RonJeremy Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 If someone likes shooting, why should we subsidise them? To carry out checks on them to protect the public .... among quite a lot of other reasons already mentioned in this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 If someone likes reading books, why should we subsidise that? Books are educational, they're important. You can't possibly suggest guns are more important? Even though everything is becoming digital, we're not there yet. Schools and families can't afford ipads or kindles for every child. I take my son to the library every week. If someone enjoys cycling, why should we build roads for them to cycle on with no cost to themselves? Because they save lives. If someone likes canoeing why should we maintain the waterways? Because waterways aren't used for just canoeing. If someone likes fishing, why should we make sure the water is clean? Anglers pay for a fishing licence. They also pay for day tickets or season tickets. This pays for the upkeep of their waterways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 Books are educational, they're important. You can't possibly suggest guns are more important? Even though everything is becoming digital, we're not there yet. Schools and families can't afford ipads or kindles for every child. I take my son to the library every week. Because they save lives. Because waterways aren't used for just canoeing. Anglers pay for a fishing licence. They also pay for day tickets or season tickets. This pays for the upkeep of their waterways. And I think the libraries are free - cheaper than a shotgun cert - so yes more important and even more subsidised. Bikes save lives??? Waterways are free to canoeists so in effect subsidised I bet the cost of everything a fisherman benefits from is not factored in a costing by a fanatical lunatic called Monbiot. I think it was Boris who described him as a "useful idiot". So way off the mark with everything, he proved the point against everything he argues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 And I think the libraries are free - cheaper than a shotgun cert - so yes more important and even more subsidised. Bikes save lives??? Waterways are free to canoeists so in effect subsidised I bet the cost of everything a fisherman benefits from is not factored in a costing by a fanatical lunatic called Monbiot. I think it was Boris who described him as a "useful idiot". So way off the mark with everything, he proved the point against everything he argues. I didn't say bikes save lives. I said cycle paths ect save lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Clowning Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 You cant keep crops from being stripped with a book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted April 30, 2014 Author Share Posted April 30, 2014 You cant keep crops from being stripped with a book. No, you could use a gun. But you should have to pay for a licence.....Full price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I didn't say bikes save lives. I said cycle paths ect save lives. ha ha ha ha Jeez (exasperated) ---------- Post added 30-04-2014 at 23:35 ---------- You cant keep crops from being stripped with a book. Technically you may be able to, but you have to throw it very accurately and very hard. ---------- Post added 30-04-2014 at 23:36 ---------- No, you could use a gun. But you should have to pay for a licence.....Full price. So you say....... ---------- Post added 30-04-2014 at 23:40 ---------- No, you could use a gun. But you should have to pay for a licence.....Full price. Shows how much you know about the subject - no one can get a shotgun license in this country they don't exist - it's a certificate. You read and believe Monbiot if you like, if there's a stick to get, rest assured he'll have the wrong end of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Clowning Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 No, you could use a gun. But you should have to pay for a licence.....Full price. And what is the full price ? How much are you saving the tax payer ? I know a farmers job is made easier by owning one and as growing food benefits us all I don't see what all the fuss is about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 Beacuse we have collectivly pooled certain things in the coutry for the common good. Then I'm sure you would be highly in favour of a much more progressive tax system for the common good. Where we reduce taxes on the poorest, an increase taxes on the wealthiest for the common good. Abolish beer duty, tobacco duty, council tax. Replace with higher income tax, and a land value tax, increased capital gains taxes, and large taxes on all forms of unearned income, such as 'rent received from property'. For the common good! ---------- Post added 01-05-2014 at 00:07 ---------- No they arnt. The vast majority of Farmers hold shotgun licenses , and you dont get much more working class than Farmers. Farmers can be of two types. Those that farm the land, and those that farm the people and money. One is working class, the other is not. The idle sod who does nothing is now to receive greater subsidy for merely owning land, he did not create, does not work and most likely inherited. Those who wish to work the land, are met by unemployment, long allotment waiting lists, lack of allotment (due to subsidies to landholders creating economic incentive to hold land idle), high land charges, and increasing allotment rents. The real scam here, is not the cost of the shotgun license, but the increase in subsidy. Three days later – on Friday – the government announced it would raise the subsidy it provides for grouse moors from £30 per hectare to £56. Yes, you read that right: the British government subsidises grouse moors, which are owned by 1% of the 1% and used by people who are scarcely less rich. Whilst the richest of the rich who own vast chunks of land, get richer, our government decides to increase subsidies for the rich (who don't need them). Meanwhile, the poorest cannot afford to eat and are priced out or denied even the ability to pay to grow their own food so that they might eat. Well they face, higher taxes, new taxes, lower wages etc. (When they really need wages to rise to a fair level - or to paraphrase for living costs to fall to a fair level.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 No, you could use a gun. But you should have to pay for a licence.....Full price. Why? You dont for example have to pay the full cost for a driving test. Perhaps we should start charging that accurately? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.