| The Falklands 12:26 - Sep 4 with 3477 views | BelsteadCav |
A lot of sabre rattling by Argentina this morning, especially now as it looks like Trump is getting involved.
Our Armed forces are in a mess at the moment, the government have even cancelled training, trying to save 30m, which is a drop in the ocean. If we can’t spend 30m on training we are in a lot of trouble.
I know Argentina are in a worse state than us, but would Trump give them weapons and planes?
Because after all, he loves oil and it looks like we’ve found a massive oil field out there.
I know we have 4 Euro fighters down there, and over a 1000 soldiers, but it’s still a worry. We definitely couldn’t get a task force ready, every single submarine we have is in fas lane at the moment for repairs. Same for most of the navy.
Worrying times, but hey are new Prime minister likes oasis [Post edited 4 Sep 13:20]
|  |
| |  |
| The Falklands on 14:21 - Sep 4 with 438 views | cressi |
| The Falklands on 14:15 - Sep 4 by StokieBlue |
That's not really true though.
Denmark, France, Austria, Belgium, Germany all have an overall individual tax burden larger than the UK.
I do agree we can do better with the money we have but the simple fact is that the majority of people in the country want the country to live either beyond it's means or are unwilling to pay for the way they want the country to work.
SB |
I would also say 90% of those countries mentioned earn more than people in the uk. |  | | |
| The Falklands on 14:23 - Sep 4 with 432 views | NthQldITFC |
What an absolute car crash of a thread. |  |
| |
| The Falklands on 14:24 - Sep 4 with 434 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| The Falklands on 13:57 - Sep 4 by J2BLUE |
We need an urgent national review of where the hell our money goes. We are taxed to death and yet we don't seem to have a pot to p1ss in. I've seen the breakdowns on the government website but I want a lot more detail. |
Mostly NHS and state pension, but those are deemed untouchable from the electorate. Number of tax payers to retirees has halved, it’s a demographic crisis and unsustainable but on we go… a wealth tax isn’t going to touch the sides (~12bn to 20bn), state pension alone is 150bn.
We also spend more on debt INTEREST (not even capital repayment) than we do on education. Denmark has about a third of our debt (scaled to GDP) yet fully functional public services and transport. Politicians of both colours have left the nation in a dreadful state in search of votes. | | | |
| The Falklands on 14:25 - Sep 4 with 420 views | StokieBlue |
| The Falklands on 14:21 - Sep 4 by cressi |
I would also say 90% of those countries mentioned earn more than people in the uk. |
But the taxes are a percentage based measure of individual burden, so the comparison is still relevant.
The UK is actually higher average wage than either France or Belgium in that list.
Just saying we are taxed to death isn't correct when you look at the wider European picture.
SB |  |
| Avatar - M101 - Pinwheel Galaxy |
| |
| The Falklands on 14:31 - Sep 4 with 388 views | Swansea_Blue |
| The Falklands on 12:43 - Sep 4 by Blueschev |
What is Argentina's claim to the Falkland's based on? It's 300 miles away so not exactly close. And nobody there wants to be part of Argentina. It would make more sense for Spain to lay claim to them. |
Yep. They need to belong to a much nearer country, like us  . Their claim is largely the same as ours; their Spanish ancestors, us and the French all had settlements on the islands and made claims in the first few years of their occupation. Our obviously endured. |  |
| |
| The Falklands on 14:31 - Sep 4 with 390 views | Guthrum |
| The Falklands on 14:25 - Sep 4 by StokieBlue |
But the taxes are a percentage based measure of individual burden, so the comparison is still relevant.
The UK is actually higher average wage than either France or Belgium in that list.
Just saying we are taxed to death isn't correct when you look at the wider European picture.
SB |
When people say "taxed to death", they mean that between houseprice-sustaining rent/mortgage, extortionate car leasing and investor-plundered utility bills, they are having trouble paying for all their massively inflated entertainment subscriptions. |  |
| |
| The Falklands on 14:44 - Sep 4 with 363 views | J2BLUE |
| The Falklands on 14:31 - Sep 4 by Guthrum |
When people say "taxed to death", they mean that between houseprice-sustaining rent/mortgage, extortionate car leasing and investor-plundered utility bills, they are having trouble paying for all their massively inflated entertainment subscriptions. |
Is that what I meant? What an odd comment. |  | | |
| The Falklands on 14:48 - Sep 4 with 351 views | lurcher |
| The Falklands on 12:31 - Sep 4 by nodge_blue |
Argentians are largely Spanish colonialists who should consider moving back to Spain and returning the country to the native South Americans if you follow their own arguments about the islands.
That said, it's not worth another conflict. Id let them have the islands. |
Possession of the islands. Comes with access to huge amounts of oil and gas. Both in the south atlantic and on antartica. The future prosperity of the UK is heavily dependant on retaining the islands. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Falklands on 14:49 - Sep 4 with 343 views | J2BLUE |
| The Falklands on 14:15 - Sep 4 by StokieBlue |
That's not really true though.
Denmark, France, Austria, Belgium, Germany all have an overall individual tax burden larger than the UK.
I do agree we can do better with the money we have but the simple fact is that the majority of people in the country want the country to live either beyond it's means or are unwilling to pay for the way they want the country to work.
SB |
I agree, every time a cut of any sort is even mentioned we have people jumping up and down about austerity.
You would think that when we are spending over £100bn a year on debt interest people might actually realise we need to cut spending a bit. I realise it won't be easy and I am not suggesting we just start cutting at random like Musk did in the US but there must be areas we can sensibly cut. | | | |
| The Falklands on 14:52 - Sep 4 with 331 views | StokieBlue |
| The Falklands on 14:48 - Sep 4 by lurcher |
Possession of the islands. Comes with access to huge amounts of oil and gas. Both in the south atlantic and on antartica. The future prosperity of the UK is heavily dependant on retaining the islands. |
Are you sure?
Firstly no guarantee that the wells will be commercially drilled and secondly the taxation on the resources goes to the Falklands government, not the UK government from my understanding.
SB | |
| Avatar - M101 - Pinwheel Galaxy |
| |
| The Falklands on 14:58 - Sep 4 with 305 views | ALF |
| The Falklands on 14:52 - Sep 4 by StokieBlue |
Are you sure?
Firstly no guarantee that the wells will be commercially drilled and secondly the taxation on the resources goes to the Falklands government, not the UK government from my understanding.
SB |
Because of the great fishing there and the revenue that brings in through licensing, and the oil, the Falklands is one of the richest nations per capita in the world. We retained out rights to Antarctica and all the minerals etc there by having the Falklands hence why it was and is very strategic. |  | | |
| The Falklands on 14:58 - Sep 4 with 304 views | StokieBlue |
| The Falklands on 14:49 - Sep 4 by J2BLUE |
I agree, every time a cut of any sort is even mentioned we have people jumping up and down about austerity.
You would think that when we are spending over £100bn a year on debt interest people might actually realise we need to cut spending a bit. I realise it won't be easy and I am not suggesting we just start cutting at random like Musk did in the US but there must be areas we can sensibly cut. |
Probably.
But my main point was that we are not heavily taxed compared to roughly comparable European countries and that was your claim.
SB | |
| Avatar - M101 - Pinwheel Galaxy |
| |
| The Falklands on 14:58 - Sep 4 with 295 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| The Falklands on 14:48 - Sep 4 by lurcher |
Possession of the islands. Comes with access to huge amounts of oil and gas. Both in the south atlantic and on antartica. The future prosperity of the UK is heavily dependant on retaining the islands. |
No it’s not - our government won’t even allow new fields in the North Sea (the current discussion are around existing license applications where the assets are already allocated by the E&P companies), no chance that they allow (large scale) exploitation in the South Atlantic. Even if they did, they would need access to large scale infrastructure on the South American mainland for offloading and refining, so without some kind of deal with Argentina the UK is unlikely to see production of any great scale. | | | |
| The Falklands on 15:00 - Sep 4 with 278 views | ALF |
| The Falklands on 14:58 - Sep 4 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
No it’s not - our government won’t even allow new fields in the North Sea (the current discussion are around existing license applications where the assets are already allocated by the E&P companies), no chance that they allow (large scale) exploitation in the South Atlantic. Even if they did, they would need access to large scale infrastructure on the South American mainland for offloading and refining, so without some kind of deal with Argentina the UK is unlikely to see production of any great scale. |
They have been setting up infrastructure in and around Stanley for years. Last time I was there (2014) exploration planning was very much already in full swing. [Post edited 4 Sep 15:03]
| | | |
| The Falklands on 15:04 - Sep 4 with 255 views | StokieBlue |
| The Falklands on 14:58 - Sep 4 by ALF |
Because of the great fishing there and the revenue that brings in through licensing, and the oil, the Falklands is one of the richest nations per capita in the world. We retained out rights to Antarctica and all the minerals etc there by having the Falklands hence why it was and is very strategic. |
The Falklands government has rights to those minerals, not the UK government as far as I can see?
SB | |
| Avatar - M101 - Pinwheel Galaxy |
| |
| The Falklands on 15:08 - Sep 4 with 244 views | ALF |
| The Falklands on 15:04 - Sep 4 by StokieBlue |
The Falklands government has rights to those minerals, not the UK government as far as I can see?
SB |
Not Antarctica, that lies well outside their territorial scope, but as a British Overseas Territory, it allows us to have a say in Antarctica. Interestingly the 50 year "let's not extract minerals from the Antarctica" was pretty close for discussion back in the late 20th Century - not sure what agreement is in place now but we retain our say. Minerals, fishing etc that is within 200 miles of the Falkland's is indeed the Falklands and not the UKs. | | | |
| The Falklands on 15:08 - Sep 4 with 237 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| The Falklands on 15:00 - Sep 4 by ALF |
They have been setting up infrastructure in and around Stanley for years. Last time I was there (2014) exploration planning was very much already in full swing. [Post edited 4 Sep 15:03]
|
You missed the key word there ‘scale’. The capacity will only be a few thousand barrels a day, even the North Sea which has long peaked for production is producing half a billion barrels a day.
There simply isn’t the infrastructure or investment for it to be a significant exporter in the near future. You need huge ports for offloading, pipelines, refining and storage which is why they need the mainland S America, and is why none of the oil majors are involved or committing significant capital to it. [Post edited 4 Sep 15:09]
| | | |
| The Falklands on 15:09 - Sep 4 with 237 views | Guthrum |
| The Falklands on 14:44 - Sep 4 by J2BLUE |
Is that what I meant? What an odd comment. |
Sorry, shouldn't really have put words into your mouth.
However, what I was describing is the reality for middle-earners in the UK. Costs have been over-inflated, expectation of standards of living has been raised and what gets squeezed is contributions to the good of society as a whole. Partly as a function of 40+ years of propaganda that taxation is evil and people deserve to have all their money to spend on themselves. That all government work is massively wasteful. That the poor and unfortunate are undeseving of public help (pensioners excepted).
Human civilisation has always worked on communal structures, which need to be paid for. That seems to have been forgotten in a wave of individualism sweeping across from the States (much of it based upon poor analysis of pseudo-history and aquisitive agendas). | |
| |
| The Falklands on 15:13 - Sep 4 with 216 views | ALF |
| The Falklands on 15:08 - Sep 4 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
You missed the key word there ‘scale’. The capacity will only be a few thousand barrels a day, even the North Sea which has long peaked for production is producing half a billion barrels a day.
There simply isn’t the infrastructure or investment for it to be a significant exporter in the near future. You need huge ports for offloading, pipelines, refining and storage which is why they need the mainland S America, and is why none of the oil majors are involved or committing significant capital to it. [Post edited 4 Sep 15:09]
|
It does beg the question why even do exploration with that issue having always been the case? The companies involved, esp Rockhopper, have been doing oil exploration for at least a dozen years, maybe more. The issue with the Argentinians was always going to be a major hurdle and sovereignty etc has never really gone away. The Argentinians do blow hot and cold so it was always likely that the option to go via there was questionable. | | | |
| The Falklands on 15:14 - Sep 4 with 213 views | J2BLUE |
| The Falklands on 14:58 - Sep 4 by StokieBlue |
Probably.
But my main point was that we are not heavily taxed compared to roughly comparable European countries and that was your claim.
SB |
My actual claim was that we are taxed to death. I didn't make any comparison to other countries. We might have the lowest taxes of those countries but it's not a contradiction to think our taxes are high.
I don't have a problem with income tax or NI. The Tories should never have cut the 2%. My main problem is that you can be taxed on income and then if you spend it you are taxed again with VAT, if you save it you get a small allowance before they tax the interest and if you invest it outside an ISA you then get taxed on any capital gains above £3000. And I know, people will reply that not many have any savings/investments etc so if you are lucky enough to you should pay some tax but I just think once i've been taxed on my income I should be able to do what I want with it.
It may sound like it but I am not actually pushing for tax cuts. It is what it is. Just spend the money wisely. We collectively pay enough tax for a functioning society. Something has to give. We need to tax companies and tax dodging individuals properly and we also need to be grown up and realise we cannot go on spending as much as we are going to pay over half a trillion just in debt interest over a 5 year parliament (based on the £100bn+ we paid last year and the belief that bond rates are going higher). | | | |
| The Falklands on 15:15 - Sep 4 with 206 views | Guthrum |
| The Falklands on 14:49 - Sep 4 by J2BLUE |
I agree, every time a cut of any sort is even mentioned we have people jumping up and down about austerity.
You would think that when we are spending over £100bn a year on debt interest people might actually realise we need to cut spending a bit. I realise it won't be easy and I am not suggesting we just start cutting at random like Musk did in the US but there must be areas we can sensibly cut. |
Cut spending from where, however? What fat is there left to trim?
Not allowing people to legally challenge stuff would save the government a vast sum - but is a slippery slope when it comes to holding them to account.
Reducing vital services has its own knock-on effects (e.g. reduction in mental health provision has increased the burden upon both policing and the NHS).
We could save quite a bit on in-work benefits by forcing employers to pay better wages at the lowest levels, but that might merely result in increasing unemployment.
The only real solution is increasing revenue. Which requires either a massive renaissance in business and trade in the UK, or ways of extracting more money from the economy.
Edit: Or massive devaluation of the currency. Which carries a whole raft of consequences. [Post edited 4 Sep 15:17]
| |
| |
| The Falklands on 15:25 - Sep 4 with 170 views | StokieBlue |
| The Falklands on 15:14 - Sep 4 by J2BLUE |
My actual claim was that we are taxed to death. I didn't make any comparison to other countries. We might have the lowest taxes of those countries but it's not a contradiction to think our taxes are high.
I don't have a problem with income tax or NI. The Tories should never have cut the 2%. My main problem is that you can be taxed on income and then if you spend it you are taxed again with VAT, if you save it you get a small allowance before they tax the interest and if you invest it outside an ISA you then get taxed on any capital gains above £3000. And I know, people will reply that not many have any savings/investments etc so if you are lucky enough to you should pay some tax but I just think once i've been taxed on my income I should be able to do what I want with it.
It may sound like it but I am not actually pushing for tax cuts. It is what it is. Just spend the money wisely. We collectively pay enough tax for a functioning society. Something has to give. We need to tax companies and tax dodging individuals properly and we also need to be grown up and realise we cannot go on spending as much as we are going to pay over half a trillion just in debt interest over a 5 year parliament (based on the £100bn+ we paid last year and the belief that bond rates are going higher). |
I know that was your claim and I provided some near-peer examples to show it's not really the case even if it is your perception. It's absolutely possible for us to pay more tax as other countries do and function well.
The EU average rate for VAT is ~22% so even with regards to VAT we aren't really doing anything strange. I understand you see it as double-taxation but it's at least a taxation on specific individual consumption and not unusual.
You say we pay enough tax for a functioning society and we probably do, however we don't pay enough tax for a functioning society at the level people want and feel they are entitled to. It's not a UK specific issue, the entire western world is the same which is why everyone has such high levels of sovereign debt.
SB | |
| Avatar - M101 - Pinwheel Galaxy |
| |
| The Falklands on 15:32 - Sep 4 with 150 views | OldFootball |
Sounds like someones found some more oil |  | | |
| The Falklands on 15:35 - Sep 4 with 143 views | J2BLUE |
| The Falklands on 15:15 - Sep 4 by Guthrum |
Cut spending from where, however? What fat is there left to trim?
Not allowing people to legally challenge stuff would save the government a vast sum - but is a slippery slope when it comes to holding them to account.
Reducing vital services has its own knock-on effects (e.g. reduction in mental health provision has increased the burden upon both policing and the NHS).
We could save quite a bit on in-work benefits by forcing employers to pay better wages at the lowest levels, but that might merely result in increasing unemployment.
The only real solution is increasing revenue. Which requires either a massive renaissance in business and trade in the UK, or ways of extracting more money from the economy.
Edit: Or massive devaluation of the currency. Which carries a whole raft of consequences. [Post edited 4 Sep 15:17]
|
If there is no fat left to trim then we are going to have to make some very tough decisions. We cannot keep spending, adding to the debt and then paying even more interest on that debt.
Devaluation of the currency is the way I think this ends. Probably not hyperinflation but a managed decline.
I think we are going to see a massive change in how people retire in the next decade or two. | | | |
| The Falklands on 15:38 - Sep 4 with 130 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| The Falklands on 15:13 - Sep 4 by ALF |
It does beg the question why even do exploration with that issue having always been the case? The companies involved, esp Rockhopper, have been doing oil exploration for at least a dozen years, maybe more. The issue with the Argentinians was always going to be a major hurdle and sovereignty etc has never really gone away. The Argentinians do blow hot and cold so it was always likely that the option to go via there was questionable. |
Because with FPSO’s you can generally do small fields profitably and offload to vessels offshore. The oil majors tend to like scaled projects which is why BP are selling their North Sea assets (since future large new fields are unlikely to be licensed). The Falkland’s unlike the North Sea is very geographically isolated which means you’d need either access to S American ports, or considerable capital investment for pipelines etc.
Even small scale production is of course beneficial to such a small population, I’m just sceptical that the UK government is interested in the Falklands for that reason, given they are so anti fossil fuel. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
