He's a lad

[sime42]

Be handy if they were all lorry drivers ....

And carers, and fruit pickers, and meat processors, and nurses ...........

[sime42]

Sounds like your saying immigrants are destroying the country as the country is "largely run by immigrants" in your words. 

I didn't realise I was being that ambiguous, but fair enough.
No, that wasn't what I was saying.

[trigger_andy]

16 minutes ago, sime42 said:

14 hours ago, Stubby said:

Be handy if they were all lorry drivers ....

And carers, and fruit pickers, and meat processors, and nurses ...........

Pay British wages, get British workers. Now that the Haulage industry have finally realised this they have greatly increased their wages and now there is an influx of people showing interest in getting trained up. Who'd have guessed? 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

On 07/09/2021 at 17:16, doobin said:

Should have been a percentage tax on the estate IMHO. What is it, a 72k cap? 72k is naff all of a house in Brighton, but a wacking great lump of the same house in Huddersfield.

 

And another thing- who here thinks any of this will reach the front line care workers? The hell it will. They'll still be on minimum wage, topped up by our taxes so that they can just about afford to exist. Yet another Tory subsidy to big business (and care is going to be very big indeed).

 

Your suggestion, albeit not ideal,  is better than what has been done.

 

What he’s done is a short term sticky plaster on a gaping wound which ‘might’ just stem the bleeding till the next election when it (might) be someone else’s problem....  And so it has been going on for decades with no true insightful leadership and clear thinking from politicians focussed on the 4 year popularity cycle. 
 

Personally, I’m sick to the back teeth of (seemingly) every man jack wanting another 1% for this or that and justifying it with “...it’s ‘only’ 1,2,3 %...”

 

Theres 2% on council tax for social care, there’s 3.4.5% for the old bill, there’s extra now on NI, add ‘em all up and see what all these random 1 & 2%s amount to in total. 
 

They'll end up strangling the golden goose!

 

You simply cannot rely upon ever increasing taxation on an ever decreasing work force (automation, robotics etc.)

 

Ive got the right hump with this!

[openspaceman]

31 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

You simply cannot rely upon ever increasing taxation on an ever decreasing work force (automation, robotics etc.)

I agree and on the assumption that there is enough money within the economy to fund increased care/health care costs what is your proposal?

 

Government and big industry doesn't seem to want to flatten out the peaks of high pay, because it leads to "braindrain". Chasing efficiency in public bodies doesn't seem to work. It is human nature to want more and that leads to a widening of the gap between ris=ch and poor. Philosophically  this doesn't bother me, I have generally had enough and not been overly envious of the super rich, my problem is that this is the part of the society that is disproportionately damaging our environment,

 

It always struck me that purchase tax was more sensible than VAT as it simply applied the tax at the point of production of luxury goods. Mind deciding what is a luxury may cause some comment.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

3 hours ago, openspaceman said:

I agree and on the assumption that there is enough money within the economy to fund increased care/health care costs what is your proposal?

 I’ll keep it intentionally brief and at high level because there are a million rabbit holes that could be opened up.  👍🏻
 

What is happening is a vain and misdirected effort to treat the symptom rather than the cause (in large part although there are some justifiable exceptions.)

 

Care of extended family, as a default start position, should be with the family - not the state. People should take responsibility for their own situations rather than having the state fund them. 
 

Taking that as a default start point, funding the exceptions to that POV should perhaps be state subsidised. 
 

Wealth disparity is at an all time high and it is not appropriate to draw taxation from the lower tiers to fund state deliverables with such a degree of wealth disparity. 
 

There needs to be a whole scale shake up of taxation. 
 

 

Edited September 9, 2021 by kevinjohnsonmbe

[openspaceman]

52 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Wealth disparity is at an all time high and it is not appropriate to draws taxation from the lower tiers to fund state deliverables with such a degree of wealth disparity. 
 

One little thing we can agree on then

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

1 hour ago, openspaceman said:

One little thing we can agree on then

Does that mean you disagree with the rest?  (I'll take a small area of agreement over nothing mind....😂)

 

 

[eggsarascal]

30 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Does that mean you disagree with the rest?  (I'll take a small area of agreement over nothing mind....😂)

 

 

Nothing wrong with being a bottom feeder, (make of that what you like). As trig said above we knew it was coming, someone's got to pay the £30 million back that Hancock gave to his neighbour, ya know, the pub landlord who got the PPE contract.

 

It stinks, and they wonder why more people are staying under the radar.

[openspaceman]

34 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Does that mean you disagree with the rest?  (I'll take a small area of agreement over nothing mind....😂)

 

 

No I broadly like the ideas except  the wealthy do tend to look after their own, albeit by putting them in a comfortable care home rather than living with the rest of the family. Neither my parents nor the in laws ended up in care (except my mother was discharged  from hospital to a care home which was funded by her money but she died during the first night). I had cared for her at her home alongside my younger brother and late sister's daughter in rota prior to hospitalisation.