Marmora Man

Hugenot: Reduce spending on Social Security by increasing the initial tax threshold for 20p tax band to ?12,500 and allowing more people to keep more of their money. For those not in work - a minimum indexed flat rate of say ?200/ week - ie ?10,000 pa or roughly the minimum wage which is less than the proposed first tax threshold. Therefore providing an incentive to find work without getting caught in the benefits trap. Subsequent tax threshold at say ?20,000 for 22p tax band and ?62,500 for 40p tax band. For the Lib Demsand others a higher rate of 50p to kick in at ?250,000 (it wouldn't bring in much revenue but satisfies the envious). Tax thresholds to be indexed. NOTE: Personally I would prefer a flat rate of tax with realistically high starting threshold - but this doesn't seem to garner much support. Reduce spending on Health allowing people to buy these services and thereby allowing further reduction taxes - in any which way they prefer but making the ownership of some form of health insurance compulsory. Those not in work covered by the State. Reduce spending on Education making it all totally private - but this is probably not acceptable to the majority. Alternative give each child an education voucher - to be spent on education where they will. Let the schools themselves be run by the state, private companies, charities, Mum & Dad. The good ones will survive - the bad ones disappear. Defence and public order are state functions and probably irreducible - tho' I have proposed privatising defence. Do all this and Gov't spending reduces dramatically. So does an army of civil servants. Taxe rates go down - individuals decide what to spend their money on - their personal free cash won't impove dramatically tho' there will be some impovement, probably of the order of 10%, which in turn stimulates economic growth. For some this is recipe for anarchy, for others it represents individual freedom.

ChavWivaLawDegree Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- but to actually get off your arse and get involved in holding the people we vote in to represent us, to account or even put yourselves forward to get involved in the decisions that are made. Politics isn't the only way to make change happen - tho' I agree with you Chav that more people taking an interest and takng action is important. A scout group, amateur boxing club, guerilla gardeners, women's institutes are all groups that actively promote good. In my view tey are probably a damn sight more efficient than any centralised action led by government or politicians - tho' smetoimes politicians can do good by allowing such organisations to flourish and not drown in bureaucracy.

neecheecat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i don't trust people who don't like cats. While I worry about people that like them too much and think it's cute when they walk around kitchen tops and squat inside saucepans. Such an event ended a beautiful relationship when I was younger

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sorry, yes, I agree Dave R. I was referring to > taxation in general. Unlike Mamora Man I believe > in moderate redistibution of wealth to be a > thoroughly good thing. > > Ta credits, as you rightly point out, are a > complete mess. My point was about the tax credit system. However, I'd be interested in your definition of "moderate" redistribution. I fully support higher tax thresholds and a system that ensures basic dignity and needs for those unable, for whatever reason, to provide for themselves. I am less persuaded that taxing people at progressively higher taxes to redistribute (inefficiently - because the gov't would be in charge) the take to others on lower incomes does much for anyone. I'd be interested to understand your rationale.

Ardbeg 10 year old as today is not a special occasion - for that I reserve a 28 year, cask strength, single cask, single malt Highland Park.

I was not attempting to put forward a coherent political philosophy - my points after the ID cards, CCTV and 42 days were meant as a list of possible topics for discussion not necessarily as an expressed point of view. They are all of interest - serious discussion and opinions are welcomed. I'll leave this to run a while before attempting to analyse / respond.

STB - you're winding me up surely?

snoozequeen1 Wrote: > Gosh, one has to love the English for their > magnificent capacity for self delusion. > > I am ashamed of myself for encouraging you at all > by replying. I meant the usual EDF class "thing" about how wonderful life when Eat Dulwich was populated by real people - which is a sterile and meaningless debate.

I believe William Rose stock non organic free range and "cared for" meats and chicken. As a bonus it's not displayed wrapped in cling film.

Many have put forward or defended various political positions on the forum. However, the talk is usually spread over many threads - my Quango thread has morphed into a discussion of the merits, or otherwise, of ID cards. If we can keep "class" and "yah boo" away from the discussion I thought an ongoing thread on the political issues of the day might prove interesting. Think of it as a continually running Andrew Marr show. To kick it off: David Davis resigns to draw attention to the gradual erosion of liberty in this country. Within he Conservative party he would be characterised as a right wing "law and order" politician. Yet he is protesting about ID cards, CCTV, 42 days detention without trial. In my view this makes him a real Tory from the libertarian wing of the party - defending the interests of the individual against the state. I recognise that DD's stance can also be characterised a part of an internal power struggle, ego trip and general political vanity. However, if we leave that aside - his professed proposition that the state is becoming too powerful and too intrusive is one that I feel an instinctive support for. Where do EDF "ers" stand on the three issues of ID cards, CCTV and 42 days detention? I've always been against ID cards (despite carrying a military ID for 22 years) - it reverses the historic basis of English common law - "that which is not forbidden is allowed". Whereas the basis of continental / Napoleonic law is "that which is not specifically permitted is forbidden". The state has no need to know where I am, what I'm doing, where I go unless and until I make / take an illegal act. Mere suspicion is not enough. If ID cards are introduced it will become an offence not to produce it or not to tell the state when you move and your new address. Why do the state need to know where I live? CCTV - it's supposed to prevent crime. There is much evidence and research to show that it merely relocates crime. It has proved useful in developing a case to prove a crime has been committed - but do you feel that being observed on camera upwards of 200 times a day in London is a worthwhile trade off to secure conviction of a criminal after the offence has been committed? I don't. 42 days detention - wrong, wrong and wrong. The various compromises have, in any case, created a constitutional nightmare and I would back any government / party that reversed this and made the limit 7 days. I'm sure there are other views and other topics to be discussed. Query - other topics: 1. Civil servants and data protection. 2. The NHS 3. Taxation and tax credits - why take money away in tax, filter it through an expensive bureaucracy and give 80% of it back as tax credits. 4. Overseas wars 5. Treatment of the military - can we / should we separate the political decision to go to war from the personal tragedies and care of the soldiers, sailors and airmen that fight the wars? 6. Police - do they deserve more pay?

Greatest fear - retaining my thinking mind but losing control of my body - being unable to walk, talk, see or hear. It is the ultimate lock up. I try to control it by being rational (it's a long way off) and atheist / humanist (it has to be sorted out by me and not some greater being I pray to) and supporting living wills and campaigns for voluntary euthanasia as a rational humanist response. I have already signed off such documents and my family are fully aware of my wishes.

bear Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is it just me or does anyone else think that ED > Sainsbury's is hideously expensive (compared to > Kennington Tesco, for example)? All supermarkets are hideously expensive. Judicious shopping in Lordship Lane, other markets, Peckham Rye will invaraibly cost less for food items - or cost the same for superior quality. Supermarket packaging often means the customer buys more than is really needed as well - adding further to the cost. Articlein one of the weekend paper's today about this.

having read some responses I'll add: 1. Thanks Chav. 2. It was an unreal simulation I'd acknowledge that - I'm in work, well paid and life at home was comfortable, warm and stress free. I didn't detail every drink of water, tea or coffee - many taken in the office. should have added the half bottle of lime squash to costs. 3. It tested me - and I was not worrying about finding work, money or unexpected problems that would blow my budget out of the water. On that basis it gave me an insight. 4. In response to Sean's question about how how can people escape the poverty / benefits trap - my experiment provides no simple answer. being the libertarian I am I would advocate a much simpler tax & benefits structure with much higher thresholds - anyone earning less than 12,000pa should not be taxed and if they have a partner & children to support so the threshold should rise further. I believe such a move could be part, but only part, funded by bureaucratic savings. the balance would have to come from reduced gov't expenditure elsewhere - something you all know I'd be strongly in favour of, or higher tax rates on better paid - something I'm les enthusiastic about.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- I ducked the EDF drinks thru' pressure of workbut it meant I stuck to budget / plan. > But MM did have a social life - he attended the > Forum Drinks, benefits budget suspended for the > duration.

I promised a while back to post a rather naive paper I wrote for a professional journal on how privatisation of the military might work. Now out of date it does, in the opening pages, illustrate the background to some of my libertarian / small government thinking. Here it is!

Well I did it. It is, as some have mentioned, undoubtedly easier to do for a week than for an unknown long term future. I didn't have to think about buying staples for the store cupboard. Shopping took longer as altho' I was buying less the price comparisons took time. I bought it all on LL - and could perhaps have done better by bussing it to Aldi / LIDL. The food was OK, nutritious but boring"ish". Having to do it week in, week out and make the cooking inventive and appetising within the budget would be very difficult and stressful. It made me aware of why anyone living on benefits will take any chance to reduce eating costs, take up a freebie or invitation to eat at someone else's cost. It wasn't a mile in their shoes but it was a few hundred yards.

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Marmora Man Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > BTW - it might be interesting to test the 6 / 7 > > degrees of separation theory on EDF members - > but > > how would we do it? > > You could try to do it by setting a reference > point like a town perhaps and then seeing how many > steps it takes each person to get back to that > town. Would need to be an obscure town - if we used Sydney, Washington or Pari many would get from there back in one leap?

You do better by usng your car more sensibly Driving Sensibly than by following the course recommended by the wannabe chain letter enthusiast. There's a mathematical flaw in his argument anyway - it has been established that we are, generally speaking, just 6 or 7 degrees of separation from anyone else in the world. If I e-mail 10 friends and they e-mail 10 friends etc it is a certainty that over the course of six "generations" many people will receive the same message from many different sources, reducing the growth in subscribers dramatically. BTW - it might be interesting to test the 6 / 7 degrees of separation theory on EDF members - but how would we do it?

I'm with VIrgin - formerly NTL when it was connected 4 years ago. No recent problems. As name suggests I live on Marmora Road - it maybe a localised problem.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Moos: When keef said "first we take Camberwell", > it was close enough to the line "first we take > Manhattan" from the Leonard Cohen track of the > same name - so I just added the second line and > nodded in MM's direction as he is a big Laughing > Len fan... Did you hear his interview with mark Lawson last week? Leonard Cohen - Interview & notes

Nero Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is a peculiar character Looks Chinese - did you know the chinese pictogram for happiness is a house with a pig in it and for unhappiness is a house with wife and mother-in-law in it.

Ladygooner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > MM - hope you have factored the cost of your beer > into your very tight benefits budget! I am starting my "week" tomorrow but intending to take time out fro Friday!

I hope to be there - to defend my right wing bastard status and share an overdue Guiness with Sean MacG.

We stayed as a family in the North East of Corfu overlooking the channel across to Albania and had a great and peaceful time. Small inlet with village - two / three tavernas - all very quiet and laid back.

Louisa Wrote: London is a decaying, grubby city which was once the capital of a huge empire, and is now the only half decent thing the UK has going for it (aside from Ken odd), so please dont patronise me with the b*llocks about how this wonderful great capital city is so great,we all know the UK has had it, and is on a gradual downward spiral. Louisa, I don't usually enter the fray with you but this is complete tosh. The quality of the average Londoner's life is infinitely better than it ever was. Real income levels are higher, access to better quality food, goods and housing equally so. I wouldn't argue that London has no problems or that it couldn't be so much better - and I'd do my bit to make it so. The idea that Britain is on a downward slide, led by London takes my breath away. Evidence? London remains a magnet for people from all around the world - it is still one of he most, if not the most, important financial centres of the world. Cities that compare compete - very few. There are the obvious Paris & New York, the less obvious such as Kuala Lumpur and Singapore. But for all round quality, vibrancy, diversity, arts, culture, business it's very hard to beat - being on the Greenwich Meridian also gives a great advantage between the USA to the west and the Middle & Far East.