RE: More UK Corruption.

RE: More UK Corruption. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

LadyEllen -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 8:30:09 AM)
Why do you think Dennis invested so much time in being permanently drunk? E

kittinSol -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 8:34:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen Why do you think Dennis invested so much time in being permanently drunk? Gasp... I was hoping that they only fucked that one time. The thought of Dennis having to get smashed in order to be able to put up with Margaret's regular deviant sexual fantasies... that's just too much to bear. Thomp

LadyEllen -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 8:36:20 AM)
It was at least twice KS - Mark and Carol......... (double the terror!) I'm thinking Dennis was smashed all the while - to induce brewer's droop (though he may have been severely dealt with for that) - to block out the whole experience from his mind E

kittinSol -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 8:41:33 AM)
I thought Mark and Carol were twins???

RealityLicks -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 8:44:39 AM)
On my version of planet Earth, Carol and Mark are twins but hey, never let facts stand in the way etc etc. Ellen, you've changed your position twice now. But then, double standards are only human, apparently [8\|]. Is it just me that thinks the game is slightly pointless when the goalposts are quite so mobile?

LadyEllen -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 9:07:34 AM)
please explain where I changed my position? E

RealityLicks -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 9:33:27 AM)
I think you're more interested in "winning" the argument, while I simply accept that your views on the UK's endemic corruption will remain unchanged. So let's forego the ritual okay? Life's too short.

Politesub53 -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 10:25:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen Public sector price fixing - yes, it means that the exchequer has to pay more. But it also means - higher turnover for the private companies involved, who then pay more VAT - higher profits for the private companies involved, who have to pay more corporation tax - better employment packages for those delivering the construction, hence higher NI and income tax contributions - reduced social welfare budgets, by way of that employment in contrast with tax credits for low wage work or unemployment This would sound better if the total extra cost, was returned in taxes. That isnt the case though, VAT, Income Tax and Capital Gains Tax, are only a proportion of the money skimmed off. Sure, if a contractor earns another £10k a year he pays more income tax, but only at 40p in the pound. The other 60p stays in his pocket, the same happens with the CGT and VAT along the chain. Which ever way you look at it, the taxpayer foots the bill for the corruption.

seeksfemslave -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 12:18:15 PM)
quote: LadyE: The subsidies on milk production are a form of governmental market fixing of course, as is the whole CAP. CAP = Common Agricultural Policy. A monstrous food price fixing ring run by the EU. So LadyE are you saying that a government would prosecute others for doing what it actually does itself ? Thats difficult to believe.

NorthernGent -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 1:06:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SadistsSeeking "...Is there such a thing as fair play in business ?..." There is where people fight for it. Wander 'round the plains like a gazelle, and the lions will bite your fuckin' head off. This is the problem we have here today; people have been rendered docile on the back of a play station and a £300 pair of shoes - the lunatics have taken over the asylum.

NorthernGent -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/17/2008 1:09:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Gasp... I was hoping that they only fucked that one time. The thought of Dennis having to get smashed in order to be able to put up with Margaret's regular deviant sexual fantasies... that's just too much to bear. Thomp Maggie must have knocked Dennis' hips right in with the biggest, fattest dildo she could get her hands on........'just the way she is.....she's all about maximum damage that one....

RealityLicks -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/19/2008 3:15:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 This would sound better if the total extra cost, was returned in taxes. That isnt the case though, VAT, Income Tax and Capital Gains Tax, are only a proportion of the money skimmed off. Sure, if a contractor earns another £10k a year he pays more income tax, but only at 40p in the pound. The other 60p stays in his pocket, the same happens with the CGT and VAT along the chain. Which ever way you look at it, the taxpayer foots the bill for the corruption. Of course, you are right. It's immediately apparent that this practice is carried out in pursuit of profit and not due to the risible notion that the construction companies are being hard done by. All the big firms post large, successive annual profit increases. There's something deeply immoral about the way we habitually ignore white-collar crime yet read page after page in the news about petty crime. Why is it that the same tinpot theorists, who drone on with "solutions" for disorder in the streets, are meanwhile buffing the toecaps of our country's true criminals? Some are too old, some too nervously intransigent to deal with a fairly blatant reality. Excusing crime at the "top" of society is the number one cause of disrespect for the law at the "bottom". The plebs now know what their bosses are really all about and no-one can get that genie back in the bottle. It follows that if you wish to reduce the effect, you should first tackle the cause but something tells me there's a bit of mileage yet in the hypocrisy and indignation lark. Pointless? Definitely - but it feels so good.

seeksfemslave -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/19/2008 3:46:36 AM)
I never claimed it wasnt fraudulent practice but I do think it does not have wholly negative consequences. If say 50 major building firms continue to trade due to these "arrangements" and those firms are spread across the country then that provides positive economic benefits . No different really than giving them a subsidy in the first place. If true competitive bidding occured it is certain that say 10 business would eventually fail. Unemployment would increase, as would social expenditure. What I pointed out is that it seems that only the "pleb" true value adding side of the economy is subject to this economic rigour. Doctors, Lawyers, Politicians, High Level Civil Servants get what they know they deserve, by arrangement. Am I wrong ? adding: the banking system gets support after it has been caught with its pants down. The reasons are understandable, but regrettable. Roll on June when I can get my money out of Northern Rock. Thanx for your support Reality, I appreciate it lol Reality is wrong when by implication he says that profit is necessarily bad. OK?

RealityLicks -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/19/2008 5:02:39 AM)
Still clinging to that fiction? By the same rationale, a burglar could justifiably assert that if he didn't steal impromptu "subsidies" from your house, he'd have to claim unemployment benefit. It also ignores the fact that the construction industry is doing very well; there is no danger of anyone going to the wall, in fact Nanny has lectured us all on the workers who are flooding here from far and wide to service the boom. This is simple greed and these thieving bastards are laughing all the way to the Caymans at the dupes who try to justify their crimes. I'm mystified by your comment about companies earning a profit. Public procurement policy doesn't obviate profit; as I have pointed out, price is not the only factor in awarding contracts. Punctual delivery, safety record, quality control etc etc are all just as important and it is entirely to be expected that private enterprises will earn a profit. They are employing local people, who in turn pay local taxes. The public sector seemingly can't win: they are criticised for not being lean and mean but when they catch someone with their fingers in the till, the goalposts are moved and suddenly its excusable because the poor executives can barely afford young Rupert's fees at Eton. We no longer live in the deferential society of some posters' youth - I say: you break the law; you go to gaol.

seeksfemslave -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/19/2008 5:16:23 AM)
You look after the burglars' interests and I'll note that keeping 50 large building firms operational is not without benefit. Its not only Rupert's school fees that are at stake its Joe and Elsie Bloggs and their three little sprogs who would suffer if 10 of the firms went to the wall. Not forgetting the multiplier effect throughout the community where the building firm was located. You list how wonderful in theory is public sector procurement. In practice there have been some spectacular failures The national health service computer system. The Dome. etc etc. The projected cost of the Olympics raises every fortnight. I am glad the building industry is doing well. Its skillfull usefull and value added. Something that cannot be said for a lot of public sector employees.

RealityLicks -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/19/2008 5:29:45 AM)
If my post were written in Mandarin you couldn't have missed it's point more completely. Come back when you've jogged two laps of the park.

seeksfemslave -> RE: More UK Corruption. (4/19/2008 7:06:28 AM)
Having returned from my jog around the park I note that my posts are written in English and you cant grasp that in principle they are correct. You old class warrior you !

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125