Cyclone Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 So long as the voluntary work is something she's prepared to give up then it's not stopping her being available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 So long as the voluntary work is something she's prepared to give up then it's not stopping her being available. What is the difference between voluntary and mandatory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Perhaps so, but if we are to treat the unemployed as such then perhaps we should do so likewise with other 'subsidised' individuals. Lets start charging a tax upon housing of some £25 billion per year, it's only £1000 per property. Let's increase it above RPI by 0.5% every year for a decade. Once homeowners/landlords have paid the 1/4 of a trillion £ back, then maybe we can return to some form of normality. Let's take stagecoachs's £340 million profit off of them and then remove all subsidies and charge them 1/4 of a billion for a century to return the subsidies granted unto them. We already tax property, it's called council tax... Most home owners will of course pay far more tax than that as they generally have an income which is taxed and then they spend that income incurring more tax. What is the .25 trillion that home owners should somehow be responsible for? Why shouldn't those who rent be responsible as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 What is the difference between voluntary and mandatory? vol·un·tar·y/ˈvälənˌterē/ Adjective:Done, given, or acting of one's own free will: "voluntary contributions". man·da·to·ry/ˈmandəˌtôrē/ Adjective: Required by law or rules; compulsory: "wearing helmets is mandatory". Of or conveying a command: "he did not want the guidelines to be mandatory". It's quite clear, one is required and the other isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Let's take stagecoachs's £340 million profit off of them That would be theft. and then remove all subsidies and charge them 1/4 of a billion for a century to return the subsidies granted unto them. You mean subsidies that they get in order to run certain bus services? Subsidies that could in other words be called payments for services rendered. If you want to stop subsidies to them, prepare to see them stop running rural bus services and removing all concessionary fares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 We already tax property, it's called council tax... Most home owners will of course pay far more tax than that as they generally have an income which is taxed and then they spend that income incurring more tax. What is the .25 trillion that home owners should somehow be responsible for? Why shouldn't those who rent be responsible as well? If you believe council tax is a tax upon property then you are mistaken. Tenants pay income tax too. Income tax is a tax upon income. But only certain types of income. 0.25 trillion is the direct cash subsidy to property via housing benfit over a decade inflation adjusted to current cash terms, there are of course other subsidies, some of which are even greater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 The people who will benefit will be the companies that get this free labour and the many service provider that get paid by the DWP the country will not benefit as these provider have to be paid. If a company gets free labour then their overheads are lower, if their overheads are lower they may lower the cost of their product. I do think that if the government have to pay for the unemployed to go on work experience they should use the public sector and charities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 If a company gets free labour then their overheads are lower, if their overheads are lower they may lower the cost of their product. I do think that if the government have to pay for the unemployed to go on work experience they should use the public sector and charities. Why not let them use communal public land n order to productive things of benefit to all. Doh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 If you believe council tax is a tax upon property then you are mistaken. Really, perhaps you could explain that. The tax is payable once per household (ie group of people that live in a house) and is dependent on the value of the property... Sounds pretty much like a tax on property. Tenants pay income tax too. Income tax is a tax upon income. But only certain types of income. I didn't say that tenants didn't pay it. And it's most income, there are a few exceptions but not many. 0.25 trillion is the direct cash subsidy to property via housing benfit How do you think this involves most home owners then? I've never been given any money directly or indirectly via HB. over a decade inflation adjusted to current cash terms, there are of course other subsidies, some of which are even greater. Which most home owners receive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Why not let them use communal public land n order to productive things of benefit to all. Doh! Chem1st are you smoking weed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.