Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: selby on May 26, 2022, 12:42:08 pm
-
What a government for the people, now lets get back to No10 for a party.
Pass the red wine around.
-
Yes, implementing socialist policies is always good for the people. Distributing wealth from the rich shareholders to people on benfits - has Sunak been taking advice from Corbyn & McDonnell? Well done - give the teatotaller a drink.
Best not tell all those pensioners who live off their shareholdings who have been posting on here for years that this was a bad policy as it would take money from them tho - oh hang on...
-
Ironically some tory MPs aren't so impressed, accusing Sunak of "throwing red meat to socialists".
It's interesting to see who approves of a Labour policy like this.
-
I thought by now that there would have been some posts about the government’s announcement about the fuel payment assistance measures.
To me it looks like there is a significant amount of help, with the poorest households set to receive around £1200.
Pensioner households to receive an additional £300 to add to their winter fuel allowance.
The £200 allowance in October now doubled to £400 and no longer repayable over five years.
I would be interested to hear from the posters who said they didn’t want the £200 loan, because it was repayable.
Do they still not want the £400 allowance which is not repayable?
Overall I reckon Sunak has done the country proud and so far it seems that the tv pundits think the same.
-
I thought by now that there would have been some posts about the government’s announcement about the fuel payment assistance measures.
To me it looks like there is a significant amount of help, with the poorest households set to receive around £1200.
Pensioner households to receive an additional £300 to add to their winter fuel allowance.
The £200 allowance in October now doubled to £400 and no longer repayable over five years.
I would be interested to hear from the posters who said they didn’t want the £200 loan, because it was repayable.
Do they still not want the £400 allowance which is not repayable?
Overall I reckon Sunak has done the country proud and so far it seems that the tv pundits think the same.
£400 is not going to help enough ,My bill for 2021 was £925 combined for 2022 it is estimated cost to be with the price rise £2600-£2800 an increase or around £1700-£1900 how does £400 really help ,that does roach the sides ,the only reason he has upped it is to try and help bungalow Boris
-
I reckon (for what that's worth) this government would have been very popular with the ordinary unbiased public had it not been for unforeseen events such as Covid and its repercussions delaying progress on commitments such as the levelling up process.
I still believe if Johnson survives as premier he will prove to be very popular again with the ordinary unbiased public.
-
Do you approve of a windfall tax BB?
-
I reckon (for what that's worth) this government would have been very popular with the ordinary unbiased public had it not been for unforeseen events such as Covid and its repercussions delaying progress on commitments such as the levelling up process.
I still believe if Johnson survives as premier he will prove to be very popular again with the ordinary unbiased public.
Honestly can't believe people can read that and not laugh.
So you take Covid away, surely you don't think he's doing a good job of Brexit?
-
I thought by now that there would have been some posts about the government’s announcement about the fuel payment assistance measures.
To me it looks like there is a significant amount of help, with the poorest households set to receive around £1200.
Pensioner households to receive an additional £300 to add to their winter fuel allowance.
The £200 allowance in October now doubled to £400 and no longer repayable over five years.
I would be interested to hear from the posters who said they didn’t want the £200 loan, because it was repayable.
Do they still not want the £400 allowance which is not repayable?
Overall I reckon Sunak has done the country proud and so far it seems that the tv pundits think the same.
How many times you going to post this one hound?
It's a bit like the Ministers cut and paste praise for Johnson tweets
-
Do you approve of a windfall tax BB?
Although I'm not normally one for showing off my generous nature by demanding the government take someone else's money, it seems the companies involved are taking moral responsibility and are willing to contribute more tax to ease the current crisis.
So, in this instance, yes, I do approve of it.
-
I thought by now that there would have been some posts about the government’s announcement about the fuel payment assistance measures.
To me it looks like there is a significant amount of help, with the poorest households set to receive around £1200.
Pensioner households to receive an additional £300 to add to their winter fuel allowance.
The £200 allowance in October now doubled to £400 and no longer repayable over five years.
I would be interested to hear from the posters who said they didn’t want the £200 loan, because it was repayable.
Do they still not want the £400 allowance which is not repayable?
Overall I reckon Sunak has done the country proud and so far it seems that the tv pundits think the same.
How many times you going to post this one hound?
It's a bit like the Ministers cut and paste praise for Johnson tweets
I was going to just post it twice as I wasn’t sure which thread the discussion was going to take place on, this one or the Gas Prices one.
However I see that there is also a third one opened now so I might put it on there as well.
-
Its sort of clever, yes the share holders take a bit of a hit, but only a proportion of those profits would have gone out in dividends, but with the tax rebate now so high on investment in the North Sea projects those profits will not be there again after the next quarter announcements and investment will sky rocket, bringing highly skilled jobs in the engineering industries and steel industries for specialised steels.
But to do so the price of energy will have to stay somewhere near where they are for quite a while, and you and I will pay for the reemergence of the North Sea oil industry, and we can position ourselves as major suppliers to the EU which gives the government real leverage in future negotiations.
-
It really is very interesting to see how widely approved this socialist policy is.
-
Labour have been calling for a Windfall Tax on the energy companies for 4 months.
Just yesterday at PMQs, Starmer asked Johnson why the Govt was still refusing to impose a Windfall Tax. Johnson launched into a tirade of abuse about how Laboour always wanted to take money of people who had earned it.
24 hours later, there's a Windfall Tax.
Like the past is being deleted and Year Zero is announced every new day that dawns.
-
Has it not crossed your mind that they were planning to announce the windfall tax along with the other measures today.
If ever Labour regain power they might have the chance to do something good themselves.
-
I can't see why RD, I have lived long enough to have lived under a few Labour governments and Tory ones.
I can honestly say that in my lifetime they have made very little difference, if anything the working man has benefitted more in this area lifestyle wise under the Tories who promoted property ownership for the working man which has been the biggest change of all.
Mostly when Labour has been in power the working man has turned against them with the Unions promoting strikes that the Wilson Callaghan governments were more or less brought down by, aided by big investment by firms being taken to other countries because of their high taxation on investment, which is evident down Wheatley Hall Road no IH, BNS, Crompton Parkinson and others that thousands of men worked at.
The Labour Party have been complicit in the destruction of nationalised industries not backing the work forces fearing losing votes in areas not affected mainly in the South East, and have had constant wars between the right and left of the party, every time wasting their chance to become entrenched except when Blair was in power, who lost it when he thought he could be a world leader instead of building on a promising start.
So that's my life history, when Labour has been in power investment has been taken away from this country by big business, and when the Tories have been in power there has been a shake out of local government jobs and the NHS and any nationalised industries they could get their hands on.
Just take your pick folks, the one thing I can guarantee is that ten years from now you will mostly be where you are because of your own ability and effort, and that whoever is in power will in those ten years have made very little difference in 99% of cases as to your living standards, but the arguments will still be the same old gumph we chomp on about now.
-
Johnson was considering a windfall tax on the 12th of May, but because Tories find it more difficult to take money off people who had earned it than Labour does, it took them longer to impose it.
Starmer wanted it imposing as a first resort.
Johnson wanted it imposing as a last resort.
-
But Boris Johnson said a windfall tax would deter investment, meaning higher prices for consumers and households up and down the land being worse off.”
So what is the crafty bugger up to?
-
Could it be that government knows more about running the country than contributors to a fourth division football forum.
-
Could it be that government knows more about running the country than contributors to a fourth division football forum.
I'm sure, so why is Boris Johnson endorsing a policy that he believes is going to make households up and down the land worse off?
I don't understand? Is he just being a complete bas**rd?
-
But Boris Johnson said a windfall tax would deter investment, meaning higher prices for consumers and households up and down the land being worse off.”
So what is the crafty bugger up to?
It might have done if the companies involved hadn't cooperated. It looks like they have taken moral responsibility though by offering to contribute by paying more tax to ease the current crisis.
-
But Boris Johnson said a windfall tax would deter investment, meaning higher prices for consumers and households up and down the land being worse off.”
So what is the crafty bugger up to?
It might have done if the companies involved hadn't cooperated. It looks like they have taken moral responsibility though by offering to contribute by paying more tax to ease the current crisis.
But the inflation it will generate will make us all worse off! Oh, the humanity! The callous sod.
-
Could it be that government knows more about running the country than contributors to a fourth division football forum.
I'm sure, so why is Boris Johnson endorsing a policy that he believes is going to make households up and down the land worse off?
I don't understand? Is he just being a complete bas**rd?
I refer the honourable 4th division gentleman to the reply I gave before.
-
Boris also said that imposing a windfall tax would stop energy firms moving away from Russian oil and gas.
Why does he want to help the Russians now???
-
But Boris Johnson said a windfall tax would deter investment, meaning higher prices for consumers and households up and down the land being worse off.”
So what is the crafty bugger up to?
It might have done if the companies involved hadn't cooperated. It looks like they have taken moral responsibility though by offering to contribute by paying more tax to ease the current crisis.
But the inflation it will generate will make us all worse off! Oh, the humanity! The callous sod.
Maybe that's why he imposed it as a last resort and not as a first resort like starmer wanted.
-
Boris also said that imposing a windfall tax would stop energy firms moving away from Russian oil and gas.
Why does he want to help the Russians now???
Maybe he wants to help the Russians out as a last resort and not a first resort like Starmer wanted.
-
[quote author ;)=River Don link=topic=285049.msg1162077#msg1162077 date=1653587816]
Boris also said that imposing a windfall tax would stop energy firms moving away from Russian oil and gas.
Why does he want to help the Russians now???
[/quote]
I was going to write that he might be making sure of the donations from Russians……
But I thought better of it so decided not to. ;)
-
I just don't understand why he is doing this when he believes this windfall tax is going to make us all poorer, help the Russians and get us all used to accepting handouts and turn us all into socialists.
Maybe he's been at the wine again?
-
Maybe you should join him.
-
Maybe you should join him.
I think I will have to, to blot out the torment.
John Redwood has told him, Jacob Reese Mogg has warned him. Such fine minds! But he just won't listen.
-
He's hardly likely to listen to biased members of a 4th division off-topic football forum either.
Get tha'sen a glass of wine.
-
He's hardly likely to listen to biased members of a 4th division off-topic football forum either.
Get tha'sen a glass of wine.
But I am not trying to tell Boris Johnson what to do, far from it.
I'm simply trying to understand why he no longer has the backbone to stand up for business and low taxes?
-
Johnson was considering a windfall tax on the 12th of May, but because Tories find it more difficult to take money off people who had earned it than Labour does, it took them longer to impose it.
Starmer wanted it imposing as a first resort.
Johnson wanted it imposing as a last resort.
And how exactly have the energy companies "earned" their excess profits? Any thoughts?
-
One word Billy rides again! I don't recall saying they "earned" it, but I suppose you'll want to change the direction of the thread anyway.
-
Easy Billy, by restricting Supply, letting outfits like Extinction rebellion and every save the planet outfit cause mayhem and had the luck of a crazy war that has woken everyone's thoughts on just where and how dependant we are on some unfriendly power crazy individuals that can upset the apple cart.
And a government that has a vested interest tax take wise in the high cost of power and fuel costs through VAT and other levies.
It's money that makes the world go around buddy not ideals, and the people in power do not like using their own when people like you and I are around to pick up the tab.
-
It's energy that makes the world go round.
And right now, the Russians are putting a squeeze on it.
-
As psted above I fully welcolme a Tory chancellor persuing socialist policies - wealth re-distribution is always an excellent idea.
According to the pundits he has given away £15 billion.
The windfall tax that isn't a windfall tax will raise £5 billion.
I am only a poster on a fourth division football forum - but I'm spotting an issue that hasn't yet been raised in those figures...
-
The cost of living crisis is really an energy crisis
We may have to invest in hydrocarbons in the short term but the lesson of all this is...
We desperately need clean, reliable and cheap energy. Desperately.
However we do it, that is what we need.
Money? Money is just tokens. Paper. Not really worth a thing. Some will tell you money represents gold. that barbaric metal.
What money really represents, mostly is energy. The power given to us by the sun, that mostly, we take for granted.
We have a shortage of that
-
As psted above I fully welcolme a Tory chancellor persuing socialist policies - wealth re-distribution is always an excellent idea.
According to the pundits he has given away £15 billion.
The windfall tax that isn't a windfall tax will raise £5 billion.
I am only a poster on a fourth division football forum - but I'm spotting an issue that hasn't yet been raised in those figures...
Wilts, I assume that the balance might have to be borrowed.
-
As psted above I fully welcolme a Tory chancellor persuing socialist policies - wealth re-distribution is always an excellent idea.
According to the pundits he has given away £15 billion.
The windfall tax that isn't a windfall tax will raise £5 billion.
I am only a poster on a fourth division football forum - but I'm spotting an issue that hasn't yet been raised in those figures...
Wilts, I assume that the balance might have to be borrowed.
Dunno hound, you would presume he would have said if that were the case? It's suprising none of the Tories asked him - I thought they were supposed to be the party that managed people's money effiecently? I presumably they trust the bloke who 'lost' £16 billion in covid loans and raised taxes to the highest level since WW2 to have a magic money tree somewhere?
It's actually £31 billion he promised to give away btw. The £15 billion doesn't include scrapping of payback of the £200 loan + here is the inflation linked rise in benefits from September that will cost another £10 billion.
As I say, I am just a poster on a fourth division football forum. Maybe some of the experts here can help us out on where the money is coming from?
Data from here btw:
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1529860113481273346
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1529882391233409024
-
I feel sure that you won’t be disappointed with regards to fourth division expert advice wilts.
We have one or two posters who will help you out.
I might be stating the bleeding obvious.
-
One word Billy rides again! I don't recall saying they "earned" it, but I suppose you'll want to change the direction of the thread anyway.
My apologies BB. When you were talking about "taking money of people who had earned it", I thought you were talking about taking money off people who had earned it. I forgot that when you write, you use words to mean summat different from the rest of us.
-
Meanwhile...Tories gonna Tory.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1529857945558831106
-
Meanwhile...Tories gonna Tory.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1529857945558831106
Because no Labour MPs have second homes do they?
From The Mail:
Meanwhile Sir Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in Camden and a £600,000 home in Oxted, Surrey.
-
''Most Tory voters want more affordable housing stock, finds poll
YouGov study also finds most Conservative supporters in favour of higher taxes on second homes
majority of Conservative voters want their party to deliver more affordable housing and let councils buy up empty properties, according to new polling which suggests that public frustration with the housing crisis is now more evenly spread across the political divide.
Two-thirds of Tories in the UK want new-build developments to include more affordable homes and 68% want higher taxes on second homes and empty properties, according to YouGov polling shared with the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/feb/06/most-tory-voters-want-more-affordable-housing-stock-finds-poll
Maybe just not near where they is all
-
I think I heard some squealing about MPs owning multiple homes, there's one of those pie chart thingy's in here to ave a gleck at
https://www.nationalworld.com/news/politics/a-government-of-landlords-one-in-six-mps-are-landlords-and-some-have-more-than-10-properties-3453815
-
I think I heard some squealing about MPs owning multiple homes, there's one of those pie chart thingy's in here to ave a gleck at
https://www.nationalworld.com/news/politics/a-government-of-landlords-one-in-six-mps-are-landlords-and-some-have-more-than-10-properties-3453815
Good to see that all of them are declaring their rental properties and paying their taxes on them.
-
I think I heard some squealing about MPs owning multiple homes, there's one of those pie chart thingy's in here to ave a gleck at
https://www.nationalworld.com/news/politics/a-government-of-landlords-one-in-six-mps-are-landlords-and-some-have-more-than-10-properties-3453815
Good to see that all of them are declaring their rental properties and paying their taxes on them.
Does that include the ones in the Caymans?
-
What's wrong with having multiple homes?
-
Labour have been calling for a Windfall Tax on the energy companies for 4 months.
Just yesterday at PMQs, Starmer asked Johnson why the Govt was still refusing to impose a Windfall Tax. Johnson launched into a tirade of abuse about how Laboour always wanted to take money of people who had earned it.
24 hours later, there's a Windfall Tax.
Like the past is being deleted and Year Zero is announced every new day that dawns.
well done to labour for calling for a windfall tax :facepalm:-- this is being presented as an original idea have they copyrighted - nobody over the years had thought of this concept - we can BANK on labour
hang on a minute
"17 May 2022 — In 1981, Conservative chancellor Geoffrey Howe introduced a one-off levy on banks, charged at 2.5% of their non-interest-bearing current account ..."
It seems windfall taxes had provenance and labour is not that smart :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:
have they predicted tomorrow is Saturday yet !! that really would be sticking their necks out
---------------
Windfall tax meaning explained | The Independent
https://www.independent.co.uk › climate-change › ener...
1 day ago — A windfall tax is a one-off levy on the profits of companies that are seen to be unreasonably high and raised through good fortune. There have ...
https://www.common-wealth.co.uk/reports/drilling-down
12.1.2022 worth a read
-------------
-
I think I heard some squealing about MPs owning multiple homes, there's one of those pie chart thingy's in here to ave a gleck at
https://www.nationalworld.com/news/politics/a-government-of-landlords-one-in-six-mps-are-landlords-and-some-have-more-than-10-properties-3453815
Good to see that all of them are declaring their rental properties and paying their taxes on them.
Does that include the ones in the Caymans?
I don’t know Bristol.
Maybe one or two of our tax experts will answer that one.
-
What's wrong with having multiple homes?
Nothing. It can cause a few hiccups now and then but as long term investments they are good.
-
CLH
It might have been easier for the Tories to embrace the windfall tax, if Mr Johnson hadn't made so many negative remarks about the idea.
-
The Tories are bricking themselves with the energy crisis .
They know full well that in order to retain power all they have to do is keep just enough people onside and they win .
An energy crisis affects everyone and everything and they know it .
-
One word Billy rides again! I don't recall saying they "earned" it, but I suppose you'll want to change the direction of the thread anyway.
My apologies BB. When you were talking about "taking money of people who had earned it", I thought you were talking about taking money off people who had earned it. I forgot that when you write, you use words to mean summat different from the rest of us.
Apology accepted, after all, it was YOU who made that comment, and I merely went along with it. I expected you to respond, and (as usual) I was right.
By saying "taking money off people who had earned it," Johnson was generalising (correctly) about Labour's usual policy of taking money off people who earn it to give to those who don't. Labour's policy regarding the windfall tax was no different whether the tax they were demanding was earned or not.
-
The Tories are bricking themselves with the energy crisis .
They know full well that in order to retain power all they have to do is keep just enough people onside and they win .
An energy crisis affects everyone and everything and they know it .
Well, fancy a political party doing something that might be popular with the public! Disgusting!
-
What's wrong with having multiple homes?
Back to the point of my post.
There's an argument that there's nothing wrong with having multiple homes, although in a society where we have so many homeless and so many others priced out of owning homes, I personally couldn't look at myself in the mirror if I owned a home that was empty for long periods.
Regardless of that, if someone can afford to own more than one home, by definition they don't need and certainly don't deserve to have their heating bills subsidised by public money.
If there's a limited pot of money, a fair approach would be not to subsidise people who evidently don't need it, but to give more support to those on the edge of falling into abject poverty.
-
BST, the comment by bfyp was made after a post by your pal sydders who posted a link about MPs having numerous rental properties so it is possible that bfyp was thinking of rentals when he asked his question.
I have tenants who can’t afford to buy or are unable to get mortgages and so have to rent.
They prefer to rent from a private landlord who looks after the property rather than some councils who don’t do even basic repairs or maintainance.
With regards to your comment about people who own multiple properties not having the right to having the heating bill subsidy, would you say that should apply to business owners who are not short of a few quid too.
-
It's quite surprising that multiple home owners qualify for additional help, whilst carers don't.
I understand why multiple home owners get multiples of the help, simply because it's cheaper to administer.
I'm not sure why carers always get the thin end of the wedge. Given they save the government so much money
-
BST, the comment by bfyp was made after a post by your pal sydders who posted a link about MPs having numerous rental properties so it is possible that bfyp was thinking of rentals when he asked his question.
I have tenants who can’t afford to buy or are unable to get mortgages and so have to rent.
They prefer to rent from a private landlord who looks after the property rather than some councils who don’t do even basic repairs or maintainance.
With regards to your comment about people who own multiple properties not having the right to having the heating bill subsidy, would you say that should apply to business owners who are not short of a few quid too.
When they talk of multiple home owners recieving the discount, does that mean landlords?
I thought it would be the bill payer. In a rented property that's not usually the landlord.
-
BST, the comment by bfyp was made after a post by your pal sydders who posted a link about MPs having numerous rental properties so it is possible that bfyp was thinking of rentals when he asked his question.
I have tenants who can’t afford to buy or are unable to get mortgages and so have to rent.
They prefer to rent from a private landlord who looks after the property rather than some councils who don’t do even basic repairs or maintainance.
With regards to your comment about people who own multiple properties not having the right to having the heating bill subsidy, would you say that should apply to business owners who are not short of a few quid too.
When they talk of multiple home owners recieving the discount, does that mean landlords?
I thought it would be the bill payer. In a rented property that's not usually the landlord.
No RD, it only goes to the landlords if the utilities bills are included in the rent.
Otherwise the tenant gets the subsidy.
I think bst was suggesting that landlords are all so well off that they shouldn’t be eligible to receive the subsidy full stop.
Thanks by the way for copying in my post, I was hoping someone would.
-
The Tories are bricking themselves with the energy crisis .
They know full well that in order to retain power all they have to do is keep just enough people onside and they win .
An energy crisis affects everyone and everything and they know it .
Well, fancy a political party doing something that might be popular with the public! Disgusting!
Depends what you class as doing something popular with the public .
Just how many times does Mr and Mrs Joe Taxpayer have to bail out free market capitalism ?
When does the re-nationalising conversation begin to happen .
Keith at one point was in favour of it before he became leader of the Labour Party but now he's apparently not .
-
The Tories are bricking themselves with the energy crisis .
They know full well that in order to retain power all they have to do is keep just enough people onside and they win .
An energy crisis affects everyone and everything and they know it .
Well, fancy a political party doing something that might be popular with the public! Disgusting!
Depends what you class as doing something popular with the public .
Just how many times does Mr and Mrs Joe Taxpayer have to bail out free market capitalism ?
When does the re-nationalising conversation begin to happen .
Keith at one point was in favour of it before he became leader of the Labour Party but now he's apparently not .
The tax payer has now had to bail out free market capitalism three times in the last 13 years.
Sometimes the market breaks. Financial crisis, pandemics, wars.
-
The Tories are bricking themselves with the energy crisis .
They know full well that in order to retain power all they have to do is keep just enough people onside and they win .
An energy crisis affects everyone and everything and they know it .
Well, fancy a political party doing something that might be popular with the public! Disgusting!
Depends what you class as doing something popular with the public .
Just how many times does Mr and Mrs Joe Taxpayer have to bail out free market capitalism ?
When does the re-nationalising conversation begin to happen .
Keith at one point was in favour of it before he became leader of the Labour Party but now he's apparently not .
The tax payer has now had to bail out free market capitalism three times in the last 13 years.
Sometimes the market breaks. Financial crisis, pandemics, wars.
And in the good times RD where do the huge profits go ?
Which is my point but made poorly mind .
Socialism for the bad days , free market capitalism for the profits .
-
One thing is sure now the free market is not a panacea. It is not perfect.
Just like nothing else in this world is perfect.
-
One thing is sure now the free market is not a panacea. It is not perfect.
Just like nothing else in this world is perfect.
So in reality not perfect equates to the free market only capable of correcting itself in the very mildest forms of adversity .
Would that be fair comment ? .
-
One thing is sure now the free market is not a panacea. It is not perfect.
Just like nothing else in this world is perfect.
So in reality not perfect equates to the free market only capable of correcting itself in the very mildest forms of adversity .
Would that be fair comment ? .
I think it's fair to say a free market works pretty well in a growing economy.
Otherwise. Problems.
-
£1200 for the poorest households?
That will be a couple of the newest iPhones for their kids then and feck the leccy bill.
-
One thing is sure now the free market is not a panacea. It is not perfect.
Just like nothing else in this world is perfect.
So in reality not perfect equates to the free market only capable of correcting itself in the very mildest forms of adversity .
Would that be fair comment ? .
I think it's fair to say a free market works pretty well in a growing economy.
Otherwise. Problems.
I saw a quote at the start of the pandemic.
"Everyone believes in God on a sinking ship. Everyone's a socialist in a sinking economy."
Free marketeers are fine believing in free markets when they are divvying up the profits. When there's debts to be dealt with, it's suddenly everyone's responsibility.
-
One thing is sure now the free market is not a panacea. It is not perfect.
Just like nothing else in this world is perfect.
So in reality not perfect equates to the free market only capable of correcting itself in the very mildest forms of adversity .
Would that be fair comment ? .
I think it's fair to say a free market works pretty well in a growing economy.
Otherwise. Problems.
I saw a quote at the start of the pandemic.
"Everyone believes in God on a sinking ship. Everyone's a socialist in a sinking economy."
Free marketeers are fine believing in free markets when they are divvying up the profits. When there's debts to be dealt with, it's suddenly everyone's responsibility.
That seemed to be how it played out in 2008 when all of a sudden I had a stake in several failing banks .
I don't remember receiving a dividend when they returned to profit mind .
-
What's wrong with having multiple homes?
Back to the point of my post.
There's an argument that there's nothing wrong with having multiple homes, although in a society where we have so many homeless and so many others priced out of owning homes, I personally couldn't look at myself in the mirror if I owned a home that was empty for long periods.
Regardless of that, if someone can afford to own more than one home, by definition they don't need and certainly don't deserve to have their heating bills subsidised by public money.
If there's a limited pot of money, a fair approach would be not to subsidise people who evidently don't need it, but to give more support to those on the edge of falling into abject poverty.
A couple of points.
1. I agree if you can afford that you probably don't need the help, why have they given this handout to all, does a multi millionaire pensioner need it? Or is it up to said recipitent to decide they don't need it?
2. Is it the fault of the multiple home owner that others are homeless? Or a failure elsewhere? Do you feel guilty if you have emtpy seats in your car when you see someone walking to work in the rain or do you stop to give them a lift?
3. How many things do you means test before you end up being worse off earning more?
4. We should be real careful on the criteria for the perception of someone's wealth. it's very complicated.
-
''3. How many things do you means test before you end up being worse off earning more?''
Can you explain this one pud please?
-
One thing is sure now the free market is not a panacea. It is not perfect.
Just like nothing else in this world is perfect.
So in reality not perfect equates to the free market only capable of correcting itself in the very mildest forms of adversity .
Would that be fair comment ? .
I think it's fair to say a free market works pretty well in a growing economy.
Otherwise. Problems.
The key fundamentals in ones life are not best left to the free market in my opinion .
An affordable roof over your head .
Healthcare .
The means to keep yourself warm .
Good services that provide care in your later years .
Everything else I can pretty much navigate around in a capitalist free market country .
I don't care much for the railways , the post office or anything else to be honest but that's just me personally and I get others may want further re-nationalisation depending on their personal circumstances .
It's high time the free market got over itself and the arrogance and self interest that goes with it .
Why should anyone care that house prices would be affected by a building programme of social housing ?
You buy a house to live in first and foremost and if you make a few quid down the line it's a bonus .
I'll even go along with the purchase of a social house just as long as that stock gets replenished .
The key fundamentals of life and to even suggest this has you branded a communist or a Marxist .
This country is like living in an abusive relationship , well getting punched or mentally damaged ain't normal .
Socialism is fine until you run out of someone elses money .
Oh the irony given someone else's money props em up when they fail .
-
A house price crash would bankrupt many youngsters tyke particularly in areas outside of ours. They would fail to get a new mortgage at remortgage points if the value dropped and have no means to sell to pay it off, it would be disastrous.
-
The Tories are bricking themselves with the energy crisis .
They know full well that in order to retain power all they have to do is keep just enough people onside and they win .
An energy crisis affects everyone and everything and they know it .
Well, fancy a political party doing something that might be popular with the public! Disgusting!
Depends what you class as doing something popular with the public .
Just how many times does Mr and Mrs Joe Taxpayer have to bail out free market capitalism ?
When does the re-nationalising conversation begin to happen .
Keith at one point was in favour of it before he became leader of the Labour Party but now he's apparently not .
The tax payer has now had to bail out free market capitalism three times in the last 13 years.
Sometimes the market breaks. Financial crisis, pandemics, wars.
To which I'd also add Brexit where we've induced our own break in the import v export market.
-
A house price crash would bankrupt many youngsters tyke particularly in areas outside of ours. They would fail to get a new mortgage at remortgage points if the value dropped and have no means to sell to pay it off, it would be disastrous.
The last thing I'd want to see happen would be negative equity emerging in the housing market .
My intentions would be to see house prices rise but gradually and not at the levels we see today .
Millions and millions of younger people have absolutely no chance of owning a home or possibly only owning a home when their parents die .
They are at the mercy of private landlords many of whom are unscrupulous .
An opportunity to move in to a social home and after a period of time have the opportunity to buy that home would be my policy .
-
I reckon (for what that's worth) this government would have been very popular with the ordinary unbiased public had it not been for unforeseen events such as Covid and its repercussions delaying progress on commitments such as the levelling up process.
I still believe if Johnson survives as premier he will prove to be very popular again with the ordinary unbiased public.
hmmm
-
Tyke it’s that policy that started the housing crisis
Social housing being sold off at cut prices and not being replaced. There’s now not enough housing
-
New builds are nearly all semi or detached houses because they're the lucrative ones and not enough cheap housing is being built as a result. I'd like to see a policy of not giving planning permission to build these unless the builder also builds cheaper terraced housing on a similar sized plot of land. And builds them before the semis and detached ones get built too, otherwise they'll backslide on it.