Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

She did, but the public were less bothered about Brexit then as they thought the issue had been decided and would be acted upon. JC was able to successfully turn the agenda onto other issues.

This is less the case this time around, Brexit has not been delivered.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

He didn't mention anything about not crippling the country and its economy. I have to give it to Corbyn, he would do that very well indeed.

Those who are even thinking of voting for that dangerous Marxist should bear that in mind. Don't say you weren't warned.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Seems fair to me. There is no moral justification for such extreme wealth. What is more practical is a wealth tax over a certain number of millions to redistribute this wealth to the citizens of the country that actually deserve it.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The politics of envy. Talk about killing the goose that lays golden eggs.

When are these people going to work out where all the money comes from to support the failing NHS?

---------- Post added at 15:28 ---------- Previous post was at 15:27 ----------

I can tell that you are Corbyn's kind of fella. Why not take a holiday in Venezuala to get a taste of his medicine? I really don't think you'd like it much.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Bless ..

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

It's true. They want everyone to get paid for doing nothing.

I think that might have an impact on our competitiveness....

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Any more tired cliches to wheel out? This one dimensional cartoon world you live in is fast becoming comical: "Marxist Corbyn, Politics of Envy, Goose that lays golden eggs, Holidays in Venezuela, etc." More please! .. buys more popcorn ...

The world is far more complicated that you seem to be able to grasp.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Bless.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

It’s more accurate to say that one of the key strategies of the New Labour project was to create a client state in which large numbers of middle class voters were also direct recipients of handouts. The tax credit system, for example, was designed to deposit a small amount of money in the bank accounts of even reasonably well off families. It acted like a mini party political broadcast that appeared on millions of bank statements every month. It has proven extraordinarily difficult to unpick as well, because Gordon Brown located the tax credit system in HMRC, not the benefits agency, which is part of the reason Universal Credit has been such a pig to roll out. Add to that non means tested winter fuel payments and free TV licences and you find Labour really did have almost everybody on one benefit or another by the time it was booted out in 2010.

It remains to be seen what Labour plans to do with UC - it’s hard to see how they can be true to the many criticisms levelled at it, and things like the two child policy in the tax credit and child benefit systems, unless they’re planning to just halt and reverse the reforms. If they do that, then we will indeed end up with a situation where very large numbers of people are receiving benefits of one kind or another.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Define “Deserve”

Provide examples of those “Deserving”

Give me details of how much money you will award them, and reasons for attributing those amounts.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

People who sit on their arses do not deserve distributed wealth, which is what this Labour clown MP was advocating.

Labour's stance would be, doesn't matter if you hold a degree or have high skills, because the person who does not or who cannot be arsed, will get the same as the person who has worked hard to achieve his profession.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Shouldn't Labour be cheering that somebody, eg Sir Jim Ratcliffe of INEOS, can go from a council house to being a self-made billionaire. Although he did benefit from going to a grammar school.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

The whole idea of people making billions is a failure of capitalism. If there's that level of income and profits in an industry competition should arise and drive prices down.

Of course we sold nationalised industry on the cheap to allow these profits to arise in markets where no genuine competition exists. Yay!

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

How dare they make profits and generate taxes.:rolleyes: Even Cuba has had to relent and allow some capitalism, iirc mainly tourism related.

Competition can't work in all arenas. If something requires a large investment to build, there has to be enough spare demand for it not to be just sitting there as an expensive white elephant. Even if the plant was built, the costs still have to be recovered, so there is little scope for price reduction. You can't easily have, eg 10 plants, all working at an average 10% capacity.

Just look at the high street and energy supply companies going bust, to see what happens when you add extra business costs and squeeze prices.

Re: Election 2019, Week 1
 

Nobody says that you can’t generate profits, as you say it creates tax revenues. My point, which you seem to have missed, is that economic theory is that suppliers enter the market and drive down prices in the consumer interest. You know, the interest of the 99% of us that don’t own significant shares in previously nationalised industry and are isolated from genuine competition - like EU workers competing for our jobs but for companies.

The theory has failed.

---------- Post added at 18:59 ---------- Previous post was at 18:29 ----------

Lays golden eggs... in Monaco it would appear.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...ax-monaco-move