Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 39 of 39

Thread: European Migrants to get full benefits

  1. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    bedford
    Posts
    4,899
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by robd View Post
    It makes a pretty big difference really. How many of the 'Eastern Europeans living in palatial homes funded by me' do you know of personally?...
    I confess, I watch premiership football ...

  2. #22
    Registered User RedFox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    121
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by Trouble View Post
    Would we get the same benefits abroad in the european countries, not that im aware off we wouldn't.
    Well, yes, provided you comply with the local regulations you get benefits in whichever country you choose to live - those are the EU rules: http://ec.europa.eu/youreurope/citiz...y/eu-eu_en.htm

    In fact in many countries you could get paid (much) more than in the UK too: http://info.assedic.fr/unijuridis/tr...ble_010108.pdf
    Last edited by RedFox; 5th-March-2011 at 07:54 PM. Reason: link corrected

  3. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    290
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    You're missing the fact that because we opened our borders in 2004 to these countries, the UK economy benefitted greatly from an influx of cheap labour. Builders, plumbers, doctors, carers, and other professions boomed because of that influx.
    Is cheap labour always a good thing? It might help the economy but does it help anywhere else? I'm going to suggest that if huge amounts of cheap labour is imported it seriously harms the least well off people in our society.

    Many economic migrants came to the UK as single people, leaving their families behind (and sometimes claiming child benefit on both the British system and in their home country!). Because they don't have their family with them they are able to live with other migrants in a similar situation to keep their overheads down. The money they save and send home usually buys a lot more in their home country because the cost of living there is much lower.

    The effect on indigenous workers who have a family to support in Britain (where the cost of living is relatively high) is devastating. Their wages are driven downwards and kept down by all of this cheap labour. Do you think that's a good thing?

  4. #24
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    Is cheap labour always a good thing?
    Errr.... yes? I mean, I'm no economist, but as I understand it, competition does tend to provide better quality and price than monopolies, in situations where competition is feasible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    It might help the economy but does it help anywhere else?
    "The economy" is, well, us.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    I'm going to suggest that if huge amounts of cheap labour is imported it seriously harms the least well off people in our society.
    Evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    Many economic migrants came to the UK as single people, leaving their families behind (and sometimes claiming child benefit on both the British system and in their home country!).
    You missed out the illegally bit from that link. These people are breaking the law.

    So what you're saying is, some people are criminals. Colour me shocked and astonished to learn that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    Because they don't have their family with them they are able to live with other migrants in a similar situation to keep their overheads down. The money they save and send home usually buys a lot more in their home country because the cost of living there is much lower.
    Relevance?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    The effect on indigenous workers who have a family to support in Britain (where the cost of living is relatively high) is devastating. Their wages are driven downwards and kept down by all of this cheap labour.
    Evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    Do you think that's a good thing?
    I don't know, all I know is you're spouting tabloid headlines without providing any actual data to back them up. I suggest a career writing for the Daily Mail.

  5. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    290
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    Blah, blah, blah, blah! Evidence? Blah, blah, blah! Evidence? Blah, blah, blah!
    Are you serious? Or are you just playing Devils Advocate?

    You start off my stating that competition gives a better price than monopolies, then question my view that admitting large amounts of cheap labour to the UK has forced wages downwards.

    The relationship between unskilled/blue-collar wages and immigration is definately proved in the US.

    Previous research has reached mixed conclusions about the effect of higher levels of immigration on the wages of natives. This paper reexamines this question using data from the Current Population Survey and the Immigration and Naturalization Service and focuses on differential effects by skill level. Using occupation as a proxy for skill, we find that an increase in the fraction of foreign-born workers tends to lower the wages of natives in blue collar occupations - particularly after controlling for endogeneity - but does not have a statistically significant negative effect among natives in skilled occupations. The results also indicate that immigrants adjusting their immigration status within the U.S., but not newly arriving immigrants, have a significant negative impact on the wages of low-skilled natives. This suggests that immigrants become closer substitutes for natives as they spend more time in the U.S.
    Do you think the same relationship doesn't apply in the UK via exactly the same mechanism?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    all I know is you're spouting tabloid headlines without providing any actual data to back them up. I suggest a career writing for the Daily Mail.
    I didn't even quote anything from a tabloid in my previous post! Although I'm happy to correct that with this lovely little snippet from Red-Ed. Surely he wouldn't lie to us over such a serious matter?

  6. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    1,324
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post

    The Mail does not provide information. It provides a flow of outrage, with little or no actual basis in fact, slanted to meet the bias of its readership.

    It lies, in short.
    I'm in a bit of a dilema now because I have just read the same story on the BBC website as I read in the Mail.Please dont tell me the BBC are at it as well.

  7. #27
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    Are you serious? Or are you just playing Devils Advocate?
    I'm serious in stating that I quite like people to provide evidence for flat statements. In my opinion, if you can't prove it, or at least provide some evidence, you shouldn't state it as a fact. I may be a bit weird with that attitude.

    You stated a number of "facts", none of which you provided evidence for. So I asked you for some.

    Errr... that's it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    You start off my stating that competition gives a better price than monopolies, then question my view that admitting large amounts of cheap labour to the UK has forced wages downwards.
    The simple answer is that "price" <> "wages".

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    The relationship between unskilled/blue-collar wages and immigration is definately proved in the US.
    That's not "definite proof", that's a single research paper. It's interesting, but it's not "definite proof".

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    Do you think the same relationship doesn't apply in the UK via exactly the same mechanism?
    I don't have enough evidence to make an assertion. Neither do you, as you've quoted a German study on the US labour market. I suspect the UK is different to the US; especially within the confines of the EU. For example, one obvious difference is that these are not "immigrants" in the same way - they're not so atttached to the UK, and they can return to their home countries if there's little work. And, many of them have done so. So a more appropriate study would be of migration within states of the US. Or, ideally, a study of, you know, the UK itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    I didn't even quote anything from a tabloid in my previous post! Although I'm happy to correct that with this lovely little snippet from Red-Ed. Surely he wouldn't lie to us over such a serious matter?
    I know, politicians lying and misreprenting facts? Almost inconceivable.

  8. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    290
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    I'm serious in stating that I quite like people to provide evidence for flat statements. In my opinion, if you can't prove it, or at least provide some evidence, you shouldn't state it as a fact. I may be a bit weird with that attitude.

    You stated a number of "facts", none of which you provided evidence for. So I asked you for some.

    Errr... that's it.
    Your contributions to this thread appear to mainly consist of attempting to discredit URLs posted by others, and demanding 'definite proof' or 'evidence'. Usually without bothering to research or post links to anything that supports your own viewpoint, or contradicts material posted by others. I don't think that makes for a very interesting debate/discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    The simple answer is that "price" <> "wages".
    The cost/price of employing someone is made up of various components, such as the amount the employee receives in their paypacket (i.e. wages), NI contributions, pension contributions, life insurance, private health insurance, perks/bonuses. Normally the amount paid to the employee in their paypacket (i.e. the wages) forms the largest part of that cost/price, and several of the other components I listed are generally proportional to the amount the employee receives in their paypacket (i.e. wages).

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    That's not "definite proof", that's a single research paper. It's interesting, but it's not "definite proof".
    In the absence of any contradictory evidence from yourself or anyone else I'm reasonably happy with it as it supports the confession made by Mr. Milliband.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    they're not so atttached to the UK, and they can return to their home countries if there's little work.
    Economic migrants tend to leave if their price drops (their wages drop) or if demand for labour drops (they can't find work). Neither of those situations means that wages will rise for the remaining workers (their price is maintained at the same low level by some, but not all of the economic migrants leaving the UK labour market). The problem for native unskilled workers is that economic migrants are willing/able to work for long hours on very low pay, either because they're single, or because their families live in a country which is much cheaper to live in. Native workers with families to support find it difficult to compete on those terms.

    By the way, what, exactly, is your problem with the Dailymail? You don't have to read it, or buy it, and it performs an important function in the UK.

  9. #29
    Papa Smurf
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Planet Scathe
    Posts
    12,528
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    By the way, what, exactly, is your problem with the Dailymail? You don't have to read it, or buy it, and it performs an important function in the UK.
    But any major supermarket has a broad range of much more absorbent paper, so I am not sure what you are getting at here

  10. #30
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sunny South Hampshire
    Posts
    873
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    I loved the front page of the Daily Star on Tuesday. The whole front page was an interview with an unemployed lass who said "It's not worth working" (or something like that).

    Out of 4 million or whatever it is unemployed, she represents what most of them think ?
    Wonder how long it took them to find her (or how much was paid)?

    It reminds me of the old war propaganda I was taught back in school. Newspapers subpoenaed by government. With the same blatant disregard for the truth (in those days for good reason of course, these days it's just because of government incompetance and self-interest. How times change).

  11. #31
    Not a spoon! Lou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Holby
    Posts
    3,772
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    Information in the Daily Mail is never reliable.
    I knew that - but I hadn't realised quite how much they lie until I read this:

    http://nosleeptilbrooklands.blogspot...ies-guest.html

    The most shocking bit, though, is just how much they can just make up - knowing that it's too expensive for their victims to take them to court.

  12. #32
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    290
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadful Scathe View Post
    But any major supermarket has a broad range of much more absorbent paper, so I am not sure what you are getting at here
    That wasn't the 'important function' I had in mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by TA Guy View Post
    I loved the front page of the Daily Star on Tuesday. The whole front page was an interview with an unemployed lass who said "It's not worth working" (or something like that).
    For a lot of unskilled people, the prospect of working hard to get less money than they can get on benefits is not an attractive option. The ConDem coalition wants to tackle the problem by restructuring the benefits system so that claimants don't lose all their benefits payments when they start work. I think a better solution would be to close the gap in earnings between the best and worst paid in society.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lou View Post
    I knew that - but I hadn't realised quite how much they lie until I read this:

    http://nosleeptilbrooklands.blogspot...ies-guest.html

    The most shocking bit, though, is just how much they can just make up - knowing that it's too expensive for their victims to take them to court.
    Lots of photographers/journalists/editors engage in questionable practices to get photos/stories. Here's a few examples:

    In the tabloids:
    A few years back, an editor got sacked after printing photos purporting to show British troops urinating on prisoners.

    More recently, a newspaper has become embroiled in an investigation over allegations of phone hacking.

    Even further back, paparazzi photographers pursued a car, resulting in a high speed crash, killing several of the cars occupants.

    In the broadsheets:
    A paper published illegally obtained documents relating to the expenses claims of MPs.

    A different paper has published illegally obtained information relating to wars and diplomatic correspondence.

  13. #33
    Papa Smurf
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Planet Scathe
    Posts
    12,528
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    That wasn't the 'important function' I had in mind.
    There's another one ?

  14. #34
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    For a lot of unskilled people, the prospect of working hard to get less money than they can get on benefits is not an attractive option. The ConDem coalition wants to tackle the problem by restructuring the benefits system so that claimants don't lose all their benefits payments when they start work. I think a better solution would be to close the gap in earnings between the best and worst paid in society.
    I'm not sure how your solution is relevant - that doesn't address the benefits trap in any way?

    Whilst I dislike many of the things the coalition is doing, I think they're being pretty good by actually addressing this issue. I don't remember anyone in the recent 13 years of Labour government worrying too much about how to help people out of benefits.

    There was an interesting piece on the radio this morning, which was talking about pensions (well, "interesting" is relative), but one point made was that the UK was not facing quite such a difficult demographic problem as many other Western countries, because we'd a large number of young immigrants arriving recently.

  15. #35
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    290
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadful Scathe View Post
    There's another one ?
    There most certainly is. The Daily Mail performs an important function by acting as a mouthpiece for a specific type of opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    I'm not sure how your solution is relevant - that doesn't address the benefits trap in any way?
    Maybe my idea of what a benefit-trap is differs from yours. To me, a benefits-trap is the situation whereby someone is financially worse off in employment than on benefits. For most people, the 'minimum wage' isn't anything near the level required to be a 'living wage'. There's only so much wealth in the economy, so the fairest thing to do is cut the pay of people at the top so that people at the bottom can have more.

    There are good reasons why it is better to pay people more, or tax them less, rather than giving them benefits:
    1. It costs a lot of money just to administer the benefits system, and the people working in this capacity don't add anything to the economy.
    2. In the UK, the pay ratio between the lowest paid workers and Chief Executives is spiralling out of control in what has been described as an 'arms race'.
    3. It is better to allow people to take responsibility and feel empowered rather than being dependent on the state.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    Whilst I dislike many of the things the coalition is doing, I think they're being pretty good by actually addressing this issue. I don't remember anyone in the recent 13 years of Labour government worrying too much about how to help people out of benefits.
    Due to the makeup of their voter-base, tackling 'benefits culture' was always going to be an extremely thorny issue for New Labour. They had 13 years to take decisive action, but bottled out time and again.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    There was an interesting piece on the radio this morning, which was talking about pensions (well, "interesting" is relative), but one point made was that the UK was not facing quite such a difficult demographic problem as many other Western countries, because we'd a large number of young immigrants arriving recently.
    I don't think there's anything wrong with immigration, provided it's managed properly. Britain was one of only three EU member states not to impose a cap on economic migrants from the 10 new EU member states in 2004. In that situation it should have been obvious to our politicians that Britain would attract large numbers, purely on the basis that the right to work was guaranteed. When 100000s of economic migrants turn up over a very short period of time it is logical that such a sudden step-change in the labour market could cause problems. A better policy would have been to initially impose a cap (as per most other EU countries) and see how the situation develops, before deciding to increase/decrease quotas, or totally remove the cap.

  16. #36
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    There most certainly is. The Daily Mail performs an important function by acting as a mouthpiece for a specific type of opinion.
    Ummm, you could make that argument about the EDL / BNP.

    In fact, the Daily Mail probably would do exactly that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    Maybe my idea of what a benefit-trap is differs from yours. To me, a benefits-trap is the situation whereby someone is financially worse off in employment than on benefits. For most people, the 'minimum wage' isn't anything near the level required to be a 'living wage'. There's only so much wealth in the economy, so the fairest thing to do is cut the pay of people at the top so that people at the bottom can have more.
    It seems like you're combining three different things here.

    1. Benefits trap: where the State gives you an incentive to stay at home rather than work. This is clearly insane, and I'm very glad this government is going to (hopefully) fix it. I'm doubly glad that the fix is not penalty-based, but is incentive-based; that is, that you'll keep getting benefits at the marginal areas, rather than having benefits taken away below the line.

    2. The level of the minimum wage: this has nothing to do with the benefits trap, as there'd still be a benefits trap no matter what level this is set at.

    3. The inequality of incomes in the UK: again, this has nothing to do with the benefits trap, as there'd still be a benefits trap no matter what the inequality levels were.

    So let's stick to one thing at a time, yes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    Due to the makeup of their voter-base, tackling 'benefits culture' was always going to be an extremely thorny issue for New Labour. They had 13 years to take decisive action, but bottled out time and again.
    Yes, pretty much. In hindsight, I dunno what the hell the Labour government was doing from 2000-2010, apart from spending a lot of our money and involving us in two nasty and protracted wars, one of which was clearly illegal.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    I don't think there's anything wrong with immigration, provided it's managed properly.
    See, the problem is, that's exactly what everyone in the debate says, so it's a meaningless statement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    Britain was one of only three EU member states not to impose a cap on economic migrants from the 10 new EU member states in 2004.
    Yes, and IMO that was a good call.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    In that situation it should have been obvious to our politicians that Britain would attract large numbers, purely on the basis that the right to work was guaranteed.
    My assumption is that they knew precisely that, but that they downplayed their expectations to keep the Daily Mail voters quiet, simply because the politicians knew that a large influx of skilled workers during a labour shortage was a good thing economically.

    Of course, I could be giving them far too much credit, they could have been simply stupid.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    When 100000s of economic migrants turn up over a very short period of time it is logical that such a sudden step-change in the labour market could cause problems.
    It didn't cause problems. It solved a labour shortage and gave our economy a boost, especially compared to other European countries at the time. If that's a problem, please give me more of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubble View Post
    A better policy would have been to initially impose a cap (as per most other EU countries) and see how the situation develops, before deciding to increase/decrease quotas, or totally remove the cap.
    Other European countries suffered through closing their borders to lots of energetic and skilled workers, at a time of economic boom and labour shortages. Their loss, our gain.

  17. #37
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    290
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    Ummm, you could make that argument about the EDL / BNP.
    Quite true. But what is the use of making a comparison with the EDL/BNP?

  18. #38
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    290
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    It seems like you're combining three different things here.

    1. Benefits trap: where the State gives you an incentive to stay at home rather than work. This is clearly insane, and I'm very glad this government is going to (hopefully) fix it. I'm doubly glad that the fix is not penalty-based, but is incentive-based; that is, that you'll keep getting benefits at the marginal areas, rather than having benefits taken away below the line.

    2. The level of the minimum wage: this has nothing to do with the benefits trap, as there'd still be a benefits trap no matter what level this is set at.

    3. The inequality of incomes in the UK: again, this has nothing to do with the benefits trap, as there'd still be a benefits trap no matter what the inequality levels were.

    So let's stick to one thing at a time, yes?
    I’m talking about different things at the same time because I think there are connections between them, and I think it’s worth expanding the debate to include them all. Some people don’t earn very much, while others earn far more than they realistically need. Rather than giving people benefits, I think it would be better and fairer to redistribute the wealth at the point where people are paid by their employer. One way to do this could be by imposing a maximum permissible pay ratio within a business (e.g. 10:1 between highest and lowest paid) Ideally, benefits should be for extreme circumstances (e.g. people who need help with a disability) and as a safety net for those unemployed, rather than a pay top-up to account for the fact that a job is poorly paid.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    Yes, pretty much. In hindsight, I dunno what the hell the Labour government was doing from 2000-2010, apart from spending a lot of our money and involving us in two nasty and protracted wars, one of which was clearly illegal.
    I’m definitely glad to see the back of New Labour, although, strangely, I’ve heard people say that the current government has no mandate to do so. Even if you exclude the coalition with the Lib Dems, the Conservatives currently have a stronger mandate for governance than Labour did from 2005 to 2010!

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    See, the problem is, that's exactly what everyone in the debate says, so it's a meaningless statement.
    In the abstract of this report, the priorities identified suggest that the government did not properly consider, plan, measure, or manage immigration.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    Yes, and IMO that was a good call.
    The same report concludes that immigration brought little or no economic benefit to the UK.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    My assumption is that they knew precisely that, but that they downplayed their expectations to keep the Daily Mail voters quiet,
    The proportion of people concerned about immigration rocketed from 5% to 40%. Surely they aren’t all Daily Mail readers. People also placed immigration as their #1 concern, ahead of Law & Order, The NHS, and International Terrorism.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    Of course, I could be giving them far too much credit, they could have been simply stupid.
    New Labour treated the electorate as if they were stupid on a range of issues. Hence, they are now in opposition. If the electoral system was fairer they wouldn’t have been able to foist so many of their stupid policies on us for so long.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    It didn't cause problems. It solved a labour shortage and gave our economy a boost, especially compared to other European countries at the time. If that's a problem, please give me more of them.

    Other European countries suffered through closing their borders to lots of energetic and skilled workers, at a time of economic boom and labour shortages. Their loss, our gain.
    The same report suggests little or no economic benefit was derived. Also, as I have previously stated, the importation of labour coincided with a missed opportunity to get a large proportion of unemployed UK natives into employment. Some UK families now have second and third generation unemployment. In my opinion, fixing the existing problems should have been the priority, rather than quickly growing the economy using imported labour.

  19. #39
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    bedford
    Posts
    4,899
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: European Migrants to get full benefits

    The only way to avoid a "poverty trap", "benefits trap", or whatever you want to call it, is to recogonise that, in a wealthy nation, that every body has a right to have enough to eat and somewhere safe to sleep, and access to justice, and to supply those unconditionally.

    To make that work you have to obtain enough tax revenue. The problem comes with that grand scheme in that the minimum income tax rate has to be high and to apply to nearly all income. There has to be an allowance for the extra costs of working over being idle.

    In a sort of democracy with the rich controlling the channels of communication a proposal that allowances will be a few hundred and the minimum tax rate will be 50% (or maybe a bit higher) a fair system has no chance of being voted in.

    The concept that we should be earning something for ourselves and as much, or more, for all of us, just will not get enough votes.

    Sadly the result is an high maintenance inefficient system that is always broken in places and always needs fixing somewhere, and where the smart and selfish can thrive. As always amongst their essential tools are prejudice, misinformation and "divide and conquer".

    When recovery comes it will be strangled because we are not preparing, not building for it, and we are wasting essential resources on paying people not to prepare, not to build.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Silver Membership - Benefits of upgrading your Forum experience.
    By Franck in forum Forum technical problems / Questions / Suggestions..
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 31st-October-2010, 08:02 PM
  2. A Thread full of Lerve
    By Emma in forum Chit Chat
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 23rd-July-2004, 05:54 PM
  3. Looking forward to the punters' benefits of Ceroc
    By spindr in forum Let's talk about dance
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 17th-December-2003, 12:27 AM
  4. Personal benefits of the CTA ?
    By RobC in forum Intermediate Corner
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 10th-December-2003, 11:38 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •