unbeliever Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Judging by the consensus seemingly developing in the UK about the EU, refugee-migrants, PIIGs and more such issues pervading 'the west', i.e. to draw up all the bridges, have nothing left whatsoever to do 'in common' indeed and gaze intently at one's national bellybutton instead, that's an easy logical step There's a world difference between demanding self-government and demanding complete isolationism. It's quite possible to have more self-government and at the same time, less isolationism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I think you'll find that selecting Corbyn as leader and "getting in" are incompatible. Are we to have no military capability to contribute to the common defence of the west at all? As I pointed out before, conventional forces are more expensive than Trident. Yes, no nuclear weaponry. ---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 11:52 ---------- so you'd pay them more and employ less of them? ---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 11:37 ---------- when labour get in corbyn will be long dead and buried. Pay more get more trained up. Make savings elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Yes, no nuclear weaponry. To be replaced with what? For about 50 years we have been saving vast amounts of money on defence by having only a small conventional military and relying on Trident/Polaris for national security. If you kill trident, you either leave us completely undefended, or you have to find a great deal more money to fund conventional forces. ---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 11:54 ---------- Pay more get more trained up. Make savings elsewhere. Where?!? How?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Just renationalise. Any profit should be put back into the business instead of the pockets of shareholders. Dividend payments represent a leak of money from services into the pockets of private individuals....which just lead to increased costs for the service users...and more profits for the private individual. Competition doesn't work either...Stagecoach and First put their fares up by the same amount at the same time. You can't choose which 10.20 train from Sheffield to Liverpool is the cheapest because there is only one option. You switch electricity supplier one week and the new one puts their price up. Privatisation works. But not for customers. So how are they going to raise money then? Go to the markets and borrow? That interest payment is a leak that is just like a dividend..... If you are not going to pay shareholders a reasonable return to accommodate their risk, don't expect them to fund a company expansion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummonds Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Pay more get more trained up. Make savings elsewhere. ah yes. the labour cuts and austerity they never want to talk about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 True. Its a bit hazy where the revenue will be generated. ---------- Post added 10-08-2015 at 09:54 ---------- 60% ??? How??? Wtf! This is normal. Police officers get similar deals. 40% off anything from many chain stores for example. Not sure if this is genuinely to help or if they reckon they will get special considerations but the amounts almost sound like a 1930's protection racket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 To be replaced with what? For about 50 years we have been saving vast amounts of money on defence by having only a small conventional military and relying on Trident/Polaris for national security. If you kill trident, you either leave us completely undefended, or you have to find a great deal more money to fund conventional forces. ---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 11:54 ---------- Where?!? How?!? The whole point of cuts is to get into a surplus to then start spending more. ---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 12:18 ---------- ah yes. the labour cuts and austerity they never want to talk about. More labour bashing, original. ---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 12:19 ---------- This is normal. Police officers get similar deals. 40% off anything from many chain stores for example. Not sure if this is genuinely to help or if they reckon they will get special considerations but the amounts almost sound like a 1930's protection racket. Private get similar deals. ---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 12:25 ---------- So how are they going to raise money then? Go to the markets and borrow? That interest payment is a leak that is just like a dividend..... If you are not going to pay shareholders a reasonable return to accommodate their risk, don't expect them to fund a company expansion... Do you not grasp the concept of reinvesting profits into essential public services? I know its hard to imagine a world without non greedy shareholders and fat cat bosses... ---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 12:28 ---------- If you kill trident, you either leave us completely undefended You can still have an adequate army without investing into a nuclear weapons program. ---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 12:30 ---------- Our main foe is mainly domestic anyway...terrorism. If we simply stopped funding foreign wars and nuclear weaponry we would have a massive surplus to spend on domestic affairs and services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 ah yes. the labour cuts and austerity they never want to talk about. This is a fair comment. When the government tells the NHS to cut back, do you think they say "sack all the nurses". Of course not. They want public services to be more efficient. Public service unions aren't generally keen on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 This is a fair comment. When the government tells the NHS to cut back, do you think they say "sack all the nurses". Of course not. They want public services to be more efficient. Public service unions aren't generally keen on that. The government have pledged to keep spending in the nhs. Im pretty sure it will increase in 2020, certainly when labour get in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 If we simply stopped funding foreign wars and nuclear weaponry we would have a massive surplus to spend on domestic affairs and services. That's a lie. The UK GDP is about £1.9 trillion. We spend ~2% of GDP on defence. We spend ~8% on the NHS. We spend ~5% on Education. We spend ~10% on pensions. We spend ~6% on welfare. You can't generate a surplus by cutting defence. Pick something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now