Torrevieja Forum

This Section Is Sponsored By Member " BRANDYBOY ".
This Section Is For Discussions About Politics Only.

Moderator: Moderator

#1090134
There is a difference between the two, though.

Miliband proposed fixing the price of gas and electricity, whilst Mrs May is proposing that the prices will be capped. So, Miliband's would have remained static if the wholesale prices went down, but the latest proposal is that the prices could fall but couldn't rise beyond a certain point.
#1090139
Mrs Nelson wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 10:38 am
So it was a bad idea for the government to interfere with the free market economy when EM suggested it a while back, now though because TM thinks it's a great idea I'm sure you guys all do too.

:lol:
I thought it was a bad idea when Miliband proposed it and still thinks it's a bad idea, even with an Ofgem-set cap rather than a Government-set fixed price.
#1090192
You would be better off asking that question to those that lived in the former East Germany, Hungary,Czec Republic, Slovac Republic, Latvia ,Lithuania, Poland, Estonia and all the former Warsaw Pact subjugated nations under Communist rule.

Instead of asking the forum why Marxism is so bad, why not explain to us all the benefits, or the perceived benefits of Marxism
You have said that you do not watch video clips, that is your choice to stay in denial of reality. Was the clip re Abbott and Thornberry too painful for you?
You can Google Das Kapital if it might help
#1090241
Mrs Nelson wrote:
Wed May 10, 2017 12:34 am
Yes and capitalism works great.

Wonga.com food banks zero hours and all the rest of your Tory crap mr blade.

Duck soup. Groucho and his brothers.
Capitalism may not be great but it works; communism doesn't.

I wondered how long it would be before you mentioned food banks. What is your obsession? People giving away free food and groceries and you are surprised how popular they are? They are full of capitalists making the most of socialist idiots!
#1090256
soapydave wrote:
Wed May 10, 2017 10:42 am
usa ,uk etc turned there backs on said countries,in favour of uncle joe,in the carve up of Europe after the war, for example, UK owed Lithuania billions in exports before WW2 started ,saw it as a way not to pay um back as with many other counties tried to blame germany
I'm not sure the west had many options regarding USSR's occupation of much of eastern europe, but I'm fascinated by your statement. I'm curious as to what the UK bought from Lithuania before WW2 that cost billions?
#1090354
Mrs Nelson wrote:
Thu May 11, 2017 1:08 am
Sheff_Blade wrote:
Wed May 10, 2017 10:52 am
Mrs Nelson wrote:
Wed May 10, 2017 10:02 am
When you have to sell your house to pay for medical care in the privatized NHS ,

remember you said that.
?????

Yes, like I remind all those socialists who said in the 70s that Thatcher would privatise the NHS. It still seems to be in public hands!

Public hands like Virgin?



https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... h-somerset

:lol: :lol:
Fair point but hardly privatising the NHS. Still one of the biggest employers in the world and all public servants. Interestingly much of this was started under Blair and Brown and their PFI initiatives.
#1090852
Mrs Nelson wrote:
Mon May 15, 2017 12:59 am
Part funded I should have said,

That's if attractive tax exemptions from our government can be classed as funding

We may not like, and I certainly do not, but it is the world that we live in. And I have said it before, the UK cannot, nor can any other country, act unilaterally to abolish all the tax exemptions. It is far too easy for these companies to just move their headquarters for tax purposes to another, more beneficial territory.

Pretty well most international trading companies around the world take advantage of these tax breaks. It is why so many major companies have their European headquarters in Eire, and why American corporations, such as the giants like Microsoft and McDonalds, have their worldwide headquarters in the State of Delaware because that is the equivalent of a tax haven for the Yanks.

Big companies around the world are now structured so that they have to pay for "services" and trade mark "royalties" to a subsidiary set up in a tax friendly country. It is why, for example, virtually all the stores that a company like Tesco trade from are owned by a series of property companies in Luxemburg, operating out of a broom cupboard in an accountancy firm. Each month/quarter, Tesco sends it's rent for the stores to Luxemburg, where the tax rate is ridiculously low, and the cost of the rent reduces the profits that Tesco in the UK make. Then the property companies lend the money back to Tesco (UK) and the UK part of the business pays interest and charges for borrowing the money that actually belongs to them, reducing the pre-tax profits even more.

With the world as it is now, and the ability to run corporations from absolutely anywhere in the world that has access to broadband, the only way any government can try to limit these tax attractions is to slowly remove them, and hope other countries follow suit. In the meantime, it is up to the relevant tax authorities to come to some compromise with these companies to get them pay more corporation tax, bearing in mind that none of these companies are actually breaking any laws.
Would you trust Labour

as always with British Politics, it's a matter of […]

Roll it in glitter Brexit

"Jonesy on the other had hopes for the best b[…]

RTN (REPORTING THE NEWS)

Could do with some at Tony Firth Auctions Los Mont[…]

Ding a ling

John woke up one morning immensely aroused so he t[…]

Your opinions

Used OCSI for years on two urbs. They're fine in m[…]

Durty Nellys Torrevieja

Rosemary you would have to have Sky Sports on your[…]

Hello Ian, I have managed to get the echo dot to w[…]

Spanish ads

Can anyone tell me how I can stop getting adverts […]

New Advertising Slots and Possibilities