Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamageddon)
    wha'bout him hun?
    He wants a super tax on the very rich and he's definitely a prominent figure in Labour

    (admittedly he's in virtually retired from front-line politics but his comments on Thatcher were rather misguided)
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    He wants a super tax on the very rich and he's definitely a prominent figure in Labour

    (admittedly he's in virtually retired from front-line politics but his comments on Thatcher were rather misguided)
    I have seen no evidence of his support for a 90% upper income band and even if he does he is not representative of the party and is certainly not an adequate population sample for the millions who vote for the party.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The fact that we exist in an economic-centric universe makes me sick to my stomach.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamageddon)
    I would indeed be surprised if you were correct as what you have stated is so self-evidently absurd.wha'bout him hun?
    How can you deny the existence of those types? You know, the sort who want people to 'pay their fair share' when they're already paying 50%. Watch any Occupy video for God's sake. The stupid mindset is rampant at University which just happens to be a leftist breeding ground. Again, how can you deny it?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I don't. At all.

    I just support the Tories even less, and have no hope in British politics ever producing a viable third contender.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Barksy)
    How can you deny the existence of those types? You know, the sort who want people to 'pay their fair share' when they're already paying 50%. Watch any Occupy video for God's sake. The stupid mindset is rampant at University which just happens to be a leftist breeding ground. Again, how can you deny it?
    Oh, I'm sure they exist. I don't believe they come anywhere near being representative of Labour voters in any way that would be significant, and nor do I believe they would be labour voters in the first place.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by josh_cook)
    The fact that we exist in an economic-centric universe makes me sick to my stomach.
    Says someone who is enjoying high quality internet, using a computer, probably attending uni, has access to high quality medicine, good nutrition etc. etc. due to us existing in an economic-centric universe
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sdm123)
    Says someone who is enjoying high quality internet, using a computer, probably attending uni, has access to high quality medicine, good nutrition etc. etc. due to us existing in an economic-centric universe
    Those things only have anything to do with economics because we make it that way. I'm not suggesting a return to the dark ages, but the fact that monetary value is now the most supreme and coveted value is sickening.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by josh_cook)
    Those things only have anything to do with economics because we make it that way. I'm not suggesting a return to the dark ages, but the fact that monetary value is now the most supreme and coveted value is sickening.
    No, they have everything to do with economics. All of these inventions, innovations and products can be delivered to people efficiently because of a focus on economics. If nobody cared about economics/money, nobody would produce anything, and you would have trouble feeding yourself, let alone post on the Student room using your iPad/iPod/PC on your high speed internet.

    Let me guess, you don't want to work yourself, but you expect to have all these aforementioned products, which means you expect others to work hard and "obsess over economics" as you say. Delusional.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by josh_cook)
    Those things only have anything to do with economics because we make it that way. I'm not suggesting a return to the dark ages, but the fact that monetary value is now the most supreme and coveted value is sickening.
    Might I recommend Economics for Dummies. Chapter 1 and 2 will demonstrate to you the importance of economics to our way of life.

    Sure, you can debate that we move away from it, but we'll loose out on all the good stuff like medical improvements, foodstuffs etc. Economics will then return through public demand.

    Please just get the book and read two chapters from it just to atleast see another, well grounded point of view.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    He wants a super tax on the very rich and he's definitely a prominent figure in Labour
    More out of his popularity than because the Labour leadership actually like him. When he first won election as Mayor he was an Independent because he hated Blair and New Labour (and based on what Blair says in his autobiography, the feeling was mutual). He rejoined Labour because Blair and co. took a 'if you can't beat them, join them' attitude.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by josh_cook)
    Those things only have anything to do with economics because we make it that way. I'm not suggesting a return to the dark ages, but the fact that monetary value is now the most supreme and coveted value is sickening.
    You are obviously not naive if you believe economics haven't got a big effect on society
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    More out of his popularity than because the Labour leadership actually like him. When he first won election as Mayor he was an Independent because he hated Blair and New Labour (and based on what Blair says in his autobiography, the feeling was mutual). He rejoined Labour because Blair and co. took a 'if you can't beat them, join them' attitude.
    Lool London rejected him twice in favour of Boris ( a overt admirer of Thatcher!)

    Boris wants the Boris island airport (if it ever gets built) to be names Margaret Thatcher airport!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamageddon)
    I have seen no evidence of his support for a 90% upper income band and even if he does he is not representative of the party and is certainly not an adequate population sample for the millions who vote for the party.
    It was in the papers - something about 60 and 70 %

    Even in the 1970s- pre thatcher, the highest tax band was 60%!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Barksy)
    1) They don't understand economics

    2) They are employed by government, if employed at all

    3) They are jealous

    4) They are champagne socialists

    5) They are weak so they want Big Brother to look after them

    6) They think it is the hip thing to do at University (suck it to da man)

    7) They are union thugs

    8) They are northern
    9) Were once miners

    10) Unemployed by choice (i.e benefit scroungers)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OhJoy)
    Why do people associate labour with fixing the economy when Gordan Brown got the economy like this in the first place. Also most labour MPs are public school kids too.

    I'm not a conservative & would not vote labour either - I'm just a liberal that's going to vote based on elections as all parties are as bad as one another!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Actually, the mess was caused by the deregulation of the banking system proposed by Thatchers and Reagan. Blair failed to save when he should have done, and Gordon Brown actually acted very well in minimizing the effects of the crash, which we are now feeling thanks to Osbourne's spending cuts
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    It was in the papers - something about 60 and 70 %

    Even in the 1970s- pre thatcher, the highest tax band was 60%!
    The audacity of brushing off a "erm, mate, he doesn't..." with a change in the percentage, a reference to an unreferenced article and some meaningless comment about 1970's tax rates...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Llamageddon)
    The audacity of brushing off a "erm, mate, he doesn't..." with a change in the percentage, a reference to an unreferenced article and some meaningless comment about 1970's tax rates...
    It's to put his extreme views into context.

    We are living in Thatcher's Britain whether you or Ken like it or not!
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    It's to put his extreme views into context.
    By exaggerating them?

    You need to go back to school and learn a few definitions. Start with context.
    We are living in Thatcher's Britain whether you or Ken like it or not!
    pretty trite
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    It was in the papers - something about 60 and 70 %

    Even in the 1970s- pre thatcher, the highest tax band was 60%!
    Highest band was 83% when she came to office (although on unearned income it came to 98%).
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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