RIP Michael Foot

[Wes Tender]

There's plenty of right-wingers who hate Foot, Benn, Blair and Brown, can you imagine the outcry if Tony Benn was given a state funeral?

 

Most of the left of the Labour Party would consider Blair and Brown to be right wing.

 

Why would Anthony Wedgewood-Benn be accorded a State funeral anyway? Had he been one of the longest serving Prime Ministers in British Political history? Was he an International Statesman at the head of British affairs on the World stage? There is Thatcherism, but I haven't heard of such a thing as Bennism.

 

In fact, is he worthy of even a footnote in the history books at all?

[St Paul]

Because a family with four adults living for example in Millbrook in a council house would have paid around 1200 pounds a year, the same as Lord Montagu ( With four adults in his house as well ) in his enormous mansion in Beaulieu. It was a regressive tax dressed up a a fairer solution to the rates problem, designed with one thing in mind, to help the rich!

 

I dont normally get involved in debates like this, but this is rubbish.It was not designed to help the rich. Is the TV licence designed to help the rich and yet that is a "poll tax". lord Montagu pays the same for his TV licence as the Milbrook family.

The old rates were generally accepted as unfair and cumbersome. Thatch's idea was that whoever uses the services should contribute the same amount, regardless of income. Wrong in my opinion, but a policy thought through and consistant. If people really wanted a fair form of local taxation based on the ability to pay, then a local income tax, is the only fair system. A lot of idiots jumped on the poll tax demos, to cause trouble, not out of any big principle. If there was a prinicple involved why do they pay their TV licence, which is collected on the same basis?

[Gemmel]

Because a family with four adults living for example in Millbrook in a council house would have paid around 1200 pounds a year, the same as Lord Montagu ( With four adults in his house as well ) in his enormous mansion in Beaulieu. It was a regressive tax dressed up a a fairer solution to the rates problem, designed with one thing in mind, to help the rich!

 

Ive read some tosh on this board, but this looking just plain ******* wrong and absolute horse ****e

[Johnny Bognor]

Because a family with four adults living for example in Millbrook in a council house would have paid around 1200 pounds a year, the same as Lord Montagu ( With four adults in his house as well ) in his enormous mansion in Beaulieu. It was a regressive tax dressed up a a fairer solution to the rates problem, designed with one thing in mind, to help the rich!

 

 

Fuengirola, you could have taken the little old lady living on her own, paying the same rates as a family of 5 living in a similar house (who happen to consume 5 times the amount of 'services') to show that prior to the poll tax, things were so much fairer.......not.

 

Thatcher was right to look at local taxation with a view to change it, she perhaps chose the wrong solution and presented it very badly.

 

.... but nearly 20 years later, after 13 years of a labour government, fairness is running through our society. Especially when Fraudon Clown abolished the 10p tax rate, thus plunging the lowest paid workers in society into a pit of disproportionate taxes. Totally unbelievable if you ask me. I mean you would expect it from Thatcher, but to have a labour governemnt screw those they pupport to represent, I can't see Fraudon getting away with this.

 

I suppose being shafted by your own lot is not as bad as being shafted by the other lot, but from where I am standing, you've still been shafted.

Edited 5 March, 2010 by Johnny Bognor

[solentstars]

When Margaret Thatcher dies she should get a state funeral. Churchill got one so Maggie should.

 

churchill was a great leader of this country fighting facism ,unlike maggies:rolleyes:who was a divisive leader not fit to wipe the great mans boots .

Edited 5 March, 2010 by solentstars

[solentstars]

Fuengirola, you could have taken the little old lady living on her own, paying the same rates as a family of 5 living in a similar house (who happen to consume 5 times the amount of 'services') to show that prior to the poll tax, things were so much fairer.......not.

 

Thatcher was right to look at local taxation with a view to change it, she perhaps chose the wrong solution and presented it very badly.

 

.... but nearly 20 years later, after 13 years of a labour government, fairness is running through our society. Especially when Fraudon Brown abolished the 10p tax rate, thus plunging the lowest paid workers in society into a pit of disproportionate taxes. Totally unbelievable if you ask me. I mean you would expect it from Thatcher, but to have a labour governemnt screw those they pupport to represent, I can't see Fraudon getting away with this.

 

I suppose being shafted by your own lot is not as bad as being shafted by the other lot, but from where I am standing, you've still been shafted.

good post that sums up for me why we have 2 tory party's nowdays.

[Wes Tender]

If people really wanted a fair form of local taxation based on the ability to pay, then a local income tax, is the only fair system.

 

If people wanted a system based on ability to pay, then they might indeed want a local income tax. But I don't believe that most want that, although it is natural for selfish reasons that people would like the burden to fall on others and they should pay less or be exempt.

 

The argument with local taxation is deeply flawed. The levy is to pay for services rendered by the local authority, so why should it be that somebody earning more should pay more, even if they might not even use those services? A decent case could be made out that those who paid more, should have more say in who governs them, but that will never be allowed, will it? The old adage of no taxation without representation was fair enough, but how about those who pay twice as much in taxes having double the votes? Seems reasonable to me. A large proportion of the income of local authorities comes from business rates where the owners of those businesses get no vote at all apart from their own single vote (if they indeed live in that Borough)

 

Take the principle to its logical conclusions and those earning more ought to pay proportionally more for any other service in the private sector too, after all, it's only fair, isn't it? Taxi driver, "you're a wealthy git, going to cost you double, mate". Window cleaner, "normally I charge a quid a window, but you look flushed, mate, so it's going to cost you double".

 

As a large proportion of local government costs is already paid for by central government, which has already taxed those higher earners at a higher rate, why should they then be clobbered again at local level?

[dronskisaint]

I support the call for a state funeral for Maggie; that way I can attend and personally ensure that lid of the coffin is well and truly nailed on.

 

I also support the call for her to be buried somewhere where I & all the others who suffered her era (& to an extent are still suffering given that employment is still half a million higher than her celebrated 'Labour isn't working' poster) can p*s* on her grave.

 

In another era still she would have been burnt at the stake...& I'd have warmed my hands!

[Foxstone]

If people wanted a system based on ability to pay, then they might indeed want a local income tax. But I don't believe that most want that, although it is natural for selfish reasons that people would like the burden to fall on others and they should pay less or be exempt.

 

The argument with local taxation is deeply flawed. The levy is to pay for services rendered by the local authority, so why should it be that somebody earning more should pay more, even if they might not even use those services? A decent case could be made out that those who paid more, should have more say in who governs them, but that will never be allowed, will it? The old adage of no taxation without representation was fair enough, but how about those who pay twice as much in taxes having double the votes? Seems reasonable to me. A large proportion of the income of local authorities comes from business rates where the owners of those businesses get no vote at all apart from their own single vote (if they indeed live in that Borough)

 

Take the principle to its logical conclusions and those earning more ought to pay proportionally more for any other service in the private sector too, after all, it's only fair, isn't it? Taxi driver, "you're a wealthy git, going to cost you double, mate". Window cleaner, "normally I charge a quid a window, but you look flushed, mate, so it's going to cost you double".

 

As a large proportion of local government costs is already paid for by central government, which has already taxed those higher earners at a higher rate, why should they then be clobbered again at local level?

 

Hear Hear !

 

The community charge was a sound idea albeit poorly sold !

While there were many legitimate protestors to the Community Charge at the time, I really do think that much of the mayhem was caused by attention seeking anarchists who managed to jump on this particular bandwagon to further their idiotic ends - And it was manna from heaven to the media who were turning against the Tory party at the time.

 

It would be good if a form of the community charge was to be resurrected to the political agenda again, and this time better communicated.

 

After all - Everybody ( including the Left) likes fairness don't they?

[Johnny Bognor]

Hear Hear !

 

The community charge was a sound idea albeit poorly sold !

While there were many legitimate protestors to the Community Charge at the time, I really do think that much of the mayhem was caused by attention seeking anarchists who managed to jump on this particular bandwagon to further their idiotic ends - And it was manna from heaven to the media who were turning against the Tory party at the time.

 

It would be good if a form of the community charge was to be resurrected to the political agenda again, and this time better communicated.

 

After all - Everybody ( including the Left) likes fairness don't they?

 

 

 

..... did you see that councils are now introducing chip & bin, where the waste in your bin will be measured?

 

It is only a matter of time before we will be charged for the amount of waste we throw out. It is a kind of consumption tax which has nothing to do with ability to pay and is very much in line with the essence of the Community Charge - the more you use, the more you pay.

 

You could argue that Thatcher was visionary and ahead of her time, the only difference being is that the labour spin machine would be far more effective in bringing this in.

 

Poll Tax = riots on the streets

Abolishion of 10p tax threshold = not even a whimper from the most ardent of socialists

[Fuengirola Saint]

As it is not argued that statistics can be manipulated to prove whatever position one wishes to portray, perhaps you can be bothered to manipulate the figures here to justify your position.

 

It is much the same regarding Government statistics to prove that the NHS is running more efficiently, that crime figures are down, that education standards have improved, etc.

 

If you believe any of it, then you are mightily naive. If you lived back here, you might have the evidence of your own experience to back it all up.

 

All i´m saying is that the last set of figures used by the Tories were only the JSA claimant count and that the government changed the way they were worked out by using the International Labour Organisation´s method. You implied that the government manipulated the figures to make the unemployment rate seem lower when in fact the changes made actually raised the figure.

[ecuk268]

 

 

 

Take the principle to its logical conclusions and those earning more ought to pay proportionally more for any other service in the private sector too, after all, it's only fair, isn't it? Taxi driver, "you're a wealthy git, going to cost you double, mate". Window cleaner, "normally I charge a quid a window, but you look flushed, mate, so it's going to cost you double".

 

A few years ago I drove a company Audi which had a manual sunroof.

 

The handle broke so I went to the local VW-Audi dealer to get a new one. The price he quoted seemed rather high and I said so.

 

He said "you could get a VW one for half the price". When I asked what the difference was he said "None, they think that if you can afford an Audi you can afford to pay more".

[Fuengirola Saint]

Are the Governments unemployment figures correct?

The Office for National Statistics said the number of working-age people in work less households jumped by 500,000 to 4.8 million in the year to June.

 

The UK's Government current unemployment figures are around 2.6 million, so does that mean that in reality 2.0 million plus people not claiming or in receipt of unemployment benefit - as per the Government's own unemployment figure.

6 months ago

 

 

You put this information in your reply ( Wes Tender) and i agree with the top part, there are many more people unemployed than the figures suggest.

If we used the last method that the Conservatives used in 1997 the figure of 2.6 million would be 1.8 million or thereabouts.

I still cannot see how the government have changed the way we measure unemployment to lower the figures

[Foxstone]

..... did you see that councils are now introducing chip & bin, where the waste in your bin will be measured?

 

It is only a matter of time before we will be charged for the amount of waste we throw out. It is a kind of consumption tax which has nothing to do with ability to pay and is very much in line with the essence of the Community Charge - the more you use, the more you pay.

You could argue that Thatcher was visionary and ahead of her time, the only difference being is that the labour spin machine would be far more effective in bringing this in.

 

Poll Tax = riots on the streets

Abolishion of 10p tax threshold = not even a whimper from the most ardent of socialists

 

I personally have no problem with this initiative - It is fair to charge for usage and I would dare to suggest that it would add a certain "Green" ethos to many that was'nt there before.

 

Sadly though, I see the "George Orwell Crew" vigorously opposing this!

[Fuengirola Saint]

I dont normally get involved in debates like this, but this is rubbish.It was not designed to help the rich. Is the TV licence designed to help the rich and yet that is a "poll tax". lord Montagu pays the same for his TV licence as the Milbrook family.

The old rates were generally accepted as unfair and cumbersome. Thatch's idea was that whoever uses the services should contribute the same amount, regardless of income. Wrong in my opinion, but a policy thought through and consistant. If people really wanted a fair form of local taxation based on the ability to pay, then a local income tax, is the only fair system. A lot of idiots jumped on the poll tax demos, to cause trouble, not out of any big principle. If there was a prinicple involved why do they pay their TV licence, which is collected on the same basis?

 

If you think this is rubbish fair enough,thats your opinion but i think you´ll find Lord Montagu had a bit of a windfall on the 1st of April 1990 whereas the family in Millbrook had their income cut by quite a big percentage as their rates would have been included in their rent,which was not reduced. I´m sorry but to me that is helping the rich.

[Fuengirola Saint]

Ive read some tosh on this board, but this looking just plain ******* wrong and absolute horse ****e

 

Why? See above post.

[Thedelldays]

If you think this is rubbish fair enough,thats your opinion but i think you´ll find Lord Montagu had a bit of a windfall on the 1st of April 1990 whereas the family in Millbrook had their income cut by quite a big percentage as their rates would have been included in their rent,which was not reduced. I´m sorry but to me that is helping the rich.

why is it...if we take as much money as possible off those who are rich is seen as "fair" and as soon as they get a level deal..it is seen as "helping them"..?

[Gemmel]

Why? See above post.

 

If you have been brain washed to such an extent to believe that drivel you posted, you have quite obviously not reasearched or understood the tax in anyway, reagrdless of what side your politics sit and nothing anybody posts on here is going to change your mind

[Wes Tender]

..... did you see that councils are now introducing chip & bin, where the waste in your bin will be measured?

 

It is only a matter of time before we will be charged for the amount of waste we throw out. It is a kind of consumption tax which has nothing to do with ability to pay and is very much in line with the essence of the Community Charge - the more you use, the more you pay.

 

You could argue that Thatcher was visionary and ahead of her time, the only difference being is that the labour spin machine would be far more effective in bringing this in.

 

Poll Tax = riots on the streets

Abolishion of 10p tax threshold = not even a whimper from the most ardent of socialists

 

Not really the same as the Community Charge, as that was based on the number of occupants in a property that loosely reflected the degree of need for the services offered by the local authority, i.e. more people in a house probably meant more need for local schools, more waste disposal, etc.

 

This is a proposal to make charges against those who fail to recycle their waste. But the idea is typical of many others thought of by think tanks comprising nerds with no practical sense of reality or experience. In short, it is unworkable. Eastleigh BC has already introduced small brown bins for food waste which will presumably be converted into compost or produce methane gas for energy. Half of the green bin is filled each week with the copious amounts of junk mail that plop onto our doormat each week. Much of the rest comprises packaging and plastics that can't be put into the other two bins. If the Government wishes to cut the amount of waste, then they ought to legislate against junk mail, or unecessary packaging of foodstuffs. But then that would mean that the Post Office would suffer a severe decline in business and revenue and there would be job losses in the packaging industry.

 

It is proposed that the scheme will be up to the individual local authorities to implement and that the council taxes should not rise as a result of a council implementing this system. Measures would have to be put in place to ensure that there wasn't a massive increase in fly tipping.

 

Personally, I would welcome the prospect of widespread public dissent against this. It would be payback time against a Labour Government that benefited from the Poll tax riots and had not learnt the lessons from it. All it would require is a flat refusal by everybody to pay the charge. Provided that we stood shoulder to shoulder united against it, they couldn't lock us all up, could they? Poll Tax riots number two coming up.

[ecuk268]

 

Personally, I would welcome the prospect of widespread public dissent against this. It would be payback time against a Labour Government that benefited from the Poll tax riots and had not learnt the lessons from it. All it would require is a flat refusal by everybody to pay the charge. Provided that we stood shoulder to shoulder united against it, they couldn't lock us all up, could they? Poll Tax riots number two coming up.

 

How did the Labour government benefit from the Poll Tax riots?

 

They were in 1990. Soon after the Tories kicked Maggie out and John Major won the '92 election and scrapped the Poll Tax.

 

Regarding re-cycling, Southampton City Council are proposing to reward those who re-cycle. So I'll be nicking stuff from my neighbours bin. The more you re-cycle, the less your council has to pay for landfill.

[Wes Tender]

If you think this is rubbish fair enough,thats your opinion but i think you´ll find Lord Montagu had a bit of a windfall on the 1st of April 1990 whereas the family in Millbrook had their income cut by quite a big percentage as their rates would have been included in their rent,which was not reduced. I´m sorry but to me that is helping the rich.

 

The family in Millbrook had been tenants of the Council for many years and therefore were able to buy their council house at a massive discount, courtesy of Maggie. People who were tenants in the private sector did not benefit in this way. Unfair, isn't it?

 

My mother has her own house with no mortgage on it and because death duties which were introduced originally to tax the super rich when they died have not been increased over very many years by the level of inflation, she will have to pay some death duties when she doesn't live in a grand mansion, but just happens to live in an area where property prices have risen. If she needs to be placed in a state care home, she would have to sell her house to pay for it, even though she and my father paid taxes all through her life. Not fair, is it?

 

Wealthy people pay higher taxes towards things that they don't use, often educating their children privately and having private health care. They don't get any refund because of this. Despite paying more in taxes througout their lives, they also get clobbered by death duties. But I'm sure that you consider this to be fair. They can afford it, so let the bastards cough up, eh?

 

When MT reduced the top rate of income tax to 40%. there was an angry outcry from people like you that the rich were benefiting from reduced taxation and thus depriving the Revenue of vast sums of money. In the event, the amount of taxation that went into the Revenue's coffers was dramatically increased, as people thought that the level of taxation was fairer. Many who had emmigrated to lower tax regimes, returned. Others who had employed tax avoidance measures didn't bother, as they felt the rate was fair.

 

Recently, Labour increased the top rate to 50%. They never learn, do they?

[Wes Tender]

How did the Labour government benefit from the Poll Tax riots?

 

They were in 1990. Soon after the Tories kicked Maggie out and John Major won the '92 election and scrapped the Poll Tax.

 

 

I know the timescale involved and am plenty old enough to remember back to the times of Harold Wilson, Dennis Healey (tax 'em til the pips squeak) drunken George Brown and all of that shower.

 

There could be no clearer example of why the so-called Poll Tax benefited Labour, than the caustic remarks directed towards the person who introduced it and her Party nearly 20 years later.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

..... did you see that councils are now introducing chip & bin, where the waste in your bin will be measured?

 

It is only a matter of time before we will be charged for the amount of waste we throw out. It is a kind of consumption tax which has nothing to do with ability to pay and is very much in line with the essence of the Community Charge - the more you use, the more you pay.

 

You could argue that Thatcher was visionary and ahead of her time, the only difference being is that the labour spin machine would be far more effective in bringing this in.

 

Poll Tax = riots on the streets

Abolishion of 10p tax threshold = not even a whimper from the most ardent of socialists

 

Well I was outraged at the abolition of the 10p tax rate! I think I might have been the only one though!

[Fuengirola Saint]

The family in Millbrook had been tenants of the Council for many years and therefore were able to buy their council house at a massive discount, courtesy of Maggie. People who were tenants in the private sector did not benefit in this way. Unfair, isn't it?

 

My mother has her own house with no mortgage on it and because death duties which were introduced originally to tax the super rich when they died have not been increased over very many years by the level of inflation, she will have to pay some death duties when she doesn't live in a grand mansion, but just happens to live in an area where property prices have risen. If she needs to be placed in a state care home, she would have to sell her house to pay for it, even though she and my father paid taxes all through her life. Not fair, is it?

 

Wealthy people pay higher taxes towards things that they don't use, often educating their children privately and having private health care. They don't get any refund because of this. Despite paying more in taxes througout their lives, they also get clobbered by death duties. But I'm sure that you consider this to be fair. They can afford it, so let the bastards cough up, eh?

 

When MT reduced the top rate of income tax to 40%. there was an angry outcry from people like you that the rich were benefiting from reduced taxation and thus depriving the Revenue of vast sums of money. In the event, the amount of taxation that went into the Revenue's coffers was dramatically increased, as people thought that the level of taxation was fairer. Many who had emmigrated to lower tax regimes, returned. Others who had employed tax avoidance measures didn't bother, as they felt the rate was fair.

 

Recently, Labour increased the top rate to 50%. They never learn, do they?

 

Who said the family in Millbrook had bought their house and taken advantage of the right to buy legislation?

[Fuengirola Saint]

Quote ( Wes Tender )

 

My mother has her own house with no mortgage on it and because death duties which were introduced originally to tax the super rich when they died have not been increased over very many years by the level of inflation, she will have to pay some death duties when she doesn't live in a grand mansion, but just happens to live in an area where property prices have risen. If she needs to be placed in a state care home, she would have to sell her house to pay for it, even though she and my father paid taxes all through her life. Not fair, is it?

 

 

The reason your Mother may have to sell her home to pay for care is legislation enacted by John Major´s Conservative government

[Johnny Bognor]

Well I was outraged at the abolition of the 10p tax rate! I think I might have been the only one though!

 

 

Didn't riot on the streets though did you?

 

Had it been a tory government, there would have been widescale disorder.

 

Which brings me back to the point I made earlier, that when the nasty-wasty tories do something, it is time for direct action. When fraudon & co do it, the socialists don't really have a problem with it.

 

I call that hypocracy.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Didn't riot on the streets though did you?

 

Had it been a tory government, there would have been widescale disorder.

 

Which brings me back to the point I made earlier, that when the nasty-wasty tories do something, it is time for direct action. When fraudon & co do it, the socialists don't really have a problem with it.

 

I call that hypocracy.

 

No I didn't - I would have looked crazy if I was all by myself!

[Johnny Bognor]

No I didn't - I would have looked crazy if I was all by myself!

 

 

Style over substance..... . Stuff your principles and what you think, as how you look is far more important .......how very new labour

 

Maybe the likes of Michael Foot are to be respected afterall ...... never agreed with his politics, but at least he was a man of his convictions. Fair play to him, I say.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Style over substance..... . Stuff your principles and what you think, as how you look is far more important .......how very new labour

 

Maybe the likes of Michael Foot are to be respected afterall ...... never agreed with his politics, but at least he was a man of his convictions.

 

You're very 'literal' in your views/opinions JB, are you slightly autistic? - I remember when there was all the snow and you were lambasting ANYONE who couldn't get out of their roads/drives: "I bet if I put a million quid at the end of your road you would get out", a very simplistic and niave way of looking at things. Would you go and protest all by yourself when you should be at work if there was something that bothered you? Nope, thought not!

[Johnny Bognor]

You're very 'literal' in your views/opinions JB - I remember when there was all the snow and you were lambasting ANYONE who couldn't get out of their roads/drives: "I bet if I put a million quid at the end of your road you would get out", a very simplistic and niave way of looking at things.

 

That was directed at Ponty and as it happens he said he would get to the end of his road for £1m ...... after saying he could not get to the end of the road. I was simply highlighting that where there's a will, there's a way.

 

Would you go and protest all by yourself when you should be at work if there was something that bothered you? Nope, thought not!

 

 

As for protesting, I was one of the 3 who organised the fly by to oust good ole rupes.

 

I didn't particularly enjoy handing out leaflets at the foot bridge before the Millwall and Cardiff games (when I could have been having a beer) especially as I had to endure both the Millwall escort on one saturday, followed by the Cardiff escort the next (with hundreds of ****ed up welshmen hurling abuse) with just myself and 1576 standing there.

 

But at the end of the day, if you feel strongly enough about someting, you will get off your arse and do something about it.

 

Anyway, protesting doesn't always have to happen between 9-5, mon-fri, but as you are a teacher, you have plenty of time with all that holiday you get and there's always inset days....

Edited 5 March, 2010 by Johnny Bognor

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

That was directed at Ponty and as it happens he said he would get to the end of his road for £1m ...... after saying he could not get to the end of the road. I was simply highlighting that where there's a will, there's a way.

 

 

 

 

As for protesting, I was one of the 3 who organised the fly by to oust good ole rupes.

 

I didn't particularly enjoy handing out leaflets at the foot bridge before the Millwall and Cardiff games (when I could have been having a beer) especially as I had to endure both the Millwall escort on one saturday, followed by the Cardiff escort the next (with hundreds of ****ed up welshmen hurling abuse) with just myself and 1576 standing there.

 

But at the end of the day, if you feel strongly enough about someting, you will get off your arse and do something about it.

 

Protesting doesn't always have to happen between 9-5, mon-fri, but as you are a teacher, you have plenty of time with all that holiday you get and there's always inset days....

 

 

I had an inset afternoon today; "Leadership through Shakespeare"...I'd have rather been teaching!! To be fair to the school, it's not their fault: The LEA gives the school a certain amount of money per year for staff training and they HAVE to spend it on something!

Edited 5 March, 2010 by Thorpe-le-Saint

[dune]

Just out of curiosity Dune, what music were you into as a lad? Anything along the lines of "The Jam", "The Sex Pistols", "The Clash", "The Specials" and you'll be classed as a massive hypocrite...

 

House.

[Wes Tender]

Who said the family in Millbrook had bought their house and taken advantage of the right to buy legislation?

 

The family in their Millbrook council house is a mythical example invented by you to illustrate how hard done by they were when the Council tax was introduced, or before that the Community charge or Poll Tax. You can have them as an example of down-trodden victims of unfair Government taxation on the one hand, but I'm not allowed to illustrate other Government legislation that improves their lot? The right to buy for Council House tenants was a massive success and many were grateful for the opportunity.

 

Your mythical family could comprise three bread-winners paying just the one lot of Council tax, compared to the single widow next door paying the same amount, although she is using far less of the services. You might think that there is injustice from your comparison with Lord Montagu, but the example I give is the one that was held up when the alteration was made to the old rates system. Do you think that situation is fair?

[solentstars]

oh dear reading this drivel anyone would think maggies torys did no wrong apart from raising vat from 5% to 17.5%, haveing mass unemplyoment twice which enabled groups like ub40 to sing classics like "one in ten",a poll tax which most of her own party said was a regressive tax and riots in the country(the specials.. ghost town).

interest rates of 17%,i remember that i was on a 2 day and nearly lost my home and job due to a overvalued pound, a because of some of their mad policys .

[Redondo Saint]

oh dear reading this drivel anyone would think maggies torys did no wrong apart from raising vat from 5% to 17.5%, haveing mass unemplyoment twice which enabled groups like ub40 to sing classics like "one in ten",a poll tax which most of her own party said was a regressive tax and riots in the country(the specials.. ghost town).

interest rates of 17%,i remember that i was on a 2 day and nearly lost my home and job due to a overvalued pound, a because of some of their mad policys .

 

 

Over time I think the more balanced people on here will agree that Maggie was a good leader of the UK. Over a period of several parliaments every goverment makes mistakes - some for the right reasons, others not.

 

I know history will show that Maggie left a better legacy than Brown and Blair.

 

 

Back to Michael Foot.

 

Certainly a man of political principle and admired by all sides of parliament.

Not a smart dresser(!) but in those days there was more emphasis on substance than wearing suits and having 'celebrity' mates.

 

Foot was a very well educated man and probably would have been better off not leading the labour party but staying behind the scenes. I am far away from his politics but can still appeciate a 'good' parliamentarian.

[dune]

Maggie wouldn't be bullied by the EEC.

[Fuengirola Saint]

The family in their Millbrook council house is a mythical example invented by you to illustrate how hard done by they were when the Council tax was introduced, or before that the Community charge or Poll Tax. You can have them as an example of down-trodden victims of unfair Government taxation on the one hand, but I'm not allowed to illustrate other Government legislation that improves their lot? The right to buy for Council House tenants was a massive success and many were grateful for the opportunity.

 

Your mythical family could comprise three bread-winners paying just the one lot of Council tax, compared to the single widow next door paying the same amount, although she is using far less of the services. You might think that there is injustice from your comparison with Lord Montagu, but the example I give is the one that was held up when the alteration was made to the old rates system. Do you think that situation is fair?

 

 

You can mention anything you want but it has nothing to do with my point that Montagu gained whilst the family in Millbrook lost out.

My point is that the Poll Tax was an unfair and regressive tax where the rich who lets remember have got quite enough money already were being subsidised by poorer members of society.

[Fuengirola Saint]

Maggie wouldn't be bullied by the EEC.

 

Maggie signed the Single European Act

[Redondo Saint]

You can mention anything you want but it has nothing to do with my point that Montagu gained whilst the family in Millbrook lost out.

My point is that the Poll Tax was an unfair and regressive tax where the rich who lets remember have got quite enough money already were being subsidised by poorer members of society.

 

Problem with your argument is that the majority of the people you consider 'rich' are just normal working families that worked hard to have a decent house of their choice.

 

Your misguided view on politics/the rich fails to understand that the majority of middle income Britain pays the tab for those that evade tax and those that choose to be the beneficiary of the welfare system.

 

No matter what govt wins power, the middle income always pay for it.

[Fuengirola Saint]

Problem with your argument is that the majority of the people you consider 'rich' are just normal working families that worked hard to have a decent house of their choice.

 

Your misguided view on politics/the rich fails to understand that the majority of middle income Britain pays the tab for those that evade tax and those that choose to be the beneficiary of the welfare system.

 

No matter what govt wins power, the middle income always pay for it.

 

Where the hell do you get that from? For what it´s worth i think that the middle classes as well as the poorer sections of society were subsidizing the rich e.g my Lord Montagu example.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

How many Lord Montugu's are there Fuengirola? I expect you may have noticed in Spain that we are being run a bit like Portsmouth FC and that is why your pound does not go as far as it did. Stop fighting your class war and think of the bigger picture.

[Wes Tender]

Where the hell do you get that from? For what it´s worth i think that the middle classes as well as the poorer sections of society were subsidizing the rich e.g my Lord Montagu example.

 

You really do have a bizarre perspective on the political situation in this country and it's therefore a good thing that you have absented yourself from these shores and live in the Spanish equivalent of Portsmouth (or is that Benidorm?) So it's the poor and the middle classes that have been subsidising the rich? Look up the meaning of the word subsidy, as I'm pretty sure that you cannot understand what it properly means.

 

As Sergei rightly asks, how many Lord Montagus are there? Your whole stance on the Community Charge appears to be based on the fact that a minute section of the population might have benefited from paying a lower sum for local services, whilst conversely paying considerably higher rates of taxation than the vast majority of the population on the other. You seem to have ignored commenting on the situation which the Community Charge was intended to address, that of the widow living alone and paying more in Rates than the large family next door, just because her house might be larger, but regardless of the fact that her usage of local services was considerably less. Or do you think that the situation was fair? At least with the Council Tax, she will get a discount as a single occupant, but there is no additional cost increase levied on homes with larger families comprising of more than one bread winner, who use more local services and who could pay more.

 

And Redondo is also right, that the greatest burden of taxation falls upon the middle classes, who generally as law abiding citizens grin and bear it, never dreaming of disobeying the laws of the land as the poll tax rioters did, as that would be anarchy. The Labour Government therefore see them as a soft target, but then wonder why they seek ways to avoid the taxes, or to emmigrate. As I said, they never learn.

[Wes Tender]

Where the hell do you get that from? For what it´s worth i think that the middle classes as well as the poorer sections of society were subsidizing the rich e.g my Lord Montagu example.

 

You really do have a bizarre perspective on the political situation in this country and it's therefore a good thing that you have absented yourself from these shores and live in the Spanish equivalent of Portsmouth (or is that Benidorm?) So it's the poor and the middle classes that have been subsidising the rich? Look up the meaning of the word subsidy, as I'm pretty sure that you cannot understand what it properly means.

 

As Sergei rightly asks, how many Lord Montagus are there? Your whole stance on the Community Charge appears to be based on the fact that a minute section of the population might have benefited from paying a lower sum for local services, whilst conversely paying considerably higher rates of taxation than the vast majority of the population on the other. You seem to have ignored commenting on the situation which the Community Charge was intended to address, that of the widow living alone and paying more in Rates than the large family next door, just because her house might be larger, but regardless of the fact that her usage of local services was considerably less. Or do you think that the situation was fair? At least with the Council Tax, she will get a discount as a single occupant, but there is no additional cost increase levied on homes with larger families comprising of more than one bread winner, who use more local services and who could pay more.

 

And Redondo is also right, that the greatest burden of taxation falls upon the middle classes, who generally as law abiding citizens grin and bear it, never dreaming of disobeying the laws of the land as the poll tax rioters did, as that would be anarchy. The Labour Government therefore see them as a soft target, but then wonder why they seek ways to avoid the taxes, or to emmigrate. As I said, they never learn.

[Whitey Grandad]

A true gentleman. I met him once when I was a student at Cambridge. I was walking back from the engineering labs with my mate when this Hillman Hunter estate pulled up and the white-haired fellow inside leant over and asked us if we knew the way to the Union. I started to explain but my mate said it was on our way and it would be easier if we jumped in so off we went. He was speaking at a debate later that evening. My mate later said that he only suggested getting in the car because he recognised the driver and couldn't remember his name. I'd never heard of him at the time, ignorant youth that I was.

[Whitey Grandad]

A true gentleman. I met him once when I was a student at Cambridge. I was walking back from the engineering labs with my mate when this Hillman Hunter estate pulled up and the white-haired fellow inside leant over and asked us if we knew the way to the Union. I started to explain but my mate said it was on our way and it would be easier if we jumped in so off we went. He was speaking at a debate later that evening. My mate later said that he only suggested getting in the car because he recognised the driver and couldn't remember his name. I'd never heard of him at the time, ignorant youth that I was.

[Gemmel]

Where the hell do you get that from? For what it´s worth i think that the middle classes as well as the poorer sections of society were subsidizing the rich e.g my Lord Montagu example.

 

What a knob

[Gemmel]

Where the hell do you get that from? For what it´s worth i think that the middle classes as well as the poorer sections of society were subsidizing the rich e.g my Lord Montagu example.

 

What a knob

[Fuengirola Saint]

How many Lord Montugu's are there Fuengirola? I expect you may have noticed in Spain that we are being run a bit like Portsmouth FC and that is why your pound does not go as far as it did. Stop fighting your class war and think of the bigger picture.

 

Sorry mush i don´t use the pound i use the Euro, I would have thought that a weaker pound would have made British exports more competitive, thus better for the economy.

[Fuengirola Saint]

How many Lord Montugu's are there Fuengirola? I expect you may have noticed in Spain that we are being run a bit like Portsmouth FC and that is why your pound does not go as far as it did. Stop fighting your class war and think of the bigger picture.

 

Sorry mush i don´t use the pound i use the Euro, I would have thought that a weaker pound would have made British exports more competitive, thus better for the economy.

[Fuengirola Saint]

What a knob

 

**** off you Tory ****wit

If you are just going to say Knob when you don´t agree then i suggest you do not reply to any of my threads

Edited 6 March, 2010 by Fuengirola Saint