Quote: Frankie Rage @ 16th November 2016, 3:26 PMIt does make you wonder what HM Gov actually does with all that f**king tax we pay..
Quote: keewik @ 16th November 2016, 8:34 PMProbably shite, but ask Mrs. Effing May.
Well, at the moment, the taxes paid in England are being used to subsidise benefits received by those livimg in Scotland that are not available to those in England - such as nil tuition fees, free prescriptions, bus passes at age 60...
Quote: Billy Bunter @ 16th November 2016, 11:20 PMWell, at the moment, the taxes paid in England are being used to subsidise benefits received by those livimg in Scotland that are not available to those in England - such as nil tuition fees, free prescriptions, bus passes at age 60...
Give me peace. That's a load of shite. The whole thing is much more complicated. And never forget, we have bloody Trident in our back yard. Stick it up the Thames and see the response that gets.
When George Osborne announced in the budget last March that he would be increasing the threshold at which the 40% income tax rate comes into effect from £43,000 to £45,000 for the 2017/18 tax year, Nicola Sturgeon stated that, under the newly devolved control of taxes (agreed following the 2014 referendum), the Scottish government would not be applying the same changes, stating that "this is not the right time for high earners to pay less". She defended this on the grounds that the Scots receive the aforementioned additional benefits.
It follows, therefore, that, if she needs to collect extra taxes to pay for these benefits from April 2017, then, clearly, up to now those benefits must have been subsidised by those who do not receive such concessions.
It is calculated that, by not copying Mr Osborne's plan to increase the threshold to £45,000 next year, around 372,000 Scots will end up paying a total of approx £190 million more in taxes.
So, if £190 million more is needed to fund those concessions in 2017/18, now that collection of tax has been devolved, where has that money come from up to now?
Possibly you have no awareness of the fact that statistics are easily manipulated. Just as you seem to think England subsidises the rest of the world, there are statistics which say Scotland contributes more per person to the UK. No way of knowing the truth so best to keep your mouth shut and tuck your prejudices away.
Quote: Billy Bunter @ 16th November 2016, 11:38 PMWhen George Osborne announced in the budget last March that he would be increasing the threshold at which the 40% income tax rate comes into effect from £43,000 to £45,000 for the 2017/18 tax year, Nicola Sturgeon stated that, under the newly devolved control of taxes (agreed following the 2014 referendum), the Scottish government would not be applying the same changes, stating that "this is not the right time for high earners to pay less".
£43,000 is considered a high earner?
I'll have to give ol' Piers credit for being 100% correct on this:
Quote: keewik @ 16th November 2016, 11:43 PM...there are statistics which say Scotland contributes more per person to the UK. No way of knowing the truth so best to keep your mouth shut and tuck your prejudices away.
And so you are now playing the 'Scots-ist' card.. give us a break, we have enough of that from the rest of the PC brigade!!! 
Quote: keewik @ 16th November 2016, 11:43 PMPossibly you have no awareness of the fact that statistics are easily manipulated. Just as you seem to think England subsidises the rest of the world, there are statistics which say Scotland contributes more per person to the UK. No way of knowing the truth so best to keep your mouth shut and tuck your prejudices away.
Prejudices? Me? That's rich coming from someone who viewed the democratic result of the EU referendum as "Union Jack waving twaddle" and "racist claptrap", accused one of the major 'leave' campaigners to be a "f**king racist eejit" and advocates Scotland vetoing "the whole mess".
And has subsequently accused the current Prime Minister to be a "dictatorial shit", a former Prime minister "also a shit" and "a complete turd", the democratically elected President-elect of the USA to be "a lying numpty" and a "bloody lunatic" and questioned whether the director of the FBI was "bribeable". Just because their views did not coincide with your own.
At least my case was backed up with figures and quotes from Scotland's First Minister and did not resort to meaningless abusive insults.
Quote: Frankie Rage @ 17th November 2016, 9:32 AMAnd so you are now playing the 'Scots-ist' card.. give us a break, we have enough of that from the rest of the PC brigade!!!
Please note - it wasn't me who mentioned Scotland.
Quote: Billy Bunter @ 17th November 2016, 9:40 AMPrejudices? Me? That's rich coming from someone who viewed the democratic result of the EU referendum as "Union Jack waving twaddle" and "racist claptrap", accused one of the major 'leave' campaigners to be a "f**king racist eejit" and advocates Scotland vetoing "the whole mess".
And has subsequently accused the current Prime Minister to be a "dictatorial shit", a former Prime minister "also a shit" and "a complete turd", the democratically elected President-elect of the USA to be "a lying numpty" and a "bloody lunatic" and questioned whether the director of the FBI was "bribeable".
At least my case was backed up with figures and quotes from Scotland's First Minister and did not resort to meaningless abusive insults.
You have a Helluva lot of time in your hands if you can be bothered trawling back through upteen months of somebody's posts.
Now I'm off to do something more intelligent.
Quote: keewik @ 17th November 2016, 10:14 AMPlease note - it wasn't me who mentioned Scotland.
Noted.
I think the word you mentioned was prejudice.
The 'prejudice' card is played so often now that I wonder if there is ever a difference of opinion without prejudice.
Quote: Frankie Rage @ 17th November 2016, 10:22 AMThe 'prejudice' card is played so often now that I wonder if there is ever a difference of opinion without prejudice.
It's come to the point where even the most slightly politically charged discussion must result in accusations of racism, sexism, misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia, and/or fascism. You must also include at least one of the following terms: white privilege, dog whistling, Hitler, straw man, trigger, safe space.
Thanks to political correctness, we've watered down the definition of racism so that the desire to curb illegal immigration is now blatant racism. To not vote for a woman -- any woman, for any reason -- is outright misogyny. To be wary of a stream of millions of young, male Muslim "refugees" after ISIS has promised to fill their ranks with terrorists -- and done so -- is Islamophobia, by gosh.
As a child, my mother always told me that life wasn't always fair. I've grown to learn that she was right; it's too bad that today's society believes that nobody's feelings should ever be hurt, nor should they ever be inconvenienced or find themselves aligned with a losing political party or movement. It's just not fair!
Quote: DaButt @ 17th November 2016, 2:32 AM£43,000 is considered a high earner?
It is to me considering the average is only about £26,000.
Quote: Chappers @ 17th November 2016, 8:03 PMIt is to me considering the average is only about £26,000.
Is that the average household income, or individual income? It's the equivalent of $32, 225, but I guess the exchange rate hasn't been very good lately. The aforementioned £43,000 is equal to $53,375.
The average household income in the United States is $56,500 (£45,500). The average individual income is $30,250 (£24,350).
Ah, so you get paid more and your houses cost less.
YOU JAMMY FUC*&@#***.
Ahem.
Quote: DaButt @ 17th November 2016, 3:26 PMAs a child, my mother always told me that life wasn't always fair. I've grown to learn that she was right; it's too bad that today's society believes that nobody's feelings should ever be hurt, nor should they ever be inconvenienced or find themselves aligned with a losing political party or movement. It's just not fair!
Did you watch South Park last year? It featured a short-lived character named Reality, who made the point that you're a jerk if you post stuff on the internet and only want positive responses. His final speech was: "We eat too much, we take our spoiled lives for granted. Feel a little bad about it sometimes. No, you want to put all your shit up on the internet and have every single person say 'hooray for you!' F**k you, you're all pricks."
Reality was then lynched by the townspeople.
This week's episode of South Park has a nice confrontation between PC Principal (the school's ultra politically correct principal) and Trump (Mr Garrison), after previous episodes had stumbled and fumbled around the US election (because the creators had expected Hillary to win).
