is a well proven fact. So, other than for pretty headlines, why do it?

Why not spend what you raise already, just that little bit better? And no, that doesnt mean "lets cut everything to the bone", it means spending money better. Why is that so wrong?

The Tories top down NHS reform is a classic example. So was Labours NHS IT system thing, or their 999 new fire service system. As is the billions on HS2. the planning for Heathrow, (30 years and counting), the utter waste in quangos and PARTS of the civil service.

How do we know it doesn't? And I'd love for government to spend more efficiently, I'm not saying its wrong but their strike rate is as poor as you've outlined, so there needs to be a certain amount of money in the coffers in order to ensure success. Or relative success.

 

[bluemangroup]

So it's OK for the bankers then is it.........

I wouldn't reduce all of their wages to 50k either. Not that I have the option to like but yeah. I still haven't mentioned bankers at any point.