For or Against Brexit 2017?

[Pat494]

A couple of invasions ( penetrations ) later and France is now acting the tart.

 

[Atilla]

A couple of invasions ( penetrations ) later and France is now acting the tart.

They did put up a good de-rear resistance, no?


However, they also sunk the Greenpeace ship...

 

[hhiusa]

G8 windup.

Enjoy all that you do

I don't follow. Why is it a windup? Think about it logically. Everyone puts money in a pot and then redistributes it equally. Why would I put more money if my needs are not going to be addressed more. If I am paying double the taxes living in Westminster or Chelsea with the congestion charges and the like, then most of that money should be redirected back there for repaving roads and infrastructure maintenance. It makes absolutely no sense to that even though you are paying twice or three times more in taxes, we are going to spend it on Liverpool or Birmingham. I would be so .

There is more tax revenue in southern England because it more desirable. I mean it is about £7,750/sq m for a place in Westminster and in Liverpool you could buy a house for the price of a sports car.

I found from real estate website that the average price for a 1 to 2 bedroom house in London SW1 region is £2,269,999.58 and for a 3 to 4 bedroom will be around £3,113,500.00.

In Liverpool the average home price is £138,802.00. You can now see how people in London are paying 10 times the property taxes alone. This is simple pay for services argument. I pay 10 times more than you; therefore, the government should spend 10 more money here than there. The south is carrying the weight of the tax bill. Any wonder why the majority of council housing in is in the north - West Yorkshire (Leeds, Bradford), West Midlands (Birmingham, Wolverhampton), Merseyside (Liverpool) and Hampshire (Portsmouth, Southampton) and Scotland.

 

[hhiusa]

You seem to be very good with numbers.

Can you kindly compare California stats with London's population and earnings please.


Thanks

Tokyo, Japan -----------$1,520,000,000,000-----13,350,000
New York City, USA----$1,358,416,000,000------8,406,000
Los Angeles, USA--------$ 765,759,000,000------3,884,000
Chicago, USA-------------$ 571,008,000,000------2,719,000
London, UK---------------$ 565,000,000,000------8,308,000

New York has the same amount of people as London with 2.5 times the economy. These results are courtesy of PwC (Price Waterhouse Coopers) http://www.pwc.co.uk

 

[Pat494]

I think you have put your finger on a major difference between the UK and the US. We tend to put resources towards the needy, not your idea of distribution. Under the spread of wealth in the USA - it seems to go to the already wealthy and the poor have to lump it.

 

[Forexmospherian]

I like this slide - because it puts LONDON top in the world of the super rich and makes the Americans understand - we can out trump you

Unfortunately - you got your property tax theory wrong - London does not pay 10 times more and should get 10 time more services from their tax

Supply and Demand - we need people to live outside London - and the Tax the super wealthy foreigners to pay extra if they want to live in the best City in the world - and mix with the Brits

I love a wind up #

 

[Atilla]

I like this slide - because it puts LONDON top in the world of the super rich and makes the Americans understand - we can out trump you

Unfortunately - you got your property tax theory wrong - London does not pay 10 times more and should get 10 time more services from their tax

Supply and Demand - we need people to live outside London - and the Tax the super wealthy foreigners to pay extra if they want to live in the best City in the world - and mix with the Brits

I love a wind up #

Yes absolutely! London's pop is 15m on a working day. 8m Live in London.

Isn't California the bankrupt state?

 

[alexaherself]

Isn't California the bankrupt state?

It depends how you measure it, I think? (Statistical paremeters/statements always do, somehow).

Looking at "billionaires" gives a hugely different picture from looking at "multi-millionaires". I can't find a source to link to, now, but I've read in a few places that the city of Mumbai alone contains far more "multimillionaires" than the entire state of California, including all its successful "Silicon Valley" people.

Also (referring back to an earlier page of the thread, here) "freedom of movement of labour" isn't necessarily quite the same thing as "freedom of movement of people", is it?

 

[hhiusa]

Does anyone have any sources to state or have we entered the blowing smoke phase?

I like this slide - because it puts LONDON top in

That is definitely one. Since it's provide almost no information. I am curious what economic insight is gained from knowing the number of billionaire in a city. I was posting that information at the behest of @Atilla. I happen to find New York City disgusting with terrible weather and hurrendous crime as all major cities are like this including London. Exception to the rule are Stockholm, Copenhagen and Oslo and Seattle.

I think you have put your finger on a major difference between the UK and the US. We tend to put resources towards the needy, not your idea of distribution. Under the spread of wealth in the USA - it seems to go to the already wealthy and the poor have to lump it.

No. The USA and the UK have similar principles. The conservative of the UK have similar principles to the Republican Conservatives of the U.S. You and I also have different definitions of what constitutes poverty. I think and I am sure many Tories think it's criminal for people on the dole to make more than some people who actually work. Additionally, by your statement, I am guessing you don't live in or nearby London. If my house is in SW1 then my property taxes go to London. Cities basically function as public corporations. Property taxes are city and municipal revenue. London earned that money not Liverpool. I am certain the tax code will back me up on this. Simple math dictates that "Person A" with £100,000 salary can spend more than "Person B" with a £50,000 salary. Person B has no right to Person A's money, which would be tantamount to panhandling.

If UK leaves EU and the latter finds that it can do without Britain, they may not let it back in. Why reintroduce the same old problem again?

The UK has sat on the fence, since the beginning, always criticising and not, really, doing much to improve anything. Tony Blair did try to get a reform on the agricultural policy. That ended in failure but he did try. Since then, nothing except stupidities, like straight bananas.

Why would the UK want to at that point?

 

[hhiusa]

It depends how you measure it, I think? (Statistical paremeters/statements always do, somehow).

Looking at "billionaires" gives a hugely different picture from looking at "multi-millionaires". I can't find a source to link to, now, but I've read in a few places that the city of Mumbai alone contains far more "multimillionaires" than the entire state of California, including all its successful "Silicon Valley" people.

While I agree with your point about billionaires versus millionaires, i always find it amusing when people nominative statements without any source material.

If any of you have taken a statistics course, you would know 80 billionaire Londoners does not make a good representation of any economy. Do you think they care about the Scouser, Bromies or Geordies?

Also (referring back to an earlier page of the thread, here) "freedom of movement of labour" isn't necessarily quite the same thing as "freedom of movement of people", is it?

Freedom of movement of labour is exactly freedom of movement of people. Who do you think supplies the labour? You can't have more labour without more people, which means more 3rd world EU immigrants.

 

[alexaherself]

i always find it amusing when people nominative statements without any source material.

Happy to entertain you in that way.

It's a "chat forum", or virtual "foyer", not an academic symposium.

I think it may have been in the Freakonomics books of Steven Levitt, among other places, that I read that, but I don't have them here and was reluctant to state a source in case I'd misremembered.

If any of you have taken a statistics course, you would know 80 billionaire Londoners does not make a good representation of any economy.

Thank you. I have taken many statistics courses, as part of my first degree. I agree completely that 80 billionaires aren't a good representation of any economy, just as I'm sure you agree that the fact that there are (allegedly) 80 billionaires in London and perhaps none at all in some other capital cities does signify at least something about a country's level of industry, and its political, social and financial security.

 

[Pat494]

In the UK the politicians keep trying to make the "non-doms" living here to actually pay a bit of tax. They aren't exactly easy to convince.

 

[alexaherself]

In the UK the politicians keep trying to make the "non-doms" living here to actually pay a bit of tax.

On our UK incomes, we pay income tax exactly the same as any other residents do.

The "non-dom" part of the tax arrangements apply only to incomes derived from overseas.

Much though Miliband and his friends would like to portray us simply as "living here but not paying tax here", it doesn't actually happen to be true. (Along with one or two other things they allege.)

 

[Atilla]

Does anyone have any sources to state or have we entered the blowing smoke phase?



That is definitely one. Since it's provide almost no information. I am curious what economic insight is gained from knowing the number of billionaire in a city. I was posting that information at the behest of @Atilla. I happen to find New York City disgusting with terrible weather and hurrendous crime as all major cities are like this including London. Exception to the rule are Stockholm, Copenhagen and Oslo and Seattle.



No. The USA and the UK have similar principles. The conservative of the UK have similar principles to the Republican Conservatives of the U.S. You and I also have different definitions of what constitutes poverty. I think and I am sure many Tories think it's criminal for people on the dole to make more than some people who actually work. Additionally, by your statement, I am guessing you don't live in or nearby London. If my house is in SW1 then my property taxes go to London. Cities basically function as public corporations. Property taxes are city and municipal revenue. London earned that money not Liverpool. I am certain the tax code will back me up on this. Simple math dictates that "Person A" with £100,000 salary can spend more than "Person B" with a £50,000 salary. Person B has no right to Person A's money, which would be tantamount to panhandling.



Why would the UK want to at that point?

So who pays for motorways in between cities if I live in a little village in Devon?

If I go to a university in York, why should Yorkies pay to build universities for geezers down sarf, u na wat I mean like arri?

I don't like NY either, dark and noisy place. Only worth visiting night time imo, but I do love Long Island.

How does all this larky get salted then?


Sorry for braking into stupid but well confused indeed with your conception of what is and how it should be?

I do like the way you tell it like it is...

Do you also wear one of those big hats? Can we have a pic of your shoes or should I say boots please?

Do you have a ranch with horses too? It's possible I've got the wrong end of the stick and just got it all plain wrong. If so, I'm soooo sorry dude.

 

[Pat494]

On our UK incomes, we pay income tax exactly the same as any other residents do.

The "non-dom" part of the tax arrangements apply only to incomes derived from overseas.

Much though Miliband and his friends would like to portray us simply as "living here but not paying tax here", it doesn't actually happen to be true. (Along with one or two other things they allege.)

Are you telling us that you are a "non-dom" ?
Your flag looks distinctly like the ole Union Jack dear Alexa ????
Where do you hail from or is it a secret ? I can just see you in a fur hat, arctic fox coat and snow covered boots ?
With frequent phone calls to uncle Vlad ?
Just kidding

 

[Pat494]

I remember the good ole days when the Sloane Rangers used to occupy West London. Now it is full of foreigners and we are relegated to the outer suburbs , like Ealing. Thanks politicians, another own goal.

 

[alexaherself]

Are you telling us that you are a "non-dom" ?

I saw no point in concealing it, since it's been discussed here before.

Your flag looks distinctly like the ole Union Jack dear Alexa ????

Exactly so. Non-doms (within the context of this conversation, at least) are people who live in the UK, aren't we?

I'm Maltese. But I've lived over here since I was 18. I came for university, and have stayed (at least for now).

I can just see you in a fur hat, arctic fox coat and snow covered boots ?

Then I would probably be "Aleksa", rather than "Alexa"?

To be honest, although I'd done plenty of European travel before I came here, it was mostly during summers, and until I moved to this country, I hadn't actually seen "real, proper snow" at all. But over the last few winters, I've seen enough for a lifetime. I still don't have the shoes for it. Sorry to disappoint you.

 

[hhiusa]

So who pays for motorways in between cities if I live in a little village in Devon?

Well the way it works in the US is, if a city like La Jolla wishes to repave their roads they apply for a grant from Caltrans and the Federal Government who gives them the money ONLY IF they put up half the cost up front. If you city has more tax revenue, then you can get more money from the state and federal grants. "You have to have money to make money." If a city doesn't have enough money to pay for half of it, the government doesn't give you a cent.

This is why I prefer living at the beach. Excess revenue from boat taxes, licensing, mooring fees and dock usage fees. Additionally, property tends to be exorbidant, which increases county comptroller's coffers.

If I go to a university in York, why should Yorkies pay to build universities for geezers down sarf, u na wat I mean like arri?

Yorkies can't really afford to pay for universities down South. I highly doubt there is much excess tax revenue to be diverted in such a way. Secondly, tax money earned by the Yorkies should stay in Yorkshire if it is derived from property taxes and other municipal taxes such as VAT in the EU or sales (8-13.3%) and franchise taxes (1.5% - 8.84%) in the US.

Do you have a ranch with horses too? It's possible I've got the wrong end of the stick and just got it all plain wrong. If so, I'm soooo sorry dude.

We used to have 3 as a matter of fact but no one lived on them. My uncle still has a horse a ranch. I, for one, do not like the countryside or the smell of horses.

 

[Pat494]

The US is run on money from elections to paving roads. They make the rich richer and try and ignore the poor. The point of who needs the money most doesn't seem to matter, as in Europe. Why let the rich have so much more when they have so much they can't even spend what they have ? The poor are so desperate they need 2 or 3 jobs just to survive.
Do others matter ? Of course. A happy country is a joy to live in for all, not just the super rich who are so afraid they have to live in gated communities. Good things have imho come out of the US but it has huge internal problems caused by greed and arrogance.

The French/Russians and a lot of dictators never saw it coming. Share the wealth around a bit is what I would suggest. Not equally as under theoretical Communism but fairly and sensibly.

 

[Atilla]

The US is run on money from elections to paving roads. They make the rich richer and try and ignore the poor. The point of who needs the money most doesn't seem to matter, as in Europe. Why let the rich have so much more when they have so much they can't even spend what they have ? The poor are so desperate they need 2 or 3 jobs just to survive.
Do others matter ? Of course. A happy country is a joy to live in for all, not just the super rich who are so afraid they have to live in gated communities. Good things have imho come out of the US but it has huge internal problems caused by greed and arrogance.

The French/Russians and a lot of dictators never saw it coming.

I think it's all about the system. If the system is good and fair, people do understand and can appreciate, working hard within that system will get societies ahead.

Systems are open to interpretation with bias and that's where equality, equity, integrity, honesty, justice; law and order come into play.


As always in such circumstances one should look at the successful countries and emulate their practices.

In our global world these days; either systems change or people move to better systems.

The powerful countries seem to have a habit of screwing up the little ones that don't suit their national interests and then grumble about people wanting to flee savages of war.

Don't have a solution, just see it for what it is. It's called living a life. :|