Haven’t we just agreed that will just use others’ profits instead? Simple isn’t it?

So why does it need to make a profit?

to stop the places that don’t have one subsidising it for the lucky ones that do?

Damn, it looked like we were on to something there for a moment.

Why is that wrong?

And thm, what do you think ‘progressive’ means?

teamhurtmore – Member

Nah, just use others’ profits to pay for it instead.

And then scrap fees so that those who don’t go/can’t go to Uni pay for others to benefit (earn more) instead – and other progressive (sic) policies like this.

For someone who claims to be, quote, “politically neutral” you sound remarkably right-wing THM.

[Quote] No matter what, I think politics at Westminster will get a lot more interesting.[/quote]

That’s the great thing about Corbyn, grassroots Labour people love him because they think he’ll take the Labour party away from the centre and back to its roots. AntiLabour people love him because they think taking the party away from the centre will decimate its votes. The rest of us get to watch on in the most interesting period of politics for yonks.

Re tax: I’d be interested to hear how much revenue Taxing over 50k earners would raise. I always thought (perhaps wrongly) the rich were tricky to tax and desirable to attract which is why governments of all colours try to keep the tax regeme competitive. Mind you if Labour join the campaign to pull out of the EU with any success firms will not find it so easy to shift roles abroad.

No “wing” needed – just common sense. Nothing progressive about having poor people paying for others to benefit and earn more than them. Sounds remarkably regressive to me.

For someone who claims to be, quote, “politically neutral” you sound remarkably right-wing THM.

“Reality has a liberal bias.” 😀

So you’re using ‘progressive’ to mean something you agree with?

Any chance of answers instead of passive/aggressive responses?

No using it in its traditional meaning. You?

Oh I see JC is on his 3rd marriage/wife … Looks like he is into S.American beauties …

Told you like my communist womanising grandfather who cherished the female companion then passed on the STD to my grandma …

Ya, let’s hear him speak moral and ethics … 😯

Ya, I want to be the cult leader … share your women with me look into my eyes look into my eyes … 😆

Nothing progressive about having poor people paying for others to benefit and earn more than them. Sounds remarkably regressive to me.

What a remarkably dumb thing for someone who claims to have a degree in economics to say.

“Poor people” should be paying very little if any tax beyond VAT. If you want to do something about “regressive” policies then I suggest that you attack the Tories for substantially increasing VAT over the last 35 years.

What with you being “politically neutral” and all.

It’s a meaningless platitude.

Back to profit.
Why do you believe a public transport system should be run for profit?

Ah the swerve? Whose talking about VAT? We were on education, different topic altogether.

Shouldn’t you be watching the proms with all the other UKIPers?

We have agreed, it doesn’t. We are going to use others’ profits instead (although we have had one complication raised already)

You can’t argue VAT is regressive. In terms of spending its progressive.

So according to where you put your boundaries its either.

Google it.

You can’t argue VAT is regressive. In terms of spending its progressive.

Don’t be ridiculous. VAT is commonly accepted to be a regressive tax because as a proportion of income, the poor pay more of it.

teamhurtmore – Member

Ah the swerve? Whose talking about VAT? We were on education, different topic altogether.

Shouldn’t you be watching the proms with all the other UKIPers?

You haven’t really got a degree in economics, have you? 🙂

I am some manual building worker educated to basic CSE level and yet you resort to petty patronising retorts instead of engaging in intelligent debate.

You’re a fraud! 🙂

Why do you believe a w transport system should be run for profit?

Because its not really fair for poor people to subsidize people with decent jobs to commute?

Seriously you want to close a couple of hospitals to pay for new rolling stock?

Don’t go there OOB – we have pages and hanners before on that topic.

BBC 1 mate

Again with the passive/aggressive nonsense.

OOB, I disagree.
I think the societal benefits of a subsidised and fully integrated transport system outweigh your objection, which is idealogical rather practical.

‘Fairness’ is subjective.

@Dazh – you can argue it either way:

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/so-is-vat-regressive-day-2-and-the-debate-continues/5455

Because its not really fair for poor people to subsidize people with decent jobs to commute?

You don’t think that people with low paid jobs commute?

think the societal benefits of a subsidised and fully integrated transport system outweigh your objection

It’s not my objection. You requested objections I offered a couple. I haven’t got a dog in this fight.

@Dazh – you argue it either way:

No you can’t. It’s plainly ridiculous to look at VAT in terms of expenditure as opposed to a proportion of income. Income tax is measured quite rightly as a proportion of income, which is why it’s regarded as progressive (as long as the rates are higher for higher earners). If you do the same with VAT it’s clearly regressive.

VAT is an expenditure tax not and income tax. So it’s exactly the correct place to start. The ridiculous (if you are allowed to say that kind of fhing) thing is to conflate it with taxes on income

No you can’t. It’s plainly ridiculous to look at VAT in terms of expenditure as opposed to a proportion of income. Income tax is measured quite rightly as a proportion of income, which is why it’s regarded as progressive (as long as the rates are higher for higher earners). If you do the same with VAT it’s clearly regressive.

Presumably the same applies to corporation tax? That’s passed on to the consumer just like VAT.

The ridiculous (if you are allowed to say that kind of fhing) thing is to conflate it with taxes on income

That would be true if VAT was only imposed on optional luxury goods, but seeing as it’s levied on things like sanitary products, child car seats etc which people can’t do without or are obliged to use by law.

Without wishing to sidetrack things why hasn’t VAT been overhauled and also been made “progressive” like income tax. Surely premium goods priced over £50k should attract a higher VAT rate? There are loads of anomalies-mobility aids for the elderly attract 5% VAT but gambling 0%,aircraft repair and maintenance 0% but car repairs 20%,gold investment coins 0% child car seats 5% for example.Lots of tinkering over the years by various governments to support various bits of the economy but surely it is ripe for reform to make it fairer,more progressive and support the economy?

Considering BR was making a loss by 1955 the end result being the Beechings cuts and even then it was still making a loss years later. Then making a profit or even breaking even would be a novelty.

Actually more seriously the big problem with nationalised anything is they make a profit in good years and treasury nicks it, hence in the bad years there is nowt for investment or to cover the losses. Whole setup is daft.

bencooper – Member

Billy Bragg singing The Red Flag at the Corbyn rally, and the Tories saying he’s a threat to national security.

It’s a long way from New Labour, isn’t it? No matter what, I think politics at Westminster will get a lot more interesting.

Don’t try to pretend yoy give a ****.

I have had a few FB posts from nationalists claiming JC as one of their own. This is disgusting. The true sentiment of independence will shine through when “Scots” are appalled that their money may contribute to helping students South of “the border” through their higher education.

Don’t try to pretend yoy give a ****.

Well, for a start, I’m not a nationalist. Why so aggressive?

athgray – Member

I have had a few FB posts from nationalists claiming JC as one of their own. This is disgusting. The true sentiment of independence will shine through when “Scots” are appalled that their money may contribute to helping students South of “the border” through their higher education.

I’ve not seen anyone claiming Corbyn as a scottish nationalist, or pro-independence, that’d be completely idiotic. But most nationalists are left-leaning and so there’s a strong link there. I voted Yes, SNP and Corbyn- I reckon most scottish nationalists and scots in general with a vote in this election voted the same. He’s also the only major UK politician who doesn’t seem to consider the SNP to be devil worshippers, and who seems to understand that a scottish person’s vote is valid.

The rest of your post is just rabid nonsense. Many scottish people and nationalists are horrified by stuff that happens south of the border and would love to see it improved.

Specifically on tuition fees, this is my business- most scottish students are pretty unaware that English, Welsh and NI students are expected to go into lifelong debt to pay for their course, and when they find out, they’re appalled. I have this conversation several times a week with students and potential students, it’s sad but actually pretty heartwarming in a way. The Scottish NUS is right behind it too.

Ironically, Scottish students are generally more pissed off to find their RUK mates are being charged… You’d think it’d be the other way round and RUK students would be angry to find out the Scots are getting it for free but they hardly ever are.

@nick we had “progressive” VAT way back, there was a basic rate if 15% and a luxury rate of 25%. The luxury rate decimated many UK businesses for example yacht building. So all the tradesmen lost their jobs and we lost the skills. The Brits now buy beats built abroad is that a winner ? We used to have an extra 10% tax on cars as well as VAR but that was abolished too. The rest of Europe has VAT on food (8-10%) and far less lower band/exceptions, the EU tried to get us to drop our lower rate on gas/electric.

@tmh, we need to let Jeremy have a fair roll of the dice, my bet is the SNP will make mince meat of him and he’ll fall all over himself with consultations and look ridiculous appearing to stand against everything and for nothing

we need to let Jeremy have a fair roll of the dice, my bet is the SNP will make mince meat of him

😆

jambalaya – Member

…….way back, there was a basic rate if 15% and a luxury rate of 25%.

That’s not true. We have never had a basic rate of 15% VAT and a luxury rate of 25% VAT at the same time.

I suspect the rest of your post is similarly inaccurate but I can’t be bothered to delve into it.

EDIT : Actually I did decide to delve deeper and the 25% VAT on yachts, which is obviously only 5% more than now, only lasted for about 5 years.

I very much doubt that the entire yacht building industry in the UK collapsed over a period of 5 years because VAT was 5% higher than it is now.

I suspect that wealthy yacht buying punters were able to scrape together the extra 5% VAT for their luxury yachts.

You haven’t really got a degree in economics, have you?

I am some manual building worker educated to basic CSE level and yet you resort to petty patronising retorts instead of engaging in intelligent debate.

8)

Genuine question:
As a poor (by STW standards) person, what will Jeremy Corbyn do for me?

I appreciate that it is a selfish question, and the politically minded members of STW will already have me marked down as a selfish tory, but I can’t afford to be any more generous than I’m already being and would like an answer.

🙂

Considering BR was making a loss by 1955 the end result being the Beechings cuts and even then it was still making a loss years later.

Years later? You mean every year up to now despite passenger doubling since 1994.

Privitised rail received 5.4Bn subsidy last year.

http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/2015/passenger-numbers/