Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#91
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Conor wrote:
Nope. THe local shop closed down because non of the new residents used it. I'm not really surprised. Have you ever been into one of these shops? Customer service is an alien concept, unless it's prefixed with the word bad. |
#92
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cast_Iron wrote:
Your evidence for this is? It's a well known fact. That's all that's required to prove something on Usenet. ;-) |
#93
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
JohnB wrote:
If you don't even know the area being discussed your opinion is worthless. BTW its not seasonal work. *All* farming is seasonal. |
#94
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cast_Iron wrote:
Was it and it is now better in what way do you think? In every way possible. |
#95
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Cast_Iron wrote in message ... Silk wrote: Cast_Iron wrote: That was Thatcher's theory, it didn't work. Oh, really? In 1979, Britain was a gloomy, strike ridden, third rate economy. Thatcher dug it out of a hole to become the first nation it is today. Was it and it is now better in what way do you think? You must be trolling. |
#96
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Oliver Keating wrote in message ... Because they if they are rich enough to be buying a second house (which I regard as the ultimate frivoulous activity), they can certainly afford to be screwed for every penny by the tax man. Why is owning a second home "the ultimate frivolous activity"? It's well known that property is as a general rule a solid investment. You get the benefit of having an appreciating asset whilst having a house in the country, or nearer your family etc. Why should activities you consider frivolous be taxed heavily, rather than ones I consider frivolous? Why not tax gambling like mad? And as people keep seeming to forget, every pound that one of these rich kids pays is a pound that the poor don't have to pay. The argument about heavily taxing high earners is going on elsewhere in the thread, so I won't repeat myself here. What I'd like to know is this: If you're so bothered why go to the frivolity of buying a new car when you've got a couple of apparently servicable cars knocking around? Why not give what you've lost in depreciation on the CLK to charity? You don't actually give a toss, but like to think, and for others to think that you do. Same goes for you being bothered about the environment. I don't suppose you considered that manufacturing a new car is widely acknowledged to pollute more than running an old one. If you're going to constantly bang on about your politics you ought to have the decency to stand by your views. |
#97
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Silk wrote: JohnB wrote: If you don't even know the area being discussed your opinion is worthless. BTW its not seasonal work. *All* farming is seasonal. Thank you for showing your ignorance. In this case the work is throughout the year. John B |
#98
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Doki" wrote in message ... Cast_Iron wrote in message ... Silk wrote: Cast_Iron wrote: That was Thatcher's theory, it didn't work. Oh, really? In 1979, Britain was a gloomy, strike ridden, third rate economy. Thatcher dug it out of a hole to become the first nation it is today. Was it and it is now better in what way do you think? You must be trolling. Everyone has different opinions, I'm simply interested in other people's. |
#99
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Cast_Iron" wrote in message ... Martyn Hodson wrote: "Cast_Iron" wrote in message ... "Greg Hennessy" wrote in message ... On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 09:11:09 +0000 (UTC), "Cast_Iron" wrote: But if you reduce the tax burden surely you encourage enterprise, which moves more money around the economy and thus you still get your tax. I am not an economist, but AFAIK there are still arguments about high vs low tax ![]() revenue per capita as they're spending and earning more cash. That was Thatcher's theory, it didn't work. Oh really ? That explains why the tax take increased by nearly 50% when the 60% band was abolished. It also explains why the top 10% of tax payers are now paying close to 40% of the overall take compared to just over 20% at the height of so socially equitable rates of 98%. But they don't spend more cash. Everyone has certain needs, once those needs are met their surplus cash sits in the bank or wherever they choose to put it. but that somewhere can include direct investment in new business investment in venture capital orgs investment in banks, building socieites and other financial services providers all of which has a varying effect on job and wealth creation It can, but the "filter down" effect that your alluding to and Thatcher espoused didn't happen and hasn't happened yet to any significant degree. the 'filter down' effect applies to anyone working for privately owned company ( in this context, working for a sole proprietor, partnership co-op or limited company , rather than a state owned or publicily quoted company) as without investment from the owner/partners/ shareholders/ co-op members there would be not business and no ongoign wealth creation would there ? --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.551 / Virus Database: 343 - Release Date: 12/12/2003 |
#100
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 00:54:37 -0000, "Oliver Keating"
wrote: Because they if they are rich enough to be buying a second house (which I regard as the ultimate frivoulous activity), they can certainly afford to be screwed for every penny by the tax man. Between us, my wife & I own 2 homes & rent a 3rd. Does that make us rich? Hardly. We have our family home. We also own the home which, before our marriage, I shared with my mother; my mother still lives there. My wife also rents an apartment near her work (1000 miles from home). Now should I sell my old home, thus making my mother homeless? Should my wife commute daily? If you want to tax rich people, tax income, not what people choose to spend their money on. -- Duncan |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Legal challenges and congestion charging for 30 second journey leaving zone? | London Transport | |||
The effects of a road congestion tax | London Transport | |||
Congestion charge cheat | London Transport | |||
Crapita bailed-out over congestion charging | London Transport | |||
Extending the congestion charge zone | London Transport |