Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Search the maintenance guides for answers to 99.999% of Omega questions

Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Why  (Read 1483 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Martin_1962

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #15 on: 26 March 2010, 21:55:13 »

Quote
Quote
Why are they cutting money in education and health yet not cancelling the ID card & databse with its estimated £2,000,000,000 bill. >:( >:( >:( >:(
Big government Martin, they are socialists therefore they are addicted to it, just like the Soviets/Chinese/Cubans etc. :y

Lizzie, thankyou for the compliment. I thought that must have been one of my better long winded rants when I noticed Banjax didnt bother trying to argue the point(s). :y ::) ;D

Martin if your going to hang Darling I will buy the rope. :y.............tbh we will never really know how bad a chancellor he was capable of becoming, as it seems that the micro managing control freak in No 10 writes his scripts for him. ;)


Mind you I want to get our work MP done.

Our local MP is just useless.

Lots of Conservatives around here except for the constituencies I live and work in.

At the election we will have a choice of the below people.

Runs a local PR agency
Retired ex Tory
Never heard of him
Useless tosser
A joke
Never heard of them
Son of popular MP from the 70s

Liberal Democrat
Jackie Alderson                   

UKIP
Jack Bennett                   

Independent
Andrew Christian-Brookes                   

Labour
Michael Foster                   

Pirate
Andrew Robinson                   

Green
Louis Stephen

Conservative
Robin Walker
Logged

Martin_1962

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #16 on: 26 March 2010, 21:55:55 »

Only one of these has visited us door to door
Logged

albitz

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #17 on: 26 March 2010, 21:57:46 »

UKIP are getting my vote. Try to pull the Tories back to the right where they belong. ;)
Logged

ChevetteNick

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Telford
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
Re: Why
« Reply #18 on: 26 March 2010, 22:05:28 »

Quote
there must be a point where there is very little incentive to bother going out to work.
What with Job Seekers Allowance, tax credits, housing benefit etc there is no incentive for me to find a job  :-[

Quote
The public sector produces no wealth whatsoever for the country, it is a drain on the countries wealth
I've met loads of people in my line of work, in the private sector, who produce no wealth whatsoever for the company and are a drain on the companies resources ;)

Quote
The public sector produces no wealth whatsoever for the country, it is a drain on the countries wealth
That's too much of a sweeping statement to be true. Universities have created a lot of wealth for this country as have government funded projects that the private sector could not afford to fund.
Logged

Nickbat

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #19 on: 26 March 2010, 22:17:18 »

Quote
That's too much of a sweeping statement to be true. Universities have created a lot of wealth for this country as have government funded projects that the private sector could not afford to fund.

No, Albs is right. Technically speaking, the public sector produces very little wealth in terms of GDP because, as it's name implies, it is funded by the state, which in turn is funded by taxation. Of course, a fair proportion of that fiscal income comes the public sector but,since the public sector is centrally-funded, the money is merely going round and round. The only way GDP can grow is by an increase in the money going into the system through private enterprise, through exports and foreign direct investment.

Can you give me an example of a government-funded project that has made a meaningful contribution to the country's finances?   :-/
Logged

Nickbat

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #20 on: 26 March 2010, 22:19:50 »

Quote
UKIP are getting my vote. Try to pull the Tories back to the right where they belong. ;)


Yep, I'm there too, Albs. :y :y

I see Professor Tim Congdon CBE, a very eminent economist, is standing for UKIP. I think he would make an excellent chancellor!  ;)  :y

 http://www.panscourer.com/2010/03/24/prof-tim-congdon-stands-for-ukip/
« Last Edit: 26 March 2010, 22:22:21 by Nickbat »
Logged

cem_devecioglu

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #21 on: 26 March 2010, 22:19:53 »

Quote
UKIP are getting my vote. Try to pull the Tories back to the right where they belong. ;)

I like this man , especially ;D

"damp rag" :-? ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iulNvamNzeg

Logged

cem_devecioglu

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #22 on: 26 March 2010, 22:36:59 »

Quote
Quote
That's too much of a sweeping statement to be true. Universities have created a lot of wealth for this country as have government funded projects that the private sector could not afford to fund.

No, Albs is right. Technically speaking, the public sector produces very little wealth in terms of GDP because, as it's name implies, it is funded by the state, which in turn is funded by taxation. Of course, a fair proportion of that fiscal income comes the public sector but,since the public sector is centrally-funded, the money is merely going round and round. The only way GDP can grow is by an increase in the money going into the system through private enterprise, through exports and foreign direct investment.
Can you give me an example of a government-funded project that has made a meaningful contribution to the country's finances?   :-/

looking from your point of view seems correct..

but..  if discussed in detail by economic terms and facts , there are many direct and indirect effects on GDP..so cant agree..
Logged

Nickbat

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #23 on: 26 March 2010, 22:48:49 »

Quote
Quote
Quote
That's too much of a sweeping statement to be true. Universities have created a lot of wealth for this country as have government funded projects that the private sector could not afford to fund.

No, Albs is right. Technically speaking, the public sector produces very little wealth in terms of GDP because, as it's name implies, it is funded by the state, which in turn is funded by taxation. Of course, a fair proportion of that fiscal income comes the public sector but,since the public sector is centrally-funded, the money is merely going round and round. The only way GDP can grow is by an increase in the money going into the system through private enterprise, through exports and foreign direct investment.
Can you give me an example of a government-funded project that has made a meaningful contribution to the country's finances?   :-/

looking from your point of view seems correct..

but..  if discussed in detail by economic terms and facts , there are many direct and indirect effects on GDP..so cant agree..


I think I should have stated GNP rather than GDP, Cem.

BTW, take a look at this:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2KztUNKj0o[/media]

 :y :y
Logged

ChevetteNick

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Telford
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
Re: Why
« Reply #24 on: 26 March 2010, 22:54:12 »

Quote
No, Albs is right. Technically speaking, the public sector produces very little wealth in terms of GDP because, as it's name implies, it is funded by the state, which in turn is funded by taxation. Of course, a fair proportion of that fiscal income comes the public sector but,since the public sector is centrally-funded, the money is merely going round and round. The only way GDP can grow is by an increase in the money going into the system through private enterprise, through exports and foreign direct investment.

Sorry but i have to disagree. Through government funded education, CEO's of succesful companies have produced more wealth for the country than what was ever spent to educate them.

Quote
Can you give me an example of a government-funded project that has made a meaningful contribution to the country's finances?   :-/
Yes i can and i will be deliberately vague as i have signed the official secrets act ;)
Rolls Royce, as you may know, was nationalised in the early seventies. During this period of nationalisation a process was developed that greatly increased the life of certain aluminium parts. Rolls Royce plc has since gone on to become a billion pound industry thanks to government intervention.
I am no socialist but i do believe a government needs to step in from time to time to offer help.

Logged

Nickbat

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #25 on: 26 March 2010, 23:03:48 »

Quote
Quote
No, Albs is right. Technically speaking, the public sector produces very little wealth in terms of GDP because, as it's name implies, it is funded by the state, which in turn is funded by taxation. Of course, a fair proportion of that fiscal income comes the public sector but,since the public sector is centrally-funded, the money is merely going round and round. The only way GDP can grow is by an increase in the money going into the system through private enterprise, through exports and foreign direct investment.

Sorry but i have to disagree. Through government funded education, CEO's of succesful companies have produced more wealth for the country than what was ever spent to educate them.

Quote
Can you give me an example of a government-funded project that has made a meaningful contribution to the country's finances?   :-/
Yes i can and i will be deliberately vague as i have signed the official secrets act ;)
Rolls Royce, as you may know, was nationalised in the early seventies. During this period of nationalisation a process was developed that greatly increased the life of certain aluminium parts. Rolls Royce plc has since gone on to become a billion pound industry thanks to government intervention.
I am no socialist but i do believe a government needs to step in from time to time to offer help.


I wouldn't disagree with that statement at all. :y

I think, in some circumstances (indeed, in the case of RR), that the strategic interests of the country must be maintained and that the ability of a government to utilise taxpayers money in such situations (albeit rare) makes sound sense.  :y

A good point, well made.  ;)
Logged

cem_devecioglu

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #26 on: 26 March 2010, 23:04:03 »

here I dont want to go in details of GDP and GNP as its a detailed subject..

however in his speech there are far more important subjects especially on the failing of Euro.. definitely..

european union is actually not like a real country..
no real planning for production, assets  , coordination etc..

and from a technical point of view with so many different countries and different problems its nearly impossible to coordinate this vegetable soup ;D

economy laws needs far strict rules and management..  :-/



Logged

Nickbat

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #27 on: 26 March 2010, 23:07:26 »

Quote
here I dont want to go in details of GDP and GNP as its a detailed subject..

however in his speech there are far more important subjects especially on the failing of Euro.. definitely..

european union is actually not like a real country..
no real planning for production, assets  , coordination etc..

and from a technical point of view with so many different countries and different problems its nearly impossible to coordinate this vegetable soup ;D

economy laws needs far strict rules and management..  :-/





Or maybe less, Cem!  ;)
Logged

cem_devecioglu

  • Guest
Re: Why
« Reply #28 on: 26 March 2010, 23:12:36 »

Quote
Quote
here I dont want to go in details of GDP and GNP as its a detailed subject..

however in his speech there are far more important subjects especially on the failing of Euro.. definitely..

european union is actually not like a real country..
no real planning for production, assets  , coordination etc..

and from a technical point of view with so many different countries and different problems its nearly impossible to coordinate this vegetable soup ;D

economy laws needs far strict rules and management..  :-/





Or maybe less, Cem!  ;)

 ;D :y

Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 17 queries.