For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
#1894940
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Where there is no EU alternative for supplies, of course, trade will continue.

That would the the same as imagining that everyone should use the AME who is closest, has the most letters after their name, gives them a cuppa on arrival, has the bushiest beard...

People work with 'partners' for all sorts of reasons at all sorts of different times.
#1895040
Flyingfemme wrote:
Pete L wrote:There is a reasonable economic argument that the only fair tax is on land. A wealth tax is a reasonably good proxy and would raise vast sums without doing much harm.

And how many times is it “fair” to tax any given article? Until it ceases to exist?
And how is one to pay this tax without selling the article? At which point you lose the opportunityto tax it again..........
And do you propose stopping taxing the income that is used to buy these articles?
This is called Communism - where people are no longer allowed to own “stuff” and cannot profit from the fruits of their labours. Are you happy to give your life for the “good”of others and live on what somebody else deems you worthy of getting?


You can only ever rent land for a brief period. (Well, Jeff Bezos is going have a crack at hanging on to it for longer than most)...

We're all rent seekers to a degree since we want someone to look after us in our dotage. But work had a social purpose long before you could actually buy stuff with money - all work is essentially helping others.
#1895122
Depends WHY we’re giving things up.

Am I prepared to give things up to recurrent outbreaks, because the rich counties have decided that instead of de-patenting the vaccine they’re happy to “live with” a huge pool of potential mution-breeders who can’t afford to vaccinate in the global south?

Nope.

I’ll give things up for the sake of public safety, not for some Tory-donor pharma company’s bottom line.

We do not have to accept it as endemic. It is a political decision to do so.
#1895135
Thank goodness it is a political decision. Whitty Ferguson & co would have lockdowns and restrictions for ever and a day if they could.

For the vast majority of people it's a short illness, similar to a bad cold or a dose of the flu. That FOI to ONS revealed 17,355 people have died solely from covid over the 2 years, with an average age of 82, similar death toll to flu. We just have to return to normality.

flybymike liked this
#1895198
The Status Quo. Being needed, listened to, feeling like you have a purpose.

Probably mostly those as I know he goes in and helps. But lockdown & WFH suits an awful lot of people.

I could WFH all the time but I'd rather be in with my team. Though when I am in i think I should get a defrosting the car bonus!

Or it Covid was ever that deadly we should get danger money :lol:
#1895200
StratoTramp wrote:The status quo. Being needed, listened to, feeling like you have a purpose.

Those guys are senior scientists. They had plenty of work to do, plenty of people listening to them, and plenty of purpose before the pandemic.

It's pure delusion thinking otherwise.

Talk about forcing the ground to fit the map :roll:
#1895209
Perhaps the topic question could be re cast as what is the World Bank willing to give up to pay for it?

Hypothetical scenario - Everyone in a worse financial position during the pandemic years (that has the paperwork to back it up), fills in a special form and send its to the tax man. Those that are not fake are gifted a sum of money to wipe out those losses. In turn the government passes on the loss to the World Bank under special pandemic terms. i.e. 0% interest and no date for repayment, or better still simply written off by World Bank. Repeat for all the other countries. The pre-pandemic poor countries would still be poor.
This way everyone has the financial means to return to their pre-pandemic spending habits.

Alternative seems to be lots of price rises as sellers/suppliers try to recover their losses, with the downward spiral of prices quickly outstripping pay so people try to spend less (prioritising the essentials for survival) and more businesses collapse.
I think most people would prefer to not be in a Kabul market situation where there was a news item some weeks ago that the market is full but nobody has any money...
#1895215
StratoTramp wrote:The Status Quo. Being needed, listened to, feeling like you have a purpose.

Probably mostly those as I know he goes in and helps. But lockdown & WFH suits an awful lot of people.

I could WFH all the time but I'd rather be in with my team. Though when I am in i think I should get a defrosting the car bonus!

Or it Covid was ever that deadly we should get danger money :lol:


Very interesting........
#1895217
The title of this thread pre-supposes that people have a choice ... maybe that is true for folks who contribute here. Active involvement in GA would suggest that there is a degree of choice in how to spend disposable income.

What about the millions of people who will be forced to contribute regardless of their ability to pay?
Flyin'Dutch', StratoTramp, eltonioni and 1 others liked this
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7