Current Affairs The Labour Party

[neil999]

I'd quite happily pay more tax if it meant that I didn't have to see homeless people on my walk home.

Not sure if this is sinister or not lol

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I'd quite happily pay more tax if it meant that I didn't have to see homeless people on my walk home.

You could give them whatever extra you'd like to pay in tax?

 

[Number_25]

You could give them whatever extra you'd like to pay in tax?

That's the system right now, isn't it? Given the horrendous rise in homelessness, it obviously doesn't work.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

That's the system right now, isn't it? Given the horrendous rise in homelessness, it obviously doesn't work.

Do you do that then?

 

[tsubaki]

So you think Labour would have done everything in their manifesto AND Brexit had they been elected?

Yes. The vast majority of the Government’s Brexit troubles stem from its red lines, specifically the freedom of movement one. If that didn’t exist (and for Labour it doesn’t so much) they would be able to get a lot more done.

 

[Number_25]

Do you do that then?

I've given money to homeless people, yes.

But for the same reason as to why we needed a NHS, you cannot depend on the 'goodness' of people to ensure that suffering is mitigated effectively.

Edit: Jesus, my spelling is atrocious today.

 

[neil999]

Do you do that then?

i sort of get this argument, however if a few individuals give money to a charity it does not solve the problem in the same way as alot of people contributing a small amount as the amounts raised would be significantly higher

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Yes. The vast majority of the Government’s Brexit troubles stem from its red lines, specifically the freedom of movement one. If that didn’t exist (and for Labour it doesn’t so much) they would be able to get a lot more done.

That's pretty speculative isn't it?

I've given money to homeless people, yes.

But for the same reason as to why we needed a NHS, you cannot depend on the 'goodness' of people to ensure that suffering is mitigated effectively.

Edit: Jesus, my spelling is atrocious today.

Ah, it sounded like you gave 10% of your wages every month.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

i sort of get this argument, however if a few individuals give money to a charity it does not solve the problem in the same way as alot of people contributing a small amount as the amounts raised would be significantly higher

I just reckon you shouldn't try and force others to do something you don't do voluntarily.

 

[Number_25]

Ah, it sounded like you gave 10% of your wages every month.

I'm unable to achieve the same sort of widespread socioeconomic reforms as the state.

I apologise that I'm a failure.

 

[neil999]

I just reckon you shouldn't try and force others to do something you don't do voluntarily.

fair point, i think we might be in a bit of trouble without general taxation tho...

 

[tsubaki]

Correct. The affected person, being forced to give up 10% of their shares receives no benefit. Glad you agree.

It is a daft proposal albeit for a policy (workforce involvement in running firms) that should exist; you could have much the same effect as what McDonnell wants by changing the law to bring in an “honest services” offence (the thing that Conrad Black was initially convicted of) whereby an officer of a company must behave in that firms best interest and then ensuring that a defence to that would be that a representative board (including workers) reasonably approved what the officer did.

That way you’d avoid the immediate issue over share ownership, you’d get worker representation and you’d go some way to sorting out one of the biggest structural problems in the City - that executives are incentivised to take actions (especially boosting short term profits) that are in their interests rather than the firms.

 

[tsubaki]

That's pretty speculative isn’t it?

Not really - any acceptance of freedom of movement sorts out the Irish border, customs systems, goes a long way to indicate the nature of the subsequent trade deal, clarifies the rights of EU citizens here and UK citizens over there, makes a continuation of security policy more likely etc. It really is most of what they are in a mess over.

 

[roydo]

Depends on your point of view tho, if that 10% is being used to improve services within the country then surely they do benefit?

Well you are assuming that services will improve, they might, they might not. The income (note, not tax) the Government make from their theft may well be cancelled out by lower tax takes in the wider country.

Factually, folk will be forced to give over 10% of their shares, for free.

 

[roydo]

that executives are incentivised to take actions (especially boosting short term profits) that are in their interests rather than the firms.

I agree. The short term bonus structures, seemingly pretty straight forward targets to boot, are at immoral levels. Its crept into civil service and quango land as well,