rogersix
Well-known member
- Jan 18, 2014
- 8,232
good input!And to think many here believe a Labour Gov't are going to be our saviours !!
good input!And to think many here believe a Labour Gov't are going to be our saviours !!
Agree with almost everything, but not on the idea of winding down all other taxes. We need to find a way in this country of taxing wealth (as in accumulated wealth, not income) to try and equalise society.I'm a big fan of universal basic income for one simple reason. The choice to work. Basic income is just that. Just enough to provide basics but enough to empower individuals. Boss a dick? Leave. Job not rewarding? Leave.
Not paid enough for the work? Employers will have to pay more. Want to work locally, you can.
It will provoke further automation and innovation and build community.
Couple it with an automated payment transaction tax and its easily affordable.
Introduce APT first, slowly and start winding down all other taxes, then start to build up UBI.
For the employer, less tax, no business rates, no NI. The real challenge will be attracting and retaining labour. They will need to be much more flexible and pay what the market demands.
You will also see a thriving gig economy.
The really significant risk is business competitiveness globally but this is the same as now.
If you view tax as a way to remove money from the economy and stabilise currency (which fundamentally it is) small tweaks to APT can fund UBI and control inflation, thus maintaining competitiveness but also supporting public services.
The challenge is that both these changes impact those who seek and want to maintain power and therefore, government and media will never endorse it. Generation Y may be the first to start to shift us in that direction. We've been fed a narrative that we are work-shy which isn't the case for 99%. For the 1% is that laziness or a systemic lack of opportunity?
All in all, both in place get us closer to a fairer world where there is equality of opportunity
In your response you said you viewed the hypothetical scenario as “show me someone with real problems”. Judging people like this is exactly what UBI doesn’t do.UBI is itself a state intervention. There may well be lots of benefits to it as have been well described on this thread, but I don't see that situation as one that particularly justifies it.
And that's why it would cost well over £500billion a year.In your response you said you viewed the hypothetical scenario as “show me someone with real problems”. Judging people like this is exactly what UBI doesn’t do.
I'm with you. APT does this over time but it's a long game. I've considered this a lot. Wealth does get taxed as part of any transaction as it moves around e.g. interest, capital gains, inheritance etc. But the whole point of APT is that it is a neutral and not punitive tax to individuals. It doesn't have the scope to hit accrued personal wealth which is a limitation for those who want full equity but this could take place preceding full implementation if desired.Agree with almost everything, but not on the idea of winding down all other taxes. We need to find a way in this country of taxing wealth (as in accumulated wealth, not income) to try and equalise socsociety
Does that mean kicking out party members/candidates for criticism of the Israeli government as well as being antisemitic?Labour still have some way to go rooting out the antisemites. Great progress has been made, but recent events haven’t been a good look.
First real error so far from Starmer in my view with his initial comments and inaction - not that it changes my voting intentions, before the usual mob swoop in. Labour or bust.
Labour have to be hardline over antisemitism. This needs to go away once and for all.
No it doesn’t mean that. It means not using antisemitic slurs at all - it’s really very simple.Does that mean kicking out party members/candidates for criticism of the Israeli government as well as being antisemitic?
It seems that the first comment by the clown of Rochdale was an absurd slur relating to the astonishingly unpopular Israeli government but he then backed it up with something more serious.
I'm not sure the words 'fair and objective' can go hand in hand with racial or religious intolerance.No it doesn’t mean that. It means not using antisemitic slurs at all - it’s really very simple.
It doesn’t matter how fair and objective an opinion is if it comes from a place of racial or religious intolerance and is preceded by open hate.
They’ve done well getting lots of the antisemites out since Corbyn, but they need to be absolutely zero tolerance. Starmer fumbled it at first, and it can’t happen again.
I don’t really see why they need to TBH, this will be a bit of a weird vote now (Galloway probably wins) but come election time it’s likely with a proper candidate (and the vetting process will be in overdrive) then Labour would be red hot favourites to take it back.Labour are shitting themselves over Rochdale now…… really?
No it doesn’t mean that. It means not using antisemitic slurs at all - it’s really very simple.
It doesn’t matter how fair and objective an opinion is if it comes from a place of racial or religious intolerance and is preceded by open hate.
They’ve done well getting lots of the antisemites out since Corbyn, but they need to be absolutely zero tolerance. Starmer fumbled it at first, and it can’t happen again.
Labour suspends parliamentary candidate Graham Jones over 'unacceptable' Israel comments
The row comes after the party was forced to disown its Rochdale by-election candidate Azhar Ali over alleged "antisemitic" comments.news.sky.com
These idiots are Undoing the good work SKS has done in rooting out the some of the scum bags in his party
Starmer can put his feet up now - no chance he won't win.The coming election is labours to loose and they are trying really hard to do just that