The Official ‘Hi-Risk Anus PM’ Clusterfuck Thread

[Dawson Park Boy]

9 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Except that austerity between 2011-17 cost the UK £100 billion and saw growth fall from 3.1% (following the QE by the Bank of England to shore up the banks in 2008) to an average of 0.3% austerity period. The rise in people using food banks during austerity doubled. It led to 1 in 4 children in the UK being classed as living in poverty. So the Bank of England printing more money as it had to do to maintain the financial system, doesn't necessarily cut growth. 

Once deep cuts are made to the public sector, as they will be under Sunak, and as they are proposed in the SNP's (current) Independence plan, it takes years to recover..

Meanwhile high inflation as we have at present, acts in itself to reduce govt debt, as they are significantly increasing their tax take, from both VAT and income. 

An alternative to austerity to reduce national debt is a tax on capital, essentially bank deposits. If there was a will to do so, there could be say 0% of tax on deposits up to £100,000, and then incremental increases of eg 1% on deposits between £100,000-500,000,  2% on $500,000 to a million. 3 or 4% on £1-2 million etc. Of course those with high levels of deposits could choose to shift their money around, and yes it would need to be well regulated, but it would eliminate the need for austerity.

 

Your talk of tax on capital - bank deposits. Is this an annual event or a one-off?

I find talk of this quite obscene. Someone who has legitimately accumulated capital over his life and paid tax on the earnings to get there has to be taxed on the very proceeds of that capital in addition to tax on the interest. IHT is bad enough on death but this is just a nasty, vindictive idea. 

[Guest Jedi]

'A nasty vindictive idea'....to ask those with accumulated wealth of over £1 million in the bank (and there would normally also be many other assets attached to that), to pay a tax of 3 or 4% on it, in order to contribute to funding public services, (which the same individuals themselves use).

Meanwhile increasing food banks, forcing 1 in 4 children into poverty, decimating disability benefits, dismantling education and health, letting the elderly freeze through the winter, awarding bankers with bigger bonuses, is a capital idea.

Its the allegedly 4th largest economy in the world having high levels of homelessness, poverty and inequality while installing a multi-millionaire PM unelected by the people, which is obscene.

Edited October 24, 2022 by Jedi

[sophia]

7 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Didn't he? I would dispute that. He could have decided not to provide any furlough. He could have provided some furlough for a few industries. He certainly didn't need to provide months of it for any company who asked. He absolutely didn't need to help the self-employed either. Credit where it's due.

No idea. I don't live in any other country so I'm not really that interested in what they do TBH. Life's way too short.

He did nothing exceptional nor was he the exception. Others did something broadly similar.

[Guest Jedi]

9 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Presenting a false dichotomy like this isn't really helping your argument TBH.

Not sure if its a false dichotomy to suggest that public funding being raised from a different set of taxes on the very richest in society wouldn't lead to a reduction in absolute poverty, homelessness, better levels of investment in education, health, transport etc, as it would enable any government to target money to tackle these areas., while reducing their borrowing. 

Its more a choice between austerity economics (again), as proposed by Sunak and Hunt, and the results which it produces in terms of poverty, and looking for alternatives to funding.

Denmark for example is consistently ranked among the happiest countries in the world, but has (comparative to the UK) high rates of tax, but also excellent public services, and less inequality.

I take your point that we don't live in a (ideal) world where a UK govt would implement a progressive tax on capital, and yes, you could progressively tax the interest on savings, but again, on austerity it doesn't lead to 'growth'

 

Edited October 24, 2022 by Jedi

[invergowrie arab]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Credit where it's due. That "little c**t" kept millions of people in jobs thanks to furlough payments.

That was kind of him.

Anyway, DM your personal details and I'll sign you up for a personal loan. No need to thank me.

[sophia]

1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

I'm not sure what relevance that has.

He made the decision to fund furlough payments for employees and the self-employed and saved millions of jobs. It's not relevant whether other countries did that for their citizens. He did it for our country and that's all that matters.

He also brought in a package of energy grants over the spring/summer which have undoubtedly helped millions of people.

But if you or anyone else is so blinded by sheer hatred of the Tories that you can't take a step back and give him a shred of credit then that's up to you.

 

There's no point in repeating yourself, it just makes you appear boorish.

Who was it that foisted the energy market upon us?

If you don't know that either or if you think it isn't relevent, good luck to you.

[pozbaird]

Couldn’t give a shite if he’s to be known as Sunak, Rishi, Rishi Sunak, or Dishy Rishi. I’ll just stick with ‘unelected untrustworthy Tory Kunt’.

Thank you very much.

[Melanius Mullarkey]

bUt tHu FuRlOuGh

fucking hell.

[Guest Jedi]

Ultimately the 'political' choices, which will now be made by a man who has an 'interesting' background when it comes to hiding his own families wealth, will be designed to target the poorest in society at a time when the cost of living is already so high.

He will 'justify this' by saying that the public debt to GDP ratio can't continue at 100% without deep cuts.

Contrast that with Japan- (ranked 6th in the world financially), a country which has a debt to GDP ratio of 231% Rather than opting for austerity, the government there went for a significant fiscal stimulus of spending on public services. (albeit 90% of government debt there is held by Japanese investors) Result was growth in its economy. Also, Japan didn't spook the markets with either its debt levels or printing more money to finance the public sector. 

Just because Sunak oversaw the furlough scheme doesn't give him a free pass to start imposing these cuts on our services while claiming there is 'no alternative'.......so Denmark higher taxes and fine public services, Japan...public spending despite high govt debt-also fine public services.

Not good enough for the UK though.

 

 

[Fullerene]

6 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:

So David Cameron was Cameron, Teresa May was May, Liz Truss was Truss yet Johnson and Sunak are Boris and Rishi. WT actual F is the score there ?

Maybe it is simply whichever makes it obvious who you are talking about.

David Cameron could not be Dave or David because there was also David Davis.   Also, Theresa Coffey and Liz Windsor.

Yeah there was Boris Becker, Boris Karloff, and Boris Yeltsin but if you just said Boris it was fairly obvious who you meant.

Then again Rishi is fairly obvious and do is Sunak.

[Sherrif John Bunnell]

10 minutes ago, Melanius Mullarkay said:

bUt tHu FuRlOuGh

fucking hell.

I must have imagined the main players in the binfire COVID thread raging about folk being paid to sit at home and do nothing.

[Guest Jedi]

5 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

 particular brand of poison. 

 These nasty 'communists', wanting to help the poor.

[Florentine_Pogen]

5 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Why would I need a personal loan?

 

How else you going to finance your 'arthouse' movies ?

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

1 hour ago, Jedi said:

Except that austerity between 2011-17 cost the UK £100 billion and saw growth fall from 3.1% (following the QE by the Bank of England to shore up the banks in 2008) to an average of 0.3% austerity period. The rise in people using food banks during austerity doubled. It led to 1 in 4 children in the UK being classed as living in poverty. So the Bank of England printing more money as it had to do to maintain the financial system, doesn't necessarily cut growth. 

Once deep cuts are made to the public sector, as they will be under Sunak, and as they are proposed in the SNP's (current) Independence plan, it takes years to recover..

Meanwhile high inflation as we have at present, acts in itself to reduce govt debt, as they are significantly increasing their tax take, from both VAT and income. 

An alternative to austerity to reduce national debt is a tax on capital, essentially bank deposits. If there was a will to do so, there could be say 0% of tax on deposits up to £100,000, and then incremental increases of eg 1% on deposits between £100,000-500,000,  2% on $500,000 to a million. 3 or 4% on £1-2 million etc. Of course those with high levels of deposits could choose to shift their money around, and yes it would need to be well regulated, but it would eliminate the need for austerity.

 

Its good that we are better together though, after all we are too wee too poor and not genetically predisposed to make political decisions up here. Im so fucking glad the rich tories down south can do this. 
eat yer cereal ya bunch of c***s x

[Guest Jedi]

6 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Its good that we are better together though, after all we are too wee too poor and not genetically predisposed to make political decisions up here. Im so fucking glad the rich tories down south can do this. 
eat yer cereal ya bunch of c***s x

I didnt suggest we were either too wee, too poor, too stupid, haven't eaten the serial, and favour Independence.

[Guest Jedi]

Sunak won't make the next GE anyway..they will ditch him when the polls don't turn..probably next year.

Edited October 24, 2022 by Jedi

[HTG]

7 hours ago, Florentine_Pogen said:

Wonder which radio / TV presenter will be the first to call him 'Pishy Sunak' live-on-air ?

Or "c**t". No need for alliteration now that Krishnan has fired the c**t bullet. 

[GTee]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Didn't he? I would dispute that. He could have decided not to provide any furlough. He could have provided some furlough for a few industries. He certainly didn't need to provide months of it for any company who asked. He absolutely didn't need to help the self-employed either. Credit where it's due.

No idea. I don't live in any other country so I'm not really that interested in what they do TBH. Life's way too short.

You kind of make it sound like he personally paid for this, out of the goodness of his heart. A man of the people. Government has no money It's taxpayers money. He chose to do what every other European country did. He wasn't some kind of visionary. In hindsight, it was probably a disastrous decision. And any decision he makes will only make him a bigger multi millionaire Tory c**t.

 

 

 

 

 

[SlipperyP]

Get off the boat Scotland.

[SlipperyP]

4 hours ago, oaksoft said:

No idea. I don't live in any other country so I'm not really that interested in what they do TBH. Life's way too short.

Easy now, wokesoft.

@BFTD

I'm sure you can do a better post than me.