DUP and Tory f*ck up thread

[J Ed]

Amazing that the Daily Mail manage to get anti-Irish bigotry about drinking into their cartoon about the DUP

 

[Streathamite]

but actually those who get way the least public funding per head are the English (and I think specifically the non London English).

Actually, Londoners are per capita easily the biggest net contributors to the exchequer, followed by those in the home counties

 

[lazythursday]

Actually, Londoners are per capita easily the biggest net contributors to the exchequer, followed by those in the home counties

Yes... but that's a different thing entirely to amount of public funding per head. The fact that London generates more tax because our economy has been structured over many decades to favour the capital is neither here nor there.

 

[8den]

The DUP are saying the loot is for everybody but I think you'll see a disproportionate amount getting spent in the NE which is mostly already better developed and is where the Prod majorities are. Middle Class Catholics who often work in the public sector will do very nicely out of it. It's what usually happens. SF are not nearly as sleekit when it comes to the pork barrel as the DUP at least that is what SDLP supporters say. It'll be more slanted if SF remain absent of course and their RC communities are unrepresented.

It's a bit rich that the part of the UK that has just had a scandal with wasting half a billion quid gets the windfall because the person most responsible, Arlene, ends up with a bumbling British PM begging for her help. Maybe God is a Free Presbyterian after all.

Quite a good piece

What the DUP have negotiated is much smarter than many predicted


Also

Belfast council refuses to replace bonfire pallets stolen from storage - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

 

[8den]

This will be my first time up north for the 12th in years and years, and I completely missed this genuine ad campaign you'll find on billboards up here,









Really think the slogan should have been "enjoy sectarianism responsibily".

 

[SpookyFrank]

Actually, Londoners are per capita easily the biggest net contributors to the exchequer, followed by those in the home counties

Maybe because the profits of most of the UK's labour gets funnelled through London in one form or another?

 

[Streathamite]

I

Maybe because the profits of most of the UK's labour gets funnelled through London in one form or another?

No, i think where I read the Stat, it was based on income tax and council tax for the paid-in element.
However, I can't be sure of that

 

[lazythursday]

I

No, i think where I read the Stat, it was based on income tax and council tax for the paid-in element.
However, I can't be sure of that

Even if that's the case, what it means is that people in London collectively pay more tax because they are richer, and the public funding per head they get back is less than that (so they are net contributors). They still get more public funding per head than every part of the UK apart from Scotland and Northern Ireland.

 

[Supine]

Maybe because the profits of most of the UK's labour gets funnelled through London in one form or another?

That's basically rubbish. London is a big productive city for sure.

Our hard work outside of London gets funnelled through multinational companies and hedge funding though. Not through the city where the streets are paved with gold.

 

[CrabbedOne]

...
Really think the slogan should have been "enjoy sectarianism responsibily".

That's a tidy summary of the GFA.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I

No, i think where I read the Stat, it was based on income tax and council tax for the paid-in element.
However, I can't be sure of that

Wages are higher because of banking, insurance, government and other parasitical industries being centered on London

 

[Streathamite]

Wages are higher because of banking, insurance, government and other parasitical industries being centered on London

I don't dispute that at all. Still doesn't alter the point of Londoners being net contributors

 

[Streathamite]

They still get more public funding per head than every part of the UK apart from Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Evidence please

 

[Fez909]

Evidence please

 

[killer b]

Why are you being weird and touchy about London?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Actually, Londoners are per capita easily the biggest net contributors to the exchequer, followed by those in the home counties

Net contributors or net takers, given the huge wealth the rich keep for themselves? If you're making money out of owning stuff and paying a bit of that in tax, what are you contributing?

If a landlord charges their tenants £10k a month and pays £2k of that in tax, are they contributing more to the exchequer than their tenants, who pay £500 a month each to the landlord for the privilege of using the thing the landlord owns and perhaps only pay £500 a month each to the exchequer? Or is this some other process? Without the landlord siphoning off their earnings, the tenants could all afford to pay more tax and still be just as well off as they are now.

Isn't much of this 'contribution' of the rich merely an illusion? A trick?

 

[Streathamite]

Why are you being weird and touchy about London?

A) l'm a Londoner
B) not being that touchy - more pedantic
C) in my job, I'm literally swimming in public sector expenditure info all the time, and what I've seen here, on this thread, doesn't accord with all I know from that. So, I'm interested to see different info. Apologies for slight derail

 

[Streathamite]

View attachment 110336

Can't see on my mobile, will view tomorrow at work

 

[DaveCinzano]

This will be my first time up north for the 12th in years and years, and I completely missed this genuine ad campaign you'll find on billboards up here,


View attachment 110324


View attachment 110325



Really think the slogan should have been "enjoy sectarianism responsibily".

‘Ethnic cleansing not palate cleansing’

 

[DaveCinzano]

Evidence please

He who smelt it dealt it

 

[Streathamite]

Net contributors or net takers, given the huge wealth the rich keep for themselves? If you're making money out of owning stuff and paying a bit of that in tax, what are you contributing?

If a landlord charges their tenants £10k a month and pays £2k of that in tax, are they contributing more to the exchequer than their tenants, who pay £500 a month each to the landlord for the privilege of using the thing the landlord owns and perhaps only pay £500 a month each to the exchequer? Or is this some other process? Without the landlord siphoning off their earnings, the tenants could all afford to pay more tax and still be just as well off as they are now.

Isn't much of this 'contribution' of the rich merely an illusion? A trick?

I agree with all you say there. The rentier aspect of London's economy is huge, and makes a mockery, IMO, of economic statistics

 

[ddraig]

wrt London is it not down to density of people?

 

[Ole]

 

[Dom Traynor]

I

No, i think where I read the Stat, it was based on income tax and council tax for the paid-in element.
However, I can't be sure of that

Evidence please

 

[Poi E]

Amazing that the Daily Mail manage to get anti-Irish bigotry about drinking into their cartoon about the DUP

Giles would have done it with some actual humour and not just bigotry.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I don't dispute that at all. Still doesn't alter the point of Londoners being net contributors

Just trying to qualify that point by adding the bit about how many of those contributors are contibuting other people's money.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Net contributors or net takers, given the huge wealth the rich keep for themselves? If you're making money out of owning stuff and paying a bit of that in tax, what are you contributing?

If a landlord charges their tenants £10k a month and pays £2k of that in tax, are they contributing more to the exchequer than their tenants, who pay £500 a month each to the landlord for the privilege of using the thing the landlord owns and perhaps only pay £500 a month each to the exchequer? Or is this some other process? Without the landlord siphoning off their earnings, the tenants could all afford to pay more tax and still be just as well off as they are now.

Isn't much of this 'contribution' of the rich merely an illusion? A trick?

I doubt the numbers exist, because of trust funds, offshore fuckery etc, but I would like to see contribution to the exchequer as a proportion of income broken down by region. I think that would tell a very different story.

Income and wealth too, come to think of it.

 

[lazythursday]

The whole 'London is a net contributor' thing tends to be made by people who want London to be a kind of independent city state (perhaps I should say City state) that keeps its tax revenues to spend on Londoners. It tries to point to a spurious unfairness that London doesn't get all its money back, completely ignoring the unfairness that exists economically between London and other areas of the UK and ignoring the fact that London does get more public funding per head than other areas of England and Wales. Really, it's those areas that are poor and don't raise enough taxation to adequately support themselves that need the higher levels of public funding, especially for infrastructure, investment etc. Without intra-regional transfers of money the country would fall to bits. And the Conservatives have already gone down this road with business rates, allowing local authorities to keep what they raise, which is going to be a boon for London and South East boroughs and a fucking nightmare for post-industrial towns and rural areas.

 

[eoin_k]

Yeah, arguments about this agreement that focus on which parts of the country are net contributors, or which receive the highest spending, seem misconceived. The point isn't that public funds are being transferred from wealthy regions to more deprived ones, which is a necessary tool for managing the political economy of a modern nation state. Even as the Tories were violently 'restructuring' Britain in the 1980s, public funds would have flowed from London and the Home Counties into parts of the country that were being deindustrialised. The point should be about how this particular decision was reached and how it discredits the government's austerity policies for Britain.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Amazing that the Daily Mail manage to get anti-Irish bigotry about drinking into their cartoon about the DUP

Strange how The Mail moans about a possible return to the 70s under social democracy when their own abjectly racist "humour" is the far greater throw-back.