Labour push for a 'Death' Tax

[-:Undertaker:-]

can you explain to me how not allowing price-fixing, even by governments, is ILLEGAL. that doesn't sound socialist at all, sounds like they'd prefer to let the MARKET decide. the eu moves the boundaries of free trade wider and wider, not in any case that I have ever heard has there been a country who allows 100% free trade with every single nation. the first police force in this country was customs and excise enforcers who worked for the king to collect tax off maritime traders. the usa does not have free trade with other nations? the cap, i will admit, doesn't work well for many people. but it isn't just us who does this, the americans do this as well.

So wait a minute, why do we need to pay into something for policies such preventing price-fixing when we could do them perfectly well in our own parliament which is one of the oldest in the world? - more to the point, you mention price fixing; Peter Mandelson who was EU Trade Commissioner met with a Russian Steel Tycoon on his yaught for a 'holiday' a mere few days before the EU was supposed to deliever on his planned bit to get rid of tariffs/lower them on steel. Mandelson said they were just good friends, how convientent. I'm sure Peter and a Russia Steel Tycoon have much in common. :rolleyes:

i don't know the names of those 'high-up' in the eu's ranks, however, we don't appear much more of a socialist bloc than anyone else.

Our very own Baroness Ashton, was fundraiser of CND at the height of the Cold War;- refuses to say whether she accepted Soviet donations to CND.

equally, allowing customers to purchase goods from abroad meant that car owners used to be able to purchase cars in northern france, belgium and the netherlands and bring them back to the UK sans additional tax, forcing car dealerships in the UK to lower their prices, improving economic efficiency.

Individual economic treaties could of been worked out rather than us having to surrender our sovereignty.

even more equally, poor regulation help lead us to the situation we have today, in terms of the financial sector. it would have been better if regulation had been tighter, which, a given, would have hurt growth, but wouldn't have sent us down the creek down without a paddle, costing us hundreds of BILLIONS in bail outs.

Poor regulation did not lead us into this crisis. Whether there was regulation or not, we'd still of had a recession and bank collapses because throughout history we have had them; 1900s, 1930s, 1970s (Britain) and right now. The only difference that over-regulation makes is that when theres the boom time, it stifles it. Indeed it did cost us billions, but the fact of the matter is that any competant government should make provisions for a possible economic collapse at any time;- and talking about billions, we give billions to the EU every year just in direct funding so I have no idea why you are suddenly so concerned about finances.

[alexxxxx]

So wait a minute, why do we need to pay into something for policies such preventing price-fixing when we could do them perfectly well in our own parliament which is one of the oldest in the world? - more to the point, you mention price fixing; Peter Mandelson who was EU Trade Commissioner met with a Russian Steel Tycoon on his yaught for a 'holiday' a mere few days before the EU was supposed to deliever on his planned bit to get rid of tariffs/lower them on steel. Mandelson said they were just good friends, how convientent. I'm sure Peter and a Russia Steel Tycoon have much in common. :rolleyes:

why you ask me? because if it's done on a european level with a common market, state aid won't be able to help certain industries, hurting competition and hurting other trading partners, that's why it's done at a european level, honestly. if anything, what mandelson has done, whether you like the way it was allegedly done, has gone towards your goal, freer trade.

Our very own Baroness Ashton, was fundraiser of CND at the height of the Cold War;- refuses to say whether she accepted Soviet donations to CND.

god loads of the student population was in the CND.

Individual economic treaties could of been worked out rather than us having to surrender our sovereignty.

well no, because of how the eu is structured that would be impossible. also, if we wanted to trade with eu at the level we do now, we'd have to accept all regulation without any say in how it's formed. ask norway. great way of signing away sovereignty don't you think?

Poor regulation did not lead us into this crisis. Whether there was regulation or not, we'd still of had a recession and bank collapses because throughout history we have had them; 1900s, 1930s, 1970s (Britain) and right now. The only difference that over-regulation makes is that when theres the boom time, it stifles it. Indeed it did cost us billions, but the fact of the matter is that any competant government should make provisions for a possible economic collapse at any time;- and talking about billions, we give billions to the EU every year just in direct funding so I have no idea why you are suddenly so concerned about finances.

poor regulation did not lead us into this crisis. what a lie. the extent of which this happened was a direct result of bank deregulation in the late 80s and mid 90s where banks were then allowed to trade bonds, mortgages in the same 'pot' so to speak as their high street banking and commercial banking services. that's what made this problem as bad as it was. the billions that we don't receive back from the EU bare no resemblance to the cost of bailing out these banks due to poor regulation. i've always been worried about our financial state. the european union must do more to become transparent, it's accepted.

[-:Undertaker:-]

why you ask me? because if it's done on a european level with a common market, state aid won't be able to help certain industries, hurting competition and hurting other trading partners, that's why it's done at a european level, honestly. if anything, what mandelson has done, whether you like the way it was allegedly done, has gone towards your goal, freer trade.

I couldn't care less about business in other countries if i'm quite honest, they dont care about ours either hence why the French are so eager to get control of the city of London. As for Mandelson, yes aslong as it isnt corrupt like the EU and Mandelson then fine. I suppose thats why he can afford houses that someone on a wage like his wouldnt be able to afford.

god loads of the student population was in the CND.

Well she was in at least her 20s I imagine from her age when she accepted that money. Not to mention the fact the USSR was our biggest enemy at that time yet she apparently took a donation from the USSR? - if she took a donation from a Nazi Party i'm sure it'd be a whole different story wouldn't it?

well no, because of how the eu is structured that would be impossible. also, if we wanted to trade with eu at the level we do now, we'd have to accept all regulation without any say in how it's formed. ask norway. great way of signing away sovereignty don't you think?

Thank you, you didnt mean to say it but you just did that the EU restricts free trade with other free-trading nations. That is not free trade. As for the rest of the world, they do it yet dont seem to need EU regulation on important issues such as the definition of what a pig is, or what colour their traffic lights should be at a cost of billions and billions.

poor regulation did not lead us into this crisis. what a lie. the extent of which this happened was a direct result of bank deregulation in the late 80s and mid 90s where banks were then allowed to trade bonds, mortgages in the same 'pot' so to speak as their high street banking and commercial banking services. that's what made this problem as bad as it was. the billions that we don't receive back from the EU bare no resemblance to the cost of bailing out these banks due to poor regulation. i've always been worried about our financial state. the european union must do more to become transparent, it's accepted.

[/QUOTE]

No it did not lead us into this mess. Boom and bust has always occured, it happened with the world economy in the 1900s and lasted until 1908, occured in the 1930s and lasted into the 1940s and has happened many other times before. De-regulation helped our country immensely, although we know you would rather have had Britain hostage of the IMF under Callgahan with his 80% tax rate with the Unions controlling the government, not the elected government controlling itself.

Ahh you say transparency, but why will the EU not have its audits signed off and why will they not let the people decide. They claim to be democratic because they elect themselves, just like the Soviet politicians elected the Premier of the USSR - was the SU democratic? You can spout like the EU the words 'transparency', 'democracy' and so forth but when you refuse to give people a choice, when you continuously hide corruption (such as the rule brought in that bans any whistleblowing in the EU) then quite honestly, people will not take you seriously.

[alexxxxx]

I couldn't care less about business in other countries if i'm quite honest, they dont care about ours either hence why the French are so eager to get control of the city of London. As for Mandelson, yes aslong as it isnt corrupt like the EU and Mandelson then fine. I suppose thats why he can afford houses that someone on a wage like his wouldnt be able to afford.

but you SHOULD care, because if they are state-aiding their car market, it means our cars become unattractive and boom, they are gone. you want free trade, you need common rules or it doesn't work.

Well she was in at least her 20s I imagine from her age when she accepted that money. Not to mention the fact the USSR was our biggest enemy at that time yet she apparently took a donation from the USSR? - if she took a donation from a Nazi Party i'm sure it'd be a whole different story wouldn't it?

i don't know whether this has been proven or not, but labour do not hide that they are part of SOCIALISTS INTERNATIONAL.

Thank you, you didnt mean to say it but you just did that the EU restricts free trade with other free-trading nations. That is not free trade. As for the rest of the world, they do it yet dont seem to need EU regulation on important issues such as the definition of what a pig is, or what colour their traffic lights should be at a cost of billions and billions.

what are you on about? every country does it. the usa and eu doesn't have a 100% free trade agreement, nor do we with china. nor does the usa with iran, nor do they with india, uae. every country, especially democracies protect their inefficient industries due to the risk of social unrest.

No it did not lead us into this mess. Boom and bust has always occured, it happened with the world economy in the 1900s and lasted until 1908, occured in the 1930s and lasted into the 1940s and has happened many other times before. De-regulation helped our country immensely, although we know you would rather have had Britain hostage of the IMF under Callgahan with his 80% tax rate with the Unions controlling the government, not the elected government controlling itself.

you can't just say 'boom and bust' was the reason that made it happen. if you say that you can't blame the government for the recession. the widely-accepted reason that this happened was because of stupid risks unsupervised by regulators. don't bury your head in the sand.

Ahh you say transparency, but why will the EU not have its audits signed off and why will they not let the people decide. They claim to be democratic because they elect themselves, just like the Soviet politicians elected the Premier of the USSR - was the SU democratic? You can spout like the EU the words 'transparency', 'democracy' and so forth but when you refuse to give people a choice, when you continuously hide corruption (such as the rule brought in that bans any whistleblowing in the EU) then quite honestly, people will not take you seriously.

i don't know why they don't sign them off. but they should. just like you say you don't agree with everything UKIP do doesn't mean i agree with everything the eu does. the EU is democratic, we consider ourselves democratic but we don't elect our PM nor our head of state. everyone has a choice on whether they want to be in the EU every time they don't cross UKIP in the election box.

[-:Undertaker:-]

but you SHOULD care, because if they are state-aiding their car market, it means our cars become unattractive and boom, they are gone. you want free trade, you need common rules or it doesn't work.

Thats why many many hundreds or even thousands of years ago we created something called a 'treaty' where you have rules, terms and coniditons of which signatures of the treaty abide by.

i don't know whether this has been proven or not, but labour do not hide that they are part of SOCIALISTS INTERNATIONAL.

Indeed, so we know where her alliances and the rest of the Labour parties lie with dont we? - not with the democratic free world, but with the dictorial, big brother-state like countries that the USSR was and the EU now is. The rats jumped ship.

what are you on about? every country does it. the usa and eu doesn't have a 100% free trade agreement, nor do we with china. nor does the usa with iran, nor do they with india, uae. every country, especially democracies protect their inefficient industries due to the risk of social unrest.

So why do you say we need the EU for free trade then? - you have just demolished your own argument single-handedly.

you can't just say 'boom and bust' was the reason that made it happen. if you say that you can't blame the government for the recession. the widely-accepted reason that this happened was because of stupid risks unsupervised by regulators. don't bury your head in the sand.

Yes, it was. That is capitalism, again you are ignoring history. Boom and bust occurs and always will occur, it is an essential part of capitalism that regenerates money and entrepreneaualism. Bury my head in the sand? - you need to look at the 1900s, 1920s/1930s and now and you will find they all share one underlying thing in common that caused the bubble to burst - what goes up, always comes down.

i don't know why they don't sign them off. but they should. just like you say you don't agree with everything UKIP do doesn't mean i agree with everything the eu does. the EU is democratic, we consider ourselves democratic but we don't elect our PM nor our head of state. everyone has a choice on whether they want to be in the EU every time they don't cross UKIP in the election box.

I think its pretty damn obvious why they wont sign them off and cant sign them off - because billions are missing, the EU is already depised enough around Europe so why on earth would they commit essential suicide by exposing themselves for the corrupt bunch of undemocratic zealots that they are?

The EU is not democratic, I do not elect 'my European President' nor 'my EU commission' but I and everyone else in this country pays taxes towards this whole thing. We want a vote, we were never asked to join this federal project and nor was most of Europe. In regards to the PM/Head of State - the PM and Monarch are British, therefore (should) be representing Britain and British values. More to the point, we elect the government whereas none of the EU is elected except for the EU parliament which can be bypassed anyway by both the courts and the commission. All the EU has to do it hold a referendum around Europe (you will say it treads on national sovereignty but you've never been bothered at any other time) and my argument and others arguments will be instantly voided.

You support a federal Europe and the offical aim and ultimate goal of the European Union is the creation of a federal Europe - why can you not accept the fact that people deserve a say on this especially as a great portion of our ancestors died to stop that very thing happening?

One reason and one reason alone, you know what the outcome would be.

[alexxxxx]

Thats why many many hundreds or even thousands of years ago we created something called a 'treaty' where you have rules, terms and coniditons of which signatures of the treaty abide by.

elaborate

So why do you say we need the EU for free trade then? - you have just demolished your own argument single-handedly.

because we need free trade with the rest of the EU, our largest trading partner.

Yes, it was. That is capitalism, again you are ignoring history. Boom and bust occurs and always will occur, it is an essential part of capitalism that regenerates money and entrepreneaualism. Bury my head in the sand? - you need to look at the 1900s, 1920s/1930s and now and you will find they all share one underlying thing in common that caused the bubble to burst - what goes up, always comes down.

1920s/1930s was caused by overproduction, speculation, poor banking regulations and isolationist measures taken by the USA. There are always reasons that can be sought for recessions and depressions. The last recession was by all means preventable.

I think its pretty damn obvious why they wont sign them off and cant sign them off - because billions are missing, the EU is already depised enough around Europe so why on earth would they commit essential suicide by exposing themselves for the corrupt bunch of undemocratic zealots that they are?

i haven't a clue what a zealot is and i don't know why the books aren't signed off.

The EU is not democratic, I do not elect 'my European President' nor 'my EU commission' but I and everyone else in this country pays taxes towards this whole thing. We want a vote, we were never asked to join this federal project and nor was most of Europe. In regards to the PM/Head of State - the PM and Monarch are British, therefore (should) be representing Britain and British values. More to the point, we elect the government whereas none of the EU is elected except for the EU parliament which can be bypassed anyway by both the courts and the commission. All the EU has to do it hold a referendum around Europe (you will say it treads on national sovereignty but you've never been bothered at any other time) and my argument and others arguments will be instantly voided.

The EU is democratic, whether you like it or not, it is democratic. It could be MORE democratic, that's a given. The president is relatively low-key, as the governments wanted and the comission has to approved by the parliament.

You support a federal Europe and the offical aim and ultimate goal of the European Union is the creation of a federal Europe - why can you not accept the fact that people deserve a say on this especially as a great portion of our ancestors died to stop that very thing happening?

One reason and one reason alone, you know what the outcome would be.

DON'T ELECT A LABOUR/LIBERAL DEMOCRAT/CONSERVATIVE MP then and you will get your wish! You can't deny the facts that these parties are constantly elected in and always show support towards the EU. 92% of the general election votes were for these parties. When (E)UKIP becomes electable or the anti-eu lobby actually gets going and comes up with some credible alternatives you may actually get your change. Our democratic system has spoken - live with it.