On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 11:51:37 +0100
Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
A bit like the liberal dufflecoats moronic mansion tax then. So if you
bought your house in the 60s or whenever for 20K in some then grungy
area like notting hill or clerkenwell and now its worth a million , too
bad , cough up please. Oh , you can't afford to? Sell your house then
you rich *******. Etc.

The figure quoted for the 'mansion tax' was two, not one million. Although

Oh thats ok then. Those evil spongers with their 2 million quid houses, why
should they keep their investment and not be made homeless when some
unemployed dosser could have the money instead?

I do realise both figures are beyond your ken.

Och , thats right jim lad. I wud ney nowt aboot em.

But since you feel every one should always be able to live in the house
they've bought regardless of income, would you extend that to help with

Are you really such an utterly envious little ****e that you genuinely think
people should lose their home to just finance more government waste or is
it just yet more sad right-on posturing that you're so good at? Perhaps when
you grow up and actually buy your own home instead of living in the squat you
currently inhabit in the peoples republic of balham you might have a different
view.

council charges, maintenance, heating etc?

No. If someone can't afford to live in their house thats their problem, not
the governments. But thats rather different to the government coming along and
saying "That house is worth something, we want some of it, now cough up".

B2003

On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 11:45:48 +0100
Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
By your post, you seem to want the benefits etc this country provides
without paying your fair *share* of the costs.

Since I'm already in the 40% tax bracket I already pay more than my fair
share.

Sorry - didn't realise you were so poor.

I rarely use the NHS, public transport or council services and I don't have
any kids so I'm paying out far more than I get back from public services.
Excuse me if I don't volunteer to pay any more so some political halfwits
who've never had a proper job can waste it on chavs or **** it down some or
other toilet - eg foreign "aid".

B2003

In message , at 12:29:37 on Tue, 9 Oct
2012, Clive Page remarked:
They were paid for jointly by Essex and Kent County Councils (you
probably don't remember the good old days when County Councils did
useful things like that).

But it was explicitly promised at the time that when they tolls paid
for the cost of construction (and interest etc.) the tunnels would
become free of charge. I expect all those making the promises are now
dead, unfortunately.

In general I am also cynical, but in this case I don't think the County
Council project ever had a hope of breaking even, and had to be bailed
out. In which case, the original promise has little relevance.
--
Roland Perry

In article ,
wrote:
But since you feel every one should always be able to live in the house
they've bought regardless of income, would you extend that to help with

Are you really such an utterly envious little ****e that you genuinely
think people should lose their home to just finance more government
waste or is it just yet more sad right-on posturing that you're so good
at? Perhaps when you grow up and actually buy your own home instead of
living in the squat you currently inhabit in the peoples republic of
balham you might have a different view.

council charges, maintenance, heating etc?

No. If someone can't afford to live in their house thats their problem,
not the governments. But thats rather different to the government coming
along and saying "That house is worth something, we want some of it, now
cough up".

Just admit you don't like the idea of people being taxed according to
their means.

--
*One of us is thinking about sex... OK, it's me.

Dave Plowman London SW 12

In article ,
wrote:
On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 11:45:48 +0100
Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
By your post, you seem to want the benefits etc this country provides
without paying your fair *share* of the costs.

Since I'm already in the 40% tax bracket I already pay more than my
fair share.

Sorry - didn't realise you were so poor.

I rarely use the NHS, public transport or council services and I don't
have any kids so I'm paying out far more than I get back from public
services.

And you'll refuse the old age pension when the time comes? By far and away
the biggest single item of 'benefits'

Excuse me if I don't volunteer to pay any more so some political
halfwits who've never had a proper job can waste it on chavs or **** it
down some or other toilet - eg foreign "aid".

You really don't read much beyond 'The Mail', do you?

--
*How about "never"? Is "never" good for you?

Dave Plowman London SW 12

On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 13:35:45 +0100
Dave Plowman wrote:
Just admit you don't like the idea of people being taxed according to
their means.

Just admit you're an envious little **** who doesn't like the idea of
anyone having more collateral than you. No doubt like most lefties you're a
steaming hypocrite and if you ever earn a significant amount of money (like
that'll ever happen short of you winning the lottery) it'll be a different
story.

B2003

On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 13:39:18 +0100
Dave Plowman wrote:
I rarely use the NHS, public transport or council services and I don't
have any kids so I'm paying out far more than I get back from public
services.

And you'll refuse the old age pension when the time comes? By far and away
the biggest single item of 'benefits'

Since I've been paying in for it via national insurance all my working life
why should I refuse it?

Excuse me if I don't volunteer to pay any more so some political
halfwits who've never had a proper job can waste it on chavs or **** it
down some or other toilet - eg foreign "aid".

You really don't read much beyond 'The Mail', do you?

I can't remember the last time I read the Mail. You really don't like anyone
who has an opinion that shakes your cosy woolly skip down the street together
hand in hand liberal world view do you?

B2003

In message , d
writes
No. If someone can't afford to live in their house thats their problem, not
the governments. But thats rather different to the government coming along and
saying "That house is worth something, we want some of it, now cough up".
Another way to approach this is to have many more council tax bands
going all the way up to (Ballpark £5m) so that those in expensive
properties pay proportionately more and is normal for those in ordinary
housing. You wouldn't then be paying mansion tax, just a fair amount
of council tax. With the end result being the same.
--
Clive

On Tue, 9 Oct 2012 14:14:56 +0100
Clive wrote:
In message , d
writes
No. If someone can't afford to live in their house thats their problem, not
the governments. But thats rather different to the government coming along and
saying "That house is worth something, we want some of it, now cough up".
Another way to approach this is to have many more council tax bands
going all the way up to (Ballpark £5m) so that those in expensive
properties pay proportionately more and is normal for those in ordinary
housing. You wouldn't then be paying mansion tax, just a fair amount
of council tax. With the end result being the same.

Well , we could debate the merits of council tax being based on property
value rather than services the property receives for hours, but certainly
that wouldn't instantly render some familes homeless.

Anyway , there's no chance of this hairbrained bill making it through. If it
does the tories are finished for a generation as they'll have ****ed their own
supporters royally.

B2003

In article ,
wrote:
On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 13:35:45 +0100
Dave Plowman wrote:
Just admit you don't like the idea of people being taxed according to
their means.

Just admit you're an envious little **** who doesn't like the idea of
anyone having more collateral than you. No doubt like most lefties
you're a steaming hypocrite and if you ever earn a significant amount of
money (like that'll ever happen short of you winning the lottery) it'll
be a different story.

You're quite an advert for Tories yourself. Just about as full of hate for
others I've seen. But you could seek treatment.

--
*Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines *

Dave Plowman London SW 12