Starved to Death...

Starved to Death...

35 posts
28 Feb 2014
tonycsm
Photographer
tonycsm
pompeytog

Don't worry dude, stolen faces always resorts to accusing people of being Daily Mail mouth frothers when someone puts up a reasonable debate against what he says.
Probably best to ignore him  



Yeah... he'll learn!

What with our resident Neo-Marxist brother beating the drum furiously like an angry chimp for the left and our very own S N P activist stirring up the usual anti-Tory and anti-Westminster sentiment in support of Scottish independence, it's quite entertaining to watch and read their antics!

It should get even more interesting as September 18th nears and even more so when the General Election comes round next year! I can't wait! laugh

Posted 5 March 2014
stolenfaces
Photographer
stolenfaces
tonycsm
Yeah... he'll learn! What with our resident Neo-Marxist brother beating the drum furiously like an angry chimp for the left and our very own S N P activist stirring up the usual anti-Tory and anti-Westminster sentiment in support of Scottish independence, it's quite entertaining to watch and read their antics! It should get even more interesting as September 18th nears and even more so when the General Election comes round next year! I can't wait! 
You agree with non-viable companies being subsidised by your taxes do you? - you think my objection to government incompetence and waste is marxist ? Whilst obviously I'm not actually a Marxist, I don't take the word as one of abuse in the way you intend it. I do see the truth of Orwell's visions in his book '1984' and how they are being exceeded by this government and their party organs. It has always been a tradition for government's to be economical with the truth (and Blair took this to a new level) but this government has no regard for the truth at all. They are caught telling outright lies almost every week. Is this democracy ?
Posted 5 March 2014
stolenfaces
Photographer
stolenfaces
pompeytog
Don't worry dude, stolen faces always resorts to accusing people of being Daily Mail mouth frothers when someone puts up a reasonable debate against what he says. Probably best to ignore him  
If he had put up a reasonable argument I wouldn't have accused him of writing and 'thinking' like UKIP. Vague assertions with no factual support do not constitute an argument.
Posted 5 March 2014
tonycsm
Photographer
tonycsm
stolenfaces

 Whilst obviously I'm not actually a Marxist, I don't take the word as one of abuse in the way you intend it.


Of course you aren't .....but then I never actually accused you of being one... you read my post and instantly assumed that I meant you!

Just as you automatically assume that someone is a racist if they raise even a valid point regarding the issues of uncontrolled immigration of which there are many.



Posted 5 March 2014
tonycsm
Photographer
tonycsm
stolenfaces

You agree with non-viable companies being subsidised by your taxes do you? - you think my objection to government incompetence and waste is marxist ?


Actually, I mostly agree with you but with a caveat regarding ALL employers and not just companies being subsidised indirectly by taxpayer's money in the form of tax credits etc.

However, this isn't anything new - this was happening back in the 80's with benefits like family credit and was further enhanced after Blair took office.

The question is...if these 'subsidies' were removed and businesses made to pay higher wages, would it affect the jobs market?

Around 11 million workers are employed by the small business sector alone and many of the small businesses are just barely keeping afloat in our current economic climate...do you really believe these businesses being forced to pay higher wages to compensate for loss of 'subsidy', wouldn't be adversely affected?

Many businesses would simply close or staffing would be reduced and what effect do you suppose that would have on the jobs maket? 

Those who were put out of work because of business closure or reduced staffing, instead of being subsidised by the taxpayer whilst working, would now be wholly supported by the taxpayer at greater cost than if they were in work so, it's not as simple as you imagine.



Posted 5 March 2014
To reply to this thread you must be a member. Click here to join