Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
3563 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1361


  Reply # 1798430 12-Jun-2017 12:59
Send private message

I'm unsure why May risked the polls.  She had parliamentary majority and that's all she needed legally to negotiate with Brussels and pass agreed outcomes into law. 

 

I always saw her role as analogous to the 'night-watchman' in a cricket test.  The night-watchman's job is to survive until stumps.  No-one expects boundaries. 

 

May was always going to be sacrificed after Brexit negotiations were concluded. Perhaps being a bookend PM was something she couldn't tolerate ...





Mike

SJB

1098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 250

Trusted

  Reply # 1798464 12-Jun-2017 13:32
Send private message

frankv:

 

SJB:

 

The problem is not Corbyn's policies it's the cost of implementing them. Nobody would argue it's not a good idea to have free higher education, world class free health care even cheaper travel on a nationalised railway system but who is going to pay for it long term.

 

 

The rich who currently avoid/evade tax would be a good place to start. Then the corporates like Apple. If they paid their share instead of just leeching on society, there would be more than enough money to pay for it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You would run out of the rich pretty quickly. They would simply move elsewhere.

 

You are better off targeting the middle class as there are a lot more of them and they are less inclined to do a runner. Of course, the problem is they won't stand for the level of taxation necessary and won't vote for you next time round so you are out in the wilderness again, especially when they see that the increased taxation hasn't made much difference. It never does.

 

 


 
 
 
 


71 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 29


  Reply # 1798508 12-Jun-2017 14:26
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

I believe that to be incorrect. The Supreme Court says it cannot be stopped. The 27 states must agree to any extension of the two year period allowed under Article 50.

 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure that you will find that as part of an EU treaty the final say on whether and how a triggering of Article 50 could be withdrawn would be down to the European Court of Justice, not the UK Supreme Court.

 

Oh, the irony.


2165 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1039


  Reply # 1798532 12-Jun-2017 14:49
Send private message

SJB:

 

frankv:

 

SJB:

 

The problem is not Corbyn's policies it's the cost of implementing them. Nobody would argue it's not a good idea to have free higher education, world class free health care even cheaper travel on a nationalised railway system but who is going to pay for it long term.

 

 

The rich who currently avoid/evade tax would be a good place to start. Then the corporates like Apple. If they paid their share instead of just leeching on society, there would be more than enough money to pay for it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You would run out of the rich pretty quickly. They would simply move elsewhere.

 

 

Yeah... it does depend on other countries also forcing the rich to pay their share. Make it a residence requirement; you must pay tax to the UK pro rata to the number of days you live there. I doubt that the rich would be willing to spend most of their time in Panama or Lesotho or Cayman Islands or whatever tax haven they're hiding their money in.

 

Corporates might be an easier target; e.g. Apple can't sell any products into the UK if they don't pay their share of taxes. Any tax-avoidance agreements they have with Ireland or anywhere else are irrelevant. After Brexit that might be possible; until then, I guess it depends on the EU to pass the appropriate anti-tax-haven legislation, and/or Ireland to renegotiate their agreement with Apple.

 

 


SJB

1098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 250

Trusted

  Reply # 1798548 12-Jun-2017 15:11
Send private message

frankv:

 

SJB:

 

frankv:

 

SJB:

 

The problem is not Corbyn's policies it's the cost of implementing them. Nobody would argue it's not a good idea to have free higher education, world class free health care even cheaper travel on a nationalised railway system but who is going to pay for it long term.

 

 

The rich who currently avoid/evade tax would be a good place to start. Then the corporates like Apple. If they paid their share instead of just leeching on society, there would be more than enough money to pay for it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You would run out of the rich pretty quickly. They would simply move elsewhere.

 

 

Yeah... it does depend on other countries also forcing the rich to pay their share. Make it a residence requirement; you must pay tax to the UK pro rata to the number of days you live there. I doubt that the rich would be willing to spend most of their time in Panama or Lesotho or Cayman Islands or whatever tax haven they're hiding their money in.

 

Corporates might be an easier target; e.g. Apple can't sell any products into the UK if they don't pay their share of taxes. Any tax-avoidance agreements they have with Ireland or anywhere else are irrelevant. After Brexit that might be possible; until then, I guess it depends on the EU to pass the appropriate anti-tax-haven legislation, and/or Ireland to renegotiate their agreement with Apple.

 

 

 

 

It would be interesting to come back in say a couple of centuries to see how things have changed.

 

IMO the current model of society is unsustainable.

 

 


15788 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4286

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1798549 12-Jun-2017 15:14
One person supports this post
Send private message

SJB:

 

 

 

It would be interesting to come back in say a couple of centuries to see how things have changed.

 

IMO the current model of society is unsustainable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

If we could overcome our parasitic nature as a species, I believe it to be sustainable. Sadly, not likely. 

 

 


11679 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5329

Trusted

  Reply # 1798551 12-Jun-2017 15:21
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

SJB:

 

 

 

It would be interesting to come back in say a couple of centuries to see how things have changed.

 

IMO the current model of society is unsustainable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

If we could overcome our parasitic nature as a species, I believe it to be sustainable. Sadly, not likely. 

 

 

 

 

While the profit motivation prevails things will not change, in an ideal society altruism would be the driving motivation, I don't see that happening anytime soon.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


15788 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4286

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1798567 12-Jun-2017 15:39
One person supports this post
Send private message

MikeB4:

 

networkn:

 

SJB:

 

 

 

It would be interesting to come back in say a couple of centuries to see how things have changed.

 

IMO the current model of society is unsustainable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

If we could overcome our parasitic nature as a species, I believe it to be sustainable. Sadly, not likely. 

 

 

 

 

While the profit motivation prevails things will not change, in an ideal society altruism would be the driving motivation, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

 

 

 

 

It's ok, we will be extinct in the not too distant future.


11679 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5329

Trusted

  Reply # 1798568 12-Jun-2017 15:41
Send private message

networkn:

 

MikeB4:

 

networkn:

 

SJB:

 

 

 

It would be interesting to come back in say a couple of centuries to see how things have changed.

 

IMO the current model of society is unsustainable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

If we could overcome our parasitic nature as a species, I believe it to be sustainable. Sadly, not likely. 

 

 

 

 

While the profit motivation prevails things will not change, in an ideal society altruism would be the driving motivation, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

 

 

 

 

It's ok, we will be extinct in the not too distant future.

 

 

Not extinct, but the planet will reset, defragment and clean up the file system.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


3563 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1361


  Reply # 1798620 12-Jun-2017 16:30
Send private message

MikeB4:

 

in an ideal society altruism would be the driving motivation, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

 

 

Some people think there is no such thing as true altruism because all altruistic acts confer some benefit on the giver. 

 

For example donating blood, makes you feel like you have done something good and you get a biscuit.





Mike

Talk DIrtY to me
4102 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2157

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1798624 12-Jun-2017 16:39
2 people support this post
Send private message

All this makes me glad I don't have kids. We're destroying our very ecosystems and all the fancy tech we invent won't save us from that fact.


10624 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3292

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1798625 12-Jun-2017 16:42
Send private message

frankv:

 

SJB:

 

frankv:

 

SJB:

 

The problem is not Corbyn's policies it's the cost of implementing them. Nobody would argue it's not a good idea to have free higher education, world class free health care even cheaper travel on a nationalised railway system but who is going to pay for it long term.

 

 

The rich who currently avoid/evade tax would be a good place to start. Then the corporates like Apple. If they paid their share instead of just leeching on society, there would be more than enough money to pay for it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You would run out of the rich pretty quickly. They would simply move elsewhere.

 

 

Yeah... it does depend on other countries also forcing the rich to pay their share. Make it a residence requirement; you must pay tax to the UK pro rata to the number of days you live there. I doubt that the rich would be willing to spend most of their time in Panama or Lesotho or Cayman Islands or whatever tax haven they're hiding their money in.

 

Corporates might be an easier target; e.g. Apple can't sell any products into the UK if they don't pay their share of taxes. Any tax-avoidance agreements they have with Ireland or anywhere else are irrelevant. After Brexit that might be possible; until then, I guess it depends on the EU to pass the appropriate anti-tax-haven legislation, and/or Ireland to renegotiate their agreement with Apple.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's not actually fair that you should pay more just because you happen to have more. That does not fit with any definition of fairness I would accept.






10624 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3292

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1798628 12-Jun-2017 16:44
Send private message

SJB:

 

frankv:

 

SJB:

 

frankv:

 

SJB:

 

The problem is not Corbyn's policies it's the cost of implementing them. Nobody would argue it's not a good idea to have free higher education, world class free health care even cheaper travel on a nationalised railway system but who is going to pay for it long term.

 

 

The rich who currently avoid/evade tax would be a good place to start. Then the corporates like Apple. If they paid their share instead of just leeching on society, there would be more than enough money to pay for it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You would run out of the rich pretty quickly. They would simply move elsewhere.

 

 

Yeah... it does depend on other countries also forcing the rich to pay their share. Make it a residence requirement; you must pay tax to the UK pro rata to the number of days you live there. I doubt that the rich would be willing to spend most of their time in Panama or Lesotho or Cayman Islands or whatever tax haven they're hiding their money in.

 

Corporates might be an easier target; e.g. Apple can't sell any products into the UK if they don't pay their share of taxes. Any tax-avoidance agreements they have with Ireland or anywhere else are irrelevant. After Brexit that might be possible; until then, I guess it depends on the EU to pass the appropriate anti-tax-haven legislation, and/or Ireland to renegotiate their agreement with Apple.

 

 

 

 

It would be interesting to come back in say a couple of centuries to see how things have changed.

 

IMO the current model of society is unsustainable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree. As long as people think they are free to have as many children as they want, the population will increase ad infinitum until it eventually corrects itself either through war, famine or disease.






5409 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2604


  Reply # 1798641 12-Jun-2017 16:59
Send private message

MikeAqua:

 

MikeB4:

 

in an ideal society altruism would be the driving motivation, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

 

 

Some people think there is no such thing as true altruism because all altruistic acts confer some benefit on the giver. 

 

For example donating blood, makes you feel like you have done something good and you get a biscuit.

 

 

It's reasonable that you might give and expect that you may be helped by others if/when you're in need.

 

I think Ayn Rand argued that such acts of charity (as giving blood) just had to have a logical "selfish" motivation, but that's IMO inevitable when looking for an answer to fit an inflexible ideology.

 

There's an argument that charity encourages dependency in the same way that it's argued that welfare encourages dependency.

 

However I expect that both "lifestyle choice" beggars and beneficiaries are a minority.  They make great "examples" for ideologists though.

 

 


6453 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3052

Subscriber

  Reply # 1798642 12-Jun-2017 16:59
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

It's not actually fair that you should pay more just because you happen to have more. That does not fit with any definition of fairness I would accept.

 

 

That would depend on how you got more. If you happened to be born into a family that lives in the right neighbourhood where you grow up with the right accent and they can afford the right university for you where you make the right contacts that lubricate you through a privileged, highly-paid career, then I would say it is eminently fair.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Fujifilm X beats its best with new top of the range, high-performance camera
Posted 24-Feb-2018 14:05


One million kiwis affected by cybercrime
Posted 24-Feb-2018 13:58


New Zealanders want to engage with government online and via mobile apps
Posted 24-Feb-2018 13:56


Samsung launches Samsung Max
Posted 24-Feb-2018 13:52


CPTPP text and National Interest Analysis released for public scrutiny
Posted 21-Feb-2018 19:43


Foodstuffs to trial digitised shopping trolleys
Posted 21-Feb-2018 18:27


2018: The year of zero-login, smart cars & the biometrics of things
Posted 21-Feb-2018 18:25


Intel reimagines data centre storage with new 3D NAND SSDs
Posted 16-Feb-2018 15:21


Ground-breaking business programme begins in Hamilton
Posted 16-Feb-2018 10:18


Government to continue search for first Chief Technology Officer
Posted 12-Feb-2018 20:30


Time to take Appleā€™s iPad Pro seriously
Posted 12-Feb-2018 16:54


New Fujifilm X-A5 brings selfie features to mirrorless camera
Posted 9-Feb-2018 09:12


D-Link ANZ expands connected smart home with new HD Wi-Fi cameras
Posted 9-Feb-2018 09:01


Dragon Professional for Mac V6: Near perfect dictation
Posted 9-Feb-2018 08:26


OPPO announces R11s with claims to be the picture perfect smartphone
Posted 2-Feb-2018 13:28



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.