Forum menu
£700k pension? Didn't Gordon Brown lift the cap on pensions which enabled this to happen? If you look into it, I think you'll be surprized about how unfair he and his party have been towards the normal working class people of this country!
[b]tell me do rooms get darker when you enter them because you strike me as someone dense enough to attract light[/b]
Quality, absolute quality. Possibly the finest insult I've seen...
Huge swathes of the country have suffered economic hardship over a long period. Typically the old manufacturing bases, legacy industries, the old "engine" of the British economy. Over several decades, those places have gradulally become too dependant on the public sector as the principal employer. Too many people are dependant on benefits in these areas too. The local economy is broken!
It's like a life support system keeping a brain dead body's heart beating, but it IS dead.
What these places need is commercial stimulation - something the coalition government are addressing to a small degree. Much more needs to be done however.
The solution is enterprise, not increased dependency on an already overburdened tax system. These areas are Labour strongholds - people there have been brainwashed into thinking they are victims who need to be supported. If there was a sea change in attitute in these communities - the majority embracing an enterprise culture, there would be a huge turn around within 20 years.
Don't hold you breath though, when you are one step away from state dependency and there are no decent jobs, the temptation of Labour's cash splurges takes away any incentive an individual might have to build a better life. You could also be sure your peers and friends would become resentful if they thought you were bettering yourself. Proper socialisn! A vicious downward spiral of underachievment and state dependency!
When will people realise how destructive a Labour administration is? How their politics ruin the country's prosperity, their ideals kill enterprise. How it breeds inequality. We'll end up like a third world country with them in the driving seat. Good job they aren't in power now!
[i]the majority embracing an enterprise culture, there would be a huge turn around within 20 years.[/i]
yes, that's all these people need, a change in attitude....
[i]Don't hold you breath though, when you are one step away from state dependency and there are no decent jobs, [s]the temptation of Labour's cash splurges takes away[/s] there isn't any incentive an individual might have to build a better life.[/i]
Fixed, and it didn't cost the taxpayer a penny.
£700k pension? Didn't Gordon Brown lift the cap on pensions which enabled this to happen?
Good idea, why bother answering the question, after all it's not like you have an answer is it?
What these places need is commercial stimulation
You mean subsidies don’t you?..is that not sacrilege? aren't markets perfect? Nothing to stop the capitalists moving in and making a killing there right now is there. I know it appears that the market has decided to not give a sh1t and leave them to rot as we can make things cheaper in China. Like you I also blame the government for this fact
EDIT 🙄 just to be certain you pick up on it
[img] 
[/img]
You mean subsidies don’t you?..is that not sacrilege?
see, typical socialist, only possible answer is subsidies! tax and spend, always the same
How about [b]lower taxes[/b] - the best form of commercial stimulation you'll ever see!
So scrapping all taxes altogether and providing no services would give the ultimate stimulation?
Apparently who knew it was so simple
See typical right wing zealot only way is to give cash breaks to the rich to set up factories in deprived areas so they can make more profit. That is all the market/enterprising types actually care about profit which is my point , glad you agree.
give cash breaks to the rich to set up factories
See, who said that? you're still stuck in your socialist mindset!
I said [b]lower[/b] taxes
for all!
less government, less control, less intervention, less tax.
who built the railways? was it the government?
who built the canals? was it the government?
who built the mills and factories? was it the government?
who built the copper and coal mines? was it the government?
see, typical socialist,
see typical right wing zealot, ask a question that doesn't fit with their blinkered view and don't expect an answer. Fingers in the ears lalalala i'm not listening. lala11 from lalaland
😆
who caused the curent recesion? was it the government?
who built the railways? was it the government?
What a stupid example. In almost every other european country, railways were built to central government plans. They all have far better organised networks, which are cheaper to run and to travel on, faster, and more likely to go by sensible routes to where you want to go.
There is a good book about why the uk rail system is so screwed, I think it is called eleven minutes late. Interesting reading, and a great example of why purely market led building of railways is a terrible idea.
Joe
Mine owners were great examples when the pits were opened and privately run:
- insisting the ponies were rescued before the men following flood and collapse in the main tunnel.
- not allowing rescuers through their mine to rescue workers from an adjoining mine resulting in all trapped miners dieing.
-throwing surviving families wholesale out of their pit owned homes after their husbands were killed.
I'm sure the mill and factory owners were equally nice to their workforces.
These are the sorts of things history shows us happen when profit and greed dictate actions. It still happens today in many countries around the world with little government regulation/control and labour protection.
Those who invest in such countries would happily see the same thing accross the UK if there was a profit incentive.
less government, less control, less intervention, less tax.
It has failed. Many times. I wouldn't expect you among others to admit that.
give cash breaks to the rich to set up factoriesSee, who said that? you're still stuck in your socialist mindset!
I said lower taxes
for all!
Sorry so the poor people on benefits will set up the factories in your low tax regume because the banks will lend them the money as they are low risk and have no capital to secure against said loan...sorry my mistake that approach by banks seems to have worked well in the last few years iirc. You seem rather keen to thelp the poor sure you are not getting the socialist itch? Twang from your conscisnce? moral awakening?Epiphany?
I agree that private money bulit all you mention but at [literally] what cost to human lives as the market decided that ponies or the machines continuing to work in the mills was of greater value than the lives of the workers there including children. Do you not notice this slight failure in your market model ? You surely wont argue it was safer then for workers or they enjoyed better conditions? Sure the owners made more money [though the workers received subsistence wages]that way but some of us are a little uncomfortable with the conditions the unregulated market delivers. I did not mention slavery, arms trade, cigareetes, asbestos and a host of other things industries have done in pursuit of profit above the health of its employees and fellow citizens. It is only perfect if your only goal is maximum profit /equilibrium at ANY cost.
less government, less control, less intervention, less tax.
What, like Dubai, where less government, control and intervention results in the near-slavery for hundreds of thousands of workers? Yeah, great. A state effectively run by capitalist corporations for their own interests. Fantastic.
See, every part of any argument you ever make can be ripped to pieces, Labrat.
who built the railways? was it the government?
who built the canals? was it the government?
who built the mills and factories? was it the government?
who built the copper and coal mines? was it the government?
Who died building the railways, canals, mills, factories and mines? Who worked in virtual slavery in said railways, mills, factories and mines? Who benefitted from the wealth generated?
Nothing wrong with private enterprise funding development; quite a lot wrong with letting private enterprise exploit workers though. Which tends to happen, if private enterprise is allowed too much control. Benevolent and altruistic employers are incredibly rare.
Oh, and who ran the railways and canals when private enterprise lost interest/found them unprofitable? Who had to deal with the poor when the mills, factories and mines closed? Clue: It wasn't those who profited from them...
Who worked in virtual slavery in said railways, mills, factories and mines?
So, we're not in bondage now Fed?, with each child born into £17,000 of debt?
Who benefitted from the wealth generated?
You tell me - was it the residents of Saltaire? or perhaps the residents of Port Sunlight? maybe Bournville?
I'd be willing to bet you've never even 'king heard of them Ernie! Give you a clue - they were not built by the government...
I've been to Saltaire, and have ancestors who worked at both Port Sunlight and Bournville. How about that one then, eh?
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Sunlight ]
Lever's stated aims were "to socialise and Christianise business relations and get back to that close family brotherhood that existed in the good old days of hand labour." He claimed that Port Sunlight was an exercise in profit sharing, but rather than share profits directly, he invested them in the village. He said, "It would not do you much good if you send it down your throats in the form of bottles of whisky, bags of sweets, or fat geese at Christmas. On the other hand, if you leave the money with me, I shall use it to provide for you everything that makes life pleasant – nice houses, comfortable homes, and healthy recreation."
[/url]
Hmm, sounds a bit Socialist to me! I'm surprised you used that as an example! 😆
Ha ha! You provide 3 examples that are the exception to the norm. And they provided benefits only to their workers and families, not to society as a whole. So, not for purely altruistic reasons then.
Tis a very large, and very deep hole you're digging. Let's hope your employer can provide you with healthcare, housing and adequate nourishment, eh?
[img] 
[/img]
You're entertaining, Labby, I'll give you that. You provide great sport. 😉
Fantastic Fred.
Look at that - examples of free market economics where employers [b]choose[/b] to reward their employees with better than market conditions, quality housing, al the perks, in the belief that the workers would be happier and more productive, and guess what, hugely successful profit making businesses! Remarkable, incentive and reward.
So, by your own admission free market economics [i]isn't[/i] all about keeping the workers in poverty, is it Fred?
No sorry I'm afraid I've won and you've lost. Finished now. You had your chance, but blew it I'm afraid. Anyway I'm bored and I'm watching [b]CSI: Miami[/b] so shh please there's a good lad. Thanks.
X
I don't.
Look at that - examples of free market economics where employers choose to reward their employees with better than market conditions, quality housing, al the perks, in the belief that the workers would be happier and more productive, and guess what, hugely successful profit making businesses! Remarkable, incentive and reward.
Got an example of this in the last 50 years?
How many folk benfited from this?
It is quite interesting quite how Mag's great experiment in Chicago school economics has reduced the UK to a one trick pony which appears to have broken a leg.