Is it not true, that the greatest achievement of the Tory government in Britain is convincing working class people that the poor are the problem and taxing them further, not the rich, is the answer?
This is our countries Prime Minster acting in a corrupt matter.
Yet the forums Tories have ignored it and are busy calling the Labour Party Marxists etc in the other thread.
Shame on you.
That was a party political broadcast on behalf of the Conservative Party.No, the argument that taxing people less, allowing entrepreneurs who take risks to create and grow businesses, to benefit from that risk taking by creating a low tax, low regulation economy, benefits the poor because these people create jobs and contribute greatly to the wealth of the nation, which in turn creates income for the government to invest in vital public services.
As opposed to the politics of envy, raising taxes which discourages entrepreneurship, reduces growth, kills jobs and badly impacts the least well off, as jobs and opportunities are denied to them.
This isn’t a battle of good versus evil, it’s a battle between those who want to increase the country’s wealth in order to improve the plight of the poor, and those who want to stifle the human desire to better their circumstances and those of their children, and in the process stifle the ability the help the less well off in society.
But your's is not some theoretical fantasy.No, the argument that taxing people less, allowing entrepreneurs who take risks to create and grow businesses, to benefit from that risk taking by creating a low tax, low regulation economy, benefits the poor because these people create jobs and contribute greatly to the wealth of the nation, which in turn creates income for the government to invest in vital public services.
As opposed to the politics of envy, raising taxes which discourages entrepreneurship, reduces growth, kills jobs and badly impacts the least well off, as jobs and opportunities are denied to them.
This isn’t a battle of good versus evil, it’s a battle between those who want to increase the country’s wealth in order to improve the plight of the poor, and those who want to stifle the human desire to better their circumstances and those of their children, and in the process stifle the ability the help the less well off in society.
And a good one as well.That was a party political broadcast on behalf of the Conservative Party.
How do google and amazon help poor people?No, the argument that taxing people less, allowing entrepreneurs who take risks to create and grow businesses, to benefit from that risk taking by creating a low tax, low regulation economy, benefits the poor because these people create jobs and contribute greatly to the wealth of the nation, which in turn creates income for the government to invest in vital public services.
As opposed to the politics of envy, raising taxes which discourages entrepreneurship, reduces growth, kills jobs and badly impacts the least well off, as jobs and opportunities are denied to them.
This isn’t a battle of good versus evil, it’s a battle between those who want to increase the country’s wealth in order to improve the plight of the poor, and those who want to stifle the human desire to better their circumstances and those of their children, and in the process stifle the ability the help the less well off in society.
Google it ;)How do google and amazon help poor people?
Very good. :-)And a good one as well.
Have you seen the polls lately?
You are assuming however that the 'entrepreneurs' take risks, when very often it is the public sector that actually takes the risk via public funded research. The entrepreneurs come in once the actual risk has been made, make a shit load of money off that public investment and paying very little tax on it (a perfect example of this is the tech industry). This is an area covered in depth in mariana mazzucato's recent book which everyone who cares about this should read.No, the argument that taxing people less, allowing entrepreneurs who take risks to create and grow businesses, to benefit from that risk taking by creating a low tax, low regulation economy, benefits the poor because these people create jobs and contribute greatly to the wealth of the nation, which in turn creates income for the government to invest in vital public services.
As opposed to the politics of envy, raising taxes which discourages entrepreneurship, reduces growth, kills jobs and badly impacts the least well off, as jobs and opportunities are denied to them.
This isn’t a battle of good versus evil, it’s a battle between those who want to increase the country’s wealth in order to improve the plight of the poor, and those who want to stifle the human desire to better their circumstances and those of their children, and in the process stifle the ability the help the less well off in society.
Ah, the trickle down theory.No, the argument that taxing people less, allowing entrepreneurs who take risks to create and grow businesses, to benefit from that risk taking by creating a low tax, low regulation economy, benefits the poor because these people create jobs and contribute greatly to the wealth of the nation, which in turn creates income for the government to invest in vital public services.
As opposed to the politics of envy, raising taxes which discourages entrepreneurship, reduces growth, kills jobs and badly impacts the least well off, as jobs and opportunities are denied to them.
This isn’t a battle of good versus evil, it’s a battle between those who want to increase the country’s wealth in order to improve the plight of the poor, and those who want to stifle the human desire to better their circumstances and those of their children, and in the process stifle the ability the help the less well off in society.
I’m just curious as they are good examples of entrepreneurs being able to amass great wealth. In your post you claim that’s good because they help poor people. How do they? I’ve picked those two but you could add dyson and a fuck load of other businesses in. Once they get that wealth they become expert at keeping it. If they paid tax like they should then your theory works however they don’t. So it’s a pile of crap. That’s what google said anyway.Google it ;)
Sounds great, which country is it that gets these results? A Scandinavian one perhaps?No, the argument that taxing people less, allowing entrepreneurs who take risks to create and grow businesses, to benefit from that risk taking by creating a low tax, low regulation economy, benefits the poor because these people create jobs and contribute greatly to the wealth of the nation, which in turn creates income for the government to invest in vital public services.
Sounds great, which country is it that gets these results? A Scandinavian one perhaps?
It can't be the UK because the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest is widening again and public services (most of which are now private) are going down the pan for lack of investment.
Very good. :-)
I'd suggest where the present government wants to go is beyond regulation and doesn't have much concern about who might get hurt.
I think a fairer society probably lies somewhere between the capitalism laid out in that party political broadcast and socialism in Rascal's manifesto.
I think that is a fair assumption. I wish I had never voted for Blair and those deaths are ultimately the responsibility of everyone who put him into power so he could lie to the country and be the Bush poodle.
You mean those the government is responsible for? The Education system for one has been squeezed relentlessly for years and even if the promised £20bn funding from Johnson materialises it only takes the system roughly back to where it was before austerity, it's the same for the police and the 20,000 extra officers, after around 26,000 were culled during austerity.Seems the biggest areas for lack of investment are the state-owned ones.
I believe there's a place for properly regulated capitalism to produce economic wealth provided there's a framework of government policies that underpins social cohesion and protects the poor and vulnerable. The current Tory government does none of this.
How do google and amazon help poor people?