Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Ask the TSR Government - 22nd Parliament watch

Announcements
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I hope James has checked his math so I don't look stupid, but 99% of Britons get a tax cut under our proposals. We are moving towards a fairer society for all, no matter where you come from. Instability in other countries affects us, and surely it is our moral duty to help other nations, especially the ones we left in absolute messes from our Imperial days?
    The Chancellor has made a mistake in his rhetoric, from the 29.3m taxpayers in Britain, 308000 earn over £150000 which is over 1% of all taxpayers. Increasing the tax rate to 50% is a tax rise for over 1% of Britain, and when the sugar tax is included with the ATA more Britons see a tax increase than a decrease. An amendment to the ATA may decrease the number of Britons seeing a tax increase but the 99% seeing a tax cut is still wrong.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    toronto353 As a member of the Liberals who supports renewing Trident, and believes in Britain having adequate military defences, do you support the appointment of a pacifist who has advocated abolishing the military to the role of Secretary of State for Defence?
    As you are aware Nigel, my commitment to the renewal of Trident and indeed to ensuring that Britain has adequate defences and equips its servicemen and women with the resources they need to do their job. I must state that I believe Aph to be a capable SOS, but you and others need be under no illusions that I will not hesitate to oppose and reverse any policies on defence which our believe to be to the detriment of our country.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by toronto353)
    As you are aware Nigel, my commitment to the renewal of Trident and indeed to ensuring that Britain has adequate defences and equips its servicemen and women with the resources they need to do their job. I must state that I believe Aph to be a capable SOS, but you and others need be under no illusions that I will not hesitate to oppose and reverse any policies on defence which our believe to be to the detriment of our country.
    It is nice to see your commitment to defending Britain, I think you would be the perfect Liberal appointment for the role if PetrosAC reconsiders his decision.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    The Chancellor has made a mistake in his rhetoric, from the 29.3m taxpayers in Britain, 308000 earn over £150000 which is over 1% of all taxpayers. Increasing the tax rate to 50% is a tax rise for over 1% of Britain, and when the sugar tax is included with the ATA more Britons see a tax increase than a decrease. An amendment to the ATA may decrease the number of Britons seeing a tax increase but the 99% seeing a tax cut is still wrong.
    I therefore withdraw that particular remark
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I congratulate the Prime Minster and the general Labour Party as a whole for dominating your coalition partners so tremendously. To have the Liberals put a pacifist and a communist in defense must be a dream come through for members like Cambo.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    If the Liberal party wanted to put the wealth of Britons first it could fund an increase in the Personal Allowance by taking an axe to the bloated foreign aid budget, however, we should know the only people Labour and the Liberals stand up for is everyone else but Britons.
    Do you actually know what foreign aid is?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cBay)
    Do you actually know what foreign aid is?
    Foreign aid is a vanity project which sees lots of money wasted on helping Iran hang people, corrupt foreign rulers' houses, dance lessons for tribal communities, and charity executives' pay. British foreign aid is not like Chinese foreign aid which is linked to trade, nor is it like foreign aid Britain used to give out 125 years ago when 40% of all long-term foreign investment was made by Britain. As I have written about at length before, foreign aid does not help international development because agricultural trade barriers in the West cost developing countries more than £65bn a year in lost trade that could fund their development. If the Western world wanted to make a difference it would end trade barriers allowing the developing nations to grow; foreign aid has no evidence for working.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Foreign aid is a vanity project which sees lots of money wasted on helping Iran hang people, corrupt foreign rulers' houses, dance lessons for tribal communities, and charity executives' pay. British foreign aid is not like Chinese foreign aid which is linked to trade, nor is it like foreign aid Britain used to give out 125 years ago when 40% of all long-term foreign investment was made by Britain. As I have written about at length before, foreign aid does not help international development because agricultural trade barriers in the West cost developing countries more than £65bn a year in lost trade that could fund their development. If the Western world wanted to make a difference it would end trade barriers allowing the developing nations to grow; foreign aid has no evidence for working.
    So in short, no.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cBay)
    So in short, no.
    You may not like it but there is documented evidence of British foreign aid money being used by Iran to help hang people, there is evidence of British foreign aid money being given to charities to fund a project but then the money funds higher salaries for the executives, and there is evidence of British foreign aid money helping fund the lifestyles of corrupt rulers. Using foreign aid to fund humanitarian missions after natural disasters would be acceptable, but arbitrary levels of money handed out making no impact is not acceptable.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    I see PetrosAC has appointed a pacifist to command the department tasked with defending Britain, running British military involvements around the world, and looking after the tools underpinning Britain's hard power. But this appointment is made in desperation, the Liberals do not have any other active members willing to take on this post, Aph is the last active member the ailing Liberals have. The alternative of losing the cabinet position to Labour does not fit in with the Liberals' desire to grab as much virtual power as the party can. Labour must be loving the appointment of an extreme-left member to the role of Secretary of State for Defence, it proves the Liberals are cannon fodder in a Labour coalition.
    Labour did not suggest or otherwise have anything to do with this appointment.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    Labour did not suggest or otherwise have anything to do with this appointment.
    That must make the appointment all the sweeter. Your coalition partners are so submissive to you that they'll capitulate completely without even needing to be asked.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    That must make the appointment all the sweeter. Your coalition partners are so submissive to you that they'll capitulate completely without even needing to be asked.
    Since when did Aph and Labour get along and see eye to eye? We already have a program for Defence Policy set out by THB that Aph will continue and add to.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Since when did Aph and Labour get along and see eye to eye? We already have a program for Defence Policy set out by THB that Aph will continue and add to.
    I like aph, he's done a lot of good in the government sub forum, and contributed a lot, and been a great member, hand on heart honestly, I expect he will continue to bring this as a minister as well. However I can also hand on heart say I don't think aph would be in government as a minister if labour had a say in it. Personally I look forward to what he can bring to the table,
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I hope James has checked his math so I don't look stupid, but 99% of Britons get a tax cut under our proposals. We are moving towards a fairer society for all, no matter where you come from. Instability in other countries affects us, and surely it is our moral duty to help other nations, especially the ones we left in absolute messes from our Imperial days?
    I really would not trust James with his maths one bit, he has time and again demonstrated a propensity towards a lack of understanding and error.

    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Since when did Aph and Labour get along and see eye to eye? We already have a program for Defence Policy set out by THB that Aph will continue and add to.
    We don't really have a program set out by THB, we have a shambles that was set out by THB that is a prime example of the incompetence of this government that was rightly withdrawn almost as soon as it was put up. We then have it in an equally incompetent, although diluted, fashion in the budget that still, argubaly, needs putting though a SoI. And Labour and Aph don't need to see eye to eye, Aph is still the perfect individual for the role as far as Labour are concerned because he will destroy the MoD as they want and not defend our nation. He is a unilateralist and pacifist.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    You may not like it but there is documented evidence of British foreign aid money being used by Iran to help hang people, there is evidence of British foreign aid money being given to charities to fund a project but then the money funds higher salaries for the executives, and there is evidence of British foreign aid money helping fund the lifestyles of corrupt rulers. Using foreign aid to fund humanitarian missions after natural disasters would be acceptable, but arbitrary levels of money handed out making no impact is not acceptable.
    No, I can't accept that line, that implies that they wouldn't have been executed EXCEPT that they were EU funded, I actually prefer China's policy of aid being tied to economic advancement rather than ours, but behind the scenes no doubt that foreign aid is being used as a diplomatic solution to problems, it's easy to say "they should get a better deal."

    And this idea of bloated foreign payments isn't new, this was the deliberate plan from the US and then the EU since the Marshall Plan. By installing pro-Western leaders into foreign countries, they've been forced to "aid" their dictator or risk him being overthrown. Foreign aid therefore is still a tool to use for promoting pro-Western democracies, yet in the end all of the above are eventually overthrown by the populace because of their own greed and anti-Western powers form. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to pursue a more isolationist agenda (which I'm in favour of) then you have to accept that more countries, with more anti-West views will form.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Since when did Aph and Labour get along and see eye to eye? We already have a program for Defence Policy set out by THB that Aph will continue and add to.
    It's the adding to that concerns me.

    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I like aph, he's done a lot of good in the government sub forum, and contributed a lot, and been a great member, hand on heart honestly, I expect he will continue to bring this as a minister as well. However I can also hand on heart say I don't think aph would be in government as a minister if labour had a say in it. Personally I look forward to what he can bring to the table,
    I actually like Aph too and other than viewing him as naive and idealistic (though i do many lefties to be fair) i suspect that of those on the right i'm one of the least hostile members to him. But while one could understand putting him in Home or the environment ect.. (something domestic that's not the economy) he will certainly only represent the interests of the far left of Labour in foreign and defense.

    It's very weird when the Lib Dem defense secretary is much more extreme than the Labour PM. I suspect the Lib Dems put their pride first when they should have swapped the position for something else (albeit since the party has to vote before wiping it's ass, perhaps Petros didn't think the party would like giving away such a big department).
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I actually like Aph too and other than viewing him as naive and idealistic (though i do many lefties to be fair) i suspect that of those on the right i'm one of the least hostile members to him. But while one could understand putting him in Home or the environment ect.. (something domestic that's not the economy) he will certainly only represent the interests of the far left of Labour in foreign and defense.

    It's very weird when the Lib Dem defense secretary is much more extreme than the Labour PM. I suspect the Lib Dems put their pride first when they should have swapped the position for something else (albeit since the party has to vote before wiping it's ass, perhaps Petros didn't think the party would like giving away such a big department).
    I use to view aph as off the grid idealistic and just and didn't have much time at all for him, but working with him in the government sub-forum has been a big enlightenment on him as a person and his views, and has given me a whole lot more respect for him. I do agree however another department may have been better suited for aph than defence, but the liberals decided he would fill the position so I am willing to work with him and see what he produces, I think you put the perfect case why it may end up working in that pretty much everyone I imagine will be to the right of aph's position, so we can agree on something reasonable which has been well debated. Although I wouldn't say you were at all wrong about it would be more understandable placing an ex-green at environment.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    It's the adding to that concerns me.



    I actually like Aph too and other than viewing him as naive and idealistic (though i do many lefties to be fair) i suspect that of those on the right i'm one of the least hostile members to him. But while one could understand putting him in Home or the environment ect.. (something domestic that's not the economy) he will certainly only represent the interests of the far left of Labour in foreign and defense.

    It's very weird when the Lib Dem defense secretary is much more extreme than the Labour PM. I suspect the Lib Dems put their pride first when they should have swapped the position for something else (albeit since the party has to vote before wiping it's ass, perhaps Petros didn't think the party would like giving away such a big department).
    He wouldn't have voted on swapping a position - we're not that bureaucratic

    I wanted to give Aph a chance and he deserves a chance. If it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out, but he should be given every opportunity.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    The Chancellor has made a mistake in his rhetoric, from the 29.3m taxpayers in Britain, 308000 earn over £150000 which is over 1% of all taxpayers. Increasing the tax rate to 50% is a tax rise for over 1% of Britain, and when the sugar tax is included with the ATA more Britons see a tax increase than a decrease. An amendment to the ATA may decrease the number of Britons seeing a tax increase but the 99% seeing a tax cut is still wrong.
    Not true, if the other tax changes are included, even with the 50p tax rate it's still a tax cut. It is therefore your maths which is wrong, you'd have to be earning around £200k for your income taxes to increase, and even then it's not very significant until you're earning £250k+ which means that my tax changes equate to a tax cut for over 99% of the population.

    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I therefore withdraw that particular remark
    You don't have to
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I really would not trust James with his maths one bit, he has time and again demonstrated a propensity towards a lack of understanding and error.
    It's not that hard to work out:

    Current net income (exc. NI) for someone earning £175k

    £110107

    Proposed net income (exc. NI) for someone earning £175k

    12500 + 30000 + 60000 + 12500

    £115000

    Current net income (exc. NI) for someone earning £200k

    £123857

    Proposed net income (exc. NI) for someone earning £200k

    12500 + 30000 + 60000 + 25000

    £127500
 
 
 
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.