DIY Stew
Established Member
6 Pages!!!!!
Can you believe it.
Stew
Can you believe it.
Stew
Public sector strikes
- Thread starter flanajb
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
RogerS
Established Member
Sawyer":1d3ycxnv said:
No it was not.
This from your original post
The city wide boys owe the UK taxpayers billions. Enough to pay the deficit, in fact. Nothing about corporate tax avoidance there. And no evidence provided by you whatsoever to justify the last sentence.
And lookie-lookie....in the same post
A good start would be to collect the vast amount of tax already owed (by the super-rich, not ordinary people)
Nothing about corporate tax avoidance there either. And no evidence provided by you whatsoever as to whether or not they do owe tax nor how much 'vast' is.
I asked for sound research to back up your statements. Instead you offered me nebulous newspaper headlines of various types which were simply that..a newspaper headline. Show me some statistics or some reports carried out by someone who knows what they are on about.
In another post, you say Vodafone: let off a 6bn tax bill by HM Revenues & Customs. Please DO check your facts and don't believe everything that you read in the tabloids. They actually paid an agreed sum of £1.25bn...that figure of £6bn was plucked out of the air to fan the febrile little minds of those protesters who demonstrated. You can read a pretty accurate report in the FT here and a very good explanation of the difficulties that ALL governments face in the face of globalisation is here. Don't believe everything that UK Uncut gets hot and bothered about. Strange name anyway for a protest organisation...more suited to The Society of Uncircumcised UK Males.
Until then I still think all you have offered is empty left-wing rhetoric. By ducking and diving rather than objectively answer the questions, you're getting as bad as Jacob at a'slippin and a'slidin.....
RogerS
Established Member
DIY Stew":2j68vdk1 said:
:lol: :lol:
So: BBC - not good enough. Telegraph, Mail & FT - not good enough. Despite intentially avoiding sources which you would predictably decry as 'left wing' nothing seems to be sufficient and everything unpalatable is met with - 'more evidence'. Picking holes in the semantics of my posts - is that the best argument available in favour of the system?RogerS":67jond83 said:
And just where do you glean all your facts from, Roger? Because whilst we have all been greatly amused by your succession of bald, unsupported assertions, you have been remarkably light on evidence, despite demanding it from me.
When you bother to cite them, I'll enjoy consulting your sources, which presumably will not include the BBC and 'serious' press.
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2009
- Messages
- 1,321
- Reaction score
- 11
I think it just goes to show what an emotive subject it is. Private sector on one side and public sector on the other. They will never agree!RogerS":aylprwtx said:
RogerS
Established Member
Sawyer.. Oh FFS...stop answering my question with another question..please refer to my original question which has been re-iterated above. Do not duck and dive and try to bring in red herrings yet again.
I will try and keep this simple.
You originally said in your very first post before you went off wandering and quoting headlines that bear no resemblance to the topic in question.....
The city wide boys owe the UK taxpayers billions. Enough to pay the deficit, in fact.
I asked where is the evidence to support those two statements. You have given none. Or if you think that the headlines you have referred to actually do provide this evidence then please copy and paste and show us.
Do not go off on yet another red herring. Just answer the first question. Then we can move on to the next one.
I will try and keep this simple.
You originally said in your very first post before you went off wandering and quoting headlines that bear no resemblance to the topic in question.....
The city wide boys owe the UK taxpayers billions. Enough to pay the deficit, in fact.
I asked where is the evidence to support those two statements. You have given none. Or if you think that the headlines you have referred to actually do provide this evidence then please copy and paste and show us.
Do not go off on yet another red herring. Just answer the first question. Then we can move on to the next one.
LuptonM
Established Member
From reading stuff, it seems the bursting of the US house bubble combined with previous low interest rates and the over leveraging of subprime mortgage type investments by US banks triggered the financial crisis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s ... ial_crisis
Now its high government debt in the eurozone that is causing problems. This was partially caused by the bailout of banks and some countries ******** tax collection systems
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s ... ial_crisis
Now its high government debt in the eurozone that is causing problems. This was partially caused by the bailout of banks and some countries ******** tax collection systems
barkwindjammer
Established Member
flanajb":3uo5mi0n said:
And thats the game the government are playing out to the 'thickos' of the populous of this country, its the oldest move in the book, its called 'divide and conquer', so 48% are on the private side and 51% are on the public sector side-pit them against one another-whilst they're scrapping it will take their eye off the ball-we raise big bonus and salaries while half of 'that lot' migrate from one side to another, in 10 yrs time we'll decide its been a huge mistake, we'll let them migrate all the way back again. tick, ,tock, ,tick, ,tock, ,
and yes my arithmetic is rubbish 48 and 51 don't make a 'hole', maybe I'd fit right into the banking sector then . . .
RogerS
Established Member
Sawyer..this is getting tedious. Are you sure you are not a politician because you have done everything except answer my question.
It is now blatantly obvious to all of us that you cannot provide any evidence to support your empty left-wing rhetoric. You have not explained your position at all. Referring back to an arbitrary couple of newspaper headlines is not a replacement for reasoned debate.
So, unless you're prepared to either put up or shut up, then I see little point in continuing this, well, I am reluctant to call it a debate.
It is now blatantly obvious to all of us that you cannot provide any evidence to support your empty left-wing rhetoric. You have not explained your position at all. Referring back to an arbitrary couple of newspaper headlines is not a replacement for reasoned debate.
So, unless you're prepared to either put up or shut up, then I see little point in continuing this, well, I am reluctant to call it a debate.
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
We all know, in general terms at least, about the wealth splashing about, tax evasion/avoidance on a huge scale and the overall inequality of the country which the Bullingdon boys are so anxious to preserve. Director's salaries and pensions, bonusses even paid when businesses are failing and have had to be nationalised, are just a part of it.RogerS":2cbxrp7l said:
You can see it before your very eyes in simple terms; amazing house prices and conspicuous wealth/consumption going on all round. That's just the tip of the iceberg.
If Roger believes it's an illusion it's up to him to show us the evidence. See if you can prove the earth is flat whilst you are at it, it'd be easier!
RogerS
Established Member
Thought you'd been a bit quiet, Jacob.
You're also doing it...trying to derail a line of enquiry by bringing in sweeping generalisations. It's not up to me to prove otherwise but the originator of the statement to prove their case. As I say generalisations don't cut it. Nor does empty left-wing cant.
You're also doing it...trying to derail a line of enquiry by bringing in sweeping generalisations. It's not up to me to prove otherwise but the originator of the statement to prove their case. As I say generalisations don't cut it. Nor does empty left-wing cant.
DIY Stew
Established Member
If only Len Goodman (Strictley Come Dancing Judge) where on this site, he would say SEVEN.RogerS":24zalz15 said:
Stew
Nope, not a politician.
Your question was 'were's your evidence?' and I've supplied various (free of left bias) sources of information for people to consider, but all you have done is split hairs with them and the wording of my posts. If I supply more, you'll do the same.
We've heard all your dogmatic and unsubstantiated statements: time for you to present your arguments and sources for scrutiny. Is this in some way problematic?
And remember - free of undue bias.
We're all waiting....
Your question was 'were's your evidence?' and I've supplied various (free of left bias) sources of information for people to consider, but all you have done is split hairs with them and the wording of my posts. If I supply more, you'll do the same.
We've heard all your dogmatic and unsubstantiated statements: time for you to present your arguments and sources for scrutiny. Is this in some way problematic?
And remember - free of undue bias.
We're all waiting....
RogerS
Established Member
Sawyer":n76xgafd said:
No...............you..............have................not.
Your original statement...for the record....The city wide boys owe the UK taxpayers billions. Enough to pay the deficit, in fact.
Let's look at your first example of 'evidence' taken from the Telegraph since you seem incapable of cutting and pasting anything to prove your point...simply throwing back the same old same old cliche so loved of the loonie Left ....'I've given you the evidence' blah blah blah.
First sentence
The so-called ‘tax gap’, which is the difference between the amount of tax due and the total collected, was reduced from 8.1pc of revenues from the year before but critics argue that the figure is still too high.
Anything about city boys? Nope. Anything about them owing enough to pay the deficit? Nope.
Second sentence
The Coalition has pledged to make tax collection more efficient by simplifying the system and clamping down on tax evasion.
Anything about city boys? Nope. Anything about them owing enough to pay the deficit? Nope.
I could go on but I won't. There is NOTHING in that article to back up your sweeping generalisation and I truly feel sorry for you that you are mentally incapable of understanding that fact.
I apologise to the rest of you guys that this has gone on so long but you will be relieved to hear that I'm 'out'. Life is too short and I have things to make.
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
Go on have a go. You've successfully deluded yourself so you know how it's done!RogerS":361ywg3p said:
Still splitting hairs then Roger.
And what were your sources? I'm keen to read them (who knows, they may change my mind). But you seem remarkably reluctant to cite anything.
I'm beginning to wonder if your stance is actually based on research, or just homespun dogma.
And what were your sources? I'm keen to read them (who knows, they may change my mind). But you seem remarkably reluctant to cite anything.
I'm beginning to wonder if your stance is actually based on research, or just homespun dogma.
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
I'd guess his sources are basically the Telegraph, and some dubious aquaintances! Do you play golf Roger?Sawyer":18gh6um4 said:
Allylearm
Established Member
The main point Roger is missing is that his thoughts or words have no support in independent analysis as he failed to show any support for his point in the first instance. So why should anyone show him theirs.
Civil Service pension is costing less, there is enough been said on it even Hutton/BBC/Guardian pointed to the fact. So revenues gained from the 14/16% increase to burden the average CS who is in the majority of the low to medium bracket, which makes it a wage cut along with wage stagnatyion for the last three years and the next 3 it looks like. The monies gained will not go to prop up the pension burden as it is self paying it will go to the treasury, even the govt have grudgingly agreed this. Wonder where it will be spent. The govt retire-ct is not for reform the CS already agreed to reform and is currently in progress and is not unsympathetic to it, the govt is looking to generate income quickly and not like their investment in 3/4 years ahead in job creation and infrastructure projects. They are cutting jobs and wonder why our borders have not enough Custom officers to stop persons from entering, but with limiting checks more get through. We have a £35/45 billion deficit in unpaid tax from upper tax bracket payees who refuse or find ways to elude payment. They allow banks to carry on regardless and pay unjustified bonus payments to brokers who speculate on making this country weak or non productive. The govt do not support business they support voodoo economics and hope to prolong the elite they are part.
Until this country loses its apathy we will be burdened by a govt of any persuasion that fail what they are their to do. For all their faults Brown/Darling had some idea what they were about, I did not see the world looking or beeting a path to the door of David/George when the Euro or Credit Crunch needed direction in the last week. What Brown/Darling got wrong like a lot of others including the other political parties (they stopped agreeing when it clearly went **** up) and economists, was believing that the Stock Exchange/Banks were trustworthy and new what they were doing and self regulate. They did not then and do not think they can now, why are we trusting them now anyway. The BofE sits on its hands and when asked to report they hide their words in hidden meaning, they cannot even tell it as it is, they have not met their target in ages why is Mervin still in a job along with his advisers, why is Mervan and a lot of others worth a Knighthood. The banks can run the core job of peoples finance, the high street bit, its the bit about making income from speculation is the bit in trouble. Make money to go down and make money to go up or Stags and Bears need placed in a zoo, the modern method of IT makes the issue to quick and does not allow for logic. The stock exchange want quick returns for investors, why how can this make sense when business growth depends on such lending. Business growth need longer term planning, the infrastructure needs longer term planning from roads/rail/water and of course energy. What this country did to sell its power manufacturing to foreign companies was ludicrous and worth a prison term.
Maybe the best is default everybody and start again. What would happen if all Europe and USA went bust all in it together likes,
Civil Service pension is costing less, there is enough been said on it even Hutton/BBC/Guardian pointed to the fact. So revenues gained from the 14/16% increase to burden the average CS who is in the majority of the low to medium bracket, which makes it a wage cut along with wage stagnatyion for the last three years and the next 3 it looks like. The monies gained will not go to prop up the pension burden as it is self paying it will go to the treasury, even the govt have grudgingly agreed this. Wonder where it will be spent. The govt retire-ct is not for reform the CS already agreed to reform and is currently in progress and is not unsympathetic to it, the govt is looking to generate income quickly and not like their investment in 3/4 years ahead in job creation and infrastructure projects. They are cutting jobs and wonder why our borders have not enough Custom officers to stop persons from entering, but with limiting checks more get through. We have a £35/45 billion deficit in unpaid tax from upper tax bracket payees who refuse or find ways to elude payment. They allow banks to carry on regardless and pay unjustified bonus payments to brokers who speculate on making this country weak or non productive. The govt do not support business they support voodoo economics and hope to prolong the elite they are part.
Until this country loses its apathy we will be burdened by a govt of any persuasion that fail what they are their to do. For all their faults Brown/Darling had some idea what they were about, I did not see the world looking or beeting a path to the door of David/George when the Euro or Credit Crunch needed direction in the last week. What Brown/Darling got wrong like a lot of others including the other political parties (they stopped agreeing when it clearly went **** up) and economists, was believing that the Stock Exchange/Banks were trustworthy and new what they were doing and self regulate. They did not then and do not think they can now, why are we trusting them now anyway. The BofE sits on its hands and when asked to report they hide their words in hidden meaning, they cannot even tell it as it is, they have not met their target in ages why is Mervin still in a job along with his advisers, why is Mervan and a lot of others worth a Knighthood. The banks can run the core job of peoples finance, the high street bit, its the bit about making income from speculation is the bit in trouble. Make money to go down and make money to go up or Stags and Bears need placed in a zoo, the modern method of IT makes the issue to quick and does not allow for logic. The stock exchange want quick returns for investors, why how can this make sense when business growth depends on such lending. Business growth need longer term planning, the infrastructure needs longer term planning from roads/rail/water and of course energy. What this country did to sell its power manufacturing to foreign companies was ludicrous and worth a prison term.
Maybe the best is default everybody and start again. What would happen if all Europe and USA went bust all in it together likes,
RogerS
Established Member
RogerS":1h3egey0 said:
Still waiting. Think I might be waiting a very very long time because you haven't done it, have you?
S'funny...you lot on the left come out with your trite little diatribes but when challenged simply duck and dive and weave away...anything but answer the question. Cracks me up, really, makes me chuckle.
