Off Topic General Election

superhorns said:
The figures are just plucked out of the air. After the election they will not matter anyway. As with the Diane Abbott car crash interview it does make them look incompetent.
Click to expand...

In the eyes of the media and their puppets yes but:

A prediction of a possible hung parliament here from the Tory Times and YouGov:


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40101566

You must log in or register to see images




Would be ironic..... Tories= Strong and Stable??? I think not
 
Last edited:
yorkshirehornet said:
Serious discussion invited:

You must log in or register to see images
Click to expand...
There's always Albania Yorkie, or Bulgaria. They could all crowd into little Liechtenstein, or then again - if they want no corporation tax then they can go to the British Virgin Islands or the Isle of Man. This is known as 'holding the country to ransom' ie. do as we want or we leave - the same people who ramble on about 'sovereignty' and 'standing up to Europe' will happily wilt before this threat yet see no contradiction in their weakness. My angle is that if a firm leaves the country for this reason then they should no longer have access to our markets.
 
You know things are not going well when you find that half the comments following the debate are anti-Tory in the Daily Mail. <yikes>
 
You must log in or register to see images


Getting tighter by the day? Even if the figures are not correct, there is a definite trend.
 
very interesting debate last night.....

Lib Dems, Labour,Green and SNP were very strong and policy driven.
Plaid a little weak
Amber Rudd .. .the same Tory rhetoric... and she was attacked by the others.. .as was the absent May
UKIP.. would not buy a used car of Nuttall....
 
yorkshirehornet said:
and the % of people in the US below the poverty line???

You make your choices... or I guess you make your money at the expense of the young the sick the old the poor....
Click to expand...

In the U.K. the reduction in the corporation tax has produced a rise in the total take. The competitive rate actually attracts inward investment and retains present companies. One of the reasons our unemployment rate is so low compared to other countries. The tax helps the U.K. Government pay for its social commitments. Having an extremely competitive rate of CT is sound economics.
 
superhorns said:
In the U.K. the reduction in the corporation tax has produced a rise in the total take. The competitive rate actually attracts inward investment and retains present companies. One of the reasons our unemployment rate is so low compared to other countries. The tax helps the U.K. Government pay for its social commitments. Having an extremely competitive rate of CT is sound economics.
Click to expand...
Doesn't really square with the level of poverty in the US:

What is the poverty rate in the US 2016?
The official poverty rate is 14.5%, meaning 45.3 million people in the US live in poverty, up by over 8 million since 2008. An additional 97.3 million (33%) of people living in the United States are low-income, defined as incomes below twice the federal poverty line, or $47,700 for a family of four.

Where will Trump get his money for his social services if he reduces CT???
 
Ireland's growth rate is the fastest in the EU due to its very low trading corporation tax rate of 12.5%. The bullies in Brussels are trying to stop this, they want Ireland to be as unattractive to business as the rest of the area.
 
yorkshirehornet said:
Doesn't really square with the level of poverty in the US:

What is the poverty rate in the US 2016?
The official poverty rate is 14.5%, meaning 45.3 million people in the US live in poverty, up by over 8 million since 2008. An additional 97.3 million (33%) of people living in the United States are low-income, defined as incomes below twice the federal poverty line, or $47,700 for a family of four.

Where will Trump get his money for his social services if he reduces CT???
Click to expand...

You really do not understand business at all.

He is trying to address the problem of companies choosing to invest abroad instead of in the US. By reducing company costs he hopes to make the US a more attractive location for business. As proved elsewhere this is a sensible policy that will eventually increase the government's revenue.
 
superhorns said:
You really do not understand business at all.

He is trying to address the problem of companies choosing to invest abroad instead of in the US. By reducing company costs he hopes to make the US a more attractive location for business. As proved elsewhere this is a sensible policy that will eventually increase the government's revenue.
Click to expand...
The question is which is better ? The carrot or the stick - is it better to move to a bargain basement society to attract investment - or to punish firms which move their investments abroad ?
 
colognehornet said:
The question is which is better ? The carrot or the stick - is it better to move to a bargain basement society to attract investment - or to punish firms which move their investments abroad ?
Click to expand...

It is not just companies but capital flows to where it produces better results. I believe the punishment option will not work. The EU may try to impose universal tax rates but there is a whole world outside that they cannot control. If they get it wrong they could make the EU more uncompetitive and poorer.

The so called 'bargain basement' countries such as Singapore and Ireland seem to be doing extremely well. Do not confuse having a business friendly environment with dodgy companies moving their profits around to avoid tax, this could and should be stopped.
 
superhorns said:
It is not just companies but capital flows to where it produces better results. I believe the punishment option will not work. The EU may try to impose universal tax rates but there is a whole world outside that they cannot control. If they get it wrong they could make the EU more uncompetitive and poorer.

The so called 'bargain basement' countries such as Singapore and Ireland seem to be doing extremely well. Do not confuse having a business friendly environment with dodgy companies moving their profits around to avoid tax, this could and should be stopped.
Click to expand...
Globalization is a man made phenomenon SH. it does not have an invisible hand which controls us all - we decide how 'globalized' we want to be, and in which ways. The globalization of finance needs control - through things like the Tobin Tax, or through other limits, or even prohibitions, exchange controls etc. These were all a part of the Bretton Woods system up to the late 1970s. We saw the dangers during the banking crisis of having an economy which was over reliant upon financial services - a country which does not produce, but just counts, will always be potentially instable.
 
"I am confident we can fullfil the promise of Brexit and build a Britain that is stronger, fairer and more prosperous than it is today." This is what May will be saying today, and therein is the problem for her. A huge swathe of voters do not see their treatment from this government as being fair, and if it is so prosperous why are they not seeing a decent life. Her claim that the UK will be wealthier is at odds with warnings from a number of independent forecasters. The Office for Budget Responsibility has warned Brexit will "reduce growth in exports and imports" and has revised down growth forecasts for the economy. Many people who do not understand economics will however understand that all she is offering is more of the same, with additional measures to raise even more from them. This election was not needed, and shows up how ill prepared the Tory party was for it.
 
colognehornet said:
Globalization is a man made phenomenon SH. it does not have an invisible hand which controls us all - we decide how 'globalized' we want to be, and in which ways. The globalization of finance needs control - through things like the Tobin Tax, or through other limits, or even prohibitions, exchange controls etc. These were all a part of the Bretton Woods system up to the late 1970s. We saw the dangers during the banking crisis of having an economy which was over reliant upon financial services - a country which does not produce, but just counts, will always be potentially instable.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure who you were referring as 'we'?. Who is going to change the world to your vision? If the EU imposes more constraints it will just lose business to non EU countries. There is zero chance of worldwide agreement on most, if not all of your ideas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back