UKIP

[Rascal]

No rascal, you are trying to compare apples with oranges and making an arse of it.

Explain why?

Nobody has.

Size of area (UK vs Europe) Historical context (USA vs Europe) Economic disparity of area (Greece and Italy compared with Germany & France).

Your comments saying "the UK has a single currency so why can' Europe" are pretty laughable mate. Sorry but they are.

Thats opinion not fact. Its a fact that disparate nations, regions and states have had single currencies for hundreds of years despite economic divergence. You state area as an issue, why? What has the size of a place got to do with its currency. Historical context? We had a European banking unon in place under the Knights Templar if you of course you take its historical context. Disparity of area is a nisnomer as a single currency obviously works in such differing places as the Shetlands and Sheffield, Anchorage and Atlanta. Its the lack of democratic control of individual areas within the EU that cause problems. We have a situation where all the money goes into lots of little pots rather than into one big pot thats the problem. The likes of Germany and France who want the EU to succeed have to do what the Strong nations do and rather than punish them they need to pull them up by they bootstrings ( a common right wing argument from me ffs)



The single currency in Europe is not a failure because its a currency, its a failure because of its political strictures. I advocate removing those strictures which will enable a strong and stable currency which in your line of work you must see as a good thing surely.

If this doesnt happen BTW i will vote to leave the EU as it now in my opinion is untenable and Cameron has the right idea in that he wants it reformed. His idea of reform may be different to mine but he isnt daft and he knows we need to be part of the EU.

 

[Damocles]

What's a "leftist"? Are there "rightists"?

If leftists did exist, I'm pretty sure that I would be quite pleased to be called a leftist. Most of the criticism towards people on the left is that they don't like hurting other people and most of the criticism towards people on the right is that they are intolerant of people's feelings.

I think I'd prefer to be a leftist than a rightist in those circumstances

I meant leftie, ie left winger. I'm sure you and Skashion both know what I meant.

For me the difference between a 'leftist' and a 'rightist', economically at least, comes down to different ways of defining 'fairness'. To me, a fair society is one where everybody pays the same amount of tax. If I pay £100, my neighbour pays £100. I guess a 'leftist' would consider this unfair - a fair society in their view is one where if you earn more money you should pay more money.

I know that equal taxation for all is unworkable but that is beside the point - the point is about what is deemed fairer, equal taxation for all or unequal taxation based on wealth.

No amount of debate on this or any other forum will change my view on what is fair, and I'm sure that's true for all the 'leftists' on here too, so we are in effect banging our heads against a brick wall.

Maybe we could help understand by a quick thought experiment. Say your neighbour was desperately poor and made £101 per week and you were a billionaire who paid £100,000,000 a week. Do you think that it is fair that both pay £100 per week in taxes, the whole point of which is to suppor the common good?

 

[SWP's back]

Explain why?

Nobody has.

Size of area (UK vs Europe) Historical context (USA vs Europe) Economic disparity of area (Greece and Italy compared with Germany & France).

Your comments saying "the UK has a single currency so why can' Europe" are pretty laughable mate. Sorry but they are.

Thats opinion not fact. Its a fact that disparate nations, regions and states have had single currencies for hundreds of years despite economic divergence. You state area as an issue, why? What has the size of a place got to do with its currency. Historical context? We had a European banking unon in place under the Knights Templar if you of course you take its historical context. Disparity of area is a nisnomer as a single currency obviously works in such differing places as the Shetlands and Sheffield, Anchorage and Atlanta. Its the lack of democratic control of individual areas within the EU that cause problems. We have a situation where all the money goes into lots of little pots rather than into one big pot thats the problem. The likes of Germany and France who want the EU to succeed have to do what the Strong nations do and rather than punish them they need to pull them up by they bootstrings ( a common right wing argument from me ffs)



The single currency in Europe is not a failure because its a currency, its a failure because of its political strictures. I advocate removing those strictures which will enable a strong and stable currency which in your line of work you must see as a good thing surely.

If this doesnt happen BTW i will vote to leave the EU as it now in my opinion is untenable and Cameron has the right idea in that he wants it reformed. His idea of reform may be different to mine but he isnt daft and he knows we need to be part of the EU.

No it is fact and proven. The EU is too large and too disparate for a "one size fits all" fiscal policy.

 

[Rascal]

It needs to be far more democratic, it needs an elected President, it needs a powerful central bank and it needs all members to have the same currency. If that happens i will vote to stay in the EU.

And when do you think this is ever going to happen.

This country at the moment does not have the political will to take part, but others do and i believe it will happen with or without us. I believe we underestimate the effects of WW2 on the people of Europes psyche. We werent occupied, everyone else was or were under facist rule. Its a powerful provision that those days can never happen again.

I would be quite happy to be a member of the EU with such things in place, without them then i would probably with a heavy heart vote to leave. Not because im against the EU but because i believe in a truly democratic process and the EU as it stands fails miserably.<br /><br />-- Sun Dec 02, 2012 9:58 pm --<br /><br />

No it is fact and proven. The EU is too large and too disparate for a "one size fits all" fiscal policy.

I await a decent answer tomorrow as to why you believe that to be so

Night mate :)

 

[Rascal]

Maybe we could help understand by a quick thought experiment. Say your neighbour was desperately poor and made £101 per week and you were a billionaire who paid £100,000,000 a week. Do you think that it is fair that both pay £100 per week in taxes, the whole point of which is to suppor the common good?

Damo, Damo, Damo.

You cant argue sense with our right wing nutjobs, they are nutjobs.

Nutjobs on the right forget we are pack animals who work best together and profer the rights of the individual to take advantage of the weak in order to better themselves. The right has always been selfish and self centred. It mistakes freedom from interference in there lives as being free, when if they we were truly free they would be on there own and vulnerable with a wallet full of cash but nothing to spend it on.

 

[Helmet Cole]

What's a "leftist"? Are there "rightists"?

If leftists did exist, I'm pretty sure that I would be quite pleased to be called a leftist. Most of the criticism towards people on the left is that they don't like hurting other people and most of the criticism towards people on the right is that they are intolerant of people's feelings.

I think I'd prefer to be a leftist than a rightist in those circumstances

I meant leftie, ie left winger. I'm sure you and Skashion both know what I meant.

For me the difference between a 'leftist' and a 'rightist', economically at least, comes down to different ways of defining 'fairness'. To me, a fair society is one where everybody pays the same amount of tax. If I pay £100, my neighbour pays £100. I guess a 'leftist' would consider this unfair - a fair society in their view is one where if you earn more money you should pay more money.

I know that equal taxation for all is unworkable but that is beside the point - the point is about what is deemed fairer, equal taxation for all or unequal taxation based on wealth.

No amount of debate on this or any other forum will change my view on what is fair, and I'm sure that's true for all the 'leftists' on here too, so we are in effect banging our heads against a brick wall.

Maybe we could help understand by a quick thought experiment. Say your neighbour was desperately poor and made £101 per week and you were a billionaire who paid £100,000,000 a week. Do you think that it is fair that both pay £100 per week in taxes, the whole point of which is to suppor the common good?

What about a system where the poor pay £1 out of every £100 in tax, and the rich pay £1 out of every £100 they earn in tax? I quite like that, and if this leaves the poor below the poverty line then maybe it's the minimum wage rather than the taxation system that is wrong?

 

[Ronnie the Rep]

I meant leftie, ie left winger. I'm sure you and Skashion both know what I meant.

For me the difference between a 'leftist' and a 'rightist', economically at least, comes down to different ways of defining 'fairness'. To me, a fair society is one where everybody pays the same amount of tax. If I pay £100, my neighbour pays £100. I guess a 'leftist' would consider this unfair - a fair society in their view is one where if you earn more money you should pay more money.

I know that equal taxation for all is unworkable but that is beside the point - the point is about what is deemed fairer, equal taxation for all or unequal taxation based on wealth.

No amount of debate on this or any other forum will change my view on what is fair, and I'm sure that's true for all the 'leftists' on here too, so we are in effect banging our heads against a brick wall.

Maybe we could help understand by a quick thought experiment. Say your neighbour was desperately poor and made £101 per week and you were a billionaire who paid £100,000,000 a week. Do you think that it is fair that both pay £100 per week in taxes, the whole point of which is to suppor the common good?

What about a system where the poor pay £1 out of every £100 in tax, and the rich pay £1 out of every £100 they earn in tax? I quite like that, and if this leaves the poor below the poverty line then maybe it's the minimum wage rather than the taxation system that is wrong?

There have been lots of proposals about this. IIRC if we had a tax free allowance of £20K and then a tax rate of 23% with no other allowances we coud balance the books. I think Hong Kong actually tried it

 

[metalblue]

You understand that for most people this is a matter of principle and democracy don't you? The direction of travel of the EU is towards a monetary and political union, and many people are opposed to this on principle. The potential for this to affect our daily lives is enormous, just ask the Greeks, the Spanish, the Irish.

You keep saying most, yet figures say 54% thats only just not most and its a one sided argument at the moment. If the pro-Europe side of the debate gets its act together and makes the case for Europe and how it benefits the UK then that gap will close im sure.

I am neither pro or anti Europe, but would like to see it reformed and made more democratic.

Its ironic that a country such as the UK which has had a monetary and political union of its own for hundreds of years has people who disprove of that very same thing with Europe. Its wierd that many Eurosceptics will campaign against Scottish independence.

How many want to stay? The poll breaks down like this

34% definitely want to leave
11% definitely want to stay

Then

22% probably want to leave
19% probably want to stay

Then

14% didn't know

So even if all the don't knows voted to stay (highly unlikely) and the probably's voted definitely that way the we would be out of Europe...as it is I would expect a 3:1 majority to vote to leave.

It's not really even left or right "thing", more labour voters (who aren't don't knows) would likely vote to leave than stay (44% to 39%), lib dem voters would likely vote to remain (39% to 47%) and the Tories would likely vote to leave (68% to 24%)

 

[Johnsonontheleft]

What's a "leftist"? Are there "rightists"?

If leftists did exist, I'm pretty sure that I would be quite pleased to be called a leftist. Most of the criticism towards people on the left is that they don't like hurting other people and most of the criticism towards people on the right is that they are intolerant of people's feelings.

I think I'd prefer to be a leftist than a rightist in those circumstances

I meant leftie, ie left winger. I'm sure you and Skashion both know what I meant.

For me the difference between a 'leftist' and a 'rightist', economically at least, comes down to different ways of defining 'fairness'. To me, a fair society is one where everybody pays the same amount of tax. If I pay £100, my neighbour pays £100. I guess a 'leftist' would consider this unfair - a fair society in their view is one where if you earn more money you should pay more money.

I know that equal taxation for all is unworkable but that is beside the point - the point is about what is deemed fairer, equal taxation for all or unequal taxation based on wealth.

No amount of debate on this or any other forum will change my view on what is fair, and I'm sure that's true for all the 'leftists' on here too, so we are in effect banging our heads against a brick wall.

Maybe we could help understand by a quick thought experiment. Say your neighbour was desperately poor and made £101 per week and you were a billionaire who paid £100,000,000 a week. Do you think that it is fair that both pay £100 per week in taxes, the whole point of which is to suppor the common good?

The above is example is obviously unworkable, but do I think that it is fair that everyone pays the same regardless of how much money they have? Yes

 

[Helmet Cole]

Do you mean the same amount in £'s or same percentage of income?