Budget 2010

groen said:
tax was never meant to be a means for the government to enforce its social and health based opinions on to the population. it was meant to be a means to raise funds for services that the population thought would be better handled through a non private entity.
Click to expand...

Aren't you South African?
 
Why is the Government still buying things we can't afford.

The Trident replacement according to some will cost 130 billion.
 
new space agency, you see not only do they steal our money. they **** it in our faces as well. (opposed to just flushing it down the toilet)

like your neighbour stealing your car and the beeping his horn and saying "hey check my new car" that is government tax and spending analogy.
 
Biohazard said:
Wow, show disdain for wiki when it doesn't fit with your argument.

Sounds about right.
Click to expand...

Eh? When have I said wikipedia was a good source? Wiki is great for basic information but it is not peer reviewed for a start. It's something any scientist knows from the start.:confused:

Biohazard said:
It is a clear unbiased article, I'm sorry you cannot accept that. It was linked two pages ago, go read.

Shetland was ceded back to Scotland way before the UK become a reality, I don't really know what you are on about.. it is both a council area and a Scottish parliament consituency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shetland

Go read, they are apart of Scotland and the UK.

I do not hate the UK, I just do not agree with it politically. My views have nothing to do with you being completely wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, and Norway still have claim that it was not the Kings to give back...

Using your link you provided...

In the 14th century Norway still treated Orkney and Shetland as a Norwegian province, but Scottish influence was growing, and in 1379 the Scottish earl Henry Sinclair took control of Orkney on behalf of the Norwegian king Håkon VI Magnusson.[6] In 1348 Norway was severely weakened by the Black Plague and in 1397 it entered the Kalmar Union. With time Norway came increasingly under Danish control. King Christian I of Denmark and Norway was in financial trouble and, when his daughter Margaret became engaged to James III of Scotland in 1468, he needed money to pay her dowry. Apparently without the knowledge of the Norwegian Riksråd (Council of the Realm) he entered into a contract on 8 September 1468 with the King of Scots in which he pawned Orkney for 50,000 Rhenish guilders.[7] On 28 May the next year he also pawned Shetland for 8,000 Rhenish guilders.[8] He secured a clause in the contract which gave future kings of Norway the right to redeem the islands for a fixed sum of 210 kilograms (460 lb) of gold or 2,310 kilograms (5,100 lb) of silver. Several attempts were made during the 17th and 18th centuries to redeem the islands, without success.[9]

Following a legal dispute with William, Earl of Morton, who held the estates of Orkney and Shetland, Charles II ratified the pawning document by a Scottish Act of Parliament on 27 December 1669 which officially made the islands a Crown dependency and exempt from any "dissolution of His Majesty’s lands". In 1742 a further Act of Parliament returned the estates to a later Earl of Morton, although the original Act of Parliament specifically ruled that any future act regarding the islands status would be "considered null, void and of no effect".
Click to expand...

eugh, quoting wiki...;)

Ahleckz said:
Pardon?
Click to expand...

Essentially if Scotland was to become independent the Shetlands would have a very legitimate call for independence from them, either being independent, joining Norway or staying in what was left of the UK.

See: http://www.journal-online.co.uk/article/5121-shetland-chief-calls-for-independence
 
Biohazard said:
Its the old 'the Scots don't own it, its the Norwegians.'.

It doesn't hold any water, because it is completely unfounded, and more often than not, a result of a biggoted mind.
Click to expand...

So says Biohazard, one of the most zenophobic people on this forum...

(Oh, BTW, don't think of me as English, I may have been born and now live here but I have a very strong scottish heritage and family up there...;))
 
Ahleckz said:
Setting up an investment bank for the sole purpose of promoting 'green industry'. Money will come from assests such as the Chunnel and private investment...
Another quango then... More money down the drain for no real gain.

The budget isn't really important, it's the response from Osbourne which is the important bit today.
Click to expand...

Will that be like this:
Osbourne: Well, we don't like any of that and nor should any right minded people.
Someone: Why not?
Osbourne: Because he said it.
 
The whole thing is pointless and just a mud slinging contest by both the main parties. Both have agreed they will hold a budget as soon as they win the election, so what is the point??
 
apeZ said:
I don't see the point in this. Why is general alcohol only up 2% and cider up by 10%? Makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...

Probably to combat 'teenage drinking' of cheap alcohol. Seems a bit unfair to tar responsible adults with the same brush.
 
Dark88 said:
Probably to combat 'teenage drinking' of cheap alcohol. Seems a bit unfair to tar responsible adults with the same brush.
Click to expand...

apeZ said:
I don't see the point in this. Why is general alcohol only up 2% and cider up by 10%? Makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...
Cider has slipped through the tax gaps - the tax on cider is well below that of other alcohol, beers and lagers. The 10% brings it in line.
 
AcidHell2 said:
What a load of rubbish, nearly all of us can afford it, it's just no one wants to pay as we want to buy everything under the sun.
People should pay the same, should have a high personal allowence say circa 10k then 1 flat tax rate. Ambition and high level jobs should not be screwed over.
Click to expand...

so rich people who drive around in ridiculous sized cars and live in ridiculous sized houses should pay the same as someone who earns 10,00 quid, OMFG what a stupid comment
 
mattscold said:
so rich people who drive around in ridiculous sized cars and live in ridiculous sized houses should pay the same as someone who earns 10,00 quid, OMFG what a stupid comment
Click to expand...

Damn right they should. Invaribly they got those "ridiculous" sized houses and cars by working bloody hard. Oh and people buying these "ridiculous" houses and cars are taxed at such a laughable rate as it is through stamp duty, fuel duty, VAT, petrol, etc. etc. etc.

Why should the successful be punished by jealousy taxes?

Edit: just been on www.listentotaxman.com and someone earning 100k a year pays £29,930.00 (£575.58 a week) in income tax. Incredible.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom