Amazing way to debate a subject. To start name calling others. Just about shows your level mate. If you disagree with what i say then you are free post an alternate view. I will happily read and then give you a reply without personal attack. For your information, a bigot is somebody who disagree's with a particular group... read my posts. I have said that the Unions have a right to strike (fact!) and that both LIE-BOUR (correctly spelt) and the Tories are both to blame for the mess that the country is in. In fact, i have used the term 'all policticans.' My particular view is based on experience and I back it up with facts (always).... if you don't like it then don't reply. I particularly get bored with people who use labels like Bigot, Racist and Fascist to counteract a discussion because they don't have the wit or intellect to do anything else. My life has been full and varied and I have a beef with all politicians regardless of colour, creed or political background (apart from Mo Mowlem) maybe you can let me know why my views based on my experiences labels me a Bigot?
Really? Define the term right wing? Son of a factory worker who's dad was made redundant at 52 and never worked again? son of a hard working staff nurse? grandson of a westoe miner? first job 1,87 a hour stacking shelves? married to a Pole?.... As me on my opinion of Poles in the UK. See how right wing i am Look mate I hate Thatcher (I paid for the download of ding-dong the Witch is dead) and the the Tories as much as you just I don't wear rose-tinted specs and think that the Lie-bour party (and the unions) are the saviour of the working class.
I'm going solely by your remarks on this thread, and it doesn't really take a Sherlock Holmes to see that your politics lie well right of centre..That's my view anyway..
Whatever mate. I'm sure right wing thinkers wouldn't agree with a right to strike (read my comments) but i'm glad that you have an opinion. Cheers
Do you think it's a fair share RAW or just use that term as it's the rule that has been imposed on them? From my point of view, the higher earners are paying more than their FAIR share, they're being forced to pay 40%+ as a reward for doing well in their lives, for getting a better job and not settling for mediocrity. I completely understand the aggro they have to deal with as a result of success, if it was me I'd be offshore with the lot. I'd pay council tax, VAT on everything, I'd have comprehensive private health care, wouldn't claim a state pension and I'd still inject **** loads into the economy through being a consumer. The haemorrhaging of public funds is very rarely down to the richer demographic, yet they're being touted as the solution. Fair? Not for me.
I wonder how many of the top 10% of earners even pay a fraction of that percentage though..For the poor it is known as tax fiddling, but for the rich it is legal loopholes.
But that's not the point, whether they pay it or not, my question was regarding the law that is considered their 'fair' share. Could it be that if a person on £200k salary was paying 20% tax, they'd be more inclined not to find these loopholes and the economy would end up better off as a result? Let's also not discount the 'poor' who claim benefits despite trading in pound notes, there's enough of them around, the asian community in Manchester have got it sewn up. I wouldn't pay it if there was a loop hole, regardless of tax, as a consumer I'd still probably pump **** loads more into the economy than the average 'poor person'. Primitively, 'survival of the fittest' has become 'survival on behalf of others, as a team, whilst complaining that it's all unfair'.
I think that all income should be taxed at source. To many big companies and millionaires escape paying diddly squat. The likes of Starbuck, Apple, Ebay, Google and so on get away with a lot more tax avoidance (be it legal) then everybody. Both the Tories and Leibour have allowed this to happen for years. I think that taxes shouldn't though, be used as a deterrent for growth. Corporation tax should be lower to encourage job creation and growth and income tax should have more bands. (People earning 10k 0% 15k 12.5% 20k 15% 25k 20% 30+k 30%) Companies should be made to take on a percentage of under 21's to reduce youth unemployment. Government should rethink overseas aid and use part the money to pay for job creation, apprenticeships and training for kids (20% unemployment is a disgrace!) Road Tax should be on fuel (the more you drive, the more you use the roads, the more you pay) and also a basic car insurance should be free on all vehicles with a MOT certificate (paid for with fuel tax) easier to collect and all cars would have insurance (to protect other road users) we need progressive politics in the UK...
If your company operated at a £1m profit, you'd happily just hand over £450k of it to the tax man when your accountant would suggest to you that you didn't necessarily have to? Not a chance in hell would I pump money into this country for it to be syphoned off by an endless list of money wasters.
My dad is a teacher, he wasn't on strike because his union thought it would be pointless striking when its so near the holidays and after exams. However he was supporting those on strike and for good reason. Those who say teachers get everything easy are idiots. I'll go through some of the arguments people put up for not striking. 1.They do get a good holidays, and get paid for it. Yes, however from my own experiences, using the 6 weeks summer holidays as an example my dad probably gets a week, maybe two to himself, the rest is totally consumed by schoolwork be it planning lessons or whatever it is (I've never asked as he's that busy). I can say this has been the case for the last 15 years that i can remember and he has been teaching for 30. So like people in the private sector he gets paid holidays, BUT he doesn't really use them as a holiday, more an extension of work. 2.The argument about pay. Would you come into work every day and expect to be paid for half of what you are doing? Agreed some teachers do turn up at quarter to 9 and leave at half past three. However my dad, almost every day leaves work at 7 and doesn't get back some night til 7, 8, 9 ,10 even 11 o'clock on some occasions and doesn't get paid for this. Extra curricular activities also are unpaid, volunteering his own time takes up just as much time as my dad is paid for. So when people go on about "TEACHERS RUINING PUPILS EDUCTION" "THEY TAKE TAKE TAKE" you yourself take a minute to think about what you are actually saying. The passion and drive my dad and thousands of other teachers have every day to better their pupils and educate them whilst dealing with real term pay cuts and idiotic education ministers and OFSTED which is for another day, makes your blood boil. End of rant.
Your dad was a teacher, well i'm half pissed, but would still like some paragraphs, rather than a wall of words man.
Listening to the radio yesterday and people reel off all these reasons why people shouldn't strike. It gets on your nerves when its all a load of rubbish and they have no insight into how hard people work for no incentive.
More an opinion though isn't it mate, that you think your dad works late and hard, doesn't apply to the industry does it? I know a couple who don't work half as much as what you've described. People who are airing an opinion on radio aren't ever going to please everybody, most opinions I've heard feel like it's just double standards. You take a kid out of school on their last week before summer break (where they usually spend the week watching videos and joking around in class) and you get threatened with fines and prison, yet the entire population of teachers can take a day off and none of them have to go to prison?
