Jump to content

Brexit - merged threads


scouser
 Share

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, oowee said:

Fund is the state. Ageing population with pension promises that cannot be met.

Wrong - Brown applied a "windfall tax" to the private funds and Cable is promoting the same again.  Hit those that have made provision so everyone is equally poor.

But there again maybe you are too young to remember one of Robber Brown's (The "prudent ") first actions as chancelor:mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 9.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, Yellow Bear said:

Hit those that have made provision so everyone is equally poor.

The 'aim' of left leaning parties (and remember Cable stood for Labour in Glasgow, but never managed to win a seat as such, which is why he later stood as an LD) is the 'redistribution of wealth'.

It means taking from those who have scrimped, sacrificed and saved - and giving to the feckless, extravagant and lazy.  Penalise and 'steal' from those who make and save money ...... and give to those who waste money. 

Churchill said of socialism "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

It means taking from those who have scrimped, sacrificed and saved - and giving to the feckless, extravagant and lazy. 

The biggest determining factor of wealth - by a wide margin and getting wider - is not how hard you work but who your parents are. https://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/ifs-director-inheritance-increasingly-determines-wealth-uk/ 

This link's better because it illustrates the increasing disconnect between earned income and wealth. http://darp.lse.ac.uk/papersdb/Atkinson_(JEI18).pdf

 

Edited by Retsdon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

The biggest determining factor of wealth - by a wide margin and getting wider - is not how hard you work but who your parents are.

 

OK. How hard your parents (and possibly grandparents) have worked then; It is absolutely right that people should be able to save for their children.  Most people would regard their children (and family as a whole) as the most important thing in their lives, so saving to help one's children is a natural thing to want to do.  It doesn't apply to me as I have no children, but I think it is 100% right that families should be able to save and pass on to the next generation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

OK. How hard your parents (and possibly grandparents) have worked then; It is absolutely right that people should be able to save for their children.  Most people would regard their children (and family as a whole) as the most important thing in their lives, so saving to help one's children is a natural thing to want to do.  It doesn't apply to me as I have no children, but I think it is 100% right that families should be able to save and pass on to the next generation.

Damn right. Equip them with the skills they need to get along, support them for as long as you can then leave them with as much as you can when you kick the bucket. 

 

Or at least that's my plan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

OK. How hard your parents (and possibly grandparents) have worked then; It is absolutely right that people should be able to save for their children.  Most people would regard their children (and family as a whole) as the most important thing in their lives, so saving to help one's children is a natural thing to want to do.  It doesn't apply to me as I have no children, but I think it is 100% right that families should be able to save and pass on to the next generation.

Agree wholeheartedly with the above. Don't have kids but those that do should be able to make sure their kids are set on the right road for the future and not expect handouts left right and centre, there again I have always said that child allowance should be paid to the first two after that the third nothing and if you have a fourth then you must be rich enough so lose/repay what was paid for the second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

but I think it is 100% right that families should be able to save and pass on to the next generation.

Wouldn't dispute that. But the thing is, at the moment the trend is away from being able to save and pass on. Without inherited wealth the amount of debt that people are forced to take on for education, housing, etc, means that they struggle to ever get out of the bit. How can anyone get themselves up off the bottom and save when they're starting life 60,000 quid in the hole, or else they're earning less than 10 quid an hour? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Wouldn't dispute that. But the thing is, at the moment the trend is away from being able to save and pass on. Without inherited wealth the amount of debt that people are forced to take on for education, housing, etc, means that they struggle to ever get out of the bit. How can anyone get themselves up off the bottom and save when they're starting life 60,000 quid in the hole, or else they're earning less than 10 quid an hour? 

It is hard, I agree.  And part of the reason is house prices - high due to low supply and high demand - due to population growth being higher than house stock growth ....... which kind of brings us back onto the Brexit topic (in spirit anyway!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

And part of the reason is house prices - high due to low supply and high demand

That's a factor for sure. The other one has been negative real rates for fixed income savers. Anyone wanting to grow or even defend their savings has been forced to either put their money into stocks or else into property. And as property is easy to leverage up on, and as there's an almost guaranteed income from the rental, it's become the 'investment' of choice. I have colleagues here in Saudi who own four or more properties back in the UK. Basically tenants pay the mortgages for them while they rake in the capital increase of the houses. I understand why they do it, but it seems morally wrong somehow.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

who own four or more properties back in the UK

There is certainly a need for rental properties, but I agree that it has gone too far and there are landlords with 100's of properties.  I have a feeling it is a market that is very much in the chancellor's line of fire - whichever party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

Yes.

With the two options being:

Remain a member of the European Union.

Leave the European Union in name only.

 

I cannot agree - there should be three options:-

1. Remain a member of the European Union.

2. Leave the European Union in name only.

3. A third Referendum.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/09/2018 at 07:43, Scully said:

Can’t wait....as long as we’re out. I don’t want us out in name only I want us out and totally unfettered. 👍

Well said Scully, my exact sentiments. The EU can't last much longer anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Yellow Bear said:

Wrong - Brown applied a "windfall tax" to the private funds and Cable is promoting the same again.  Hit those that have made provision so everyone is equally poor.

But there again maybe you are too young to remember one of Robber Brown's (The "prudent ") first actions as chancelor:mad:

What? Wrong country mate. Think you need to go back and read again. We were talking about Germany not the UK :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Gordon R said:

I love the way the Remain bunch clamour for another Referendum. The sheer arrogance of that pathetic crew thinking that a second vote would bring a better result. I honestly think the leave vote would be higher, but it matters not - there won't be another..

 

Spot on, I'm sure a new vote would bring a much bigger majority for leave to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, krugerandsmith said:

Yes then we could go for a best of three.

🤣 could you imagine the rows and pitiful commentary on here from the gaggle of quitters???

One vote was one too many we don't need any more pretentious, commentary from little Englander's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, krugerandsmith said:

Yes then we could go for a best of three.

Why not hold one every year? 

With a 2 year negotiating period, it would guarantee many civil service jobs, many airline jobs flying negotiators to and from Brussels and give that politicians dream ........ perfect chaos.

9 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I voted remain I stand by we voted out (out means out)

Me too.  It was a democratic choice, the outcome went one way - so I will back the outcome as decided by the vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...