Amsterdam_Neil_D Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Cameron goes to Westminster to celebrate the armed forces in Afghanistan, men and women sent by him to have there legs blown off or worse. we started putting troops on the ground as part of operation enduring freedom in 2006 ... I think your letting your vierws cloud your judgement here a little That's a good reply but explain why the slimy word removed turned up at Westminster then ? The day he took office he could have flown every single one of them home, he didn't so he has a hand in every single injury and death since that point. Cloud free zone here. How's the pea soup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Unless the intention is to wait until there is a budget surplus (so either a few years if one believes today's forecast or until the end of never, perhaps) then surely the income from the B&B, Northern Rock and Lloyds sales will be reducing the deficit and not 'paying down debt'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 (edited) £10 off a tank with the Tories. Sounds like an announcement about cheaper handjobs. Edited March 18, 2015 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Any news on beer and bingo yet? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Any news on beer and bingo yet? Gambling taxes unchanged. 1p tax cut on beer, 2p on whiskey. wine unchanged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Only caught bits on the wireless but the new stuff with ISA's seems quite positive for savers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I hate how people who haven't really thought it through demand cheaper fuel and the politicians just pander to it. More and more tax should be put on fuel. People are incredibly wasteful in this regard. There's no need to be blaring it round in big cars with big engines. Accelerating and decelerating hard is pointless and driving around fast is at best just a leisure pursuit that also harms the environment and at worst is very dangerous. You shouldn't be making it cheaper for people to do this. I'd quite happily pay quite a bit more on petrol/diesel if it meant the money went into providing better healthcare or schools. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I hate how people who haven't really thought it through demand cheaper fuel and the politicians just pander to it. More and more tax should be put on fuel. People are incredibly wasteful in this regard. There's no need to be blaring it round in big cars with big engines. Accelerating and decelerating hard is pointless and driving around fast is at best just a leisure pursuit that also harms the environment and at worst is very dangerous. You shouldn't be making it cheaper for people to do this. I'd quite happily pay quite a bit more on petrol/diesel if it meant the money went into providing better healthcare or schools. Blame Clarkson. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I hate how people who haven't really thought it through demand cheaper fuel and the politicians just pander to it. More and more tax should be put on fuel. People are incredibly wasteful in this regard. There's no need to be blaring it round in big cars with big engines. Accelerating and decelerating hard is pointless and driving around fast is at best just a leisure pursuit that also harms the environment and at worst is very dangerous. You shouldn't be making it cheaper for people to do this. I'd quite happily pay quite a bit more on petrol/diesel if it meant the money went into providing higher pay for healthcare workers and teachers. Fixed! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Only caught bits on the wireless but the new stuff with ISA's seems quite positive for savers? I guess we'll have to wait for all the details and then see what actual accounts are offered. I'm not so sure that the 'help to buy' ISAs will be as good for savers hoping to buy as it may be claimed (they'll have their ISA limit vastly reduced for a start - this scheme looks like it has a limit of an initial opening balance of £1k and thereafter £200 per month). I'd guess the £1k savings income allowance for all basic rate taxpayers may be of more benefit than ISA changes (though that depends on whether one gets any interest income anyway!). Perhaps there'll be a rush to Santander 123 and the other accounts like that? Maybe the allowance might mean that they'll have to increase ISA interest rates to compete? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Cameron goes to Westminster to celebrate the armed forces in Afghanistan, men and women sent by him to have there legs blown off or worse. we started putting troops on the ground as part of operation enduring freedom in 2006 ... I think your letting your vierws cloud your judgement here a little That's a good reply but explain why the slimy word removed turned up at Westminster then ? The day he took office he could have flown every single one of them home, he didn't so he has a hand in every single injury and death since that point. Cloud free zone here. How's the pea soup I'm not sure we could bring everyone home overnight ? but our involvement over there has now ended ... Whether that was down to Cameron or would have happened regardless I couldn't honestly tell you Back at Schiphol now , hope the pilot can see further than I can through this fog !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I hate how people who haven't really thought it through demand cheaper fuel and the politicians just pander to it. More and more tax should be put on fuel. People are incredibly wasteful in this regard. There's no need to be blaring it round in big cars with big engines. Accelerating and decelerating hard is pointless and driving around fast is at best just a leisure pursuit that also harms the environment and at worst is very dangerous. You shouldn't be making it cheaper for people to do this. I'd quite happily pay quite a bit more on petrol/diesel if it meant the money went into providing better healthcare or schools. What about the millions of people who don't own flash cars and who don't drive fast, and for whom a car is a necessity but who still find petrol extremely expensive and a massive proportion of their weekly spend? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 More and more tax should be put on fuel. People are incredibly wasteful in this regard. There's no need to be blaring it round in big cars with big engines. Accelerating and decelerating hard is pointless and driving around fast is at best just a leisure pursuit that also harms the environment and at worst is very dangerous. You shouldn't be making it cheaper for people to do this. What is the alternative than Darren? Over congested trains that have countless delays (and lets not even mention the astronomical cost) Bus? Nope dont fancy waiting in the freezing cold for an hour then three buses come at once? I think I would prefer to be own car and listen to my music at my own comfort! Like risso says what about normal drivers, why should they be punished? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 (edited) I hate how people who haven't really thought it through demand cheaper fuel and the politicians just pander to it. More and more tax should be put on fuel. People are incredibly wasteful in this regard. There's no need to be blaring it round in big cars with big engines. Accelerating and decelerating hard is pointless and driving around fast is at best just a leisure pursuit that also harms the environment and at worst is very dangerous. You shouldn't be making it cheaper for people to do this. I'd quite happily pay quite a bit more on petrol/diesel if it meant the money went into providing better healthcare or schools. What about the millions of people who don't own flash cars and who don't drive fast, and for whom a car is a necessity but who still find petrol extremely expensive and a massive proportion of their weekly spend? Screw them, the practical concerns of the masses are as naught compared to the clean conscience of the environmentally diligent. Edited March 18, 2015 by Awol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post OutByEaster? Posted March 18, 2015 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted March 18, 2015 What is the alternative than Darren? Over congested trains that have countless delays (and lets not even mention the astronomical cost) The best performing railway in the country was the one left in public hands - renationalising the railways might be a good way to get people back onto trains. The tickets would be a lot cheaper without the need for Mr Branson's profit. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I hate how people who haven't really thought it through demand cheaper fuel and the politicians just pander to it. More and more tax should be put on fuel. People are incredibly wasteful in this regard. There's no need to be blaring it round in big cars with big engines. Accelerating and decelerating hard is pointless and driving around fast is at best just a leisure pursuit that also harms the environment and at worst is very dangerous. You shouldn't be making it cheaper for people to do this. I'd quite happily pay quite a bit more on petrol/diesel if it meant the money went into providing better healthcare or schools. What about the millions of people who don't own flash cars and who don't drive fast, and for whom a car is a necessity but who still find petrol extremely expensive and a massive proportion of their weekly spend? That's a short sighted way of looking at it. If someone can't afford to run a car, then they can't afford to run a car. There are other options available - public transport, bikes, getting a job closer to home etc. But if it was as simple as you make out, why not make petrol free of tax? Then these people who can't afford petrol would be fine. Taxes are added to certain things to discourage their use, which I'm sure you already know. We need to discourage the use of petrol for obvious reasons, or at least make it more appealing to use less of it. If someone is already running the cheapest possible car they can afford with the lowest running costs, and the extra tax on petrol makes the difference between feeding the family or not that week, then they can't afford to be living that lifestyle. But these are specific cases, cases that can't be accounted for in every piece of decision making. If you account for the person who needs petrol to be cheaper to feed their family, then you're taking the life saving drugs away from someone that the NHS can't afford to pay for - what about them? Wasteful use of petrol and diesel in an inefficient way is a bad thing. This isn't a wishy washy greeny thing. Every encouragement to get people to drive less and more efficiently needs to be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 More and more tax should be put on fuel. People are incredibly wasteful in this regard. There's no need to be blaring it round in big cars with big engines. Accelerating and decelerating hard is pointless and driving around fast is at best just a leisure pursuit that also harms the environment and at worst is very dangerous. You shouldn't be making it cheaper for people to do this. What is the alternative than Darren? Over congested trains that have countless delays (and lets not even mention the astronomical cost) Bus? Nope dont fancy waiting in the freezing cold for an hour then three buses come at once? I think I would prefer to be own car and listen to my music at my own comfort! Like risso says what about normal drivers, why should they be punished? Normal drivers would pay more for unnecessary trips or inefficient driving. They'll gain by having their grandparents having an Earth left, more money in the country, better healthcare, better everything where money is desperately needed but is currently being frittered away by people driving gas guzzling cars on needless journeys. They'll soon stop if it costs them more. Real life example - My boss at work has just borrowed a Boxster GTS for a few days. Each lunchtime he's taken someone out in full sport mode, ragging the tits off it, wasting £15 of petrol each time. That's £50 of petrol he's wasted, £30 of it going to taxes, a lot of pollutants into the atmosphere, £20 to the middle east. If that cost him £100 he'd either not do it or do it and give more money back to the economy and more money to OPEC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 we should also put up the cost of electricity by that way of thinking all those people with a smart phone and a laptop and an xbox AND on demand services on their TV - wasteful use of electricity by some should be stopped by simply cranking up the price oh, thanks for the tip on getting a job closer to home - why I hadn't thought of that I can't imagine, me and my crazy commute, just work closer to home, ideally down the end of a cycle path Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 we should also put up the cost of electricity by that way of thinking all those people with a smart phone and a laptop and an xbox AND on demand services on their TV - wasteful use of electricity by some should be stopped by simply cranking up the price oh, thanks for the tip on getting a job closer to home - why I hadn't thought of that I can't imagine, me and my crazy commute, just work closer to home, ideally down the end of a cycle path Completely the wrong end of the stick. Electricity is more of an essential than petrol. I know it's not as simple as just getting a job closer to home, but if petrol is too expensive then it possibly becomes more of an option than it was before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I hate how people who haven't really thought it through demand cheaper fuel and the politicians just pander to it. More and more tax should be put on fuel. People are incredibly wasteful in this regard. There's no need to be blaring it round in big cars with big engines. Accelerating and decelerating hard is pointless and driving around fast is at best just a leisure pursuit that also harms the environment and at worst is very dangerous. You shouldn't be making it cheaper for people to do this. I'd quite happily pay quite a bit more on petrol/diesel if it meant the money went into providing better healthcare or schools. What about the millions of people who don't own flash cars and who don't drive fast, and for whom a car is a necessity but who still find petrol extremely expensive and a massive proportion of their weekly spend? That's a short sighted way of looking at it. If someone can't afford to run a car, then they can't afford to run a car. There are other options available - public transport, bikes, getting a job closer to home etc. But if it was as simple as you make out, why not make petrol free of tax? Then these people who can't afford petrol would be fine. Taxes are added to certain things to discourage their use, which I'm sure you already know. We need to discourage the use of petrol for obvious reasons, or at least make it more appealing to use less of it. If someone is already running the cheapest possible car they can afford with the lowest running costs, and the extra tax on petrol makes the difference between feeding the family or not that week, then they can't afford to be living that lifestyle. But these are specific cases, cases that can't be accounted for in every piece of decision making. If you account for the person who needs petrol to be cheaper to feed their family, then you're taking the life saving drugs away from someone that the NHS can't afford to pay for - what about them? Wasteful use of petrol and diesel in an inefficient way is a bad thing. This isn't a wishy washy greeny thing. Every encouragement to get people to drive less and more efficiently needs to be there. If those same people had a choice of packing up their 40 a day habit or feeding their family I still know which one they would chose .... Sounds like a wishy washy greeny thing if you ask me but if we all drive crap cars that weren't capable of high speeds then think how many traffics police would lose theist jobs , think of the lost revenue from speed cameras , the lost jobs at the oil companies the petrol stations So my advice ... Drive fast and inefficiently and save the economy ... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts