iron sky Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 The biggest problem we got is fast riseing prices. Food,gas,electric,water,rents keep going up but wages are falling behide, peoples incomes working or not no longer covers there living costs. I do belive one day soon perhaps no one will be able to pay for any of there bills and then what do we do? Crime will rise to an all time high as people will steal to live as some are already doing now. Theres no straight forward answer to this mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 The biggest problem we got is fast riseing prices. Food,gas,electric,water,rents keep going up but wages are falling behide, peoples incomes working or not no longer covers there living costs. I do belive one day soon perhaps no one will be able to pay for any of there bills and then what do we do? Crime will rise to an all time high as people will steal to live as some are already doing now. Theres no straight forward answer to this mess. The recent crime stats contradict your theory... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 If it gives you a warm feeling thinking they do, then go for it, but clearly you are wrong. As an example a family with two children with one working adult on minimum wage gets substantially more tax credits and child tax credits then they pay out in tax, so they are not subsidizing their next door neighbours tax credits or their own tax credits. They won’t even be paying enough tax to cover the cost of educating their children let alone all the other services they receive. It doesn't work that way. Like I said nobody can know or dictate what exactly the taxes they pay in gets spent on. If you pay taxes in any way you contribute to everything that taxes are used to provide. All you are highlighting is that some people put in more than they take out while others take out more than they put in. We have a broadly progressive tax system so that's how it is supposed to work. There's nothing special about it. Higher earners get no special privilege because of it. And there is no reason to behave in some fawning deferential way towards higher earners, which is what you seem to expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iron sky Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 The recent crime stats contradict your theory... Perhaps for now wait untill April 2013 arrives. Should be rememberd figures can be made to look good so it looks like the people in power are doing a great job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Perhaps for now wait untill April 2013 arrives. Should be rememberd figures came to made to look good so it looks like the people in power are doing a great job. So why would they ever show bad figures..if the figures always looked rosy then I'd agree with you but they don't.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 It doesn't work that way. Like I said nobody can know or dictate what exactly the taxes they pay in gets spent on. If you pay taxes in any way you contribute to everything that taxes are used to provide. All you are highlighting is that some people put in more than they take out while others take out more than they put in. We have a broadly progressive tax system so that's how it is supposed to work. There's nothing special about it. Higher earners get no special privilege because of it. And there is no reason to behave in some fawning deferential way towards higher earners, which is what you seem to expect. If you want to buy lots of things to a value of £1000 and I give you £100 and someone else gives you £900 then my contribution is 10% of the cost of the items, but if you give me £200 back them my contribution is zero. This is no different to the people that get more money back in tax credits than they pay in tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenRivers Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 How long, and what might be the results of the introduction of Austerity, Cuts, Inflation and what might the results be? Hopefully, it will change the mindset of future governments in times of boom or recession, that spending should be in proportion to income and we should only spend what our tax revenue will allow us to spend, instead of borrowing money all the time, ladening future generations with high debts and banking on future growth to pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 What I tries to communncate for discussion was how long do you think this austerity will continue, 1 Year, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years? How long can they, those that rule in our name, whatever the brand on the tin, continue on this road. What do you see as the end result of having travelled on this austerity road, everyone working and claiming benefits? Most living it up like never before? The trickle down becomes a flood? How do you see the country, after this load on bank imposed boll**ks via blaming whatever government, ends this austerity? Sad to say it but Austerity might well be here to stay. We no longer manufacture enough to pay our way when others can do it cheaper, our position as 'financial capital' has taken a beating with the libor scandal, and the financial situation in Europe could bring us all down, allowing the Bric countries to dominate. The rich will continue to get richer, and the poor will get poorer, (the 1% against the 99%) The gap will become evermore apparent. Unemployment or part time employment will increase and tax revenue will fall leaving less money for welfare, NHS, education etc. As the infrastructure wears out there will be no money to repair it, so roads and public buildings will become more dilapidated. Anyone who can afford to will probably move abroad to make a new life. In other words we will more and more resemble a third world country. Empires rise and empires fall. Ours is in decline. However, trying to be positive, we have always been an inventive and resourceful nation, so anything is possible. We might come up with the next big thing which could pull us through or maybe a new policy will make a measurable enough difference to get us back on the right track. Let's hope we at least find a way to pull together, rediscover our old fashioned work ethic, and appreciate a less materialistic way of life, which would be no bad thing whatwver lies in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Sad to say it but Austerity might well be here to stay. We no longer manufacture enough to pay our way when others can do it cheaper,... That's not completely true. The UK can't compete on high -volume low-skill manufacturing, But it can (and does) compete on highly-sophisticated high-technology solutions. Unfortunately, if your economy shifts from a high-volume low-tech economy to a low-volume high-tech economy, there will be far fewer jobs. So why have the government been encouraging unrestrained immigration for the past many years? Another thread talks about the cheap labour rates enjoyed by Kia in Slovakia. There's nothing wrong with Kia cars (or rather there's certainly a lot less wrong with them than there was when we had a Kia Sedonia in 2000:hihi: ) - A US car writer said of that car: "This is absolutely the worst car I have ever had the misfortune to assess. - And I wrote on the original Lada.":hihi: BMW make cars in Germany. BMW cars are not cheap and they do not enjoy the cheap labour rates Kia have to pay. Yet BMW aren't going out of business and - although perhaps their order books are a little lower this year than they would like - they don't seem to be panicking, either. The UK can't compete on quantity - but it can compete on quality. and the financial situation in Europe could bring us all down, allowing the Bric countries to dominate. Yet so many people think the UK Should just pull out of Europe and go it alone? On the one hand, the UK should pull out of Europe but on the other the UK can't survive without Europe. Which is it? The rich will continue to get richer, and the poor will get poorer, (the 1% against the 99%) The gap will become evermore apparent. Unemployment or part time employment will increase and tax revenue will fall leaving less money for welfare, NHS, education etc. The UK doesn't have very many of anybody in the 93rd percentile or below. most people in the UK aren't in 'the other 99%' (well, not spread out amongst them) they're in the top 6 or 7% The poor will certainly get poorer, but they'll still be fabulously wealthy compared to those who are really poor and there's a limit to the bit about 'the rich will get richer'. The only way that the rich can get richer is if their companies generate more wealth and the only way that will happen is if global markets improve and people can buy whatever it is that the rich are selling. The bit about the poor getting poorer is very likely, IMO. If the world generates less wealth, breeds more people and produces less food, many of the poor are going to starve to death. Unless, of course, there are food riots - in which case there will be alternative ways of dying. Food prices in the UK are going to rise - and the price rise is likely to be significant. The UK diet relies heavily on meat and on dairy products and the grain crop failures this year will mean a shortage of animal foodstuff. Initially, there may be a glut of meat (as herds are killed off) but then there will be a shortage and the prices will rise. IMO (and I'm biased; I'm a 'country boy') the UK [along with a number of other countries] should do more to move towards (you'll never get there) self-sufficiency in food production. Anyone who can afford to will probably move abroad to make a new life. Where will they move to? Where are these countries which are run more efficiently/successfully and which offer better standards of living? If those countries are indeed operated more efficiently and are more successful, why isn't the UK operated along the same lines? ... Let's hope we at least find a way to pull together, rediscover our old fashioned work ethic, and appreciate a less materialistic way of life, which would be no bad thing whatwver lies in the future. I don't know where the 'Work ethic' went - but it does appear to have gone. The BBC showed a programme a couple of years ago in which they replaced a number of migrant Latvian agricultural workers with an equal number of Brits. None of the Brits managed to meet the output levels of the Latvians and most of them quit after a day or two, saying 'the work is too hard.' I worked as an agricultural worker when I was a teenager. Picking bloody radishes! - It was back-breaking, mindless, soul-destroying work. (Fortunately, I had a teenager's back. ) - but it was money. The migrant Calabrian workers I worked alongside had to live on their earnings - which weren't much. They didn't complain. i doubt you would get Brits who were prepared to do that work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 If you want to buy lots of things to a value of £1000 and I give you £100 and someone else gives you £900 then my contribution is 10% of the cost of the items, but if you give me £200 back them my contribution is zero. This is no different to the people that get more money back in tax credits than they pay in tax. Yeah [sigh] there are net gainers and net losers. So? You're still not explaining why you think this means we should be somehow be deferentially thankful to higher tax payers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.