Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bristol City' started by Jiffie, Aug 15, 2020.
When myself and Red Alert one day agree on something, then I'll start believing
The liar is you. The poster who keeps slagging off others is you.
answers to your post.
Here is mine.
You want to read your own posts again and the responses. So health, unemployment, the army, life expectancy were answers to your life is harder.
I'm not trying to claim my life is harder. It isn't, and I couldn't really care less as it's another diversionary conversation. The older generations worked their arses off a lot harder than we do. Our generation financially are a bit fooked. It's not a contest. Everyone has their own challenges.
Point is, you claimed the conversation wasn't about taxes. We clearly had a conversation about taxes. That's it.
YOUR post get those responses about life why?
Just to make a point about taxes.
Had labour won the election last December, many rich people who like Gary Lineker already a fair wedge of tax (bar of course stamp duty on his Barbados property) would taken their money out of the UK (not Gary of course), so who do think would have paid for that shortfall given Labour's spending plans? and believe me there would have been one huge shortfall.
And a further point about Lineker.
The real point about Lineker is this, he is a football pundit (one who managed to keep his job, whilst others are sacrificed at the BBC alter of diversity, although that diversity does not extend to most female employees). He is entitled to his views that is how democracy works (something that red fascists don't understand, when it comes to people with different views to their own) but he cannot be allowed to bring the BBC into disrepute, something that he has done not only with his political views but also with foul mouthed rants about his specialist subject.
People always argue this and the point remains the same. Should we just never raise taxes on the rich just because they might threaten to take their money away?
Research tends to suggest that people don't tend to leave when taxes are properly enforced anyway. They just end up paying what they owe, and contribute to society as they should.
Starting at the top of the previous page with a cursory look at posts 241, 242, 243, 244, 245 … Leaves me stating you are without question wrong (untruthful).
You did post again an insult. I without malice missed a *, but an insult it was. You are arguing not about whether you insulted others, but how you sought to be derogatory. That is silly.
Clearly your post was structured in a manner that left that impression hence its responses. Your reactions? Disrespect and scorn. Silly again.
THAT IS DISGUSTING
You can complain. Scroll to the bottom. https://www.bristol.gov.uk/
The research that I read suggested that if as few as 3,500 of the UK's richest people took their money out of the UK would have left a catastrophic black hole that would have been left in labours tax spending and resulted in higher taxation yet again for the middle classes.
As I said before 15,000 of France's richest people did that and it virtually crippled the French economy.
I guess you need something to moan about now that Lee has gone
WHICH BIT DO YOU COMPLAIN UNDER?
The out of touch boomer section
Oblivion into gone Junior.
Go it let.
I have, used human rights/ equality angle ...
But are you surprised with the 'Lewis Hamilton' type we have as Mayor ?
Both are equally balanced with a massive chip on both shoulders, so much so I'm surprised they can manage to get out of bed every day.
So the answer is to just let rich people avoid tax for fear of some of them leaving? Not buying that I'm afraid.
Complaining about BLM under the equality angle. Yes that will work