Current Affairs The Conservative Party

Status
Not open for further replies.
roydo said:
Sounds great. But according to critics of Sunak, the tax burden is all ready at a very high rate.
Click to expand...

A lot of those critics of Sunaks are (or represent) the very wealthy, who could stand with it being a lot higher without suffering hardship.

But they would rather buy more yachts.

Of course its always framed around 'raising taxes on hardworking families', but there's a lot of cash that can hopefully be squeezed back out of a currently fattened ~1%.
 
Xizor said:
A lot of those critics of Sunaks are (or represent) the very wealthy, who could stand with it being a lot higher without suffering hardship.

But they would rather buy more yachts.

Of course its always framed around 'raising taxes on hardworking families', but there's a lot of cash that can hopefully be squeezed back out of a currently fattened ~1%.
Click to expand...

It was on a video of his New Year message being dissected by some union fella.

Problem is, and its an unpalatable fact, is that a huge % of income tax is paid by a tiny % of "rich" people as it is. There was a list last year, similar to the Rich List, showing the highest paying tax payers. The numbers, in cold hard cash, were astonishing.

I dont pretend to know the answer, I am largely off grid these days, but bland "grow tax and do ok" isnt it.
 
roydo said:
The numbers, in cold hard cash, were astonishing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a tough one. I'm occasionally of the mind that our current system just cannot hold, we've wandered down an economic cul-de-sac based on infinite growth, like a global ponzi scheme about to topple. Where does society go after that? Lots of historical data available about collapsing societies and the aftermath, none of it involving ice cream and rainbows.

And even that is problem #2 after the climate!
 
Xizor said:
Yeah, it's a tough one. I'm occasionally of the mind that our current system just cannot hold, we've wandered down an economic cul-de-sac based on infinite growth, like a global ponzi scheme about to topple. Where does society go after that? Lots of historical data available about collapsing societies and the aftermath, none of it involving ice cream and rainbows.

And even that is problem #2 after the climate!
Click to expand...

It is a bit of a mind bender, and no mistake. Like, by a mile, government expenditure is on good stuff; health, care, pensions, safety nets. @davek suggested scrapping Trident would be a panacea to cure the county's ills. Quite frankly, it would not scratch the surface. Taxing Amazon and non doms likewise.

I guess that is why there isnt all that much between the main parties, because the question remains the same. And the answers are all the same. In a macro way.
 
roydo said:
It is a bit of a mind bender, and no mistake. Like, by a mile, government expenditure is on good stuff; health, care, pensions, safety nets. @davek suggested scrapping Trident would be a panacea to cure the county's ills. Quite frankly, it would not scratch the surface. Taxing Amazon and non doms likewise.

I guess that is why there isnt all that much between the main parties, because the question remains the same. And the answers are all the same. In a macro way.
Click to expand...

The danger is that whilst half-sensible politicians are looking for an orthodox way out of the mess that may not even exist, demagogues are increasingly ranting at the sidelines that everything would be easy to sort out if only we hand over power to them.

And the longer we don't resolve the core issues, the more seductive those rants get to a critical mass of people.
 
Goat said:
So lets let the Tories have another 5 years?

And im sorry, I cant let that pass, you want to abolish Trident? You actually think now is the right time to show weakness?
Click to expand...

How does having trident show strength?!
The UK is the USAs tinpot lap dog, there is not one benefit of having nuclear weapons
 
Xizor said:
The danger is that whilst half-sensible politicians are looking for an orthodox way out of the mess that may not even exist, demagogues are increasingly ranting at the sidelines that everything would be easy to sort out if only we hand over power to them.

And the longer we don't resolve the core issues, the more seductive those rants get to a critical mass of people.
Click to expand...

The core issue is the one you alluded to; we are wedded to a global, largely capitalist, system in a symbiotic relationship with many many countries.

I quite like that, but again, as you alluded to, if it crumbles, we crumble with it. Will it? Doubt it, warming etc notwithstanding. In the meantime, politicians muck around with trivial details which appeal to who they need to vote for them.

In my lifetime, only Thatcher and Blair got it. Thatcher made working class folk feel middle class, Blair didnt scare the middle class. Both geniuses in their own way, political allegiances aside.
 
roydo said:
It is a bit of a mind bender, and no mistake. Like, by a mile, government expenditure is on good stuff; health, care, pensions, safety nets. @davek suggested scrapping Trident would be a panacea to cure the county's ills. Quite frankly, it would not scratch the surface. Taxing Amazon and non doms likewise.

I guess that is why there isnt all that much between the main parties, because the question remains the same. And the answers are all the same. In a macro way.
Click to expand...
It's a complex one for sure, and compounded by the very serious efforts by previously-described "developing" countries to supercharge their own growth. For instance, Indonesia is banning the export of certain raw materials in the hope that the manufacture of things like batteries will thus take place there rather than here (thus moving their economy up the value chain). You can see other countries rich in raw materials doing likewise, which would kinda leave our own efforts out in the cold as we don't have much to offer.
 
Bruce Wayne said:
It's a complex one for sure, and compounded by the very serious efforts by previously-described "developing" countries to supercharge their own growth. For instance, Indonesia is banning the export of certain raw materials in the hope that the manufacture of things like batteries will thus take place there rather than here (thus moving their economy up the value chain). You can see other countries rich in raw materials doing likewise, which would kinda leave our own efforts out in the cold as we don't have much to offer.
Click to expand...

Quite. Financial services is, or was, our top trump.
 
roydo said:
It is a bit of a mind bender, and no mistake. Like, by a mile, government expenditure is on good stuff; health, care, pensions, safety nets. @davek suggested scrapping Trident would be a panacea to cure the county's ills. Quite frankly, it would not scratch the surface. Taxing Amazon and non doms likewise.

I guess that is why there isnt all that much between the main parties, because the question remains the same. And the answers are all the same. In a macro way.
Click to expand...
By the early 2030s four new Vanguard class subs are to be built. That'd cost about £40B. The relevant part of the defence budget to keep the existing fleet of sea-going subs is £3B per annum. Billions more is spent on upgrading war heads and the upkeep of naval bases. Also the defunct fleet of nuclear subs cost about £100M to scrap safely.

Of course, not even that would solve ALL the heath and welfare problems which make those systems groan, nowhere near it. But they'd be something substantial toward the annual budget over the coming decade and make for less cuts.
 
davek said:
By the early 2030s four new Vanguard class subs are to be built. That'd cost about £40B. The relevant part of the defence budget to keep the existing fleet of sea-going subs is £3B per annum. Billions more is spent on upgrading war heads and the upkeep of naval bases. Also the defunct fleet of nuclear subs cost about £100M to scrap safely.

Of course, not even that would solve ALL the heath and welfare problems which make those systems groan, nowhere near it. But they'd be something substantial toward the annual budget over the coming decade and make for less cuts.
Click to expand...

The UK Govt spend about £1200 Billion a year on stuff.

I get the view about not liking nukes, thats fine. But the cost of them is a weak argument. Like, it would mean the destruction of thousands of jobs, and most likely the death of Barrow in Furness, for a political dogma.

Heard that before somewhere.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top