Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

To make the UK better?

Announcements Posted on
    • 94 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    Food and fuel are also necessities but we tax them, and I'm not talking about house taxation anyway, I specifically mentioned a land value tax, not a house tax. Why do you think I want to tax houses? Houses are a necessity afterall.
    I never said such a thing. You were comparing a 200K car to a 250K house. I said if you really want to compare a 200K car to a house, then you should at least consider a £5,000,000 house. In that case you would be rich. If you have a 250K house in the centre of London, it hardly makes you "rich"

    (Original post by chefdave)
    The telecommunications companies has a monopoly on the specturm due to a bidding process set up under the last gov't (it was about the only thing they got right), so if network providers are able to prosper under my model why can't the BBC? We pay them remember, they get to use the airwaves for free.
    Perhaps because if the BBC paid for the spectrum, it would actually cost us...


    (Original post by chefdave)
    The BBC however are monopolising various frequencies and reducing your liberty by just a fraction, before their presence 97-99 FM was available to all and now Chris Moyles et al have grabbed it for themselves. For this slight infringement they should pay full market price.
    So they got there first before other companies. So what? Also, I lol at this being your main argument for privatising the BBC
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veale)
    erosion.
    oh yes an excellent and concise arguement that accurately addressed all the points i made.

    or rather not as the case may be
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veale)
    erosion.
    Even though the whole world experiences erosion.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex5455)
    oh yes an excellent and concise arguement that accurately addressed all the points i made.

    or rather not as the case may be
    my point was that the united kingdom is not exactly united, and that on top of that its falling into the sea.
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by de_monies)
    I never said such a thing. You were comparing a 200K car to a 250K house. I said if you really want to compare a 200K car to a house, then you should at least consider a £5,000,000 house. In that case you would be rich. If you have a 250K house in the centre of London, it hardly makes you "rich"
    If you have a quarter of a million quid you're not doing bad, why does the location matter anyway? Is a £250k asset worth more in Hull than it is in London?

    In reality any land value above £0 is a freebie granted to owner by the state at the expense of everybody else. If you have a piece of prime London real estate for example worth £1m this amounts to £1m in unearned wealth the state has generously given you. It's not unreasable therefore to ask somebody to pay upto £1m for the value of the services they're receiving. This is the land value tax, it's a like for like reciprocal payment.


    Perhaps because if the BBC paid for the spectrum, it would actually cost us...
    It would cost you nothing, they'd pay for it and the money would end up at the Treasury. This already happens with the 3g network as you explained so it has a precedent.


    So they got there first before other companies. So what? Also, I lol at this being your main argument for privatising the BBC
    Taxing monopoly makes a lot more sense than taxing jobs or fuel, there's absolutely no reason to make the BBC a special case. If they're as great as you're suggesting they'd easily thrive under the new model I'm proposing.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veale)
    erosion.
    It's not erosion, it's post-glacial isostatic adjustment.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Stop being so down on ourselves. I'm not one for national pride but no other nation that I know of so blindly hates itself as much as we do.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veale)
    erosion.
    LOL. Well aren't we aren't the Maldives or the Netherlands that may quite likely be underwater as seas rise.

    We will only lose Norfolk, which is frankly a good thing.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gagaslilmonsteruk)
    There is one school in my home town which actually still operates this system. Though as of September 2013 this is going to change to be in line with the rest of England.

    At the moment, most of my home town is;
    First School - Reception to Year 3
    Middle School - Year 4 to Year 7
    Secondary School - Year 8 onwards

    However one school chain is like;
    First School - Reception to Year 4
    Middle School - Year 5 to Year 8
    Secondary School - Year 9 onwards
    Yeah, I went to schools that are R-y4, y5-y8, 9-13/4 although I could only stay until the end of year 12 cos they closed the middle schools so needed to make more room in the high schools, so I'm in a new building but we could carry on our subjects with the same exam board, even though the bio teacher for instance has started with OCR with the current year 12s.

    I think my nephew must have gone to schools like in your first option but he still started high school in year 7 even though he went to a middle school! cos he moved up to high school at the same time as me, he's nearly 3 years younger but only 2 school year below.
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Classical Liberal)
    1. Outlaw fractional reserve banking
    2. Create debt free money
    1) Sounds rather illiberal to me
    2) There's no such thing as "debt free money" because "money" as we know it is a publicly held record of who owe's what to whom. If you tried to purchase a bag of carrots from me with this debt free money what exactly is it you're giving me? It makes a lot of sense to simply trade an IOU (money) for the carrots so I can redeem it from you at a later date.

    Debt free money is a fraud and a swindle, just as socialists believe we can give everyone 'free' healthcare and 'free' health treatment the libertarians believe we can trade these mythical debt free money notes and all get something for nothing.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    * Stop schoolchildren from being brainwashed by politically correct, cultural marxist NWO agenda (i.e promotion of what socialists believe to be "equality")
    * Stop non-white immigration
    * Establish a flat income tax rate
    * Abolish "quotas" for perceived minority groups. Jobs should go to outstanding candidates, not someone who has been selected solely because of their perceived "minority" status
    * Abolish usury (i.e interest rates), preventing the masses from becoming debt slaves to long-nosed bankers
    * Ban abortion, with the exception of cases where the mother-to-be's life is in danger as a result of the pregnancy
    * Establish year-long hard labour camps for people convicted of offences that don't warrant a long-term prison sentence.
    * Extend the definition of "reasonable force" to any kind of force at all. If I see a stranger in my house, I'm not going to stand and wait to see whether or not s/he is going to attack me or my family.
    * Adopt a "survival of the fittest" approach in schools. All too often at schools up and down the UK, the bright pupils are held back by troublemakers and idiots. The teacher should be allowed the time to nurture and develop the minds of the brightest. The less bright pupils can leave at 14/15 and go and work in McDonalds.
    * Only people who are in a committed, monogamous, heterosexual relationship should be granted the right to vote.
    * Legalise all drugs and tax them heavily.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    2) There's no such thing as "debt free money" because "money" as we know it is a publicly held record of who owe's what to whom. If you tried to purchase a bag of carrots from me with this debt free money what exactly is it you're giving me? It makes a lot of sense to simply trade an IOU (money) for the carrots so I can redeem it from you at a later date.

    Debt free money is a fraud and a swindle, just as socialists believe we can give everyone 'free' healthcare and 'free' health treatment the libertarians believe we can trade these mythical debt free money notes and all get something for nothing.
    If the government makes a piece of paper and declares it good for payment of taxes and debts, it is for all intents and purposes money.

    You could think of the monetary system as a cycle, much like today, where the government spends money into existence through whatever channel, whether it be a citizens dividend or spending on infrastructure. This money then comes back and can be destroyed when taxes are paid. The debt on the part of the government is the obligation that the money they created to be good for payment of taxes.

    This would mean that there would really be no such thing as fiscal policy. It would all be monetary policy.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The UK is fine as it is with the sole trend that smart ppl seem intent on erasing themselves from the gene pool. We should force couples with an average iq of 110 to produce at least 2 offspring. The rest of the population wont have to, except those with iqs under 90 who will be incentivized to self sterilize.
    • 94 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    If you have a quarter of a million quid you're not doing bad, why does the location matter anyway?
    Have you never heard of the London wage. People are meant to be paid higher in London, because of how expensive it is to live there. A 250K house in Hull will get you a pretty big house. A 250K house in central London will get you a small house

    (Original post by chefdave)
    Is a £250k asset worth more in Hull than it is in London?
    No, but the cost of living is higher in London

    (Original post by chefdave)
    In reality any land value above £0 is a freebie granted to owner by the state at the expense of everybody else. If you have a piece of prime London real estate for example worth £1m
    this amounts to £1m in unearned wealth the state has generously given you.
    It does not mean that at all. People will pay £1m for the house if it is worth £1m. The people who buy the house are down by £1m. Also, why do you choose an expensive house? People pay 120K for a bog standard house to live in, and they are still down 120K. Nothing was given to them for free. Land is not a freebie. I suppose you could say land is cheap,but there aren't many places where you can develop properties on. The stuff on top of the land costs so much more than £0

    (Original post by chefdave)
    It's not unreasable therefore to ask somebody to pay upto £1m for the value of the services they're receiving. This is the land value tax, it's a like for like reciprocal payment.
    It is unreasonable(in the way you portray it) If you paid £1m for a house, why should you have to shell out another £1m for supposed "services" ?

    (Original post by chefdave)
    It would cost you nothing, they'd pay for it and the money would end up at the Treasury.
    Except for the fact that you've now shelled out double on the house that you originally would have...

    (Original post by chefdave)
    This already happens with the 3g network as you explained so it has a precedent.
    No. 3G networks lease the license to use parts of the spectrum for their needs.

    (Original post by chefdave)
    Taxing monopoly makes a lot more sense than taxing jobs or fuel,
    Monopolies are taxed. It's called corporation tax...

    (Original post by chefdave)
    there's absolutely no reason to make the BBC a special case. If they're as great as you're suggesting they'd easily thrive under the new model I'm proposing.
    OK. Let's take another public sector service ie: the MOD. They have a monopoly on channel 14 of the 2.4GHz range, which every one else is not allowed to access. Should they then pay for channel 14, instead of just being given it for free?
    • 94 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    1) Sounds rather illiberal to me
    2) There's no such thing as "debt free money" because "money" as we know it is a publicly held record of who owe's what to whom. If you tried to purchase a bag of carrots from me with this debt free money what exactly is it you're giving me? It makes a lot of sense to simply trade an IOU (money) for the carrots so I can redeem it from you at a later date.

    Debt free money is a fraud and a swindle, just as socialists believe we can give everyone 'free' healthcare and 'free' health treatment the libertarians believe we can trade these mythical debt free money notes and all get something for nothing.
    I'm more capitalist than socialist, but it's interesting to see that you're actually quite left wing economically and right wing socially. A country works better the other way around
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clare~Bear)
    Yeah, I went to schools that are R-y4, y5-y8, 9-13/4 although I could only stay until the end of year 12 cos they closed the middle schools so needed to make more room in the high schools, so I'm in a new building but we could carry on our subjects with the same exam board, even though the bio teacher for instance has started with OCR with the current year 12s.

    I think my nephew must have gone to schools like in your first option but he still started high school in year 7 even though he went to a middle school! cos he moved up to high school at the same time as me, he's nearly 3 years younger but only 2 school year below.

    Is this in Bournemouth/Poole by any chance? I went through the Poole system, but Bournemouth is like everywhere else starting in year 7.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Organ)
    LOL. Well aren't we aren't the Maldives or the Netherlands that may quite likely be underwater as seas rise.

    We will only lose Norfolk, which is frankly a good thing.
    The Netherlands isnt eroding.
    I think some Dutch delta works may not be the worst thing to be built in Britain. Look at the Thamer barrier, which was already outdated when it was built
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by original_username)
    Whats it like in schools now? When I was at secondary school I think Maths was setted straight from year 7, then everything was setted from year 9 onwards.

    I don't think it really does make that much of a difference though, in years 10-11 I chose History for a free option and that class was mixed. So we had people from A band to C band all in the same class and everyone achieved what they should. I think it can have a good effect on the less bright kids, when you shove them all into the thicko class, with more people that will just piss about for every lesson then it is sort of just saying to them "There you go kids, you're thick and we don't give a **** about you". Not really inspiring them to try harder is it. Obviously Maths and Science need to be setted but the rest I'm not convinced.
    In schools there is some basic setting for maths up to and including GCSE level. At A level as far as I know there is none, but only the best students tend to do further maths.

    Science in my experience wasn't setted. Up to year 9 I did it in my form class, and at GCSE the only split was between double science and triple science, but that was an option rather than a meritocratic thing.

    In my opinion, subjects such as english and history need setting at least as much as maths.

    That said I would oppose something like the grammar school system: I know plenty of people who aren't great at english but do awesome in maths, for example.

    I really don't think that having bottom sets is synonymous with forgetting the worst students. Teaching staff should be trained to be willing to teach both bright and less bright students. This is also, though, why we should encourage people to enter work if they're never going to flourish academically, for whatever reason.
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    1. Take LSD
    2. Turn Britain into facist state
    3. Attack all countries beginning with the letter F
    4. Rebuild the Tower of Bablyon
    5. Write autobiography and distribute as educationally dependent in schools
    6. Attack all countries beginning with I
    7. ???????
    8. PROFIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    Fair enough, what crimes would warrant death penalty? Would treason?
    I wouldn't like to answer that question from my armchair. Certainly only the most serious crimes, as obviously applying it to minor offences would reduce the deterrent effect for major ones, and would probably do more harm to the criminals than the good it would do for the rest of society. Exactly what offences, though, would depend on a huge number of things of which I am completely ignorant.

    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    And I agree with you on Britain being a force of good but I don't think a militarily spending would do much. We're one of them most powerful countries now especially for our size. Iran and North Korea just don't and can't match up militarily. And we've got nukes. It doesn't make much sense for a country like ours to increase our spending considering we'll most likely never be a superpower again. There's the USA which is pretty much similar to Britain that threatens other countries hence no need for us to do it ourselves.
    Of course we're not going to be a superpower again; but I don't think we should be relying on the USA to do our dirty work for us. We may be allies, but we can't rely on them to have our best interests at heart.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: March 11, 2012
New on TSR

THE world university rankings 2014-2015 revealed

Will they affect your uni choices?

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.