FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

The council tax will rise

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

By 6%, is it fair the boroughs have to increase it, as the government wont help them? It will hit the poorer areas the most.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It was bound to happen again, apparently minimum wage/living wage went up so why would everything else stay the same

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"It was bound to happen again, apparently minimum wage/living wage went up so why would everything else stay the same "
That is right too

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *raceytvcdTV/TS
over a year ago

mansfield


"It was bound to happen again, apparently minimum wage/living wage went up so why would everything else stay the same That is right too"
they just keep hitting the average working man in the pocket every time , time for protests

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heBirminghamWeekendMan
over a year ago

here

Time to protest - yes

The amount of money that is wasted by councils is disgraceful.

Raising the tax is an easy lazy way to get more money.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Our rise is going to be about the same it's the max they can rise it by without holding a referendum

But they say we will get lots of potholes filled and nicer parks!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ours is rising by 5.99%. That because it has been frozen for 3 years and has the higher amount for social care now.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *tace 309TV/TS
over a year ago

durham


"Time to protest - yes

The amount of money that is wasted by councils is disgraceful.

Raising the tax is an easy lazy way to get more money.

"
I agree . our council built a brand building for the DLI museum a few years back .them close it down only to sell the land off to some developer . what a waste of money .why build the bloody thing in the first place . . there are far too many fat cats in councils milking every penny of ours .its always the little people who get it in the neck . I don't mind paying council tax providing it goes on things that count .paying some chief execs over inflated salary and all his expenses claims are not my idea of how this money should be spent .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Far too many managers managing managers who can manage their own finances let alone anyone elses.

A good friend of mine just retired where 15 yrs ago...Yes just 15 yrs ago he managed regions social workers and all of their budgets. He tells me horrific stories of scandalous wastage which is cleverly hidden. He got promotions during that time and said each time he was doing less work than in the previous job. His original post is now covered by 12 managers and then himself. In that group each had a manager to manage the social workers schedule and a manager to manage that manager and a separate manager to handle the finance. ..x 4 regions.

His job was all paperwork...reports about meetings and reports to justify this 5hat and everything else the region's were doing...Most of which he said wasn't even read but filed away incase they needed to cover themselves. NI has 62 % of the workforce in government administration.

It'll all collapse one day because it's not sustainable... there are no longer enough earners... One who actually earn the money rather than administer and manage what money is earned.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Authorities screwing people over for money again? Nothing unusual there.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rumpyMcFuckNuggetMan
over a year ago

Den of Iniquity

Let's not even start about Northampton's councils

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I am sorry but Teresa may needs to open her eyes and actually see what's going on we are sinking fast can't she see that she needs to get off her power trip and stand down x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heBirminghamWeekendMan
over a year ago

here


"I am sorry but Teresa may needs to open her eyes and actually see what's going on we are sinking fast can't she see that she needs to get off her power trip and stand down x"

Why would that make a difference to the way councils spend the money they have ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington


"Time to protest - yes

The amount of money that is wasted by councils is disgraceful.

Raising the tax is an easy lazy way to get more money.

"
given that the fastest rising parts of council budgets are adult care and children's care which would you cut?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Time to protest - yes

The amount of money that is wasted by councils is disgraceful.

Raising the tax is an easy lazy way to get more money.

given that the fastest rising parts of council budgets are adult care and children's care which would you cut?"

On Surrey I would start with the salaries of the people who supposedly "run" the council..

Too many layers of them on too much..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *esus H ChristMan
over a year ago

birmingham

130 million in debt, too many organ-grinders not enough monkeys, and when they want to save more money who do they take it off the poor bleeding monkeys, they cut services that actually contribute to a community like libraries, swimming baths, leisure centres...as you can tell I seriously dislike Bham shitty council and I worked for them for nearly 9 years, the amount of waste was shocking and the general attitude of the staff was to do as little as they could get away with,

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"I am sorry but Teresa may needs to open her eyes and actually see what's going on we are sinking fast can't she see that she needs to get off her power trip and stand down x

Why would that make a difference to the way councils spend the money they have ?"

Exactly, how much water does it take to fill a bucket with no bottom

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heBirminghamWeekendMan
over a year ago

here


"Time to protest - yes

The amount of money that is wasted by councils is disgraceful.

Raising the tax is an easy lazy way to get more money.

given that the fastest rising parts of council budgets are adult care and children's care which would you cut?"

There’s a difference between identifying waste and making cuts

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I am sorry but Teresa may needs to open her eyes and actually see what's going on we are sinking fast can't she see that she needs to get off her power trip and stand down x

Why would that make a difference to the way councils spend the money they have ?

Exactly, how much water does it take to fill a bucket with no bottom"

Shall we call her Liza x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The system is a large part of the problem. The system us set up to protect the many layers of 'organ grinders' as one so eloquently put it. There are many issues but to name one very simple issue that could save billion s in any particular year would be to remove this concept that one has to use up any money in a financial year so as not to loose the funding for the next. Some managers need to be able to say...I don't need this and let it be used where it dies need to be used and still get their full lot next year...Or be able to set aside some to amass together to go to a project that otherwise would never be done.

There's is millions and millions squandered on things that aren't used in order to 'use it or loose it' in governmental and private businesses everywhere.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The system is a large part of the problem. The system us set up to protect the many layers of 'organ grinders' as one so eloquently put it. There are many issues but to name one very simple issue that could save billion s in any particular year would be to remove this concept that one has to use up any money in a financial year so as not to loose the funding for the next. Some managers need to be able to say...I don't need this and let it be used where it dies need to be used and still get their full lot next year...Or be able to set aside some to amass together to go to a project that otherwise would never be done.

There's is millions and millions squandered on things that aren't used in order to 'use it or loose it' in governmental and private businesses everywhere. "

Exactly how the NHS is run don't they learn nothing x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The system is a large part of the problem. The system us set up to protect the many layers of 'organ grinders' as one so eloquently put it. There are many issues but to name one very simple issue that could save billion s in any particular year would be to remove this concept that one has to use up any money in a financial year so as not to loose the funding for the next. Some managers need to be able to say...I don't need this and let it be used where it dies need to be used and still get their full lot next year...Or be able to set aside some to amass together to go to a project that otherwise would never be done.

There's is millions and millions squandered on things that aren't used in order to 'use it or loose it' in governmental and private businesses everywhere.

Exactly how the NHS is run don't they learn nothing x"

There should be a cap on managers/admin/earners.... Say 1:1:20 for example.

(BTW I used to be in senior management)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Time to protest - yes

The amount of money that is wasted by councils is disgraceful.

Raising the tax is an easy lazy way to get more money.

"

Absolutely spot on - there still remains massive inefficiency and jobs which are "easy street" - it really is time we tokk to the streets on this.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington


"Time to protest - yes

The amount of money that is wasted by councils is disgraceful.

Raising the tax is an easy lazy way to get more money.

given that the fastest rising parts of council budgets are adult care and children's care which would you cut?

There’s a difference between identifying waste and making cuts"
so tell us what percentage of council budgets is waste and what that is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ady LickWoman
over a year ago

Northampton Somewhere

We're expecting ours to go up by more than average. Apparently Northampton County Council have fucked up massively!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heBirminghamWeekendMan
over a year ago

here


"Time to protest - yes

The amount of money that is wasted by councils is disgraceful.

Raising the tax is an easy lazy way to get more money.

given that the fastest rising parts of council budgets are adult care and children's care which would you cut?

There’s a difference between identifying waste and making cutsso tell us what percentage of council budgets is waste and what that is."

Not a clue ! And what’s the point in knowing a percentage ... point is, you can’t demand more money without first knowing that every penny is being spent for the maximum value.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The increase comes to around £10 per month, if that's what it costs to maintain services then i don't mind paying it. This is a consequence of the tax being frozen for the last few years. People need to stop expecting to get things for free all the time.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"The increase comes to around £10 per month, if that's what it costs to maintain services then i don't mind paying it. This is a consequence of the tax being frozen for the last few years. People need to stop expecting to get things for free all the time. "

It won't maintain services for long. Demand is going to keep growing and growing. People need to stop expecting the state to take care of their family for them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

But we do pay in taxes. I don't expect every thing for free just a fair deal x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

It's unfair as the cuts are imposed by central government, enforcing local tax increases predominantly in more deprived areas.

It's a new poverty tax.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ribsaMan
over a year ago

A box at end of your bed

It goes up every year without fail. Pisses me off

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

More money to fund high paid councillors so they can cope with the fallout of us leaving the EU and prices rising

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irestorm 500Couple
over a year ago

coventry

Fed up with it ..when you are having to account for every penny and you then have to find more pounds x storm x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington


"More money to fund high paid councillors so they can cope with the fallout of us leaving the EU and prices rising "
how much do councillors get paid?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington


"Time to protest - yes

The amount of money that is wasted by councils is disgraceful.

Raising the tax is an easy lazy way to get more money.

given that the fastest rising parts of council budgets are adult care and children's care which would you cut?

There’s a difference between identifying waste and making cutsso tell us what percentage of council budgets is waste and what that is.

Not a clue ! And what’s the point in knowing a percentage ... point is, you can’t demand more money without first knowing that every penny is being spent for the maximum value.

"
you do realise you've just totally contradicted yourself don't you?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington


"We're expecting ours to go up by more than average. Apparently Northampton County Council have fucked up massively!! "
yep, they have.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"More money to fund high paid councillors so they can cope with the fallout of us leaving the EU and prices rising how much do councillors get paid?"

The head of our council can't afford to buy a house in our Borough, apparently.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ENGUYMan
over a year ago

Hull

My C Tax will rise after allowing for the 25% solo occupancy, by £7 pm.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heBirminghamWeekendMan
over a year ago

here


"Time to protest - yes

The amount of money that is wasted by councils is disgraceful.

Raising the tax is an easy lazy way to get more money.

given that the fastest rising parts of council budgets are adult care and children's care which would you cut?

There’s a difference between identifying waste and making cutsso tell us what percentage of council budgets is waste and what that is.

Not a clue ! And what’s the point in knowing a percentage ... point is, you can’t demand more money without first knowing that every penny is being spent for the maximum value.

you do realise you've just totally contradicted yourself don't you?"

Oh! How so?

I thought my point was clear enough, but please feel free to elaborate ...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The underpin lie is the inflation figure.

Wages used to tie into inflation in a series of judering steps that kept standard of living roughly equal.

They say the inflation rate is 2.x%, but we buy a lot from Europe, and since brexit the currency has been devalued by over 10% so thats 10% more on everything we buy and 10% less earned on everything we sell. Houses are 6% more, now council tax will be 5.x% more.

But wages... Unless you are an MP, expect 1 or 2% max. Because that is the inflation rate, isn't it?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago

Bristol East

Low tax = few or no public services

Higher tax - more public services

I guess it depends whether you see things through what is in your own interest or the interest of the neighbourhood or society you are living in.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

My council is putting it up by 4.98%.I know a few people in the council and its the governments statutory services that are driving this up

The 4.98% council tax rise includes a 1.99% increase in standard council tax, and a 3% Adult Social Care precept fund.

Officials at the council say this means that approximately 75% of the Council's entire budget will be used to meet the cost of statutory, demand-led social care services.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"Low tax = few or no public services

Higher tax - more public services

I guess it depends whether you see things through what is in your own interest or the interest of the neighbourhood or society you are living in.

"

There are very few limits on the demand for public services. Whatever tax rises happen now, demand will outstrip supply again within a few years.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

It's shocking how central government has taken more power, including away from local councils. But rapidly pushed out the causes for people to have degraded qualities of life, whilst they will only blame the local council.

It's another of their divide and conquer strategies, where they typically just fire up the masses against each other.

It also can be timed, so that attention is taken off them. Don't be fooled. Maintain focus upon the shit that this government id causing.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?"

Actually the proportion of GDP paid in tax is incredible stable since the 1970s. We do pay more tax in an absolute sense, the problem is that demand has grown but the tax intake is always ~36% of GDP. Personally i don't want to pay more tax so people need to wipe their own parents asses when they get old.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The elephant in the room the ageing population.

Statutory services we all expect but don't want to pay for.

Children's services we expect but don't want to pay for.

The government now expects you the council tax payers to cough up the money it is not coming from central government it's coming out of your council tax.The age of austerity has passed the burden from state funded to council funded.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"The elephant in the room the ageing population.

Statutory services we all expect but don't want to pay for.

Children's services we expect but don't want to pay for.

The government now expects you the council tax payers to cough up the money it is not coming from central government it's coming out of your council tax.The age of austerity has passed the burden from state funded to council funded."

Should have never bailed out the cunting banks.

#fuckrbsintheassuntiltheydie

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The elephant in the room the ageing population.

Statutory services we all expect but don't want to pay for.

Children's services we expect but don't want to pay for.

The government now expects you the council tax payers to cough up the money it is not coming from central government it's coming out of your council tax.The age of austerity has passed the burden from state funded to council funded."

this ... coupled with more and more laws that require councils to legally take responsibility for certain social problems such as housing homeless people .... the 'bed and breakfast' industry has been creaming it in for decades in some urban areas ... more instances where welfare budget are just being handed over to landlords by the bin-bag full

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The council tax will rise "In England & Wales"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

It's a choice for it to rise for the public. It's a choice made by the government. How your council spends the money is a sideshow - it's the conservative government forcing them to take your money by having cut their income.

Even if they provide the exact same services each year, they need more money from somewhere for it. The fact that increased needs, social changes such as demographics and government forced demands are moving them to bankrupts, means you can only look to the government to solve the problem that they are largely the cause of.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

did everyone think it would get less?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anejohnkent6263Couple
over a year ago

canterbury

Has gone up under all governments so what's new x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Has gone up under all governments so what's new x"

whats new is every year you get less in return

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"By 6%, is it fair the boroughs have to increase it, as the government wont help them? It will hit the poorer areas the most. "

Of course the rise will hit the poor and poorest areas most. Disproportionately hitting the poor is what the Tories are about, they are Now approaching the 8th year of austerity which is in reality nothing more than an elaborate ruse to transfer wealth from the state to rich Tory backers and supporters.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oAnCouple
over a year ago

Streatham

I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

"

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes"

Many poor are trapped in a society that's leaching disproportionately from them, fostered by government action. Live in an expensive home and society and are poor, then it's a double whammy, though there is some potential for flexibility.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London


"Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?

Actually the proportion of GDP paid in tax is incredible stable since the 1970s. We do pay more tax in an absolute sense, the problem is that demand has grown but the tax intake is always ~36% of GDP. Personally i don't want to pay more tax so people need to wipe their own parents asses when they get old. "

General taxation is not the same as local taxation. We also had a larger proportion of.The population working and therefore net payers.

Conversely there is more to pay out on, especially health and social care.

I somewhat agree about the bankers. Some liquidity was needed but the terms should have been far harsher. Hell, there should have been some terms!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes"

Trapped?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oAnCouple
over a year ago

Streatham


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes"

If trapped in a expensive home maybe sell it and downsize it. Having a council home based on value rarher than occupancy would make foreiners who do not reside here pay their fair share

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?

Actually the proportion of GDP paid in tax is incredible stable since the 1970s. We do pay more tax in an absolute sense, the problem is that demand has grown but the tax intake is always ~36% of GDP. Personally i don't want to pay more tax so people need to wipe their own parents asses when they get old.

General taxation is not the same as local taxation. We also had a larger proportion of.The population working and therefore net payers.

Conversely there is more to pay out on, especially health and social care.

I somewhat agree about the bankers. Some liquidity was needed but the terms should have been far harsher. Hell, there should have been some terms!"

The 36% is all taxes but it's not fundamentally a money issue. There's no real limit to the demand for these services, not a limit that we could afford anyway. As long as people expect that government to wipe their ass and to take whatever risks with their health for the good old NHS to fix then the taxes will never be enough.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

If trapped in a expensive home maybe sell it and downsize it. Having a council home based on value rarher than occupancy would make foreiners who do not reside here pay their fair share"

Having a council home? There's thought!

I agree that non-occupied residences should be taxed at a premium rate based on an indexed property value. Investment will become a less attractive prospect.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

If trapped in a expensive home maybe sell it and downsize it. Having a council home based on value rarher than occupancy would make foreiners who do not reside here pay their fair share"

Council houses or ex council houses now leased out?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

If trapped in a expensive home maybe sell it and downsize it. Having a council home based on value rarher than occupancy would make foreiners who do not reside here pay their fair share

Having a council home? There's thought!

I agree that non-occupied residences should be taxed at a premium rate based on an indexed property value. Investment will become a less attractive prospect."

I'm not getting the correlation between a council home and foreigners who don't live here paying their fair share.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

If trapped in a expensive home maybe sell it and downsize it. Having a council home based on value rarher than occupancy would make foreiners who do not reside here pay their fair share

Having a council home? There's thought!

I agree that non-occupied residences should be taxed at a premium rate based on an indexed property value. Investment will become a less attractive prospect.

I'm not getting the correlation between a council home and foreigners who don't live here paying their fair share."

I was being facetious. There are barely any council houses. I don't know what the initial post meant either...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral


"It was bound to happen again, apparently minimum wage/living wage went up so why would everything else stay the same "
Sadly very true

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Either way we get fucked in the arse only winners are the fat cats and super rich x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

If trapped in a expensive home maybe sell it and downsize it. Having a council home based on value rarher than occupancy would make foreiners who do not reside here pay their fair share

Having a council home? There's thought!

I agree that non-occupied residences should be taxed at a premium rate based on an indexed property value. Investment will become a less attractive prospect.

I'm not getting the correlation between a council home and foreigners who don't live here paying their fair share.

I was being facetious. There are barely any council houses. I don't know what the initial post meant either..."

wasn't it Labour that said they would build thousands of council homes

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

"
successive governments have refused to do the necessary revaluation exercise - it is based on house values just from 1991

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

Many poor are trapped in a society that's leaching disproportionately from them, fostered by government action. Live in an expensive home and society and are poor, then it's a double whammy, though there is some potential for flexibility. "
the thing is that property is a very illiquid form of wealth, and the two life events that cause property to depreciate are divorce and sole occupancy prior to death.

Hang around property auctions for a while and you realise in need of modernization often means 'granny died here' and the house will sell for a third less than the local average to a buy to let parasite, sorry landlord.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

successive governments have refused to do the necessary revaluation exercise - it is based on house values just from 1991"
Nobody is brave enough to do that.Thats political suicide.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

Many poor are trapped in a society that's leaching disproportionately from them, fostered by government action. Live in an expensive home and society and are poor, then it's a double whammy, though there is some potential for flexibility. the thing is that property is a very illiquid form of wealth, and the two life events that cause property to depreciate are divorce and sole occupancy prior to death.

Hang around property auctions for a while and you realise in need of modernization often means 'granny died here' and the house will sell for a third less than the local average to a buy to let parasite, sorry landlord."

Your naivety of the housing market is evident in this statement. Where do you get this ideological crap?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?

Actually the proportion of GDP paid in tax is incredible stable since the 1970s. We do pay more tax in an absolute sense, the problem is that demand has grown but the tax intake is always ~36% of GDP. Personally i don't want to pay more tax so people need to wipe their own parents asses when they get old.

General taxation is not the same as local taxation. We also had a larger proportion of.The population working and therefore net payers.

Conversely there is more to pay out on, especially health and social care.

I somewhat agree about the bankers. Some liquidity was needed but the terms should have been far harsher. Hell, there should have been some terms!

The 36% is all taxes but it's not fundamentally a money issue. There's no real limit to the demand for these services, not a limit that we could afford anyway. As long as people expect that government to wipe their ass and to take whatever risks with their health for the good old NHS to fix then the taxes will never be enough. "

Surprise, surprise - since the crash, government have cut income to councils by £billions - funnily enough that has meant that services being received by citizens have been savagely cut. Your remark upon people getting arse wiped as an expectation couldn't be more extremely different to the reality.

That's services being savagely cut back, irrespective of what local population growth and service needs may truly be (they are higher than is being delivered).

This whole problem discussion is 100% caused by the government and is 100% within the scope of government to fix, without substantial council tax rises imposed on residents.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?

Actually the proportion of GDP paid in tax is incredible stable since the 1970s. We do pay more tax in an absolute sense, the problem is that demand has grown but the tax intake is always ~36% of GDP. Personally i don't want to pay more tax so people need to wipe their own parents asses when they get old.

General taxation is not the same as local taxation. We also had a larger proportion of.The population working and therefore net payers.

Conversely there is more to pay out on, especially health and social care.

I somewhat agree about the bankers. Some liquidity was needed but the terms should have been far harsher. Hell, there should have been some terms!

The 36% is all taxes but it's not fundamentally a money issue. There's no real limit to the demand for these services, not a limit that we could afford anyway. As long as people expect that government to wipe their ass and to take whatever risks with their health for the good old NHS to fix then the taxes will never be enough.

Surprise, surprise - since the crash, government have cut income to councils by £billions - funnily enough that has meant that services being received by citizens have been savagely cut. Your remark upon people getting arse wiped as an expectation couldn't be more extremely different to the reality.

That's services being savagely cut back, irrespective of what local population growth and service needs may truly be (they are higher than is being delivered).

This whole problem discussion is 100% caused by the government and is 100% within the scope of government to fix, without substantial council tax rises imposed on residents. "

You can't even imagine a world without the government doing everything for you, how sad.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty"

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government. "

Who would pay the people who have to give up work, to look after an old relative? Would they be guaranteed their job back when the person dies? What about respite, for people caring long term?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government. "
The Chinese do it.Im not Chinese though.Its not in our culture to live with the old folks.No parent wants to be a burden on their children.Thats standard.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xplorer13Man
over a year ago

glenrothes

Our council tax has already gone up! Wish our wages went up by 6%

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government. "

how do you propose that folks earn money to keep their family and act as carer to their aged parents all at the same time ? ... expecially after doing as told by the governent and moving hundreds of miles away from home to find work? .... you clearly haven't thought much about the practicalities of the issue have you ... but then nor did the thatcher government when tebbit famously advocated 'get on your bike' ... sometimes you need to forget the hypothesis of living solely by numbers and get with the real world

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government. The Chinese do it.Im not Chinese though.Its not in our culture to live with the old folks.No parent wants to be a burden on their children.Thats standard."

indeed bobby boy, what was it you said, you would rather execute or recycle pensioners over 65

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government. The Chinese do it.Im not Chinese though.Its not in our culture to live with the old folks.No parent wants to be a burden on their children.Thats standard."

My mum lives with one of my sisters,and when that sister moved miles from us, my mum went to live with my younger sister, who works. Luckily, my mother doesn't need much looking after, even though she is 87. If she ever needs personal care I will help, or she can move in with me. I have no career to worry about losing.

My brother's mother in law also lives with him, his wife and their children. He has a big house and they works from home.

Not everyone is fortunate to not have to give up work to look after someone. Would you rather they gave up a good job to live on carers allowance?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government. The Chinese do it.Im not Chinese though.Its not in our culture to live with the old folks.No parent wants to be a burden on their children.Thats standard.

indeed bobby boy, what was it you said, you would rather execute or recycle pensioners over 65 "

How long does he have left?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

Many poor are trapped in a society that's leaching disproportionately from them, fostered by government action. Live in an expensive home and society and are poor, then it's a double whammy, though there is some potential for flexibility. the thing is that property is a very illiquid form of wealth, and the two life events that cause property to depreciate are divorce and sole occupancy prior to death.

Hang around property auctions for a while and you realise in need of modernization often means 'granny died here' and the house will sell for a third less than the local average to a buy to let parasite, sorry landlord.

Your naivety of the housing market is evident in this statement. Where do you get this ideological crap? "
Ad hominem abuse is no substitute for rebuttal.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government. The Chinese do it.Im not Chinese though.Its not in our culture to live with the old folks.No parent wants to be a burden on their children.Thats standard.

indeed bobby boy, what was it you said, you would rather execute or recycle pensioners over 65 "
Recycle of course I'm a green voter.Only when your no longer useful and a burden.That could be 65 in your case . However maybe 90 if your useful grandpa.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?

Actually the proportion of GDP paid in tax is incredible stable since the 1970s. We do pay more tax in an absolute sense, the problem is that demand has grown but the tax intake is always ~36% of GDP. Personally i don't want to pay more tax so people need to wipe their own parents asses when they get old.

General taxation is not the same as local taxation. We also had a larger proportion of.The population working and therefore net payers.

Conversely there is more to pay out on, especially health and social care.

I somewhat agree about the bankers. Some liquidity was needed but the terms should have been far harsher. Hell, there should have been some terms!

The 36% is all taxes but it's not fundamentally a money issue. There's no real limit to the demand for these services, not a limit that we could afford anyway. As long as people expect that government to wipe their ass and to take whatever risks with their health for the good old NHS to fix then the taxes will never be enough.

Surprise, surprise - since the crash, government have cut income to councils by £billions - funnily enough that has meant that services being received by citizens have been savagely cut. Your remark upon people getting arse wiped as an expectation couldn't be more extremely different to the reality.

That's services being savagely cut back, irrespective of what local population growth and service needs may truly be (they are higher than is being delivered).

This whole problem discussion is 100% caused by the government and is 100% within the scope of government to fix, without substantial council tax rises imposed on residents.

You can't even imagine a world without the government doing everything for you, how sad. "

Services that have been agreed as the responsibilities of the various elements of government, your fellow citizens would rightly expect to be delivered from that source. You pay for the services, whether emergency, police, fire, ambulance services and your society relies on the others, in order to continue to function: eg. taxation, driver licensing, immigration, security and military services - you get the picture. As tax payers, you are funding those services and presumably expect them?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

the government do next to fuck all any more anyway ... if they shirk any more of their responsibility then what's the point of government ... just fuck them off altogether and let people get on with it themselves.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government.

Who would pay the people who have to give up work, to look after an old relative? Would they be guaranteed their job back when the person dies? What about respite, for people caring long term? "

Remember when your parents wiped your ass - Did they have jobs?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?

Actually the proportion of GDP paid in tax is incredible stable since the 1970s. We do pay more tax in an absolute sense, the problem is that demand has grown but the tax intake is always ~36% of GDP. Personally i don't want to pay more tax so people need to wipe their own parents asses when they get old.

General taxation is not the same as local taxation. We also had a larger proportion of.The population working and therefore net payers.

Conversely there is more to pay out on, especially health and social care.

I somewhat agree about the bankers. Some liquidity was needed but the terms should have been far harsher. Hell, there should have been some terms!

The 36% is all taxes but it's not fundamentally a money issue. There's no real limit to the demand for these services, not a limit that we could afford anyway. As long as people expect that government to wipe their ass and to take whatever risks with their health for the good old NHS to fix then the taxes will never be enough.

Surprise, surprise - since the crash, government have cut income to councils by £billions - funnily enough that has meant that services being received by citizens have been savagely cut. Your remark upon people getting arse wiped as an expectation couldn't be more extremely different to the reality.

That's services being savagely cut back, irrespective of what local population growth and service needs may truly be (they are higher than is being delivered).

This whole problem discussion is 100% caused by the government and is 100% within the scope of government to fix, without substantial council tax rises imposed on residents.

You can't even imagine a world without the government doing everything for you, how sad.

Services that have been agreed as the responsibilities of the various elements of government, your fellow citizens would rightly expect to be delivered from that source. You pay for the services, whether emergency, police, fire, ambulance services and your society relies on the others, in order to continue to function: eg. taxation, driver licensing, immigration, security and military services - you get the picture. As tax payers, you are funding those services and presumably expect them?"

What was agreed was based on various assumptions about population, life expectancy and work force size. None of those assumptions are valid and the level of service people expect is unsustainable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

Many poor are trapped in a society that's leaching disproportionately from them, fostered by government action. Live in an expensive home and society and are poor, then it's a double whammy, though there is some potential for flexibility. the thing is that property is a very illiquid form of wealth, and the two life events that cause property to depreciate are divorce and sole occupancy prior to death.

Hang around property auctions for a while and you realise in need of modernization often means 'granny died here' and the house will sell for a third less than the local average to a buy to let parasite, sorry landlord.

Your naivety of the housing market is evident in this statement. Where do you get this ideological crap? Ad hominem abuse is no substitute for rebuttal."

Calling landlords parasites is as hominem. Your assumptions about property auctions are objectively false.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"the government do next to fuck all any more anyway ... if they shirk any more of their responsibility then what's the point of government ... just fuck them off altogether and let people get on with it themselves."

Now that's a great idea.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government.

Who would pay the people who have to give up work, to look after an old relative? Would they be guaranteed their job back when the person dies? What about respite, for people caring long term?

Remember when your parents wiped your ass - Did they have jobs?"

no .... my mother gave up her job and went back to work when i started school .... it was the norm

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"people expecting government to wipe their arses? fuck yeah ... social care of the old and frail is something that we have contributed to as a safety net all out lives ... wiping frail peoples arses is not just a necessity, it's a government responsibilty

Imagine how awful society would be if people looked after their parents in old age instead of palming them off to the government.

Who would pay the people who have to give up work, to look after an old relative? Would they be guaranteed their job back when the person dies? What about respite, for people caring long term?

Remember when your parents wiped your ass - Did they have jobs?

no .... my mother gave up her job and went back to work when i started school .... it was the norm "

just to add to that. my grandmother was allowed to retire at 60. she lived on the same street because it was prior to tebbits petulant demands about bicycles, and she was able to help my parents with day care.....

it's utterly obvious that you still haven't thought any of this through.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?

Actually the proportion of GDP paid in tax is incredible stable since the 1970s. We do pay more tax in an absolute sense, the problem is that demand has grown but the tax intake is always ~36% of GDP. Personally i don't want to pay more tax so people need to wipe their own parents asses when they get old.

General taxation is not the same as local taxation. We also had a larger proportion of.The population working and therefore net payers.

Conversely there is more to pay out on, especially health and social care.

I somewhat agree about the bankers. Some liquidity was needed but the terms should have been far harsher. Hell, there should have been some terms!

The 36% is all taxes but it's not fundamentally a money issue. There's no real limit to the demand for these services, not a limit that we could afford anyway. As long as people expect that government to wipe their ass and to take whatever risks with their health for the good old NHS to fix then the taxes will never be enough.

Surprise, surprise - since the crash, government have cut income to councils by £billions - funnily enough that has meant that services being received by citizens have been savagely cut. Your remark upon people getting arse wiped as an expectation couldn't be more extremely different to the reality.

That's services being savagely cut back, irrespective of what local population growth and service needs may truly be (they are higher than is being delivered).

This whole problem discussion is 100% caused by the government and is 100% within the scope of government to fix, without substantial council tax rises imposed on residents.

You can't even imagine a world without the government doing everything for you, how sad.

Services that have been agreed as the responsibilities of the various elements of government, your fellow citizens would rightly expect to be delivered from that source. You pay for the services, whether emergency, police, fire, ambulance services and your society relies on the others, in order to continue to function: eg. taxation, driver licensing, immigration, security and military services - you get the picture. As tax payers, you are funding those services and presumably expect them?

What was agreed was based on various assumptions about population, life expectancy and work force size. None of those assumptions are valid and the level of service people expect is unsustainable. "

no ... it's unsustainable on todays extremely low centralised tax take. to expect people to give up their, work, lives etc in the prime of their earning ability decimates productivity.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"By 6%, is it fair the boroughs have to increase it, as the government wont help them? It will hit the poorer areas the most. "

Mine will increase by 6%. Normally increases by 4% a year anyway, yet the service they provide is still falling apart.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"By 6%, is it fair the boroughs have to increase it, as the government wont help them? It will hit the poorer areas the most.

Mine will increase by 6%. Normally increases by 4% a year anyway, yet the service they provide is still falling apart."

that'll be because the funding from central government has been obliterated out of all existance. a coupled with the re-installation of right to buy where te council are obliged to hand over all of the money from thye sales to the exchequer, it's little wonder services are dwindling. if you to take a look at the declarations of interest for memebers of parliament you will see that various tory mp's or their families are heavily invested in businesses that fill the void where once the councils occupied.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercuryMan
over a year ago

Grantham


"By 6%, is it fair the boroughs have to increase it, as the government wont help them? It will hit the poorer areas the most.

Mine will increase by 6%. Normally increases by 4% a year anyway, yet the service they provide is still falling apart.

that'll be because the funding from central government has been obliterated out of all existance. a coupled with the re-installation of right to buy where te council are obliged to hand over all of the money from thye sales to the exchequer, it's little wonder services are dwindling. if you to take a look at the declarations of interest for memebers of parliament you will see that various tory mp's or their families are heavily invested in businesses that fill the void where once the councils occupied."

Councils retain about 30% of money received from Right To Buy, so not all goes to the Exchequer.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

70% asset stripping is ok then? i don't think so

40% of right to buy homes are being let to those in receipt of benefit, so not only have the councils been asset stripped they are now paying for the privilege in perpituity

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The only services councils are providing now are statutory services.I was chatting to a strategic lead and was told the first question they ask when implementing cuts this year is."Is it Statutory?"If not stop all funding now,because of the dire financial situation they are in.

So many areas of young person's services and childrens services are being stopped.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The only services councils are providing now are statutory services.I was chatting to a strategic lead and was told the first question they ask when implementing cuts this year is."Is it Statutory?"If not stop all funding now,because of the dire financial situation they are in.

So many areas of young person's services and childrens services are being stopped."

there's a similarity to this throughout all services from fire brigades, NHS, schools, police, etc etc etc

the societal system has been made destitute in just 8 years

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?

Actually the proportion of GDP paid in tax is incredible stable since the 1970s. We do pay more tax in an absolute sense, the problem is that demand has grown but the tax intake is always ~36% of GDP. Personally i don't want to pay more tax so people need to wipe their own parents asses when they get old.

General taxation is not the same as local taxation. We also had a larger proportion of.The population working and therefore net payers.

Conversely there is more to pay out on, especially health and social care.

I somewhat agree about the bankers. Some liquidity was needed but the terms should have been far harsher. Hell, there should have been some terms!

The 36% is all taxes but it's not fundamentally a money issue. There's no real limit to the demand for these services, not a limit that we could afford anyway. As long as people expect that government to wipe their ass and to take whatever risks with their health for the good old NHS to fix then the taxes will never be enough.

Surprise, surprise - since the crash, government have cut income to councils by £billions - funnily enough that has meant that services being received by citizens have been savagely cut. Your remark upon people getting arse wiped as an expectation couldn't be more extremely different to the reality.

That's services being savagely cut back, irrespective of what local population growth and service needs may truly be (they are higher than is being delivered).

This whole problem discussion is 100% caused by the government and is 100% within the scope of government to fix, without substantial council tax rises imposed on residents.

You can't even imagine a world without the government doing everything for you, how sad.

Services that have been agreed as the responsibilities of the various elements of government, your fellow citizens would rightly expect to be delivered from that source. You pay for the services, whether emergency, police, fire, ambulance services and your society relies on the others, in order to continue to function: eg. taxation, driver licensing, immigration, security and military services - you get the picture. As tax payers, you are funding those services and presumably expect them?

What was agreed was based on various assumptions about population, life expectancy and work force size. None of those assumptions are valid and the level of service people expect is unsustainable. "

We're talking about an annual contract of agreement between the individual and the state - ie. now, 2018, not some fanciful time in the past. People are paying for services, into central government and local councils, as an example, with funding to both elements responsible for services delivered at a local level. What you as a local resident influence your representatives to deliver is your own choice. But the actual scope and quality of services being delivered locally has diminished since 2010, due to multi-billion pound cuts of the money that you have contributed, being made to local budgets. You paid but you didn't get the services and so council tax is rising.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The government continued to cut funding year on year to public services and at the same time made promises to the electorate of a high standard of services.Theyve passed the problem down to a local level and that's where it's going to stay.The hard decisions are now being made by councils.The most vulnerable and poorest and youngest are the real victims of austerity.If you got a problem with you council tax bill take it up with the government.Its got fuck all to do with local level

Expect many services to become traded services ,if they haven't already.Its inevitable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"

We're talking about an annual contract of agreement between the individual and the state - ie. now, 2018, not some fanciful time in the past. People are paying for services, into central government and local councils, as an example, with funding to both elements responsible for services delivered at a local level. What you as a local resident influence your representatives to deliver is your own choice. But the actual scope and quality of services being delivered locally has diminished since 2010, due to multi-billion pound cuts of the money that you have contributed, being made to local budgets. You paid but you didn't get the services and so council tax is rising."

It's not simply an annual thing, the state has borrowed 86% of GDP to pay for things already consumed, that future generations must pay for but not consume. You advocate adding to that.

There was no golden era before 2010 either, some services were better but they were funded by borrowing.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"Somebody else's fault?

I don't think so. As soon as we have to pay more for the services that we or the most vulnerable receive then it must be down to waste or laziness.

Councils know full well that increased council leads to election disaster. What must the situation be like if they feel that they have no choice?

The fact is the country is in debt mainly because we don't pay enough for what we expect.

If prices have been going up but we've not been paying more what did we expect to happen?

It's absolutely correct to expect good management and working practices in the public service, but that certainly isn't the only problem.

Councillors are also unpaid and non-specialist working in their spare time. We don't, as a country, like "professional" politicians or want to pay them much so, again, what do we expect?

Actually the proportion of GDP paid in tax is incredible stable since the 1970s. We do pay more tax in an absolute sense, the problem is that demand has grown but the tax intake is always ~36% of GDP. Personally i don't want to pay more tax so people need to wipe their own parents asses when they get old.

General taxation is not the same as local taxation. We also had a larger proportion of.The population working and therefore net payers.

Conversely there is more to pay out on, especially health and social care.

I somewhat agree about the bankers. Some liquidity was needed but the terms should have been far harsher. Hell, there should have been some terms!

The 36% is all taxes but it's not fundamentally a money issue. There's no real limit to the demand for these services, not a limit that we could afford anyway. As long as people expect that government to wipe their ass and to take whatever risks with their health for the good old NHS to fix then the taxes will never be enough.

Surprise, surprise - since the crash, government have cut income to councils by £billions - funnily enough that has meant that services being received by citizens have been savagely cut. Your remark upon people getting arse wiped as an expectation couldn't be more extremely different to the reality.

That's services being savagely cut back, irrespective of what local population growth and service needs may truly be (they are higher than is being delivered).

This whole problem discussion is 100% caused by the government and is 100% within the scope of government to fix, without substantial council tax rises imposed on residents.

You can't even imagine a world without the government doing everything for you, how sad.

Services that have been agreed as the responsibilities of the various elements of government, your fellow citizens would rightly expect to be delivered from that source. You pay for the services, whether emergency, police, fire, ambulance services and your society relies on the others, in order to continue to function: eg. taxation, driver licensing, immigration, security and military services - you get the picture. As tax payers, you are funding those services and presumably expect them?

What was agreed was based on various assumptions about population, life expectancy and work force size. None of those assumptions are valid and the level of service people expect is unsustainable.

no ... it's unsustainable on todays extremely low centralised tax take. to expect people to give up their, work, lives etc in the prime of their earning ability decimates productivity."

Lol, that tax take is not low, it's the same % of GDP it's been since the 1970's. Lefties talking about productivity, give me a break. You can work full time and still wipe your parents ass twice a day, it's what happens in the vast majority of countries in the world. It always makes me laugh how socialists are never very sociable, you can't outsource running your own family.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" that tax take is not low, it's the same % of GDP it's been since the 1970's. "

so despite the incoherent ramblings of descriptive economists attempting to guide the country to a higher plain of capitalist existance, we are no further forward than we were 50 years ago .... that sums up the extent of usefulness that economists have ... basically diddly squat.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


" that tax take is not low, it's the same % of GDP it's been since the 1970's.

so despite the incoherent ramblings of descriptive economists attempting to guide the country to a higher plain of capitalist existance, we are no further forward than we were 50 years ago .... that sums up the extent of usefulness that economists have ... basically diddly squat.

"

Anyone who thinks there's a better non-capitalist way to organise the economy needs to revist their history lessons.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" Anyone who thinks there's a better non-capitalist way to organise the economy needs to revist their history lessons. "

your hypotheses on life are nothing more than that. your imaturity and lack of life experience underlies the vacuous comments you are posting which are comprised of part anecdote and part idealism. one day you might grow up to realise what exactly it is like to be responsible for two parents who are not just housebound, but are completely unable to physically undertake the most basic tasks required to live life. ulike children, aging parents do not become more independent but quite the opposite.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


" Anyone who thinks there's a better non-capitalist way to organise the economy needs to revist their history lessons.

your hypotheses on life are nothing more than that. your imaturity and lack of life experience underlies the vacuous comments you are posting which are comprised of part anecdote and part idealism. one day you might grow up to realise what exactly it is like to be responsible for two parents who are not just housebound, but are completely unable to physically undertake the most basic tasks required to live life. ulike children, aging parents do not become more independent but quite the opposite. "

And yours are just the banal ramblings of someone totally disconnected from the real world. Whenever theres a fact, you respond with ideology.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" And yours are just the banal ramblings of someone totally disconnected from the real world. Whenever theres a fact, you respond with ideology."

i can see from your abusive tone that you have nothing constructive to offer to the debate other than ad hominem and probably best that you refrain from posting further to be fair.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


" And yours are just the banal ramblings of someone totally disconnected from the real world. Whenever theres a fact, you respond with ideology.

i can see from your abusive tone that you have nothing constructive to offer to the debate other than ad hominem and probably best that you refrain from posting further to be fair."

Pot and kettle.

Here are the facts: taxes are normal / high, services are poor and debt is extremely high. If the country had spare money, which is doesn't, then there are debts to be paid. If you can tell me how you get better services without some variation of the money tree arguement then I'm all ears.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

no, that's your job. justify your education and come up with some realistic plan that isn't just based on wildly idealistic nonsense, because that all your contribution is based on thus far.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

high tax? wtf???? this country is officially by comparison to others, one of the lowest direct taxed nations on earth.

and that is an economic fact.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" And yours are just the banal ramblings of someone totally disconnected from the real world. Whenever theres a fact, you respond with ideology.

i can see from your abusive tone that you have nothing constructive to offer to the debate other than ad hominem and probably best that you refrain from posting further to be fair.

Pot and kettle.

"

really ... where exactly did i personally attck you?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"high tax? wtf???? this country is officially by comparison to others, one of the lowest direct taxed nations on earth.

and that is an economic fact. "

A pound of tax is a pound of tax, irrelevant whether it's direct or not. Our government does love a good stealth tax. Anyway I'm perfectly happy with the status quo, relative to anything you'd prefer so no i won't be answering your 101 questions that simply serve to avoid you having to defend your indefensible anti-capitalist ideas.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"high tax? wtf???? this country is officially by comparison to others, one of the lowest direct taxed nations on earth.

and that is an economic fact.

A pound of tax is a pound of tax, irrelevant whether it's direct or not. Our government does love a good stealth tax. Anyway I'm perfectly happy with the status quo, relative to anything you'd prefer so no i won't be answering your 101 questions that simply serve to avoid you having to defend your indefensible anti-capitalist ideas. "

your theorising had reached a cul-de-sac so it's probably just as well that you stop flogging your dead horse and leave the thread i agree

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"

We're talking about an annual contract of agreement between the individual and the state - ie. now, 2018, not some fanciful time in the past. People are paying for services, into central government and local councils, as an example, with funding to both elements responsible for services delivered at a local level. What you as a local resident influence your representatives to deliver is your own choice. But the actual scope and quality of services being delivered locally has diminished since 2010, due to multi-billion pound cuts of the money that you have contributed, being made to local budgets. You paid but you didn't get the services and so council tax is rising.

It's not simply an annual thing, the state has borrowed 86% of GDP to pay for things already consumed, that future generations must pay for but not consume. You advocate adding to that.

There was no golden era before 2010 either, some services were better but they were funded by borrowing. "

There is still a social obligation upon government to deliver the services that it is responsible for and that are within the range of services that you as a citizen, quite rightly expect from government agencies.

Put aside the issues of government debt and how borrowing is done: separate topic. Your government, with their obligations to you as citizens. At a granular level, you would presumably not accept it if police or any other service was withdrawn tomorrow. None of the other responsibilities of your government should be diminished in a similar way, where there is no democratic mandate for that withdrawal.

Residents are tax payers, who are continuously paying for the services to be delivered, each and every year. In part, you pay council tax, as part of your contract with local government, for the provision of those services. Other council services are paid for by other forms of taxation, collected by central government, with redistribution of collected tax receipts made to the local agency responsible. You seem flippantly to overlook these concepts and misdirect onto other very different subjects.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


" Anyone who thinks there's a better non-capitalist way to organise the economy needs to revist their history lessons.

your hypotheses on life are nothing more than that. your imaturity and lack of life experience underlies the vacuous comments you are posting which are comprised of part anecdote and part idealism. one day you might grow up to realise what exactly it is like to be responsible for two parents who are not just housebound, but are completely unable to physically undertake the most basic tasks required to live life. ulike children, aging parents do not become more independent but quite the opposite.

And yours are just the banal ramblings of someone totally disconnected from the real world. Whenever theres a fact, you respond with ideology."

pot kettle black

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"

We're talking about an annual contract of agreement between the individual and the state - ie. now, 2018, not some fanciful time in the past. People are paying for services, into central government and local councils, as an example, with funding to both elements responsible for services delivered at a local level. What you as a local resident influence your representatives to deliver is your own choice. But the actual scope and quality of services being delivered locally has diminished since 2010, due to multi-billion pound cuts of the money that you have contributed, being made to local budgets. You paid but you didn't get the services and so council tax is rising.

It's not simply an annual thing, the state has borrowed 86% of GDP to pay for things already consumed, that future generations must pay for but not consume. You advocate adding to that.

There was no golden era before 2010 either, some services were better but they were funded by borrowing.

There is still a social obligation upon government to deliver the services that it is responsible for and that are within the range of services that you as a citizen, quite rightly expect from government agencies.

Put aside the issues of government debt and how borrowing is done: separate topic. Your government, with their obligations to you as citizens. At a granular level, you would presumably not accept it if police or any other service was withdrawn tomorrow. None of the other responsibilities of your government should be diminished in a similar way, where there is no democratic mandate for that withdrawal.

Residents are tax payers, who are continuously paying for the services to be delivered, each and every year. In part, you pay council tax, as part of your contract with local government, for the provision of those services. Other council services are paid for by other forms of taxation, collected by central government, with redistribution of collected tax receipts made to the local agency responsible. You seem flippantly to overlook these concepts and misdirect onto other very different subjects."

Sorry but that really doesn't make sense. You can't just say "there's a social obligation" but funding it is a seperate issue! How exactly who you fulfil the social obligation if you were in their shoes? What exactly do you want them to do, given the resources and debts they have?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


" Anyone who thinks there's a better non-capitalist way to organise the economy needs to revist their history lessons.

your hypotheses on life are nothing more than that. your imaturity and lack of life experience underlies the vacuous comments you are posting which are comprised of part anecdote and part idealism. one day you might grow up to realise what exactly it is like to be responsible for two parents who are not just housebound, but are completely unable to physically undertake the most basic tasks required to live life. ulike children, aging parents do not become more independent but quite the opposite.

And yours are just the banal ramblings of someone totally disconnected from the real world. Whenever theres a fact, you respond with ideology.

pot kettle black "

Just facts I'm afraid, taxes are high, the government is loaded with debt and there is no magic tree that's coming to our rescue. Capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the other ones that have been tried.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

uk direct taxes are amongst the lowest in the world ... absolute economic fact ... therein lies the problem

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"uk direct taxes are amongst the lowest in the world ... absolute economic fact ... therein lies the problem"

£3000+ a year is much more than I get in return

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty property

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

Many poor are trapped in a society that's leaching disproportionately from them, fostered by government action. Live in an expensive home and society and are poor, then it's a double whammy, though there is some potential for flexibility. the thing is that property is a very illiquid form of wealth, and the two life events that cause property to depreciate are divorce and sole occupancy prior to death.

Hang around property auctions for a while and you realise in need of modernization often means 'granny died here' and the house will sell for a third less than the local average to a buy to let parasite, sorry landlord.

Your naivety of the housing market is evident in this statement. Where do you get this ideological crap? Ad hominem abuse is no substitute for rebuttal.

Calling landlords parasites is as hominem. Your assumptions about property auctions are objectively false. "
describing the rentier class as parasitic us a long standing trope in economic thought - you may dislike it but a huge element in eighteenth century economic thought was the conflict between the landlord class and productive capitalism. If you want to claim that objective facts are on your side produce some evidence.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *tace 309TV/TS
over a year ago

durham


"I think council tax should be based on

. the value of your property like in other countries so that as a percentage the rich pay more.

. no exemptions for empty prop

some poor are trapped in expensive homes

Many poor are trapped in a society that's leaching disproportionately from them, fostered by government action. Live in an expensive home and society and are poor, then it's a double whammy, though there is some potential for flexibility. the thing is that property is a very illiquid form of wealth, and the two life events that cause property to depreciate are divorce and sole occupancy prior to death.

Hang around property auctions for a while and you realise in need of modernization often means 'granny died here' and the house will sell for a third less than the local average to a buy to let parasite, sorry landlord.

Your naivety of the housing market is evident in this statement. Where do you get this ideological crap? Ad hominem abuse is no substitute for rebuttal.

Calling landlords parasites is as hominem. Your assumptions about property auctions are objectively false. describing the rentier class as parasitic us a long standing trope in economic thought - you may dislike it but a huge element in eighteenth century economic thought was the conflict between the landlord class and productive capitalism. If you want to claim that objective facts are on your side produce some evidence."
there is no exemption for empty properties up here .you are charged 150% on your bill if the property is empty

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

In Scotland we had no council tax rises in years.

It was all to make the snp look good but it was only a delay. Our councils take the blame for cutting servises.

The snp have also exasperated the problem by demanding councils fund the snp vanity projects !!!

No one likes their councils no matter where they live but I think my local council in Greenock have done well considering the financial pressure placed on them by the snp.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"In Scotland we had no council tax rises in years.

It was all to make the snp look good but it was only a delay. Our councils take the blame for cutting servises.

The snp have also exasperated the problem by demanding councils fund the snp vanity projects !!!

No one likes their councils no matter where they live but I think my local council in Greenock have done well considering the financial pressure placed on them by the snp."

20 local authorities are putting up Council tax by 3% this week, most are dated tomorrow 16th Feb

.

2 local authorities are putting council tax up by 2.5%

.

Perth & Kinross council tax is going up by 2%

.

8 will remain same, 0% rise

.

?All councils have the power to raise the basic council tax bill by up to 3%. This affects every band from A to H. But in all areas, bills in Bands E to H will rise by at least £2 to £10 a week because of national changes to the system. That rise will be on top of any 3% local rises

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anejohnkent6263Couple
over a year ago

canterbury

Labour give it all the Billy big gonads about council houses etc....how many did the Lionel Blair government build....oh not many ....big Tonys new Labour was all about ...new torys in discuise and the Labour idiots bought it lol xxxhe and his family doing very well from the property market as most Labour mps do as well xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Labour give it all the Billy big gonads about council houses etc....how many did the Lionel Blair government build....oh not many ....big Tonys new Labour was all about ...new torys in discuise and the Labour idiots bought it lol xxxhe and his family doing very well from the property market as most Labour mps do as well xx"
..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anejohnkent6263Couple
over a year ago

canterbury

Not a rant at all agree with u

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x"

According to crisis, 4/5 homeless people living on the street are regular drug users. They are on the streets because they make bad life choices, it's silliness to say that people who made good life choices should give up what they have gained to reward those who made bad life choices.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x"

We could eat the rich or better still serve them up to the poor.

Viva la revolution.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I can't see why our Government just cut the bridge price in half instead of it being free. God the money we would have and then it hits me the conservatives won't have that going on, well not without a larger slice of the money pie. .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x

We could eat the rich or better still serve them up to the poor.

Viva la revolution.

"

jeez, bob, you want to execute & recycle pensioners, and now you want to eat the rich too

is anyone safe from you

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x

We could eat the rich or better still serve them up to the poor.

Viva la revolution.

jeez, bob, you want to execute & recycle pensioners, and now you want to eat the rich too

is anyone safe from you "
Old rich people beware.... They've been drinking good wine all their lives and they are salty.

Seasoned and marinated.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x

According to crisis, 4/5 homeless people living on the street are regular drug users. They are on the streets because they make bad life choices, it's silliness to say that people who made good life choices should give up what they have gained to reward those who made bad life choices. "

Not all homeless is self inflicted most ex servicemen, violence abuse can't afford homes hidden homelessness hostels sofa surfers etc homeless are people too and we have people dying on our streets everyday x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"

We're talking about an annual contract of agreement between the individual and the state - ie. now, 2018, not some fanciful time in the past. People are paying for services, into central government and local councils, as an example, with funding to both elements responsible for services delivered at a local level. What you as a local resident influence your representatives to deliver is your own choice. But the actual scope and quality of services being delivered locally has diminished since 2010, due to multi-billion pound cuts of the money that you have contributed, being made to local budgets. You paid but you didn't get the services and so council tax is rising.

It's not simply an annual thing, the state has borrowed 86% of GDP to pay for things already consumed, that future generations must pay for but not consume. You advocate adding to that.

There was no golden era before 2010 either, some services were better but they were funded by borrowing.

There is still a social obligation upon government to deliver the services that it is responsible for and that are within the range of services that you as a citizen, quite rightly expect from government agencies.

Put aside the issues of government debt and how borrowing is done: separate topic. Your government, with their obligations to you as citizens. At a granular level, you would presumably not accept it if police or any other service was withdrawn tomorrow. None of the other responsibilities of your government should be diminished in a similar way, where there is no democratic mandate for that withdrawal.

Residents are tax payers, who are continuously paying for the services to be delivered, each and every year. In part, you pay council tax, as part of your contract with local government, for the provision of those services. Other council services are paid for by other forms of taxation, collected by central government, with redistribution of collected tax receipts made to the local agency responsible. You seem flippantly to overlook these concepts and misdirect onto other very different subjects.

Sorry but that really doesn't make sense. You can't just say "there's a social obligation" but funding it is a seperate issue! How exactly who you fulfil the social obligation if you were in their shoes? What exactly do you want them to do, given the resources and debts they have? "

There is a social obligation for government agencies to deliver the services, which are being paid for, via taxation, by the UK residents who rightly expect them. The issue of government borrowing is a separate point.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x

According to crisis, 4/5 homeless people living on the street are regular drug users. They are on the streets because they make bad life choices, it's silliness to say that people who made good life choices should give up what they have gained to reward those who made bad life choices. "

Correlation does not equal causation, of course. Your comment 'They are on the streets because they make bad life choices' I note isn't backed up with evidence either. As a mental health charity states 'what really needs to be highlighted is the two-way relationship between homelessness and mental health.' Which highlights the incredibly important aspect of mental - which most of us know hasn't been supported appropriately by government.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

The council tax is rising because government has insisted on reducing £billions from the budgets that councils are given from wider taxation income. Your services in the UK have been cut, because for many consecutive years, the councils haven't had the tax income that they should have.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x

According to crisis, 4/5 homeless people living on the street are regular drug users. They are on the streets because they make bad life choices, it's silliness to say that people who made good life choices should give up what they have gained to reward those who made bad life choices.

Not all homeless is self inflicted most ex servicemen, violence abuse can't afford homes hidden homelessness hostels sofa surfers etc homeless are people too and we have people dying on our streets everyday x"

True I was working with an x service man on building site just before xmas who had been on the streets that summer.Some people look down their noses at people on the streets and assume its a life choice.They lack obviously lack empathy for those less fortunate..Sad.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x

According to crisis, 4/5 homeless people living on the street are regular drug users. They are on the streets because they make bad life choices, it's silliness to say that people who made good life choices should give up what they have gained to reward those who made bad life choices.

Correlation does not equal causation, of course. Your comment 'They are on the streets because they make bad life choices' I note isn't backed up with evidence either. As a mental health charity states 'what really needs to be highlighted is the two-way relationship between homelessness and mental health.' Which highlights the incredibly important aspect of mental - which most of us know hasn't been supported appropriately by government."

Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x

According to crisis, 4/5 homeless people living on the street are regular drug users. They are on the streets because they make bad life choices, it's silliness to say that people who made good life choices should give up what they have gained to reward those who made bad life choices.

Correlation does not equal causation, of course. Your comment 'They are on the streets because they make bad life choices' I note isn't backed up with evidence either. As a mental health charity states 'what really needs to be highlighted is the two-way relationship between homelessness and mental health.' Which highlights the incredibly important aspect of mental - which most of us know hasn't been supported appropriately by government.

Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices? "

that's a very naive, immature and uninformed post ... you need to study sociology in more detail

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x

According to crisis, 4/5 homeless people living on the street are regular drug users. They are on the streets because they make bad life choices, it's silliness to say that people who made good life choices should give up what they have gained to reward those who made bad life choices.

Correlation does not equal causation, of course. Your comment 'They are on the streets because they make bad life choices' I note isn't backed up with evidence either. As a mental health charity states 'what really needs to be highlighted is the two-way relationship between homelessness and mental health.' Which highlights the incredibly important aspect of mental - which most of us know hasn't been supported appropriately by government.

Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices?

that's a very naive, immature and uninformed post ... you need to study sociology in more detail"

Any facts to back that up or just more opinion?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Any facts to back that up or just more opinion? "

using the phrase 'life choices' to underpin a standpoint in a sociological debate? that's a failed assigment right there with a footnote in red from your tutor/lecturer calling your work naive and immature

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"

Any facts to back that up or just more opinion?

using the phrase 'life choices' to underpin a standpoint in a sociological debate? that's a failed assigment right there with a footnote in red from your tutor/lecturer calling your work naive and immature "

So "no" then...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

no more or less than your effort ...

'Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices?'

what was it you said earlier ... ah yes ... pot, kettle

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"no more or less than your effort ...

'Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices?'

what was it you said earlier ... ah yes ... pot, kettle

"

So 4/5 take illegal drugs but we just ignore that because it doesn't suit our ideology. Just like you can't explain how social services are meant to be funded without a magic money tree.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"no more or less than your effort ...

'Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices?'

what was it you said earlier ... ah yes ... pot, kettle

So 4/5 take illegal drugs but we just ignore that because it doesn't suit our ideology. Just like you can't explain how social services are meant to be funded without a magic money tree."

again... another immature post .... '4/5 take illegal drugs' is sociologically meaningless .... what drugs? what frequency? what amount? .... at least you dropped the crass 'life choices' mantra though .... go do some proper in depth research with some proper references as to what your pony statistics mean. i'll ignore you naive posts from now as i'd rather concentrate my attention on people who have something to contribute with substance

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"no more or less than your effort ...

'Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices?'

what was it you said earlier ... ah yes ... pot, kettle

So 4/5 take illegal drugs but we just ignore that because it doesn't suit our ideology. Just like you can't explain how social services are meant to be funded without a magic money tree.

again... another immature post .... '4/5 take illegal drugs' is sociologically meaningless .... what drugs? what frequency? what amount? .... at least you dropped the crass 'life choices' mantra though .... go do some proper in depth research with some proper references as to what your pony statistics mean. i'll ignore you naive posts from now as i'd rather concentrate my attention on people who have something to contribute with substance"

Your criticisms of the evidence would be more convincing if you actually quoted some yourself. You always play the game of throwing 101 questions out there to avoid saying anything meaningful yourself. The only factual thing you've said on the whole tread is an irrelevant distinction between direct and indirect taxes!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Dam I'd hazard a guess that an equal amount of lawyers take cocaine .But hey they don't sleep on the streets...So they are the good guys.Taking the good socially acceptable drugs....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"Dam I'd hazard a guess that an equal amount of lawyers take cocaine .But hey they don't sleep on the streets...So they are the good guys.Taking the good socially acceptable drugs.... "

Maybe in the 80's

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Dam I'd hazard a guess that an equal amount of lawyers take cocaine .But hey they don't sleep on the streets...So they are the good guys.Taking the good socially acceptable drugs.... "

millions of millionaires in the creative arts too ... they call it inspiration lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"All the council's look after themselves before others fancy office blocks and town halls spending a fortune they can't afford and then close library and loose public services selfish, selfish, power hungry bastards how about Teresa may go and live in a council house and give Number 10 to the homeless or open up buck house to the homeless too same goes to the super rich who don't pay their taxes sorry g ok ING of on a rant x

According to crisis, 4/5 homeless people living on the street are regular drug users. They are on the streets because they make bad life choices, it's silliness to say that people who made good life choices should give up what they have gained to reward those who made bad life choices.

Correlation does not equal causation, of course. Your comment 'They are on the streets because they make bad life choices' I note isn't backed up with evidence either. As a mental health charity states 'what really needs to be highlighted is the two-way relationship between homelessness and mental health.' Which highlights the incredibly important aspect of mental - which most of us know hasn't been supported appropriately by government.

Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices? "

Yet again, you've tried deflection. You miss the very obvious that is clearly highlighted.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"no more or less than your effort ...

'Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices?'

what was it you said earlier ... ah yes ... pot, kettle

So 4/5 take illegal drugs but we just ignore that because it doesn't suit our ideology. Just like you can't explain how social services are meant to be funded without a magic money tree.

again... another immature post .... '4/5 take illegal drugs' is sociologically meaningless .... what drugs? what frequency? what amount? .... at least you dropped the crass 'life choices' mantra though .... go do some proper in depth research with some proper references as to what your pony statistics mean. i'll ignore you naive posts from now as i'd rather concentrate my attention on people who have something to contribute with substance

Your criticisms of the evidence would be more convincing if you actually quoted some yourself. You always play the game of throwing 101 questions out there to avoid saying anything meaningful yourself. The only factual thing you've said on the whole tread is an irrelevant distinction between direct and indirect taxes!"

Pot Kettle Black time again

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"no more or less than your effort ...

'Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices?'

what was it you said earlier ... ah yes ... pot, kettle

So 4/5 take illegal drugs but we just ignore that because it doesn't suit our ideology. Just like you can't explain how social services are meant to be funded without a magic money tree.

again... another immature post .... '4/5 take illegal drugs' is sociologically meaningless .... what drugs? what frequency? what amount? .... at least you dropped the crass 'life choices' mantra though .... go do some proper in depth research with some proper references as to what your pony statistics mean. i'll ignore you naive posts from now as i'd rather concentrate my attention on people who have something to contribute with substance

Your criticisms of the evidence would be more convincing if you actually quoted some yourself. You always play the game of throwing 101 questions out there to avoid saying anything meaningful yourself. The only factual thing you've said on the whole tread is an irrelevant distinction between direct and indirect taxes!

Pot Kettle Black time again"

Go do your research talk to homeless charities, Samaritans look at the soup kitchens or the homeless people then get back to us. So many people have had good jobs business family and lost the lot ended up on the street. Bereavement etc a lot of people struggle with n mental health who slip through the nest and they are being failed dramatically by this government. I spy social cleansing x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anejohnkent6263Couple
over a year ago

canterbury

Recycle pensioners..i will put land of leather on standby ....x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"no more or less than your effort ...

'Ok, how else do you want to explain a trend that strong? In a country with healthcare and education free at the point of use, unemployment benefits and council houses. How would a majority of the people who slip through all those safety nets do so, whilst making good life choices?'

what was it you said earlier ... ah yes ... pot, kettle

So 4/5 take illegal drugs but we just ignore that because it doesn't suit our ideology. Just like you can't explain how social services are meant to be funded without a magic money tree.

again... another immature post .... '4/5 take illegal drugs' is sociologically meaningless .... what drugs? what frequency? what amount? .... at least you dropped the crass 'life choices' mantra though .... go do some proper in depth research with some proper references as to what your pony statistics mean. i'll ignore you naive posts from now as i'd rather concentrate my attention on people who have something to contribute with substance

Your criticisms of the evidence would be more convincing if you actually quoted some yourself. You always play the game of throwing 101 questions out there to avoid saying anything meaningful yourself. The only factual thing you've said on the whole tread is an irrelevant distinction between direct and indirect taxes!

Pot Kettle Black time again

Go do your research talk to homeless charities, Samaritans look at the soup kitchens or the homeless people then get back to us. So many people have had good jobs business family and lost the lot ended up on the street. Bereavement etc a lot of people struggle with n mental health who slip through the nest and they are being failed dramatically by this government. I spy social cleansing x"

I don't disagree

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top