H_B Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Whataboutery Yes, indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Fuxake GD stop feeding the piss poor troll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumper Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 If he really were Hothersall, then simply asking him to explain how not raising a tax makes it a subsidy over and over again should make him hide forever. Facts and unionists are like garlic and vampires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 If he really were Hothersall, then simply asking him to explain how not raising a tax makes it a subsidy over and over again should make him hide forever. Facts and unionists are like garlic and vampires. As I said earlier, you have really no idea how this all works do you? You have also yet to explain who the "self-professed Conservative" you referred to is. Take it we'll just chalk that up to another moment of chucklefuckery from you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Stubbs Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I agree however I think it was a discussion of this that led to the CT discussion. Thanks to the NO voters in Scotland we are still part of the UK; and thanks to the ineptitude of Labour in England and Wales and the Tories divisive election campaign we now have a majority Tory government at Westminster. Both these facts are disdainful but are facts nonetheless. We must now decide how we deal with these latest cuts; personally I think we have no option but to raise taxes. It will be important to explain why we have to raise taxes but the overwhelming number of Scots will understand why and accept it IMO. Aye it seems like Swinney is putting the feelers out on this already, think we might see some tax rises in the near future. Agree that good communication is key and the reasons will be broadly understood and accepted. No tax rise has ever been universally well received but the people likely to really pissed off mostly won't be SNP voters anyway. I reckon they'll pull it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamaldo Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Now that I know who it is, can someone please explain to me why Ad Lib has a picture of Prince George as his avatar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumper Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I have no idea how taxes work. I'd always assumed, naively, that when my work puts money in my bank account, and then I take it out again to give it to the council, that's how taxation works. Apparently this is wrong, and what really happens is that any money in my bank account is there by the grace of the government, and if they choose to allow me to spend some of it on Buckfast and bus fares and feather pillows then this "subsidises" me, whereas an absence of a subsidy would be where I give all of my money to them. I've got to say this still confuses me a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 The majority of the millions it costs to maintain this policy actually goes into the coffers of local authorities to offset the CT freeze and help them maintain services in their area. But that doesn't sound as bad, so I can see why you went with the cash gifts to Morningside mansions thing instead. Sorry but this is just nonsense. For the first couple of years the Scottish Government insulated councils against the freeze by guaranteeing more block grant. Thereafter, however, they threatened to cut the block grant of councils which raised the council tax instead. They imposed real terms cuts on local authority budgets, hurting the poorest. It's total bollocks to say that central government has massively insulated councils from the freeze and to the extent that they have, it's come at the cost of reduced budgets elsewhere at central government level, including cuts to the schools budget, which has fallen behind England in the last few years. The beneficiaries of the council tax freeze are those whose council tax bills would otherwise have gone up. The people who financially benefit from the council tax not going up the most are those in higher banded properties, because in pounds and pence their council tax bill would have risen by more. They are the rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Looking at your last few sentences Ad Lib.. Even that itself isn't the fundamental problem. If they were able to say 'Look.. OK.. So someone in a £1.5 m house saves £500 but someone in a much lower value property saves £100 that means a lot more to them..' And the monetary cost of the policy meant that 70% of the cost to central government went to lower decile taxpayers this would be eminently explainable. The real problem.. And the elephant in the room the SNP sycophants keep avoiding is that its a policy the bulk of the cost of goes to the least in need. It would be like giving everyone in Scotland 10% of their salary as a one off bonus and saying 'Look.. OK.. So the majority of this cash injection goes to those on 40K plus and if you are unemployed with zero income well f**k you .. But just look at what the extra £1500 means to that call centre worker ' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 The beneficiaries of the council tax freeze are those whose council tax bills would otherwise have gone up. The people who financially benefit from the council tax not going up the most are those in higher banded properties, because in pounds and pence their council tax bill would have risen by more. They are the rich. This really depends on it you define it in terms of wealth or ability to pay. In terms of ability to pay, those that pay a higher proportion of their income on Council Tax benefit the most from a freeze. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Sorry but this is just nonsense. For the first couple of years the Scottish Government insulated councils against the freeze by guaranteeing more block grant. Thereafter, however, they threatened to cut the block grant of councils which raised the council tax instead. They imposed real terms cuts on local authority budgets, hurting the poorest. It's total bollocks to say that central government has massively insulated councils from the freeze and to the extent that they have, it's come at the cost of reduced budgets elsewhere at central government level, including cuts to the schools budget, which has fallen behind England in the last few years. The beneficiaries of the council tax freeze are those whose council tax bills would otherwise have gone up. The people who financially benefit from the council tax not going up the most are those in higher banded properties, because in pounds and pence their council tax bill would have risen by more. They are the rich. But proportionate to their income, monthly outgoings and disposable income the percentage of "discount" they receive is lower than those on a lower income. Sure they will get more pounds and pence but as a measure against how much that impacts the competitive standard of life then surely a person on a lower income saving a £5 is more beneficial than the rich person receiving £15?John Swinney stated in 2014 that the council tax freeze was fully funded by the Scottish Government for the seventh successive year. Can you tell me how that wasn't the case? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Looking at your last few sentences Ad Lib.. Even that itself isn't the fundamental problem. If they were able to say 'Look.. OK.. So someone in a £1.5 m house saves £500 but someone in a much lower value property saves £100 that means a lot more to them..' And the monetary cost of the policy meant that 70% of the cost to central government went to lower decile taxpayers this would be eminently explainable. The real problem.. And the elephant in the room the SNP sycophants keep avoiding is that its a policy the bulk of the cost of goes to the least in need. It would be like giving everyone in Scotland 10% of their salary as a one off bonus and saying 'Look.. OK.. So the majority of this cash injection goes to those on 40K plus and if you are unemployed with zero income well f**k you .. But just look at what the extra £1500 means to that call centre worker ' One must assume, by extension of your premise, that you would advocate a payment from the council tax budget to those who don't pay it in lieu of a reduction?Should we also pay out from the inland revenue in respect of income tax and NI? How can we make VAT fairer on these people? Road tax, corporation tax.....where should it end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 John Swinney stated in 2014 that the council tax freeze was fully funded by the Scottish Government for the seventh successive year. Can you tell me how that wasn't the case? Thanks. John Swinney lied. It wasn't fully funded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 John Swinney lied. It wasn't fully funded. Ach well nothing to worry about eh? Excusable according to your moral compass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Seriously. You have to be thick as f**k to continue this shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Ach well nothing to worry about eh? Excusable according to your moral compass. Politicians lie all the time. I have no moral objection to John Swinney being a minister, and MSP and a liar. He's just playing the game. And has duped a lot of people. Credit to the lad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 John Swinney lied. It wasn't fully funded.I really don't remember the outcry at that from the other parties at the time. I might have missed it. I do presume, however, that your interpretation of the funding figures and budgetary implications are different to Mr Swinney's, probably biased against his and wholly subjective.Is there, perhaps, an objective analysis we can perhaps peruse for some insight here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 John Swinney lied. It wasn't fully funded.I really don't remember the outcry at that from the other parties at the time. I might have missed it. I do presume, however, that your interpretation of the funding figures and budgetary implications are different to Mr Swinney's, probably biased against his and wholly subjective.Is there, perhaps, an objective analysis we can perhaps peruse for some insight here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Politicians lie all the time. I have no moral objection to John Swinney being a minister, and MSP and a liar. He's just playing the game. And has duped a lot of people. Credit to the lad.To play this game you must be a good liar and that warrants praise?Are you a good liar Mr Lib? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Brian Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 To play this game you must be a good liar and that warrants praise? Are you a good liar Mr Lib? Obviously not he only got 1000 ish votes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.