Jump to content


Corbyn suggests earnings limit

Recommended Posts

I accept your apology for your ignorant comment.

 

Deluded as well as a sockpuppet then :)

 

Wheres the ignore button.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deluded as well as a sockpuppet then :)

 

Wheres the ignore button.

 

We shall get on I can see. :)

However I think Jeremy has his good points.

At least he resembles Alec Guinness, and not Cruella de Ville.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no...he smashed her into the long grass

 

Not really, even the Guardian only considered it a score draw. I wouldn't consider him smashing anything apart from unpopularity contests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really, even the Guardian only considered it a score draw. I wouldn't consider him smashing anything apart from unpopularity contests.

 

I think his heart is in fairness and decency.

These things however are not required in modern politics.

Load-mouthed self assertion , without ability, seems to be all that is required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really, even the Guardian only considered it a score draw. I wouldn't consider him smashing anything apart from unpopularity contests.

 

please tell me which media outlet would ever give Corbyn the edge?

but did you actually watch it? she was well and truly out batted today, she was totally on the defensive and even had to lower herself to attack the Red Cross...

i wonder if she is also going to attack all the other academics who are putting the boot into her over her handling of the NHS...

Even one of her own MP's is putting the knife in...

http://www.thecanary.co/2017/01/04/theresa-may-just-savaged-nhs-tory-health-chair/

and its only going to get worse for her...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To achieve what? If it's to get more tax then you'll need to look very carefully at how best to do that as it's diminishing returns. If it's simply to make a point then go ahead but you might end up reducing tax returns which I don't think benefits anyone.

They were there before until Maggie cut them for her fat cat mates weren't they.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They were there before until Maggie cut them for her fat cat mates weren't they.

 

Yes and they were a disaster at the time. The richest are paying a higher percentage of total tax revenue than they ever have before.

 

Increasing tax rates doesn't mean they will pay more - tax revenues dropped when the 50% rate was introduced.

 

Read up on the Laffer Curve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the Laffer curve is not an excuse to abandon any pretence at controlling C level salaries and the number of times greater than the average that they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But the Laffer curve is not an excuse to abandon any pretence at controlling C level salaries and the number of times greater than the average that they are.

 

I didn't say it was. I was responding to a poster who wanted to bring back higher tax rates and so was suggesting they look up the research which shows why that wouldn't be beneficial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But the Laffer curve is not an excuse to abandon any pretence at controlling C level salaries and the number of times greater than the average that they are.

 

It really is.

The goal is to make the poor better off. If the reality is that limiting top pay effects the reverse of this goal of making the poor better off then it would be wrong to do it.

It's really that simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's an argument not to have very high tax rates. It's not an argument to give up any pretence at controlling executive salary. The two things are very different.

 

Oh, and the goal is not to "make the poor better off", it's to reduce income inequality.

 

---------- Post added 12-01-2017 at 09:01 ----------

 

I didn't say it was. I was responding to a poster who wanted to bring back higher tax rates and so was suggesting they look up the research which shows why that wouldn't be beneficial.

 

Clearly some people think that it is though (see post after yours).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it's an argument not to have very high tax rates. It's not an argument to give up any pretence at controlling executive salary. The two things are very different.

 

Oh, and the goal is not to "make the poor better off", it's to reduce income inequality.

 

 

I'm going to focus on the last bit of your post:

 

You're pulling my leg right? By that argument you'd be happy to have the poor starving as long as everybody else is starving too. Tell me that's not what you actually think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.