UKIP No1

Topical debate
tex
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:32 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by tex » Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:55 pm

If Kevin Cahill figures were correct and all investigations proved them to be correct, I would have thought after 10 years down the line we would have heard something by now. Or is there another conspiracy in the offering.

User avatar
Stephen Richardson
Posts: 310
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 11:03 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by Stephen Richardson » Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:41 pm

Local sales tax is used as part of the American tax system. The USA has a completely different system to the UK. It is completely ridiculous to talk of VAT being replaced by a local sales tax without explaining exactly how the entire tax system of the UK would change.

How would the government raise the money to replace the revenue lost by not levying VAT? Would there be more tax taken from somewhere else or would spending be cut (in America there is no NHS and people have to rely on private medical insurance.)

Besides any such sales tax - just like VAT - is a regressive tax and impacts on less well off people more than the well to do - better to introduce a local income tax, that would be more progressive.
When one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.

dolly pentreath
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:49 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by dolly pentreath » Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:52 pm

tex wrote:If Kevin Cahill figures were correct and all investigations proved them to be correct, I would have thought after 10 years down the line we would have heard something by now. Or is there another conspiracy in the offering.
The classic imperialist response to inconvenient situations of this sort is to pretend that they do not exist and hope that they will go away.

The classic imperialist response to inconvenient facts of this sort is to ignore them and at all costs try not to be drawn into discussion.

Lesser problems (economy disappearing into a black hole/ non-existence of weapons of mass destruction/ proof that governments policies (choose any one you like) have made the situation worse/ cost of government project (name any one you like) has quadrupled/ world about to be destroyed by asteroid etc. etc.) are usually dealt with by a simple denial followed by brazening it out.

By the way, the expression you were groping for is actually "in the offing". Would you like the meaning of that explained as well?

User avatar
Marhak
Posts: 11075
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:46 am

Re: UKIP No1

Post by Marhak » Thu Mar 17, 2011 12:10 am

When three independent investigations all come up with the same answer, there's not much choice but to take their findings as fact. "Conspiracies" have nothing to do with it (well, not on their part anyway). Tex only doubts this because it refers to Cornwall.

CJenkin
Posts: 1332
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:01 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by CJenkin » Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:33 am

Regardless of whether Cahill's figures add up - the reality is that in a centralised state the bulk of public spending is spent in and around the centre and will therefore 'subsidise' the centre. In a decentralised state the wealth is spread around. Whilst Cornwall is tied to a centralised England (this affects English peripheral regions aswell) it will always be impoverished.
For Cornwall a centralised model simply doesn't work - only the English would seriously believe that they subsidise Wales and Scotland (or indeed Cornwall). As an independent nation Scotland would do just fine and probably exceed its present economic position.

tex
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:32 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by tex » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:00 am

Marhak wrote:When three independent investigations all come up with the same answer, there's not much choice but to take their findings as fact.
What has been done, or is being done with these facts? Bearing in mind it has been 10 years since these findings.

Any evidence that shows that these "same answer" are correct and proven without doubt would be very helpful.
C Jenkin
Regardless of whether Cahill's figures add up.
So I take it there isn’t any evidence. So who is expected to take whom seriously.

CJenkin
Posts: 1332
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:01 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by CJenkin » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:16 am

The evidence is all around you if you care to look - we all pay taxes but only a proportion of those taxes will inevitably be spent in Cornwall. Cornish people (along with Welsh, Scots etc.) fund the MOD and every other ministry located and based within the UK's capital city there is very little distribution of government departments around the UK we are extremely centralised to the detriment of all the peripheral regions. What Cahill was trying to do was to establish a balance of payments between the money generated in Cornwall and the spend in Cornwall. This is extremely difficult to do accurately and Cahill would have struggled to cover everything for example I don't believe he took int account the impact of the Duchy. What it indicated (which is largely common sense) is that there was a shortfall and there will always be a shortfall whilst everyone's taxes etc. fund head offices that are almost exclusively located in one region of the UK.
What devolutionists would argue is that more of the tax take should be spent locally.
Unfortunately that might mean that the UK's capital city suffers somewhat financially but being the wealthiest city in Europe it should cope ;-)

tex
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:32 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by tex » Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:19 pm

CJenkin wrote:The evidence is all around you if you care to look
Everybody can see that. They can also see MK is no difference from the other parties, political talk without the walk. Incidentally this may be of interest.http://www.unitetheunion.org/marchforal ... =%22TUC%22

CJenkin
Posts: 1332
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:01 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by CJenkin » Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:58 pm

tex wrote:
CJenkin wrote:The evidence is all around you if you care to look
Everybody can see that. They can also see MK is no difference from the other parties, political talk without the walk. Incidentally this may be of interest.http://www.unitetheunion.org/marchforal ... =%22TUC%22
It is of interest, I won't be attending due to other commitments but I know there will be a good contigent of people from Cornwall at the front of the march with a St. Piran's flag and the Scottish.
However I don't agree with your second sentence - MK members make a 'difference' every day of the year and do their best to 'walk the walk'. How to achieve more is the real question. MK exists because of Cornwall's unique identity ethnically, culturally, nationally and economically none of which can be properly addressed by UK wide (or England) institutions.

tex
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:32 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by tex » Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:46 pm

CJenkin wrote:MK exists because of Cornwall's unique identity ethnically, culturally, nationally
But are there enough Cornish who appreciate this? Even if there were enough MK wouldn’t get elected with just the Cornish vote. It only has to appear that MK is alienating itself from part of the voting public, to make the voters think twice, this on its own is a luxury MK cannot afford.

CJenkin
Posts: 1332
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:01 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by CJenkin » Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:36 am

I believe all the full-time residents of Cornwall can appreciate this - MK has no interest in alienating people. We continually stress the need to work towards an inclusive society within Cornwall. I note however that selectively edited my comment. It's not me that's interested in division but I suspect lots of labour stooges are ;-).
By the way Cornish is an adjective and so can be applied to anything that pertains to Cornwall including its residents it is not the sole preserve of an ethnicity (imprtant as that is) as my original comment sought to highlight.

User avatar
Kevrenor
Posts: 280
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 4:35 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: UKIP No1

Post by Kevrenor » Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:59 am

tex wrote:It [MK]only has to appear that MK is alienating itself from part of the voting public, to make the voters think twice, this on its own is a luxury MK cannot afford.
It is impossible for MK to appear that way for there is a conga line of (usually) English nationalists (be they misguided, sock-puppets, trolls, 'agents provocateurs', or racists, ready to take any opportunity that arises (or more often can be manufactured) to accuse MK of things we do not do, say, or intend.

I suppose outnumbered by probably 180 to 1 we can only expect that sort of attention from those whose interest would be better turned to England or Britain (as is there want).

tex
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:32 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by tex » Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:14 pm

With MK agreeing virtually with everything that is being posted on here, this 180 must be continually rising, I have yet to read anything significant that MK has said to stem this flow.

CJenkin
Posts: 1332
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:01 pm

Re: UKIP No1

Post by CJenkin » Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:59 pm

tex wrote:With MK agreeing virtually with everything that is being posted on here, this 180 must be continually rising, I have yet to read anything significant that MK has said to stem this flow.
MK as an organisation doesn't post on here - there are a number of individuals who happen to be members of MK who can at least post with some accuracy and authority on what MK stands for and I don't think we would fret about tex's (or YC's)band of English racists and nationalists increasing. Kevrenor is right leave Cornwall to sort out it's own issues we don't need your 'help' or 'interest', England is east of the Tamar.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest