Posts by Steve Parks
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to DexterX,
It look like you are telluing me what to do.
No, he's asking you if you can answer his counterargument about the rent issue.
Some of the things you adamantly ask are inane, it is like being asked, “Who do you think will wing the 2011 election? An answer is provided and then one is asked to provide proof of the 2011 election, an event which hasn’t happened.
No, you’re being silly. The questions just mirror your own. For example: ’Who are the “Too many that are doing business for capital gain” and what is the proof?”’ You demand specific facts and figures to back up a claim. Unless, of course, you are the one making the claim.
I have another question for you, why do you keep hitting yourself in the forehead?
I see making witty responses is also not one of your strengths.
-
The CGT that is being contemplated is in effect a land tax and is likely to be recoverable annually and may be a calculation on the value of the ppty
That’s not the form Elliffe & Huang wrote about, and it’s not the kind being argued in favour of here.
I see from deep red any body that holds a counter view to lets tax our way out of the recession is explained as being a psychopath
DeepRed was referring to the person arguing in favour of asset sales, which you’re against.
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to Steve Parks,
[double post]
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to DexterX,
Interesting, I didn’t think you would be part of the productive base of the economy the part that makes or trades touchable thangs – working for the state – that’s communism isn’t it?
Ah, so that’s what they taught you on that finance course.
Matthews says “consistent CGT will raise quite a lot of money”, so where will that money come from? In my view it will come from rent
We’ve noticed. It’s a view you’ve repeated ad nauseam. Matthew has provided a counterargument which you keep ignoring.
Matthew, Ben and you Steve seem to all sing from the same songbook, I find it hard to differentiate between who is responding.
Matthew and Ben are the productive ones. I’m the filthy commie. The devilishly handsome filthy commie.
-
I’ve only just now read that article that Robyn linked to in the opening of her post. (This one.)
… In written answers, the ministry insists that Pace is “not a programme or scheme”, despite Ms Tizard using such words, but instead a “tag in the system that indicates the job preferences of a client”.
Hmm… PACE = “Pathways to Arts and Cultural Employment”.
It’s just a “tag in the system”, but it gets called a pathway to arts and cultural employment?
Whatever.
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to DexterX,
I don’t have a dogma, I would hazard a quess that you are in safe employment a government or psudeo government type job perhaps and that might be why you just don’t get it.
Thanks for reading my blog.
But otherwise, I’m not sure what the point is of this odd paragraph of yours. If you’re suggesting that people in the public service are all lefties who support things like cgt, then you’re just showing your ignorance. Same if you think they all feel “safe”.[Matthew wrote:] You have put forward not a skerrick of supporting evidence to back up your claims
Supporting evidence is something he demands from his opponents. Expecting he might provide his own is totally unreasonable.
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to Sacha,
Overconfidence is thick on the ground –
Why are these types all so arrogant?
-
Coincidently, I have just read this comment by property lawyer David Whitburn. … I’m not sure where to start pointing out the flaws and inconsistencies in his argument.
Oh, and this is by the by, but I figured out where to start.
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to Kumara Republic,
Inside Job
Might go see that at the Paramount tomorrow. Either that or Winter's Bone. Or I might go see a mainstream film at Reading. Depends on my mood.
But Inside Job is on my must see list.
...here, the people in power are still lying and trying to cover their tracks. The financial officers interviewed on camera squirm under Ferguson's scrutiny and attempt to avoid his questions. Unafraid to be increasingly aggressive over the course of an interview, Ferguson, unlike Michael Moore, keeps himself off camera so the focus remains on the subject. ...
Inside Job is a tragi-comedy of epic proportions, dark and despairing, and like the best satire, it will make you want to shake your fist and scream at the screen.
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to DexterX,
A lot of the left leaning thinking in this thread seems to think that the Govt should be Robin Hood...
You don’t have to be left leaning to favour CGT. Why do you want to take from the general pool of tax payers, and give to the people who make a capital gain (i.e. revenue)? Why are you trying to be Robin Hood, Dexter?
The problem with leaning to the left or to the right is it is a crutch that stop one from thinking for oneself and seeing a different view.
My view on cgt has changed over time, and not at all in correlation with being “left or right”. Again, you don’t have to be left leaning to support a cgt. Someone who is capable of seeing a different view is someone who is willing to change their view when the argument or the evidence is provided. You are the one being dogmatic here, not us “lefties”.