Print Story [Redacted]
Diary
By yicky yacky (Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 04:38:33 AM EST) Redacted (all tags)
[Redacted]


[Redacted]
< Caesar sauce | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' >
[Redacted] | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
The Six Million Dollar Man by Improbus (4.00 / 3) #1 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:00:14 AM EST
Proved conclusively that the Sasquatch is an alien robot.  Don't you watch TV? LOL



If you immediately know the candlelight is fire, the meal was cooked a long time ago. --- Oma Desala
I object! by sasquatchan (4.00 / 1) #5 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:44:46 AM EST


[ Parent ]
You May Object ... by Improbus (4.00 / 2) #6 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:53:10 AM EST
But was the Six Million Dollar Man wrong?



If you immediately know the candlelight is fire, the meal was cooked a long time ago. --- Oma Desala
[ Parent ]
Dear sir, by DullTrev (4.00 / 1) #2 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:15:24 AM EST

You claim that all the cool kids are taking part in your competition. For the avoidance of doubt, could you please state that while all the cool kids may indeed be doing it, that does not mean anyone doing it is a cool kid. Specifically, I feel insulted by being accused of being a cool kid in any way whatsoever, and demand an explicit exclusion from that phrase.

Yeah, I'm bored. We got stuffed on Monday. Stoke are going to knock us out.


--
DFJ?
(Comment Deleted) by yicky yacky (4.00 / 1) #4 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:42:44 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by yicky yacky



[ Parent ]
Politics by nebbish (4.00 / 2) #3 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 05:25:36 AM EST
Although I largely agree, through my job I see something most middle-class people don't - a consistent and very dogged tackling of poverty under Labour. Things are much, much better for the least well off than they were under the Conservatives, and gradually getting better all the time. The visible end of this is the reduction of people living on the streets.

It's been achieved through quite a canny mixture of tax credits, shifting funds around and efficiency in the benefits service, so the "I refuse to pay more taxes" idiots haven't been able to complain about it.

I don't vote Labour any more either, but I certainly would if there was a risk of the Conservatives getting in (not that they would in my seat, but you know what I mean).

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

Daily Mail Rebuttal by Breaker (4.00 / 2) #7 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 06:11:19 AM EST
Although I largely agree, through my job I see something most middle-class people don't - a consistent and very dogged tackling of poverty under Labour.
By stealth taxing the middle class with a myriad of new, innovative ways for the Chancellor to put his hand in your pocket.  Gordon Brown - the Patron Saint of tax specialists.  Tax law under labour has become more complex, and has tended toward punitive rather than preventative penalties for mistakes and malfeasance.  Tax specialists are cleaning up in tax advantage areas.

Case in point IR35: independant contractors, usually high skilled, were specifically targetted.  Independant contractors that do not get paid for sick days or times when there is no work.  And with good tax advice, IR35 can easily be sidestepped.

It's been achieved through quite a canny mixture of tax credits, shifting funds around and efficiency in the benefits service, so the "I refuse to pay more taxes" idiots haven't been able to complain about it.
Corresponding with a massive rise in governmental bureaucracy and all that that entails.  How can tax credits be of use to those who have spent their entire lives attached to the all giving teat of the Welfare State?  Where previously the welfare system was a safety net for the unfortunate, it is now regarded as a right and a lifestyle choice for our new underclass of state dependants. 

Is it idiotic to resist paying more tax?  I'd assert that those who are refusing to pay more tax are already paying 40% already, and those pointing the finger are not.  And a lot of those who resist tax rises do so not out of cheapness, but an utter mistrust of what the ruling bureacracy will do with it.  A statement of "1% tax rise and we're going to build x new hospitals and increase funding for existing facilities by £y" will be much better received by the taxation refuseniks than "we're putting up taxes another 0.5%".

I don't vote Labour any more either, but I certainly would if there was a risk of the Conservatives getting in (not that they would in my seat, but you know what I mean).
Labour are finished.  If the Tories can regroup and actually look like a credible political party then Labour will be out on their ears come the next general election.  Too much spending, not enough results.


[ Parent ]
Short answer by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #9 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 06:22:51 AM EST
To part of what you said :-)

I'm not going to ask you how much you earn, but I earn just under the national average and have had my tax cut for the last four years running (before that I was signing on, so I don't know what it was like). This suggests to me that those earning less than average are having their wealth increased (though I'd need to check proper figures to know for definite I suppose).

It's redistribution of wealth. I agree with it. You don't. Fair enough.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

[ Parent ]
If my response previously was by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #12 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 06:49:14 AM EST
"Daily Mail" surely you should have had a subject of "Socialist Worker"? ^^

I do pay a wedge of tax more than you then.  Which concentrates my mind a little more on where it's all going, and also makes me resistant to be paying more.

So, I am to pay more tax so others pay less?  That's a slippery slope, because there will come a time when I'll no longer want a high stress, long hours highly paid job from which I keep little of the proceeds from. 

I'll want a 35 hour week tea break every 2 hours sort of job that'll net me the same amount of take-home cash.  That's not really good for the country, now, is it?

It's redistribution of wealth. I agree with it.
Ah yes, If I could get someone else to pay my share of social contributions, I'd be all for it.

I'm sure if our roles were reversed so would our opinions! 


[ Parent ]
I am too by nebbish (4.00 / 2) #15 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 07:00:14 AM EST
I fully understand that if I was in your position I might well change my mind.

I should add that I would pay (slightly) more ta quite happilyx. It's all relative, and I'm pretty well off compared to my clients. I would probably question where it goes a lot more though, and maybe be more disatisfied with the present government...

QED

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

[ Parent ]
Thank you, Sir! by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #21 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 07:31:29 AM EST
Engaging political discussion conducted on weblog with no flames!  Outrageous.

In all honesty, I don't mind being taxed for NHS, taxed for upkeep of security forces, education, and all the rest that keeps a country ticking over.  Even benefits for those unable to work, or in disadvantaged circumstance.  Tell me that I'm in line for a 1% increase in tax but it'll reduce the homeless numbers to nearly zero and I'd be all over that.

But keep taxing the likes of me more for bloody stupid ideas like ID cards and other projects of that nature, and I start wondering the nature of the social contract.


[ Parent ]
I knew it could be done! by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #25 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 11:45:03 PM EST
Actually managed that with circletimessquare of all people once, but that was a long time ago...

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

[ Parent ]
Also... by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #10 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 06:36:00 AM EST
I regretted saying "idiots" as soon as I posted that comment. There''s nothing idiotic about wanting to keep your money out of the hands of a government you disagree with.

Even if you are wrong.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

[ Parent ]
Eh? by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #14 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 06:59:17 AM EST
Wrong about what?  Not wanting to pay more tax?


[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by yicky yacky (4.00 / 1) #11 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 06:39:58 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by yicky yacky



[ Parent ]
Woah! by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #13 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 06:54:09 AM EST
Fuck, I've got a bit of defending to do here...

First paragraph - you're right, it could have a lot to do with an improved ecomomy, and no, I can't really go into specifics about how Labour has tackled it. What I am seeing though is an increase in benefits and a decrease in tax for people in low incomes. When I was working at a supermarket and living in a rented slum under Major I got exactly the opposite. Anecdotal, I know, but there you go.

Obviously the Conservatives wouldn't have supported the fox hunting ban but I find the idea that they wouldn't have tried to foist ID cards etc on us if they were in power a difficult one. It isn't just Labour that has shifted to the right, it's everyone, and the Conservatives have been traditionally much more authoritarian - the only reason they couldn't have done it before was that the climate (re terror etc) was different. I can't really argue this point very well because it's all "ifs...", but that's what I think.

Dome - Tory idea, Labour just didn't scrap it when they got in.

And lastly - I don't support Labour either. I agree with you on a lot of points. But I think the Tories would be worse. More authoritarian, less interested in teh poor. Obviously it's impossible to have any evidence of this with them being out of power for so long, but there you go.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by yicky yacky (4.00 / 2) #17 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 07:08:05 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by yicky yacky



[ Parent ]
Ah yes. by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #19 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 07:26:40 AM EST
I can't get rid of the impression that Cameron and Osborne are lying*/laughing

Much like B Liar's smirk?  Or Gordon Brown's air of "don't look at the taxman behind the curtain" when giving speeches?


[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by yicky yacky (2.00 / 0) #22 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 07:36:10 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by yicky yacky



[ Parent ]
You also missed by Breaker (4.00 / 2) #8 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 06:22:51 AM EST
The fact that B Liar also got us involved in an unjustifiable and costly war.  Just think how many more one-parent illegal immigrant drop in centres we could have if it wasn't for that drain on the country's coffers.

Also, speling standads are droppeng; hier education body's are agast at the standad of there nu intacks.

And +1: Footie-O-Meter.  I am surprised that Toon are not also going to enter, TBH.  Still, the mighty Royals took another point closer to promotion the other day so it's all good.


Patrician Hewitt is by Metatone (4.00 / 2) #16 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 07:06:11 AM EST
Virginia Bottomley reincarnated... very disturbing...

(Comment Deleted) by yicky yacky (2.00 / 0) #18 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 07:11:12 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by yicky yacky



[ Parent ]
Modern politics... by Metatone (4.00 / 1) #20 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 07:31:05 AM EST
You're bang on the money about "Century of the Self." There are enough constituencies that vote Tory in England that it's fair to say it is a naturally Tory country. Thus, whoever wants power has to be a Tory one way or another.

What does amuse me is those who think that the Tories will do things differently on civil liberties and the like. They have even less interest in actually bucking the "Daily Mail line" than Blair does. Their record on police surveillance and CCTV stuff makes that clear...

(Comment Deleted) by yicky yacky (2.00 / 0) #23 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 07:45:48 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by yicky yacky



[ Parent ]
I too am disappointed... by Metatone (4.00 / 1) #24 Wed Feb 15, 2006 at 08:36:26 AM EST
and you are right, the actions of New Labour have been to push the political discourse further to the right, which just makes things worse.

(c.f. also the basic corruption and incompetence that the QinetiQ privatisation represents.)

You are also correct to estimate that for you personally (and though he might argue otherwise, for Breaker and myself too) a Cameron government won't make a lot of difference.

Tax might go down eventually, but that newfound wealth will probably be swallowed up in increased healthcare payments as the Tories accelerate privatisation. Civil liberties will continue a downward trend, and so long as the world economy stays stable our life/money situation won't really change much.

I personally might be irked by the slow decay of society and stuff like public transport that a Tory government seems to indulge in, but given there is nothing I can do to change it, I'll just have to lump it...

[ Parent ]
Hmmm by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #26 Thu Feb 16, 2006 at 12:53:29 AM EST
A Cameron government would make a difference, simply because I'd no longer see B. Liars ever present smirk on my telly.

Re: privatisation of NHS - I can't see any Tory government daring to cut the NHS back.  And wasn't it Labour that has started using private firms to reduce NHS waiting lists?  Oh and what about the additional tax I pay on my private medical cover?

I agree with you on the civil liberties front; I can't see any government willing to halt the advance of intrusion that was started by Thatcher and now continued by B. Liar.

As far as transport goes; yes the Tories did indeed stuff it royally.  But equivalently, Labour did not step in and try to fix that.  And they did have a chance at it when Railtrack went bust, without having to do any re-nationalisation dance.  They could have bought Railtrack for a song, and started some proper end-to-end management of the rail lines and infrastructure.  But they didn't.

You can change all of this.  Vote for Breaker's Honesty and Truth Party in 2015!


[ Parent ]
[Redacted] | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback