State ownership of companies

[Hots on]

First of all, terrorist groups dont have those capabilities.

Wouldnt it be more efficient to target ISIS etc themselves rather than unleashing hell and killing millions of innocent people with a nuclear weapon?

 

Are you just on a wind up? NATO's nukes are to guard against the Russians and potentially the Chinese also. Terrorist groups like ISIS are dealt with by counter terrorism police and special forces.

[ricgem2002]

The self employed can claim for lots of things.

but not at the same rate as a mp

[unbeliever]

but not at the same rate as a mp

 

If you look into it, I think you'll find that whilst the arrangement for MPs historically was overly generous and open to abuse, the current arrangement is quite reasonable.

The second homes thing is obviously contentious, but is not really unreasonable as an MP will have 2 (quite possibly very distant) places of work: Westminster and their constituency. If we made them fund both out of their own pocket, you could then only have MPs with a substantial second income. This obviously does not apply to London MPs.

[El Cid]

If you look into it, I think you'll find that whilst the arrangement for MPs historically was overly generous and open to abuse, the current arrangement is quite reasonable.

The second homes thing is obviously contentious, but is not really unreasonable as an MP will have 2 (quite possibly very distant) places of work: Westminster and their constituency. If we made them fund both out of their own pocket, you could then only have MPs with a substantial second income. This obviously does not apply to London MPs.

 

A lawyer friend of mine works away from home, perhaps MPs are another step up the pay scale ladder, but he does not have 2 homes. He has one home and rents a flat as many days as required.

[unbeliever]

A lawyer friend of mine works away from home, perhaps MPs are another step up the pay scale ladder, but he does not have 2 homes. He has one home and rents a flat as many days as required.

 

MP's have 2 places of work for most of the year. What you're suggesting would actually be more expensive to the taxpayer.

 

MP's are paid a lot less than some lawyers: £67k. So they're not poor, but they're hardly super-rich either.

Edited August 15, 2015 by unbeliever

[The Joker]

Why does every political thread on here drift from nationalisation of utilities and public services, to fatcat bankers bonuses, to nuclear annihilation?

 

I just popped in to have a look, and wow, ISIS are now just 45 minutes from detonating a dirty bomb in London or something?

 

I'm gonna go and hide in the cellar now.

 

I blame Thatcher.

[Hots on]

Why does every political thread on here drift from nationalisation of utilities and public services, to fatcat bankers bonuses, to nuclear annihilation?

 

I just popped in to have a look, and wow, ISIS are now just 45 minutes from detonating a dirty bomb in London or something?

 

I'm gonna go and hide in the cellar now.

 

I blame Thatcher.

 

Debates, good debates, always develop and broaden. What took this thread down the nuclear/Trident/NATO/the Russians/mutually assured destruction topic was when I think TJC1 suggested that we could help renationalise certain companies using the money saved by scrapping Trident. Or words to that effect. I point out that public services being taken over by crony capitalists would be the least of our worries if we had the Russians and the Chinese threatening, maybe attacking, the west. Which is what would happen if not for NATO's weapons of mass destruction.

Edited August 15, 2015 by Hots on

[The Joker]

Debates, good debates, always develop and broaden. What took this thread down the nuclear/Trident/NATO/the Russians/mutually assured destruction topic was when I think TJC1 suggested that we could help renationalise certain companies using the money saved by scrapping Trident.

 

Thank you, you've saved me trawling through over a dozen pages of nonsense.

 

I have to agree with TJC1.

 

Nobody's gonna nuke us.

 

We haven't needed a nuclear deterrent since the Russkies fell like dominos a couple of decades ago.

 

Anybody who thinks we still need one in this day and age, should join me in the cellar.

[El Cid]

MP's have 2 places of work for most of the year. What you're suggesting would actually be more expensive to the taxpayer.

 

 

Not sure what would work out the cheapest, but assets bought using tax payer funds should stay with the tax payer; we are in debt you know !!

[unbeliever]

Not sure what would work out the cheapest, but assets bought using tax payer funds should stay with the tax payer; we are in debt you know !!

 

If you prefer. Currently I think MPs are allowed to buy or rent. If they choose to buy, they take the risk if of losing or gaining depending on what the housing market does.

Mortgages are also cheaper than rent for the same property, so if they choose to get a mortgage rather than renting, they're saving the taxpayer money.

If you want them to hand over any gains from a bought property, but still leave them liable for any losses, they're all going to rent and we'll gain nothing and end up paying more in expenses.

I suppose making them all rent is more proper, but it's more expensive to us. Which would you prefer? There's no right answer.