- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,159
Well no they aren't because if everybody was treated the same the tax would apply to all houses.
Poll: General election voting intentions poll
- Thread starter semi-pro waster
- Start date
- Status
Well no they aren't because if everybody was treated the same the tax would apply to all houses.
trying to sell the different but equal card? A simple way to expose the flaw in your position is to substitute wealth for gender (tricky but not impossible to change). Is it ok if all women are treated differently to men as long as we apply the women's version to a male to female transsexual?
How about skin colour? Ok to treat different colours differently as long as, if they change it in some way, the treatment changes too?
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/punishment
Sounds pretty accurate for the first one.
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,159
We're going around in circles here so subject change time.
Thoughts on zero hour contracts?
Thoughts on zero hour contracts?
They are abused.
Why didn't labour ban them?
Actually I think they are working exactly intended. Sold as a flexible contract for both employee and employer, but actually just a way to get around basic employee rights.
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,159
This is what I was wondering. They seem to spend all their time going on about them yet when they were in power for more than ten years? Nothing.
Exactly, they were quite happy to watch the number of them double between 2004 and when they were eventually kicked to the curb.
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,159
But then New Labour is arguably Conservative anyway.
We all pay council tax don't we? That's a wealth tax, just a highly regressive one so I welcome anything that makes it more progressive.
Equating this with the "Separate but Equal" policies of Jim Crow era USA is low even for you Dolph. Here's a key difference, you can't choose your race, gender, sexuality but you can choose to be not-super rich. At the end of the day this isn't going to stop people aspiring to be rich, those who can are still going to want to live in mansions, the mansion tax is not a punishment.
I would argue that they were neither, instead offering the very worst of what old labour had to offer, along with the very worst that the conservatives have ever offered.
It's an insult to the people who actually truly believed and dedicated their lives to "the Labour Party" that that shower of **** was able to use the name.
My thoughts are; the only people who **** and moan on about them being a horrid thing and make a big song and dance about it are people who aren't actually on them, but want something to champion to make them feel morally superior to other people.
The people I know who are on them; seem to like the flexibility that they have in when they can do things other than work.
Obviously there are good and bad points, in that you don't have guaranteed work, but of the people I personally know on them, they seem to get alright amounts of time in any case, I know this isn't the case everywhere and some are abused though.
And for the earlier point, in my opinion; mansion tax is a punishment which ever way you look at it.
Mansion Tax reeks of envy.
All that needs to be done is an additional set of Council Tax bands.
But then the money wouldn't go into the central coffers.
True, but even then I think council tax is inherently unfair in it's design and implementation in any case.
Community charge was a "fairer" system, but we all know how that ended up
Just lol.
The chances of suffering gender identity syndrome are much higher than the chances of winning the lottery, and gender (both physical and identified) can be changed. Likewise some people clearly believe sexuality can be changed otherwise we would not try to treat those attracted to children in the way we do, and again, identified sexuality is probably key here.
Those who believe in unequal treatment and discrimination will always try to justify it, claim their descrimination of choice is special, justified and so on. That doesn't make it any less discriminatory.
They are both a good and a bad thing, but to work at their best, we need a citizen's income programming rather than the terrible welfare system we currently have.
- Status