India’s successful Moon Landing

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just a footnote - it's a popular delusion that businesses generate money and governments spend it.
In fact nearly half GDP is spending by government on public services, which generates enormous amounts of wealth like any other business activity, as well as the value of the benefits to society itself.
Taxation generates wealth - what goes around comes around.
A profound and complete misunderstanding of economics. You couldn’t be further wrong if you tried.

The ability of the perspective is a man in the desert drinking his own urine thinking he’s getting more water. It will prolong his life, but not for long.
 
The greatest weakness of the stock market , finance and the business is "Limited Liability". They should bear the losses as well as the gains.
Limited liability in the UK was established in 1855. It is an enabler of economic growth allowing larger companies to be formed with investment from an unlimited number of shareholders. The Victorian industrial and economic "miracle" may not otherwise have happened.

Unlimited liability makes shareholders personally responsible for the debts of the company. This works for sole proprietorships and small numbers of shareholders. It is quite unmanageable for hundreds (or more) shareholders.

That the concept of limited liability is sometimes abused is true - the solution is not dismantling business structures largely proven to work effectively.

Taxation generates wealth - what goes around comes around.

That taxation generates wealth seems counter-intuitive. How do you define wealth.
 
A profound and complete misunderstanding of economics. You couldn’t be further wrong if you tried.

The ability of the perspective is a man in the desert drinking his own urine thinking he’s getting more water. It will prolong his life, but not for long.
See what I mean? 🤣
Where do you think the money goes?
The NHS makes zero profit but how do you think it survives?
Large parts of British industry are/were bailed out by the state, Rolls Royce for one. How is this possible?
You need to put your thinking cap on Deema!
Another question to ask yourself - why do tax cuts never achieve the stated objective of encouraging growth?
Here's a clue: "what goes around comes around".
Or to put it simply, taxation drives economies, not by the taking of it, but by the disbursement of it into the economy.
Or to put it even more simply - increase welfare payments gets spent in shops, which make more profit and might employ more people....and so on.
All successful economies are high tax economies.
 
Last edited:
Stop digging @Jacob, occasionally and on reflection and a bit of background reading you gain more credibility accepting you’ve made a Billy Do than continuing to insist you’re right.
 
Stop digging @Jacob, occasionally and on reflection and a bit of background reading you gain more credibility accepting you’ve made a Billy Do than continuing to insist you’re right.
Have you ever heard of "tax and spend"? Look it up.
A little intro here, sorry about the teeth!
 
Last edited:
Reminds me of the story of the student who failed his economics paper(I think he might have been a distant relative of PP). After resitting it a year later, his tutor asked him how he thought he'd done. "Well", he said, "by some stroke of luck the questions were identical to those from last year, so I reckon I aced it!".
"Ah", said his tutor, "the questions might have been the same, but there's no guarantee that the answers were".
 
Reminds me of the story of the student who failed his economics paper(I think he might have been a distant relative of PP). After resitting it a year later, his tutor asked him how he thought he'd done. "Well", he said, "by some stroke of luck the questions were identical to those from last year, so I reckon I aced it!".
"Ah", said his tutor, "the questions might have been the same, but there's no guarantee that the answers were".
Well yes - economics is not a science!
 
Tax and spend, wow, that’s a blast from the past, about as old as Noah and the ark and has been proven many many times to be an unworkable system that is now longer entertained as a theory that should be pursued. Governments spend, spend spend, usually on appeasing the population especially in the ‘good’ times by increasing the reach of the state. That increases national debt, increases borrowings, the interest rate governments have to pay, the cost to each of us in higher taxes to pay for the debt that’s been incurred in our name which leads to more poverty, which leads to call for more government assistance…..and on and on it goes. Just look at the state of the economy now, you can see this cycle happening right now, it will affect generations after us.
 
They were just paid workers and didn't invest money, or get a share of the profits, or voting rights.
Their voting rights where to go on strike and bankrupt the company they where blackmailing, tell me why the mines where constantly being bailed out when they where not making a profit, where did the bail out monies come from? 🤔
 
..... why the mines where constantly being bailed out when they where not making a profit, where did the bail out monies come from? 🤔
because we needed the coal but Thatcher wanted to break the unions and import coal instead. She effectively sold off coal and other industries to the highest bidders. UK water is 70% foreign owned, UK rail ditto, ICI went to Germany.... and so on. Brexit on top of that means we relinquish even more control to foreign businesses. What a mess!
 
.... Just look at the state of the economy now, you can see this cycle happening right now, it will affect generations after us.
But taxes have been progressively cut from 1979 onwards! In 1979, the top rate was reduced from 83% to 60% and the basic rate from 33% to 30%. (thanks to Thatcher). Downhill ever since. Now 20%, 40% and 45%
Where are the benefits?

Forgot to say - you aren't supposed to actually believe in free market economics. Truss and Kwarteng were exceptions and hadn't got the message - look what happened next! 🤣
Neo liberalism is just an excuse to reduce public spending "we can't afford it" etc so that the mega rich can hang on to more of their ill-gotten gains.
 
Brexit on top of that means we relinquish even more control to foreign businesses? Bit of stretch, that.
Yes, because they own large amounts of it. They have no interest in the service to the UK public except as a source of profit. If necessary they would happily let them sink, or chuck sh*t into UK rivers as they are doing currently
 
Last edited:
Neo liberalism is just an excuse to reduce public spending "we can't afford it" etc so that the mega rich can hang on to more of their ill-gotten gains.
  • Despite the reduction in the additional rate from 50% to 45% in April 2013, the share of total Income Tax liabilities accounted for by the top 1% of taxpayers by income rose from 25.1% (£39bn of £157bn total) in 2012-13 to 28.3% (£71bn of £251bn total) in 2022-23.
 
I never fully understand where some get their facts from, clearly a woke perspective on the world, of ‘if I think it should be this way, it must be!’ So, to help those who weren’t around when the miners destroyed their industry and very brief potted history.
At the time of the miners strike, the British coal mining industry was unproductive, the cost for a tonne of coal was significantly higher than importing it from half way around the word, mined by the Aussys (25% higher). UK coal also had a much higher sulphur content than imported coal which had led to ‘acid rain’ over Scandinavia and the destructions of millions of trees. The UK needed to desulphur the British coal in order to reduce the acid rain. So every tonne of coal dug out of the ground required massive subsidies from the owner of British coal, the government.
So we had an industry that refused to modernise, was inefficient and its product more costly to actually use and far more costly to produce than importing the stuff. Now, any sensible person would have said, right chaps, we need to increase productivity, modernise and make our coal economically viable. We need to ensure than all the poor people in the UK can buy out coal, support out industry and not be in fuel poverty. Well that’s is exactly what Ian McGregor tried to do…..and the Union dug its heels in and refused to accept any change. In fact the Union had already achieved a 43% wages increase in 1972 under labour and was again pushing for a further exorbitant wage increase. The Union believed that by freezing the population, and turning the lights out (coal fired power stations) it would force the government under public pressure to back down. Well, it didn’t. The union shot itself and its members in its head, and never ever recovered from it. As a consequence, despite the world wide need for coal, the British industry and all the supporting company’s died a very rapid death.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top