Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

[Finney Is Back]

The groupthink that has created the most successful and enduring broadcaster in global history?

The recent groupthink is in danger of destroying that most successful and enduring broadcaster in global history. Unless the BBC genuinely accept this and do something about it we may well no longer have a state broadcaster in the next decade or two.

 

[Finney Is Back]

For the person who pays taxes and can afford the kids and then their circumstances change and they can't afford it, you think their kids should go hungry. Cool.

Sorry but I've just always been somebody who believes a person should pay their own way.

It would be an interesting stat to see how many of those with more than two children having their income supported by the government were once not having their income supported by the government only for their circumstances to change.

 

[LutonSpurs]

Sorry but I've just always been somebody who believes a person should pay their own way.

It would be an interesting stat to see how many of those with more than two children having their income supported by the government were once not having their income supported by the government only for their circumstances to change.

They have paid their own way with taxes. And things change. These people matter even though you don't think they do evidently.

I know people who have been hurt by the interest rate hikes and have ended up in foodbanks. They are my responsibility as they have contributed to the same system I have. And they deserve welfare.

 

[scaramanga]

Personally I think there is a need to have a tax-funded state broadcaster. The issue is that the tax-funded state broadcaster has to be balanced and uphold the highest standards of journalism. Those that have brought this recent shame on the BBC should hang their heads in shame, by doing this they threaten the very existence of something that should be cherished.

I can't see that need. I don't see what it accomplishes. Far better content is made by independent subscription services with a hell of a lot less noncing involved.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I don't think it is right that any person should take home less than 50p in any £1 that they earn.

Depends how they've earned it.

 

[Finney Is Back]

They have paid their own way with taxes. And things change. These people matter even though you don't think they do evidently.

I know people who have been hurt by the interest rate hikes and have ended up in foodbanks. They are my responsibility as they have contributed to the same system I have. And they deserve welfare.

They are not your responsibility. If people have taken on debt while interest rates were at historic low levels and not made provision for interest rates to go up to normal levels again then that is poor choice made by them, not you.

I have no idea on what rate tax payer you are. However, unless a person is a higher rate tax payer then they probably aren't actually funding those people on wellfare, they are probably only funding themselves.

 

[scaramanga]

They are not your responsibility. If people have taken on debt while interest rates were at historic low levels and not made provision for interest rates to go up to normal levels again then that is poor choice made by them, not you.

I have no idea on what rate tax payer you are. However, unless you are a higher rate tax payer then you probably aren't actually funding those people on wellfare, you are probably only funding yourself.

I think the break even point is in the low £30ks to be a net contributor. I'd imagine most people here are unless they have dependents.

That's the nuance of the immigration argument that isn't being discussed. As a capitalist, I think labour should be free to move across borders like any other commodity. I also believe that, in general, any individual migrant is likely to work and to benefit the country. But if that person is from a religion or culture where women aren't allowed to work, it's almost impossible for them to ever become a net contributor.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I think the break even point is in the low £30ks to be a net contributor. I'd imagine most people here are unless they have dependents.

That's the nuance of the immigration argument that isn't being discussed. As a capitalist, I think labour should be free to move across borders like any other commodity. I also believe that, in general, any individual migrant is likely to work and to benefit the country. But if that person is from a religion or culture where women aren't allowed to work, it's almost impossible for them to ever become a net contributor.

I don't know the exact figure. I read somewhere that each person costs the government £17k a year. You'd have to earn around £65k to pay that much in tax and NI.

This is a little old but halfway down shows that 53% are net recipients: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...ctsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/latest