Or buy a Brand New Vauxhall with up to 5 year's interest free credit, which then works out a lot cheaper than buying nearly new (always assuming you're not paying cash of course)
This for me is quite and interesting point. As I wasn't born into money and I was 10 years old when Thatcher's reign of prime minister ended I am not "Thatcherite" In fact what she did or didn't do bears no relevance in me choosing the way I want to vote. this brings me to my next point, 10-15 years ago it would of made more sense for to vote Labour but as things have progressed in my life the Tories make more sense. There is quite a lot of animosity about people who are wealthy voting for the conservatives etc..... My point is at what point do you make the differentiation? People will always do what they think is best and for me I believe that the Conservatives offer a more stable future for my business. When someone creates a successful business that is employing local people how and when is it ok to judge them as Tory scum? This does not change who I am as a person. I've seen all the tit for tat that JWM brings on here when politics is brought up and some of the things that both sides of the discussion bring up frankly makes me cringe. It gets so personal and is based on things that have hardly no relevance in the modern world that happened years and years ago. Times have changed, time for some people to move on I think.
Without wanting to be confrontational at all, Kempy, in the example of Thatcher's legacy, this is a bit naive. I'm with you on getting 'personal' though. Not necessary.
Yes JK I know things didn't go well with the coal mines and privatisation etc..... What I'm trying to get across is that all this has happened years ago. The modern generation are looking forward, not back.
I got the wife a new Kia Picanto and I used the credit option. £135 a month, £250 upfront payment. No road tax, insurance at £140 a year for both of us and 100,000 mile 7 year warranty. Trouble free motoring.
Fair enough Kempy, but I'm not quite so convinced regarding that approach. For example, to me, The Environment & Global Climate Change on a foreign policy level is one of the most important issues at the moment (possibly the MOST important) - don't worry, I fully realise that may sound ridiculous to plenty of people. However, the 'free market-ism' and mass deregulation of the financial sector during the 1980s and early 90s, spearheaded by Thatcher (amongst others), is intrinsically linked to the global mess we're in concerning Climate Change. Therefore, in this case, it is invaluable to look back at the mistakes made, so that we can hope to rectify them as fast as possible.
Realising the mistakes of the past and not repeating them is of course a good thing. What I am saying though is calling people names and bringing up stuff from 30 years ago to throw in the face of others is neither helpful or going to get anyone anywhere.
Interesting concept this one. Surely it is their money at the end of the day and their choice to spend it as they wish. It is the ones that have never saved that are the bigger burden to us all. Even more, those who have never worked and relied on benefits throughout their lives.
And what of the ones who do not have an opportunity to save? Possibly because affordable housing is not available to them? So much for utilising the economy to help the most vulnerable in society. I find it entirely disheartening that a 'strong' or 'improving' economy is not used to help the most vulnerable. It is simply used as a vehicle for further growth of the economy, and so the cycle goes on.
While I agree with the broad concept of this CT, the one thing I would say is that you do have to bear in mind there is a point where raising taxes is counter-intuitive. You only have to look at the very real mass exodus from France after Hollande put up the rate to 75%. Wealthy French definitely left France (many came to London) as a direct consequence. So there has to be a line, though that is with income tax rather than Mylene Klass's pitiable attempts to justify not shelling out a few quid because she is wealthy enough to own a property well beyond the reach of most.
To be honest JK that was not the thrust of my point, it was arguing the point that people should be allowed to spend money that they have earned in the way that they choose and not be nannied into being told. In that context was the point then extended to people who either never have or indeed never could save and that I agree is a totally different discussion. I do believe in the welfare state and helping the less fortunates and will continue to do so unless they take the p*ss.
Apologies Thurnby, I didn't intend my post to be a direct rebuttal of yours, and it seemed to turn into a mini-rant of sorts! I'm just feeling somewhat politically disenfranchised at the moment.
The point about Thatcher is that she didn't just close the mines down. It was an economic theories of Milton Friedman a right wing American economist that she followed. The gist of it was that businesses had to be competitive and stand on their own two feet or fall by the wayside. Unfortunately the Poles and the Australians were producing coal at far lower prices than we ever could because the former paid low wages and the latter were open cast mining with 50 ton buckets. There was an alternative agenda in that Thatch wanted to break the NUM and Scargill. She pursued policies that decimated British manufacturing industry and did it in a manner than inflicted huge damage on our country. interestingly she also made Northern England and Scotland Tory free zones politically, something that may well have an effect on the outcome of the upcoming election. Of course people can run from unfavourable tax regimes,that is always going to happen. A bit of a Tory trick to try to undermine others for your own advantage.No doubt something they learned on the playing fields of Eton.
You're right on the points you bring up. I could never justify it to myself that Tories are right for me and that's fine because they are never going to be right for the less fortunate. I said earlier in this thread that the time for token gestures has long gone and real efforts to improve the eco system of this planet, the way we approach aiding third world countries and poverty in the developed world. The reason I'm all for Green is because they are as far from the main stream self serving politicians who only really care about how happy the banks are and as close to true democracy as we are currently going to get. Everyone who is comfortable now, will be conmfortable under the Greens. There'll just be a few years of mentality change. And then once the unreasonably wealthy have helped to pay for all our social programs and rebuilding of criminally under funded infrastructure by actually paying their tax, then we can look to the more global approach. This is something that will never happen as long as those that are currently comfortable don;t worry about those that aren't!
If you start up a little coffee shop and refuse to pay tax on your earnings you will be jailed, If you are Starbucks the Government let's you use the loopholes to avoid paying tax legally. The same with Vodaphone Asda Boots etc, why should massive corporate companies trade by different rules ?.Apple Google Microsoft are at it too, setting up in Ireland . Apple is worth more than Greece for heavens sake with change , surely they should pay their way rather than attack small businesses.
