Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Counterfactual: Dave would not have become PM if in May 201

13»

Comments

  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited June 2013
    Plato said:

    I notice we've a new button 'Off Topic' - isn't at least 50% of every thread *off-topic* ?

    I'm not sure what this adds since PB meanders all over the place from cricket commentary, pop videos, trivia about almost anything et al when nothing more interesting is happening.

    Some veer off within a single comment.

    We could always use 'off topic' in lieu of a like button, Plato.

    Would add irony to evil intent.

    [Edit: I see Mark Senior has already 'liked' your post]

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    AveryLP said:

    Plato said:

    I notice we've a new button 'Off Topic' - isn't at least 50% of every thread *off-topic* ?

    I'm not sure what this adds since PB meanders all over the place from cricket commentary, pop videos, trivia about almost anything et al when nothing more interesting is happening.

    Some veer off within a single comment.

    We could always use 'off topic' in lieu of a like button, Plato.

    Would add irony to evil intent.

    [Edit: I see Mark Senior has already 'liked' your post]

    I noticed that too :^ )
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Plato said:

    AveryLP said:

    Plato said:

    I notice we've a new button 'Off Topic' - isn't at least 50% of every thread *off-topic* ?

    I'm not sure what this adds since PB meanders all over the place from cricket commentary, pop videos, trivia about almost anything et al when nothing more interesting is happening.

    Some veer off within a single comment.

    We could always use 'off topic' in lieu of a like button, Plato.

    Would add irony to evil intent.

    [Edit: I see Mark Senior has already 'liked' your post]

    I noticed that too :^ )
    Just testing LOL
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Miss Plato, I'm never off-topic!

    Speaking of which, I've decided to give Catullus' poems another go. I wasn't going to, but then I read that his poems were amongst the fruitiest of classical literature.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    Omnium said:


    I believe that all governments have placed far too much responsibility into the hands of self-seving managerial elites.

    Worse still is that usually these people are very far from being anything like 'management elites' - many of them are complete incompetents.


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8Uzikag7Xo
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    AveryLP said:

    AveryLP said:

    AveryLP said:

    On PB we are mostly interested in patient care, clinical performance and sound finances.


    As you would have guessed from the site name, politicalpatientcareclinicalperformanceandsoundfinances.com.
    You bet!

    Fair enough , so what have been the cumulative losses made by Circle Health in the last 5 years ?

    That is a matter for the shareholders of Circle Health, Mr. Senior.

    As a taxpayer I am much more concerned with reducing the deficit and thereby the accumulating debt of the government.

    But if you are thinking of investing in Circle Health, you are right to question their business model. They haven't yet proved they can pay off the debts of Hinchingbroke accumulated under NHS mismanagement and still provide a competitive return to shareholders. There is though much talk of "backloaded" returns over the contract term, but then there would be wouldn't there?

    The great merit of free market capitalism is that Circle Health will only attract further funds if it does provide a competitive return to investors. So we don't need to endlessly blog, lobby, politick and comment about their performance. We just wait and see and watch others risk their funds.

    Now isn't that a simpler and more effective way of handling things, Mr. Senior?

    I would argue that it is also a matter for the public as a whole . To entrust the running of a major hospital to a company which has lost over £ 120 million in the last 4 years and seen its share price plummet to a recent low of 36.75 pence would indicate that the government should be preparing plans for when this company goes bankrupt .

  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Moves by the EU today to ban menthol cigarettes have been slammed by UKIP.

    Deputy Leader Paul Nuttall MEP described the plan as "utterly ridiculous"

    "This legislation shows just how far the EU is prepared to go to control how we live and what we do. If people want to smoke menthol cigarettes, let them. What will the EU do next? Regulate what time we go to bed? Ban putting sugar in tea? Ban Buck's Fizz because the orange juice disguises the alcohol? It's utterly ridiculous."

  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    "What the Prime Minister said was: “If you want a low-tax economy, you have to collect the taxes that are owed.” When what he should have said, of course, was: “If you want to collect the taxes that are owed, you have to have a low-tax economy.”.......

    We have had yet another demonstration of this famous principle (the Laffer curve) in our very recent national history. The introduction of the 50p rate of income tax caused two-thirds of those earning a million pounds per year simply to disappear from the reach of HM Revenue & Customs. Whereas under the previous highest tax level of 40p, 16,000 people were prepared to declare earnings of one million pounds, that number shrank to only 6,000 after Gordon Brown, bless him, raised it to 50p. Result: the Treasury lost £7 billion in revenue.

    Got that? If people regard levels of tax as fair (in the true sense of the word, not the Left-wing sense, which actually means “vindictive”), they will not go to expensive and dangerous lengths to escape from paying. The more punitive and discouraging of wealth-creation taxes are, the more they are avoided by stealth or geographical relocation – or by the even more economically disastrous measure of people being disinclined to increase their own productivity."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/g8/10135699/The-rise-and-rise-of-greedy-government.html
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Tennis: some vague musings ahead of Wimbledon (no tips): http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/a-look-ahead-to-wimbledon.html
  • Options
    IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Another Richard

    Absolutely! Quota's of party members here we come :-)

  • Options
    IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Avery - How the hell have you racked up so many posts?!?
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Financier said:

    We have had yet another demonstration of this famous principle (the Laffer curve) in our very recent national history. The introduction of the 50p rate of income tax caused two-thirds of those earning a million pounds per year simply to disappear from the reach of HM Revenue & Customs. Whereas under the previous highest tax level of 40p, 16,000 people were prepared to declare earnings of one million pounds, that number shrank to only 6,000 after Gordon Brown, bless him, raised it to 50p. Result: the Treasury lost £7 billion in revenue.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/g8/10135699/The-rise-and-rise-of-greedy-government.html

    That's not what the Laffer curve says; Darling not Brown introduced the 50p rate; and perhaps the recession affected high incomes too. More fundamentally, the piece fails to address corporate tax avoidance which is most of the problem.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Financier said:

    "What the Prime Minister said was: “If you want a low-tax economy, you have to collect the taxes that are owed.” When what he should have said, of course, was: “If you want to collect the taxes that are owed, you have to have a low-tax economy.”.......

    We have had yet another demonstration of this famous principle (the Laffer curve) in our very recent national history. The introduction of the 50p rate of income tax caused two-thirds of those earning a million pounds per year simply to disappear from the reach of HM Revenue & Customs. Whereas under the previous highest tax level of 40p, 16,000 people were prepared to declare earnings of one million pounds, that number shrank to only 6,000 after Gordon Brown, bless him, raised it to 50p. Result: the Treasury lost £7 billion in revenue.

    Got that? If people regard levels of tax as fair (in the true sense of the word, not the Left-wing sense, which actually means “vindictive”), they will not go to expensive and dangerous lengths to escape from paying. The more punitive and discouraging of wealth-creation taxes are, the more they are avoided by stealth or geographical relocation – or by the even more economically disastrous measure of people being disinclined to increase their own productivity."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/g8/10135699/The-rise-and-rise-of-greedy-government.html

    The Laffer curve is a joke. Ronald Reagan espoused it and left us with, at that time, the biggest deficit ever ! It is only believed by people who sniff a lot !
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930
    surbiton said:

    Financier said:

    "What the Prime Minister said was: “If you want a low-tax economy, you have to collect the taxes that are owed.” When what he should have said, of course, was: “If you want to collect the taxes that are owed, you have to have a low-tax economy.”.......

    We have had yet another demonstration of this famous principle (the Laffer curve) in our very recent national history. The introduction of the 50p rate of income tax caused two-thirds of those earning a million pounds per year simply to disappear from the reach of HM Revenue & Customs. Whereas under the previous highest tax level of 40p, 16,000 people were prepared to declare earnings of one million pounds, that number shrank to only 6,000 after Gordon Brown, bless him, raised it to 50p. Result: the Treasury lost £7 billion in revenue.

    Got that? If people regard levels of tax as fair (in the true sense of the word, not the Left-wing sense, which actually means “vindictive”), they will not go to expensive and dangerous lengths to escape from paying. The more punitive and discouraging of wealth-creation taxes are, the more they are avoided by stealth or geographical relocation – or by the even more economically disastrous measure of people being disinclined to increase their own productivity."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/g8/10135699/The-rise-and-rise-of-greedy-government.html

    The Laffer curve is a joke. Ronald Reagan espoused it and left us with, at that time, the biggest deficit ever ! It is only believed by people who sniff a lot !
    How can the laffer curve be a joke. It is simply a relational model between tax rate and tax take. The actual points of where the laffer curve is are the debate.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930
    AveryLP said:

    AveryLP said:

    AveryLP said:

    On PB we are mostly interested in patient care, clinical performance and sound finances.


    As you would have guessed from the site name, politicalpatientcareclinicalperformanceandsoundfinances.com.
    You bet!

    Fair enough , so what have been the cumulative losses made by Circle Health in the last 5 years ?

    That is a matter for the shareholders of Circle Health, Mr. Senior.

    As a taxpayer I am much more concerned with reducing the deficit and thereby the accumulating debt of the government.

    But if you are thinking of investing in Circle Health, you are right to question their business model. They haven't yet proved they can pay off the debts of Hinchingbroke accumulated under NHS mismanagement and still provide a competitive return to shareholders. There is though much talk of "backloaded" returns over the contract term, but then there would be wouldn't there?

    The great merit of free market capitalism is that Circle Health will only attract further funds if it does provide a competitive return to investors. So we don't need to endlessly blog, lobby, politick and comment about their performance. We just wait and see and watch others risk their funds.

    Now isn't that a simpler and more effective way of handling things, Mr. Senior?

    Thats all well and good till Circle goes El Busto and the pieces have to inevitably be picked up by the taxpayer.
  • Options
    Robert_EveRobert_Eve Posts: 31
    Just be thankful that Brown went.
  • Options
    fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    edited June 2013
    test
This discussion has been closed.