Charity to support the needy?

[999tigger]

Why is it baffling to have an opinion ? I have heard people who have had their benefits cut complain about foreign aid .

 

There are far too many young MP's who have not had a career outside politics . My idea of zero pay for MP's would attract more older (50 plus) people who have had successful careers . Many MP's already have other jobs and I don't have a problem if an organisation wishes to sponsor an MP, providing it is publicly known .

 

---------- Post added 24-10-2015 at 19:52 ----------

 

 

Yes , or have a sponsor

 

I want more winners and less losers to be MP's

 

Its not baffling to have an opinion. there are plenty of people who complain about foreign aid not just those on benefits.

 

Your idea of no pay for MPs leaves them reliant on their sponsors as their sole income. Its only going to favour the wealthy. Having money is not the same as having a successful career. Money isnt the only measure of capability and whether you are a winner or loser.

MPs are there to represent the will of their constituencies and elected on the basis of which policies they support.

[unbeliever]

 

Yes , or have a sponsor

 

I want more winners and less losers to be MP's

 

 

I'm a Conservative by anybody's standards and I don't like this plan.

If the people want successful businesses people and the like to be their MPs, all they have to do is vote for them.

Being an MP should be a full time job, and I would favour a ban on them moonlighting. If you think that a person is only fit to be an MP if they have first made a success of themselves outside government, I absolutely agree. But I would never go further than to express that agreement than by voting and campaigning accordingly.

[Gamston]

Its not baffling to have an opinion. there are plenty of people who complain about foreign aid not just those on benefits.

 

Your idea of no pay for MPs leaves them reliant on their sponsors as their sole income. Its only going to favour the wealthy. Having money is not the same as having a successful career. Money isnt the only measure of capability and whether you are a winner or loser.

MPs are there to represent the will of their constituencies and elected on the basis of which policies they support.

 

Yes , Scottish voters elected a 20 year of SNP candidate in the last election because they thought the SNP would be in a position to blackmail the labour party to divert more money from English tax payers to Scottish scroungers in return for their support .

 

The fact that Boris Johnson is the Mayor of London as well as being a MP proves that being a MP is only a part time job .

 

At the end of the day there are far too many British politicians on the gravy train at the tax payers expense . As well as MP's at Westminster , the UK tax payer also has to fund the mickey mouse parliaments and assemblies of Scotland , Wales and Northern Ireland . Also there is the expensive European Parliament which UK tax payers are forced to contribute towards .

 

The Labour party are hardly benefiting from a cornucopia of talent under the current system at the moment otherwise they wouldn't have elected the present no hoper as their new leader .

 

The only way to improve the quality of our MP's is to cut out the dead wood and make it harder for losers to get elected by radicle reforms for candidates to be eligible to stand for election . We could start by barring over weight candidates from standing in elections because fat people are predominantly lazy individuals . I cannot think of any positive contributions made by the likes of Cyril Smith , John Prescott , Eric Pickles or Diane Abbott in Parliament .

[InigoMontoya]

Workers pay taxes while they are working of which some goes towards unemployment benefit to be paid to those who are out of work .

 

The OP may as well have suggested that all taxation be abolished and replaced by charities to provide services for all the needs of the population .

 

Everybody pays taxes.

 

(Apart from Vodafone, Starbucks, Amazon, Jimmy Carr, and Gary Barlow)

 

 

It's called VAT…

[Gamston]

Everybody pays taxes.

 

(Apart from Vodafone, Starbucks, Amazon, Jimmy Carr, and Gary Barlow)

 

 

It's called VAT…

 

Vodafone, Starbucks, Amazon, Jimmy Carr, and Gary Barlow all pay VAT in the UK so your post is a little devalued .

 

BUT , you are correct even benefit scroungers and MP's can't avoid paying VAT .

[InigoMontoya]

Vodafone, Starbucks, Amazon, Jimmy Carr, and Gary Barlow all pay VAT in the UK so your post is a little devalued .

 

BUT , you are correct even benefit scroungers and MP's can't avoid paying VAT .

 

 

 

If you get yourself or your business VAT registered you can offset it.

 

Ordinary citizen Montaya has to pay it in full.

 

But good of you to use the word "scrounger" to out yourself as a callous reactionary buffoon.

[andyofborg]

But good of you to use the word "scrounger" to out yourself as a callous reactionary buffoon.

 

i think he just felt lonely under his bridge

[Gamston]

If you get yourself or your business VAT registered you can offset it.

 

Ordinary citizen Montaya has to pay it in full.

 

But good of you to use the word "scrounger" to out yourself as a callous reactionary buffoon.

 

So you are trying to move the goalposts now . Amazon and Starbucks pay more VAT than they claim back in the UK which makes them tax payers, just like anyone who pays VAT is a tax payer which you correctly pointed out earlier .

[999tigger]

Yes , Scottish voters elected a 20 year of SNP candidate in the last election because they thought the SNP would be in a position to blackmail the labour party to divert more money from English tax payers to Scottish scroungers in return for their support .

 

The fact that Boris Johnson is the Mayor of London as well as being a MP proves that being a MP is only a part time job .

 

At the end of the day there are far too many British politicians on the gravy train at the tax payers expense . As well as MP's at Westminster , the UK tax payer also has to fund the mickey mouse parliaments and assemblies of Scotland , Wales and Northern Ireland . Also there is the expensive European Parliament which UK tax payers are forced to contribute towards .

 

The Labour party are hardly benefiting from a cornucopia of talent under the current system at the moment otherwise they wouldn't have elected the present no hoper as their new leader .

 

The only way to improve the quality of our MP's is to cut out the dead wood and make it harder for losers to get elected by radicle reforms for candidates to be eligible to stand for election . We could start by barring over weight candidates from standing in elections because fat people are predominantly lazy individuals . I cannot think of any positive contributions made by the likes of Cyril Smith , John Prescott , Eric Pickles or Diane Abbott in Parliament .

 

1. I cant see the problem in electing her, at least she is representative of what younger people experience. its up to the electorate who they choose to elect.

 

2. The fact he does 2 jobs doesnt mean he is good at either of them. His constutuency is a safe and affluent conservative seat. It will involve less work than something like an inner city constituency with lots more people atending the MPs surgery.

 

3. Id rather we had good MPs because they exercise power and make decisions on behalf of the rest of us involving billions. Good decisions can save considerable amoounts or make sure its spent wisely. Actual MPs salaries in comparison are minor.

 

4. The problem with limiting MPs to people who arent overweight, would cut out 64% of the population. If you then wnat to make it so you have to work for nothing and fund yourself for 5 years that would restrict it further to the very wealthy.

 

Do you go round in real life calling people scroungers and losers?

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2015 at 17:45 ----------

 

So you are trying to move the goalposts now . Amazon and Starbucks pay more VAT than they claim back in the UK which makes them tax payers, just like anyone who pays VAT is a tax payer which you correctly pointed out earlier .

 

They may be tax payers, but in comparison to other companies they have artificially arranged their affairs to minimise tax payments. If corportaions dont pay thelr fair share of tax that means the tax payer will have to make up the difference. Fair share being tax for business done in the UK and not pretending its done in Luxembourg.

 

Not illegal and they are within their rights, but the tax payer will pick up the bill.

[Gamston]

1. I cant see the problem in electing her, at least she is representative of what younger people experience. its up to the electorate who they choose to elect.

 

2. The fact he does 2 jobs doesnt mean he is good at either of them. His constutuency is a safe and affluent conservative seat. It will involve less work than something like an inner city constituency with lots more people atending the MPs surgery.

 

3. Id rather we had good MPs because they exercise power and make decisions on behalf of the rest of us involving billions. Good decisions can save considerable amoounts or make sure its spent wisely. Actual MPs salaries in comparison are minor.

 

4. The problem with limiting MPs to people who arent overweight, would cut out 64% of the population. If you then wnat to make it so you have to work for nothing and fund yourself for 5 years that would restrict it further to the very wealthy.

 

Do you go round in real life calling people scroungers and losers?

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2015 at 17:45 ----------

 

 

They may be tax payers, but in comparison to other companies they have artificially arranged their affairs to minimise tax payments. If corportaions dont pay thelr fair share of tax that means the tax payer will have to make up the difference. Fair share being tax for business done in the UK and not pretending its done in Luxembourg.

 

Not illegal and they are within their rights, but the tax payer will pick up the bill.

 

You make some fair points . My original point was that I didn't begrudge the amount of money the Government spent on foreign aid , but I accept all of this money does not go where it should, just like some domestic spending goes to some people who are claiming benefits which they shouldn't be claiming.

 

Other posters brought MP's , Amazon and Starbucks into the equation . I just think there are far too many bad MP's in parliament and don't think if they were paid more it would attract better candidates which is why I suggested they should not be paid at all because it would prevent many less able candidates from being elected. Winston Churchill looked a bit overweight, so maybe I should make a U TURN over that suggestion , but some how I don't think Mrs Thatcher would have become Prime Minister if she had been fat . Infact Mrs Thatcher never took the full salary she was entitled to when she became Prime Minister while John Prescott took full advantage of grace and favour privileges some of which he wasn't entitled to when he was Deputy PM .

 

Regarding Amazon and Starbucks the solution is simple , overseas based companies should pay an extra 1% or 2% VAT . However , Starbucks and Amazondo create jobs , workers pay taxes, so they do have a positive input to our economy . It tends to be those complaining about Goverment spending cuts who bring up the issue of overseas based companies not paying enough tax .