Latest Moan From You and Me 2024

I just think if someone has an opinion, doing a course is not going the change that opinion, it will just change that persons public face, to comply with what is expected.
Politicians do it all the time.
Its probably where its all going wrong because all politicians have false exteriors, very few are what you see is what you get.

 

I just had a thought. It happens now and again.
If you raise the minimum wage, benefits etc, you are only providing more money for them to pay to the fat cats ( win win win if you're a fat cat)
The only genuine way to benefit the workers and those on benefits is to reduce the prices of commodities - like that's going to happen.
Do they still have that thing where the government tops up wages to subsidise big business in the guise of helping the worker?

 

The government raise minimum wages because it doesn't cost them anything, but they take the credit, just like its the bank of England that puts up interest rates but government claim responsibility when they come down.

We need a cut in VAT, it would help everybody and get things moving, when I say a cut I mean something worthwhile not half a percent.
But then probably businesses would just put up their prices to take up the slack.

We're DOOOOOMED.

 

I'm just a dumb voter, but it seems obvious to me a reduction in VAT is a great idea, as would be to re-introduce the automatic increase in the tax allowance. The "money go around" needs to happen and the plebs have to have at least minimum income to make it work

 

Thats because they won't be drawn into a pointless, drawn out debate invented by the billionaire media industry to stir up emotion on an emotionally charged topic - like brexit or immigration - that benefits no-one except their shareholders.

 

UK VAT rates are already quite good - 0% on food and children's clothes; 5% on some services, child car seats and home energy. 20% on most things.

In France the rate is 5.5, 10 or 20% on food and pharmaceuticals depending on the item; 5.5 for disabled equipment and water supplies and 20% for the rest.

If you did cut rates there'd have to be a prohibition on price rises but how on earth would that be monitored? Not by an ombudsman, surely!

Maybe better to oblige utility companies to meet strict efficency targets before paying any more dividends to share-holders and make them reduce prices until they do.

 

Trickle down economics was never going to work. As expected,the rich took shed loads of money out of the economy and held on to their loot, taking the money out of the system so there was bgggggr all left to trickle down.
Nothing was invested. Property, art, tasteless bling has been bought. I suppose there might be an element of trickle down in the purchase of obscenely expensive weddings, birthdays and failed trips to the moon.

 

Surely that would just cause the shareholders to sell and the government would have to bail the companies out.

 

Even the Tories are starting to realise that Water must be brought back under state control.
The service is a monopoly and all the profits are siphoned off to share holders, whilst the service gets worse, and we are all drowning in our own s###t.

 

I still think it can work but if the regulator is corrupt it's not going to, what is the point of having them if they don't do their job.

 

Or, if not under state control, water should at least be run as a non-profit business.

 

Sounds like the definition of all nationalised industries of the 1970s.

But I agree you shouldn't be making profits out of necessities.

 

@pete they were nationalised because they were inefficient and MT wanted to cut the costs of subsidising them from the tax budget.

At the very least they need to be run well enough to supply water and sewage treatment efficiently and without loss to the owners, be they the public or shareholders. Profits should go into investment for better servces and facilities so not a good fit for a publicly owned organisation but the minute they're nationalised, there'll be reduced incentives for management and staff to work to their best ability for their clients.

That means incentives and bonuses for meeting worthwhile targets and, maybe, fines for failure.

 

But aren't we, the bill-payers, the clients? If companies are working for shareholders (as they are), the money that should go on infrastructure gets siphoned away, never to be seen again.