Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Fred,

I agree that PFI was equally as bad as the BSF program, but that does not excuse either, so I don't get your point.

Fred, I wasn't refering to 'rubbish' waste, that would be a whole new can of worms, as would the environmental issues and I have no interest in debating either with you. Come to think of it, you are doing what you always do and broadening the scope of the discussion so I don't have the time to continue.

As a shining example of the waste I mean, I refer you to the mothballed on launch, expensive, new aircraft carrier that someone, somewhere, agreed to buy. It wasn't the private sector that signed the contract. I would prefer to have seen that sort of wasted money not collected as tax in the first place. Hopefully the price of steel will increase and we can weigh it in for a profit before it gets wet.

The country is paying 120million a day in interest payments to service its loans, that to me is waste and is doing exactly what, i assume, you would detest. Instead of the tax and spend redistribution of wealth mentatility it is the millions of ordinary folk pouring money into the coffers of the few.

Rawdm999,

Well said. Like you I feel it is almost impossible to continue debating with Fred when he twists things so much. I will though still sometimes quote figures and fact as answers, but will not comment any further on his posts, until/unless he changes tack.

Greek - frustrating isn't it. He frequently states as fact something, which when challenged, he loses in the blur of is twisting & turning.

His response, if any, will determine my next post, if any, as i've remembered how much time can be lost in these futile debates with him.

Raw,

The BIG difference here is that I have the freedom of choice to buy or not to buy private sector output, useless or not. I don't have a choice on where my hard earned money/tax is wasted.

=========

The country is paying 120million a day in interest payments to service its loans, that to me is waste and is doing exactly what, i assume, you would detest. Instead of the tax and spend redistribution of wealth mentatility it is the millions of ordinary folk pouring money into the coffers of the few.

==========

As a consequence of living in a developed society, it is necessary for the reasonable structures and complexities of that state to have financial support i.e. taxation in one form, or another.

In a reasonably caring and organised society, taxation does not have to be only in cash, but probably includes the work, which members of that society provide within it, whether it appears initially directly towards themselves or society in general. Low paid workers in low paid public services are an example. They receive a low wage, but they service others.

Initially, a parent having a child seems for personal benefit, but when you consider that that child may be a future health carer, researcher, trader or businessman and contribute to society at a later date the value to society may change.

The problem which I see with having lower taxes and being able to opt out when the taxation doesnt suit oneself, is defining what is of value yourself and to that society as a whole, I.E. the total environment we live in.

Are the Police an expensive waste of time and who produce little of value.

Unfortunately, they are necessary for the keeping of law and order. But a perfect society may not need them.

(But living out of town, rarely travelling away from my castle and employing a few minders, I dont need, or want them.)

I think, in order to have harmony within a society, a tolerance of mistakes (not criminality) and what can be defined has to be accepted. That does not exclude improving by progress.

The problem is, that when a butterfly flaps its wings it effects everybody.

In order to affect the use your tax, it seems you have to become politically involve and hope you have enough of others to concur with your values.

===============================

I think the squealing about 120million a day, is similar to those complaining about their fix rate prime mortgage which they took out in good times.

Sad, but it looked good, at the time. (Was it turning a blind eye, or have we God's gift of hindsight.)

I hope those who are taking out mortgages at this point in time will feel as good about it in 2years time.

=================================

Greek,

What are you grumbling about?

Havent checked, or disagreed, with your figures, and will accept them for the time-being.

But, I dont think the only sinners were the Labour government when enabling contracts and believed they adopted joyfully the procedures, developed by their predecessors and filled the private sectors teeth with gold to get what they wanted.

Borrowing, from the public to finance the private sectors profit margin and then being asked to bail out by the private sector when things go wrong, is crazy.

(I dont apologise for baiting you earlier (once again). Of course, I dont think the police a complete waste of time!) 8-) or (

Fred

I never said I had a problem with general taxation, civilisation is based on taxation. I do have a problem with higher taxes if, and only if, those taxes are wasted.

'I think the squealing about 120million a day, is similar to those complaining about their fix rate prime mortgage which they took out in good times.'

Rubbish. If people took out a fixed rate mortgage it was their, possibly ill advised, choice. They don't have a choice where their taxation goes.

Do you mean the previous government didn't have its advisors?

If so ?

If not, are they the same as the present to bunch seem to have?

Rawdm999,

I think we are wasting our time with Fred. We state that he refuses to reply on the same subject we commented on, then he asked what we are grumbling about. Now he says that for now he is accepting my figures. Problem is he did not say that before.
So it appears we have to guess what he accepts.
I don't mind debate, but I am done with him for the sole reason he twists everything to make you look wrong. You can't debate with someone like that. It is a waste of time.

You should know better than to argue with an idiot. They invariably drag you down to their own level and end up beating you with their years of experience.

Discussion evolving again & haven't got time.

Greek.

No. It is wiser not to make assumptions, unless it is explicit in what I write


(You have an a perfect right to assumptions, but false assumptions can lead you up a dark alley.)

Also, I feel it is a little like being accusing somebody of villainy, or similar action, and confirming it by on the assumption that, because the individual does not to answer, or plead according to whim, he/she is found guilty and should be "banged up".

I hope that is not the principal that you are operating on.

Greek, we are wasting time. I'm taking Hilary's comment on board and writing it out a hundred times.

try the squelch button. never used it myself.
but then havnt felt the need to write out a hundred lines either.
seems desperate. LoL!
may or may not help
just a suggestion and as always just my opinion and please be sure to dyor
regards
jkd

Raw.

What ever turns you on!

Does Andrew Mitchell manage his "government office" from the Cayman Islands?

Says it all really.

A woman who has 13 children has just been complaining about the cuts on our local news channel.
I suppose she expects us to keep her large brood.
Cost to the tax payer.
First child 20.30 per week. 81.20 per month. 1055.60 per year.
Other children 13.40 per week. 52.60 per month. 683.80 x 12 = 8205.60 per year.
Total for this 1 family 9261.20 per year, in child benefit alone.
Then of course they may be on other benefits.
Examples like this are one of the reasons we are in this mess.
If she had not received child benefit, I bet she would have found another hobby.
I think any family that has more than 2 children should not receive child benefit.
Why should we keep these large families.
Makes my blood boil.

rawdm999

The point to remember re the news aircraft carriers is that both would never have been in service simultaneously. Whilst one is operational, the other will be in refit, undergoing modifications and updates followed by a lengthy regeneration process - trials and training.

Whether the RN (or RFA) will ever have jets to operate from the carriers, only time will tell. Incidentally, the Coalition was absolutely right in that cancelling the contracts would have cost a significant amount of tax payers money.

Oh, hello Hil. Budge up a bit on the squelchy step. I brought some refreshment this time. Glass of Krug?

I would castrate the children at birth.

That would teach them to be better citizens.

Best comment so far on the whole business from Sam Jones, FT Hedge Fund correspondent, today at lunchtime:

"Cuts cuts cuts. Fund manager I am with thinks these will create opportunities. So we are having a nice Montrachet."