Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Who was at the TUC 'auserity march' today?
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
But hey, if we all go out and march about, the international tax accounting regime that countries have agreed between them can easily be renegotiated for the UK's benefit
So companies that trade on every UK high street but aren't British shouldn't pay tax? Sounds logical to me.
You're right about the Treasury, though. The government should do something about this, but given that Mr Cameron's inheritance was nurtured in part in offshore tax havens there is little chance of that.
Well, no other party changed it while they were in power either, so I wouldn't make it a party political issue. It's more about our agreements with other countries. While I agree that the rules should be changed, I find the ad hominem part deeply saddening.
True, no other party changed it. They never will, too many vested and personal interests at stake.
We're all in it together of course
Not sure you've used the term ad hominem correctly there, btw. It's not abuse but a statement of fact.
But I must move on ... goodnight.
I'm not going to get in to a legnthy arguement here. I'll just have my say then I'll piss off.
1. The cuts are needed to bring this nation's finances back under control.
2. People in the third world with no food, clean water and medical care are facing austerity, not trade unionists with food on their table, clean water, free NHS care and a wide screen tv in the lounge.
I agree that holding a march is probably futile. The only thing is that it is the only thing we can do to show our opposition to government policy at the present time.
My 'union' (RCN) is definitely not political, and sees itself more of a professional body. It has seen unfair and unnecessary cuts that adversely affect vulnerable people.
This is at a time when there is plenty of money around, but most of it is concentrated in the 1% of the same rich people as always. We need a more equal society.
The thing to remember is that we are all INCREDIBLY affluent, but it doesn't show up as spending money in the pocket. People in our society now expect to be able to live for 20 years without working after they retire. That is unprecedented at any time or place in history. That represents a huge pile of money for each person, but it is not money they can rush out and spend right now. Nonetheless it represents incredible affluence. It dwarfs almost anything else in the budget. There are also much smaller things, like if they find a lump in their breast, they expect to see a fully qualified consultant quickly, and be offered an MRI scan. Have you any idea how much an MRI scanner costs? That is a standard of living, again, unpredecented in history, and it represents a huge sum of money, but it is not a wad of cash you can rush out and spend on widescreen tellies today. And this level of affluence applies to all of us.
I can assure you that there are both union and non union affiliated employees struggling economically in the UK.
Imagine that you are so skint at the end of the month that you are forced into choosing to buy a healthy meal option for the family; or a less healthy option plus toilet roll; or beans and bread and fuel for the car (which you need to carry out your job).
How do you know the cuts are needed? Because the big boys said so?
I checked the accounts for our local authority and they had a huge underspend at the end of last year (March 2012).
They also set council tax rates to allow for a 1% pay rise for employees that never materialised.
Plus they increased the amount they stashed away in "reserve" accounts.
I was under the impression that it was dodgy deals by the banking community and subsequent bail out by the public purse that lead to this financial crisis - not the financial ineptitude of any political party.
Google Bill Nighy backing Robin Hood tax on banks on YouTube.
Rickster - that's naive, the cuts are needed because the Bank bailout will not work and has to be paid for by Joe Public.Why? because the poor debt was amassed in middle America, who then sold off the toxic sections to all the countries who were its allies, on the basis if everyone takes a slice and manages it in their own way - no problem. Don't think this is putting right previous wrongs, that's BS
saw the march.
i liked when ed miliband, in a rehash of his conference speech, said "have you ever seen a more incompetent, hopeless, out-of-touch, U-turning, pledge-breaking, make-it-up-as-we-go-along, back-of-the-envelope government as this?" and several people shouted YES!
The point of course is that companies should pay tax where they make their money, not channel it back into front companies in cheaper tax areas. Starbucks has made more than £3bn in sales since 1998, but paid less than £9m in corporation tax. That's very wrong by any standards. If I went to work in another country I'd expect to pay my income tax there. These people are taking massive advantage and it should be stopped.
And I still don't understand how Starbucks make any profit !
As they aren't breaking any laws, how do you think they will react to George telling them to pay more ?
And they won't lose any business at all, anyone who drinks Starbucks coffee is incapable of understanding economic arguments
I don't shop at Amazon or Starbucks. They don't appear to have noticed
These companies are not breaking the law So why should they be punished ?
I found myself watching the march without being able to judge one way or another. I am a private employer - we have given pay rises each year in line with inflation despite losses due to the recession in our sector - we are still hiring sporadically and have managed to avoid making people redundant. I still struggle to find good people for the vacancies I have.
At one point we had an advert in the local job centre for a month with no folks enquiring about it except for people who didn't actually want to do the job (so why apply??) and ended up getting someone from a temp agency.
My experiences of a union (unite) is not good unfortunately. They canvassed outside our main site for a while - managed to get enough in one sector to get official recognition, caused a lot of internal strife between the non-union and union employees which resulted in the shop steward being threatened and then they pretty much buggered off and I haven't seen anything of them for a couple of years. I was never impressed with our local full time-official - seemed to have little understanding of employment law but it may just have been that he was overworked. Because I am in HR I have heard some absolute horror stories about Unite from one of the employment law specialists I know - basically the union picking political headline-making rather than the best option for their members. I would hope other unions are better value for money.
What you are asking for is a change in the law, and there is more chance of me being the next Prime Minister than that happening !
Starbucks, or Microsoft aren't basing themselves "off shore" from the UK, they are companies from other countries !
Sounds like protectionism of the worst sort ! The USA tried it in the twenties .