Fuel duty cut will cost £500,000,000

[martint235]

Sorry but half the motons round here are still flying flags out of their car windows. If they can afford the extra fuel required to put up with the added drag caused by those, they can afford extra fuel duty. Simples.

 

[Alun]

I do think it unfiar to blame the unemployed, as the state workers take far more out per head than those on benefits do.

Don't you think "state workers" (I assume this includes police, firemen, nurses, etc) should get more than people who are unemployed?
If it were the other way around, surely they would just chuck their hand in and become unemployed themselves?

 

[Linford]

Don't you think "state workers" (I assume this includes police, firemen, nurses, etc) should get more than people who are unemployed?
If it were the other way around, surely they would just chuck their hand in and become unemployed themselves?

State workers are supported by the efforts of the private sector - in the same way that the unemployed are. State workers provide services, but don't create anything of worth for their efforts in terms of monetary value - apart from Customs and Excise who raise tax (off the people who generate the wealth).

 

[MissTillyFlop]

As I said the Louise "I'll do anything to get noticed" Mencsh on Twitter - When are we going to see this reflected in public transport fares?

Because obviously what with a ll their "green credentials", I wouldn't want it to look like MPs were desperately trying to win votes by any means.

 

[Alun]

State workers are supported by the efforts of the private sector - in the same way that the unemployed are. State workers provide services, but don't create anything of worth for their efforts in terms of monetary value - apart from Customs and Excise who raise tax (off the people who generate the wealth).

You've just quoted some schoolboy economics, you haven't actually answered the question.

 

[Simon1234]

I think that you will find that it is the other way around, in that without the support of a society wide support network the private sector would struggle to operate at all.

Really? The private sector survived for 1000s of years before the state existed!

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Alun]

Really? The private sector survived for 1000s of years before the state existed!

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2

I'm struggling to see the relevance of that statement.

 

[martint235]

Really? The private sector survived for 1000s of years before the state existed!

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2

1,000s of years? Really? Without an army paid for by some kind of central taxation system?

 

[Simon1234]

1,000s of years? Really? Without an army paid for by some kind of central taxation system?

Nope. Fairly recent history...

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2

 

[martint235]

Nope. Fairly recent history...

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2

I think you'll find that once people decided to settle in one place rather than roam, one of the first things established was a defence system made up of people excused the duty of gathering crops etc. Which puts the setting up of an army before private business.

 

[Alun]

Nope. Fairly recent history...

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2

We have had a recognisable "state" system for hundreds of years, what period of history are you referring to?

 

[Richard Mann]

Clearly someone leaked to Labour that the Treasury was about to do this, and they jumped on the bandwagon.

They should have just stuck to the incompetence line, rather than make a play for the driving vote, but that's politics. This way they probably get a little amuse bouche from the drivers, and a hearty main course of watching a junior minister try to answer the unanswerable on the news programmes. Then a sweet course of calling it "another" U-turn.

I bet they're feeling really smug.

 

[Simon1234]

I think you'll find that once people decided to settle in one place rather than roam, one of the first things established was a defence system made up of people excused the duty of gathering crops etc. Which puts the setting up of an army before private business.

Nope. Thats just allocation of resources. Nothing to do with a State. Just my point.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2

 

[dawesome]

Watch the lovely Chloe Smith get a thorough Paxman here:

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bddWaHuxTzc&feature=youtube_gdata_player


Starts about 6 minutes.

 

[martint235]

Nope. Thats just allocation of resources. Nothing to do with a State. Just my point.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2

True it's not a state in that it's not a country but it is an example of a public service supported and paid for by the general population of a given area.