Jeremy Corbyn

SocketRocket said:
Many things are different from the time you grew up in and went to University. The population is much larger to start with and the numbers of people expecting a university education is massively larger. How do you propose the current numbers of undergraduates be funded; solely by the taxpayer or as now, partially by the tax payer and partially by the graduate?

Do you accept that more money is being spent on the NHS now than at any other time in history. Is there not huge amounts of waste in NHS procurement and spending priorities which have existed for a very long time now and not just under one political administration.

Do you believe that welfare should be available to the feckless, work shy and those who produce more children than they could afford even if working full time. Do you think tax credits should be used as tool to subsidise low paying Employers and what it was originally designed for; to buy Labour votes. I think just about everyone supports a welfare state that provides a safety net to those in genuine need or with disabilities but anyone who does not think there are large numbers of people 'swinging the lead' are very naive and taken in by the left wing press and politic. Just look around you in any town and city during working hours and see what goes on.

Maybe all these things could be funded by making very large tax increases to people like yourself so that you are punished for your own success and made to fund those that have no ambition or self determination. I think many would be seeking to move to other countries where they would be thought better of.
Click to expand...

Typical shotgun rant, mixing prejudice and myth.

Briefly, the population is not that much larger. Anyway, so what? More taxpayers.

There has been a massive and unnecessary explosion in university courses and now the rubbish courses drag down the better ones. No evidence has ever been produced to show why 50% of the population should go to uni. In any case, the Student Loan system does not save the exchequer any money, and it would not cost any more to scrap it and restore direct funding. There is a graduate tax already. It is called income tax. If you earn more, you pay more.

More money is spent within the NHS, but a much greater proportion is spent on the apparatus of Trust structures, PFI money, which is money completely pissed away, management consultants and unnecessary management of various other sorts. Procurement isn't high on the list of waste, nor are locum or staffing agencies. Loads of medical time is wasted on bureaucracy, much of which is to prepare the NHS for detailed billing systems. Do away with the Trust structures and internal market and that will free a ton of money for actual healthcare.

Welfare should be available to those who need it and people shouldn't be demonised for being poor. Just because there are some feckless and workshy, although not as many as the Mail would have you believe, does not mean that others in society should be punished. The welfare state made this country what it is, and it is immoral for Govt to pull it away at the same time as they are lining the pockets of their friends in the city. This Govt believes in income redistribution, just the opposite direction to Jeremy.

Don't know if you have seen the changing demographics of the population, but we desperately need people to produce many more babies pronto, before the number of retired non tax-payers exceed the number of tax payers.

Tax rates used to be much higher in the UK, even under Tory Govts, and were higher still in the US under Reagan when the US was at its most productive. The Laffer Curve (which I assume you are driving at) has been shown to be rubbish, and even Laffer himself tacitly admits as much. The idea of trickle down economics has also been discredited. If you want to help the economy, give money to people who will spend it and recirculate it in the economy (the multiplicative effect) rather than those who will stick it in the Caymans.
 
The 'art' of attaining wealth, is how to extract the most from the poor. Money only flows uphill.
Something 'eastern' countries, are extremely adept at and now a lot of 'western' nations are following suit.
It is a no-brainer, that however much the poor are given, that money is quickly obtained by the rich.
There are many ways this can be achieved but generally those without financial savvy are an easy target for - gambling, drink, smoking, drugs, advertising, high interest rates on loans, desire to copy celebrity (tattoos, footy gear, and other 'fashion' statements)

So for the rich to become richer, give the poor more freebies.
 
Ethan said:
Typical shotgun rant, mixing prejudice and myth.

Briefly, the population is not that much larger. Anyway, so what? More taxpayers.

There has been a massive and unnecessary explosion in university courses and now the rubbish courses drag down the better ones. No evidence has ever been produced to show why 50% of the population should go to uni. In any case, the Student Loan system does not save the exchequer any money, and it would not cost any more to scrap it and restore direct funding. There is a graduate tax already. It is called income tax. If you earn more, you pay more.

More money is spent within the NHS, but a much greater proportion is spent on the apparatus of Trust structures, PFI money, which is money completely pissed away, management consultants and unnecessary management of various other sorts. Procurement isn't high on the list of waste, nor are locum or staffing agencies. Loads of medical time is wasted on bureaucracy, much of which is to prepare the NHS for detailed billing systems. Do away with the Trust structures and internal market and that will free a ton of money for actual healthcare.

Welfare should be available to those who need it and people shouldn't be demonised for being poor. Just because there are some feckless and workshy, although not as many as the Mail would have you believe, does not mean that others in society should be punished. The welfare state made this country what it is, and it is immoral for Govt to pull it away at the same time as they are lining the pockets of their friends in the city. This Govt believes in income redistribution, just the opposite direction to Jeremy.

Don't know if you have seen the changing demographics of the population, but we desperately need people to produce many more babies pronto, before the number of retired non tax-payers exceed the number of tax payers.

Tax rates used to be much higher in the UK, even under Tory Govts, and were higher still in the US under Reagan when the US was at its most productive. The Laffer Curve (which I assume you are driving at) has been shown to be rubbish, and even Laffer himself tacitly admits as much. The idea of trickle down economics has also been discredited. If you want to help the economy, give money to people who will spend it and recirculate it in the economy (the multiplicative effect) rather than those who will stick it in the Caymans.
Click to expand...

Initial line is a typical Socialist response to a debate. Attack the integrity of anyone disagreeing with you.

The population has grown by a very large amount during the last 15 years and that increase does not automatically create increased tax revenue. Most of the increase by far is due to immigration and births from immigrants. Many of these people work for low wages and as such do not pay much tax, in fact in many cases benefits such as tax credits negate tax revenues.

I agree that much money in the NHS was and continues to to swallowed up by PFI costs. We cant really blame all that on the Tories, can we.

Welfare should be available for those that deserve it, not who need it. Anyone can need the tax payer to pass on their hard earned cash. The welfare state was never designed to be used the way it currently is. It was a National Insurance and based on you contributing. Benefits were designed to help people back into employment where ever possible.

The idea of increasing population to pay for the old is self defeating. The extra population grows old so you have to exponentially increase it to keep up and public services can never serve this model.

If you are happy to pay considerably more tax to support Corbyn's Socialist Utopia then vote for him. Lets face it though, he wont ever be a Prime Minister.
 
The Green Fairy said:
The 'art' of attaining wealth, is how to extract the most from the poor. Money only flows uphill.
Something 'eastern' countries, are extremely adept at and now a lot of 'western' nations are following suit.
It is a no-brainer, that however much the poor are given, that money is quickly obtained by the rich.
There are many ways this can be achieved but generally those without financial savvy are an easy target for - gambling, drink, smoking, drugs, advertising, high interest rates on loans, desire to copy celebrity (tattoos, footy gear, and other 'fashion' statements)

So for the rich to become richer, give the poor more freebies.
Click to expand...

So none of it is of their own doing!
 
excellent words as always Ethan, and as usual the self righteous tory views
the only thing a tory government will do is look after its own
why don't the tory government crack down on tax avoidance and insider dealing etc oh if they did they would loose most of their doners

people who support a left of center labour party policies are not all dinosaurs, unlike some on here with their tory rhetoric, or against the creation of wealth, just the abuse of wealth and power

shagster
 
shagster said:
excellent words as always Ethan, and as usual the self righteous tory views
the only thing a tory government will do is look after its own
why don't the tory government crack down on tax avoidance and insider dealing etc oh if they did they would loose most of their doners

people who support a left of center labour party policies are not all dinosaurs, unlike some on here with their tory rhetoric, or against the creation of wealth, just the abuse of wealth and power

shagster
Click to expand...

Oh me sides! You're killing me... lol...

Remind me how many millions, yes millions, the banks have been fined in recent years for any number of transgressions? PPI, Libor... remind me how many private companies have been fined by the likes of Ofcom, ofgen etc...remind me which govt has brought in tough new laws on tax evasion.... 156 individuals fined in 2010/11, 565 in 12/13, and 1165 in 14/15, a very steep increase compared to what happened under Labour - all the details are out there if you searched for facts instead of thumping your chest and shouting political rubbish.
 
shagster said:
excellent words as always Ethan, and as usual the self righteous tory views
the only thing a tory government will do is look after its own
why don't the tory government crack down on tax avoidance and insider dealing etc oh if they did they would loose most of their doners

people who support a left of center labour party policies are not all dinosaurs, unlike some on here with their tory rhetoric, or against the creation of wealth, just the abuse of wealth and power

shagster
Click to expand...

It goes something like this. Maybe you've heard something like it before.

Usual self righteous Socialist views. The only thing a Labour Government will do is look after it's own.
Why didn't the Labour Government clamp down on Tax avoidance and insider dealing etc. Oh! if they did they would lose most of their Labour donors.

People who support right of centre Tory party policies are not all dinosaurs, unlike some on here with their Socialist rhetoric, or against the creation of wealth, just the abuse of wealth and power.

Sockster :rolleyes:
 
Never said i was against the creation of wealth, that's just your interpretation . I think making the best of your ability is a good thing and should be encouraged.

When was the last real labour government, as blairs shower was a poor tory imitation.
if john smith had not passed away we would never have had the a--hole that is blair.

Wow 1165 fined that's going to fill the debt the country is in. That really is tough and getting to the heart of the problem, at this rate we will be out of debt by the year dot.

The millions the banks have been fined will not make one bit of difference as they will still carry ripping customers off.

The point i made about dinosaurs is as soon as a left wing point of view is made, the usual suspects criticise their views and they must be wrong.
Why is a right wing point of view better than a left wing point of view and vice versa.
At the end of the day, very few politicians are actually in it for their real beliefs and to make the country a better place for everyone, the are just pigs at the trough getting what they can, regardless of which party they support.
Just my view, i hope it dose not offend, but no doubt it will

shagster
 
shagster said:
Never said i was against the creation of wealth, that's just your interpretation . I think making the best of your ability is a good thing and should be encouraged.

When was the last real labour government, as blairs shower was a poor tory imitation.
if john smith had not passed away we would never have had the a--hole that is blair.

Wow 1165 fined that's going to fill the debt the country is in. That really is tough and getting to the heart of the problem, at this rate we will be out of debt by the year dot.

The millions the banks have been fined will not make one bit of difference as they will still carry ripping customers off.

The point i made about dinosaurs is as soon as a left wing point of view is made, the usual suspects criticise their views and they must be wrong.
Why is a right wing point of view better than a left wing point of view and vice versa.
At the end of the day, very few politicians are actually in it for their real beliefs and to make the country a better place for everyone, the are just pigs at the trough getting what they can, regardless of which party they support.
Just my view, i hope it dose not offend, but no doubt it will

shagster
Click to expand...

You are entitled to your view however wrong it may be.

You accuse others of being biased but are exactly that yourself.
 
Last edited:
shagster said:
Never said i was against the creation of wealth, that's just your interpretation . I think making the best of your ability is a good thing and should be encouraged.

When was the last real labour government, as blairs shower was a poor tory imitation.
if john smith had not passed away we would never have had the a--hole that is blair.

Wow 1165 fined that's going to fill the debt the country is in. That really is tough and getting to the heart of the problem, at this rate we will be out of debt by the year dot.

The millions the banks have been fined will not make one bit of difference as they will still carry ripping customers off.

The point i made about dinosaurs is as soon as a left wing point of view is made, the usual suspects criticise their views and they must be wrong.
Why is a right wing point of view better than a left wing point of view and vice versa.
At the end of the day, very few politicians are actually in it for their real beliefs and to make the country a better place for everyone, the are just pigs at the trough getting what they can, regardless of which party they support.
Just my view, i hope it dose not offend, but no doubt it will

shagster
Click to expand...

But do you know how much they were fined? No, you haven't bothered to look. So there's massive corporations being fined, and a significant increase in individuals being fined. All done by a Tory govt you said looks after its mates...

I don't have a problem with your political stance apart from it appears to be based on old fashioned political rhetoric, i.e. the Tories always do x, y, z for their mates. If Labour become credible again, and have characters who I feel are good enough they'll get my vote again - note, again. I've voted Labour more than I've voted Tory, but that vote has always been based on strength and credibility of what is in front of me.

The current lot don't appear to know what they want to be. Some want to revive an era, Foot-like, that was a disaster for Labour, whilst others want to go down the progressive line of the Blair years. Unfortunately, mention Blair and you're mentioning something that is tainted and toxic. Have a look at what Blair achieved within the UK before he became Bush's lapdog. Some brilliant socialist reforms, and fulfilling election promises for social change. Have a look at how successful Labour were under that centre ground stance that included excellent social reforms - which are dismissed because of the "warmonger."

Have a look at Andy Burnham's CV. A better CV than David Miliband, who unfortunately hasn't yet returned to the fold. Burnham is a great candidate for a leader/pm. And then there's Corbyn, a supporter of the far left, inc. terrorist organisations etc. Whether we like it or not, the UK is a business and needs to be run on sound financial terms. I wouldn't trust Corbyn with the kid's piggy bank, but I would Andy Burnham.

Until Labour find some decent, middle ground, policies and are led by credible trustable politicians they're not getting my vote. But that doesn't mean I like a lot of what the Tories do, but they will continue to get my vote whilst they build their policies around getting the UK out of the financial mess whilst Labour just want to follow Greece's example of borrowing their way out of.
 
SocketRocket said:
Initial line is a typical Socialist response to a debate. Attack the integrity of anyone disagreeing with you.

The population has grown by a very large amount during the last 15 years and that increase does not automatically create increased tax revenue. Most of the increase by far is due to immigration and births from immigrants. Many of these people work for low wages and as such do not pay much tax, in fact in many cases benefits such as tax credits negate tax revenues.

I agree that much money in the NHS was and continues to to swallowed up by PFI costs. We cant really blame all that on the Tories, can we.

Welfare should be available for those that deserve it, not who need it. Anyone can need the tax payer to pass on their hard earned cash. The welfare state was never designed to be used the way it currently is. It was a National Insurance and based on you contributing. Benefits were designed to help people back into employment where ever possible.

The idea of increasing population to pay for the old is self defeating. The extra population grows old so you have to exponentially increase it to keep up and public services can never serve this model.

If you are happy to pay considerably more tax to support Corbyn's Socialist Utopia then vote for him. Lets face it though, he wont ever be a Prime Minister.
Click to expand...

You always retort that whatever anyone who disagrees with you says is a typical socialist rant. Can you not see how hypocritical that is? Perhaps I should call yours a typical reactionary bluster.

Immigrants to this country are mostly of working age or kids. They either pay tax, and usually by doing the jobs that locals think are beneath them, or help rebalance the unbalancing demographic. Nobody claims that will fix the demographics for ever, but may delay problems a bit. Welfare and national insurance have evolved. NI is just another form of income tax now, and is not hypothecated to pay for welfare and the NHS. It pays for roads, defence, foreign aid and all the usual stuff.

Even people earning small amounts of money are important to the economy because they spend their money on food or clothes. Then that money is used to pay shop staff, who spend it again and so on and so forth, with tax paid at most stages along the way. Each £ paid to the first person driver £3 or 4 more spending in the economy and a couple of quid tax revenue too. This is the multiplier effect. http://study.com/academy/lesson/the...nding-multiplier-definition-and-examples.html Hedge fund people who get big payouts stick their money offshore and it does nobody any good, not even the HMRC.

Corbyn does not promise a socialist utopia, but a fairer society and it does not take considerably more tax to provide it. It takes keeping considerably more money from leaking out of the economy to fat cats and private investors, though. David Cameron talks about letting those with the broadest shoulders bear more of the burden, seeing as how we* are all in this together. Corbyn means it.


* he doesn't include him or his kind in we, because he really means you.
 
I've just waded through much of the thread and one thing occurs to me


If the political parties were to help everyone the same, then a good centre ground course would be a perfect one to steer. We wouldn't need left and right wing policies because a safe middle ground would be fairer to everyone.
 
Hobbit said:
Oh me sides! You're killing me... lol...

Remind me how many millions, yes millions, the banks have been fined in recent years for any number of transgressions? PPI, Libor... remind me how many private companies have been fined by the likes of Ofcom, ofgen etc...remind me which govt has brought in tough new laws on tax evasion.... 156 individuals fined in 2010/11, 565 in 12/13, and 1165 in 14/15, a very steep increase compared to what happened under Labour - all the details are out there if you searched for facts instead of thumping your chest and shouting political rubbish.
Click to expand...


But no one of any real significance has seen the inside of a prison though... A handful of lackeys and that's it... As for the fines these just get passed onto the customers in effect... And, I doubt many of the individuals fined have actually handed much over...
 
SocketRocket said:
Initial line is a typical Socialist response to a debate. Attack the integrity of anyone disagreeing with you.

The population has grown by a very large amount during the last 15 years and that increase does not automatically create increased tax revenue. Most of the increase by far is due to immigration and births from immigrants. Many of these people work for low wages and as such do not pay much tax, in fact in many cases benefits such as tax credits negate tax revenues.

I agree that much money in the NHS was and continues to to swallowed up by PFI costs. We cant really blame all that on the Tories, can we.

Welfare should be available for those that deserve it, not who need it. Anyone can need the tax payer to pass on their hard earned cash. The welfare state was never designed to be used the way it currently is. It was a National Insurance and based on you contributing. Benefits were designed to help people back into employment where ever possible.

The idea of increasing population to pay for the old is self defeating. The extra population grows old so you have to exponentially increase it to keep up and public services can never serve this model.

If you are happy to pay considerably more tax to support Corbyn's Socialist Utopia then vote for him. Lets face it though, he wont ever be a Prime Minister.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you can provide the statistical data to back that statement up ?
 
MegaSteve said:
But no one of any real significance has seen the inside of a prison though... A handful of lackeys and that's it... As for the fines these just get passed onto the customers in effect... And, I doubt many of the individuals fined have actually handed much over...
Click to expand...

So what do you suggest? Where do you expect the fines to be passed onto? And yes, I agree that fines only end up costing the customer more... or do they? If a bank/business passed on millions of pounds in fines to its customers via greater charges etc what would a number of customers do? Vote with their feet?

And you doubt many of the individuals have paid their fines. Another, I can't be bothered to look coz it might hurt my argument? If you look you will find that those that were fined for non-payment/fraud have had their assets seized - one losing £700,000 and another £1.4mill.

Too many people quick to say this party hasn't and this party has. A few facts in the debate wouldn't do any harm... not as much fun tho.'
 
Hobbit said:
So what do you suggest? Where do you expect the fines to be passed onto? And yes, I agree that fines only end up costing the customer more... or do they? If a bank/business passed on millions of pounds in fines to its customers via greater charges etc what would a number of customers do? Vote with their feet?

And you doubt many of the individuals have paid their fines. Another, I can't be bothered to look coz it might hurt my argument? If you look you will find that those that were fined for non-payment/fraud have had their assets seized - one losing £700,000 and another £1.4mill.

Too many people quick to say this party hasn't and this party has. A few facts in the debate wouldn't do any harm... not as much fun tho.'
Click to expand...


I'd have liked to have seen the head honchos spend a few years behind bars after having had all their assets stripped... Not get healthy payoffs before toddling off to collect their pensions....


And, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...x-bill-as-settlement-is-torn-up-10268716.html

Think you'll find he's one of many...

Ever been allowed to get away paying no tax?
Nor me either...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mudball
Is 90k pay middle class
7 8 9
Replies
162
Views
6K
harpo_72
harpo_72
rudebhoy
Cost to heat a towel rail electrically?
Replies
9
Views
478
cliveb
C
I
Motocaddy QB2 Push Trolley
Replies
4
Views
149
IanMcC
I
rystaman
St Andrews Discontinues 3-Day Unlimited Pass
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
6K
Klimski
K
G
My golfing journey transition into new club
Replies
4
Views
825
golfoutlaw
G
Top