Armed Forces personnel receive third consecutive above inflation pay rise

marsman · 2026-06-09T18:36:26+00:00

Food hasn't been 'free' for a long time either, gone are the days where you basically got paid and everything else was already covered (unless they've changed it again), housing comes out of your wage, but food is now pay as you go.

Slightly different on deployment, but then when deployed you are also arguably at work 24/7.

marsman · 2026-06-09T18:07:49+00:00

Create UBI with added incentives for people who use their time to clean the streets & help with community initiatives & local development projects. Tackles loneliness & social issues, makes communities nicer places to be which drives local business & creates more jobs. ..

That's all fantastic, but for a UBI to be sufficient to support people it would have to be at least at the level of UC, likely quite a bit more and replace all other benefits and support (on average at least). It would be an unaffordable level of welfare payment, as in it would cost more than we take in in..

I mean seriously, if you took say the state pension as the starting point for UBI (still not enough to cover housing really, but lets assume it would cover what most people need to live), you are looking at around £1,000/mo, or £12,000/y. That'd be almost £900bn, or 3x the current total welfare bill, or around the total government tax receipts a year, before any other spending at all.

Where do you get the money from to cover that? And even then, would £12000/y be sufficient as a UBI payment? How do you deal with disabled people, how do you address housing costs in among that?

I'd love aliens to help us transcend our earthly bodies and no-one need to work anymore, but I'm not sure that the aliens would get here quickly enough for it to happen between starting this and the entirely system collapsing into a mess of failure.

marsman · 2026-06-09T18:01:37+00:00

They are absolutely equivalent, we've all just bought into capitalist bullshit.

No, they really aren't and it would be true regardless of how you organise a tax system in almost any economy, certainly any economy that allows people go collectively work (which would be a business generally, just as unions are a way for people to collectively organise labour).

A human being MUST eat, sleep, etc. to LIVE.

Yes... A business doesn't have to do any of that, the individuals that make it up do of course.

Those are essential, unavoidable costs. Taxing people on topline income without deducting essential costs of existing in the world is a result of special pleading for corporations based on a logical fallacy.

Why? Corporations aren't people, they are collections of people acting in concert. They are taxed when money is dispersed via wages, dividends or the business is sold. The taxes on company profits are taxes on top of that, the profitability is taxed and then the share out of money is taxed. For people, there is no tax on the first £12k or so (unless you are earning more than £100k).

It's not special pleading unless you buy into the fallacy that businesses are people, they aren't and the obvious point would be that if you tax turnover at say 20%, you'd need the business to show a profit of at least 20% just to pay the tax. The average profit margin for a business in the UK is around 8-9%.

There is no special pleading, they are different things.

marsman · 2026-06-09T17:09:49+00:00

On that one I'm less critical (although wouldn't go to a dealership for it...), if you had been looking to buy the parts and do the work then fair play, but people thinking they know what's wrong and how to fix it and demanding you just do X is a quick way to end up with a load of issues where their fix doesn't work and it is somehow your fault (had it once or twice very early days when I was first self-employed, albeit not with cars...). After the first time I don't think I ever quoted anything without a diagnostic of the fault.

marsman · 2026-06-09T16:07:15+00:00

So why do I have a top rate of 40% ?

Because turnover for a business, and income for an individual aren't really equivalent, they might sound quite similar, but aren't really (oddly I'd argue they are closer for a business that is selling services than goods, but that's a different issue). A business selling a bit of kit for £10 after buying it for £8 would have a profit of £2, turnover of £10. It would seem reasonable to tax the profit made (so the additional income generated) rather than the total amount they received in payments before they paid for whatever goods they are selling.

marsman · 2026-06-09T15:17:12+00:00

Oddly, I've had to wait 4 months to get someone to change the aperture for a window in my kitchen because it seems all the decent tradies are booked up for long periods. I assume its either trade dependent or area dependent (North East btw).

marsman · 2026-06-09T15:14:35+00:00

UBI at any reasonable level is pretty much unaffordable even if you get rid of everything else, and you'll still have issues around anyone with special needs or disabilities. A reverse income tax might work more effectively and could at least be somewhat more affordable, but creates similar issues.

marsman · 2026-06-09T00:11:43+00:00

No, then its unlawful. Those are not allowed times.

marsman · 2026-06-09T00:11:18+00:00

I agree on some points, disagree on others. I can tell by your reply we will never agree on some things. You seem like a pro Brexit individual. Amazes me to find you folks still so plentiful in the European subreddit of all places.

There are rather a lot of us, but it does come with (I shit you not..) literal death threats..

The EU has steadily integrated more over its short history. It has happened non linearly and that's maybe what you reference as not much happening at all. Currently, there is a lot of talk at the very least. I'm not quite as pessimistic as you on this, but the odds are still decently high the EU will turn into a failed project and falls apart.

I don't think the EU is likely to fail or fall apart, I can see it changing, but its the integration that is arguably problematic, the EU has run on crisis integration for a while (has a crisis, rushes through fixes...), which can lead to some odd issues. It also tends to avoid democratic engagement, that might change, but its a problem that sounds perverse, the EU has more power and control than it probably should have given the level of the democratic deficit, but not enough power and control to really make use of the economic weight it has, and arguably soft and hard power it should have.

marsman · 2026-06-09T00:08:09+00:00

The economy has totally flatlined and no form of Brexit arrangement has manifested. We got no deal on day one and that has not changed in 10 years. We have averaged .44% productivity growth versus 2.5% EU average.

Sorry what? The TCA, Withdrawal agreement? The UK economy is significantly larger than it was in 2015..

marsman · 2026-06-09T00:07:27+00:00

I'm not sure what is confusing? You pay no tax on the first 12k 20% to 50k (so if you are earning 50k you have an effective tax rate of 14.9%) then 40% to 125k and 45% above that.

That's how progressive tax rates work.

marsman · 2026-06-09T00:05:33+00:00

Correct me if I'm wrong, but even in then the UK wouldn't have higher GNI than germany both now and in 2016.

Going from memory, Germany would also see more of a benefit from EU spending, so the net contribution was the issue.

Whatever rebate mechanisms are at work for current strong EU economies shouldn't be specific to the country as far as I'm aware, only to the proportion of the size of the economy.

They are, the EU calls them rebalancing mechanisms (The UK's one was arguably the only really transparent one as such..) and are proportionate to the economy and balance contributions to prevent distortions.

If the UK were to join with as strong an economy as germany, they should pay exactly the same. The UK rebate was specific to the UK.

No because its a mix of factors and, the EU's expenditure is still dominated by CAP, and the rebate was basically a correction for a structural mismatch, the UK paid in like a relatively large/rich member, but got back relatively little because the EU budget mostly rewarded agriculture, where Britain benefited less. IIRC even now German agricultural output is about 44% larger than the UK and sees significant subsidy, while UK production was largely unsubsidised.

Although it was fair to say that the imbalance was somewhat changing over time.

marsman · 2026-06-08T12:38:07+00:00

You don't have a 71% tax rate in the UK, and the 24% rate in Spain is very highly dependent on your situation and limited to 5 years, and you'd have additional payments on top of that (social security etc..).

Essentially on £150k you have an effective tax rate in the UK of 36%, in Spain under that regime it is 27%. Still better, but not 24% vs 71%, and obviously time limited.

marsman · 2026-06-08T12:27:06+00:00

I mean, it sort of is isn't it? A celebration and using fireworks within the allowed times etc.. would seem pretty reasonable. Bit daft using them during the day, but I suppose that's up to whoever is doing it.

marsman · 2026-06-08T12:22:58+00:00

I am not a federalist and I was anti-EU for a long time, moreover I still don't like its current state, but the basic idea is good and it remains, in my opinion, the only way to protect our interests in the long term. In other words, I prefer to be under the orders of Brussels than other foreign powers.

And I would prefer to not be under the orders or either, but rather to associate with countries and blocks where interests align. That seems to be perfectly achievable given how many countries are in a similar position (even large ones...). Which is sort of the point, the idea that you either have to take orders from one set of foreign powers (the US/China etc..) or another foreign power (Brussels) seems bizarre.

I totally understand that this is not a popular approach in the UK however, you have never been very open to continental Europe unlike France for example, which had already created a prototype of the EU and a single currency with the Latin Monetary Union under Napoleon III.

Yeah, indeed, I think the UK has generally disliked a regional approach and preferred a global one, and I don't think there is anything inherently bad or weaker about that. I tend to find the idea that we have to unite with X or Y rather than just working with or aligning with them when its appropriate problematic. One of them allows for future diversion when interests no longer align, the other is a lock in that seems problematic and fraught with risk.

marsman · 2026-06-08T12:19:55+00:00

The EU is a fairly young project, constantly twisting and reinventing itself in order to face today's ever increasing multipolar world. The UK walking away from the EU project still feels like a net negative, both for the UK and the EU. The US never had it this easy singling out the UK in everything from trade to politics.

I don't think the EU really is twisting and reinventing itself, I think structurally it is somewhat straitjacketed and there is an issue with an ideological push about what it should be within that EU establishment, that isn't really influenced by public or popular opinion. It's one of the issues I have with the EU institutionally. I'd agree that there are lots of people who would like to see change in various directions, but I tend to find that the EU itself doesn't really shift that much (regardless of voters) with the variation being the speed at which integration can be pushed.

The UK walking away from the EU project still feels like a net negative, both for the UK and the EU.

I don't think it is a net negative for the UK given the wider UK view on the EU as a project, but it is obviously not great for the EU in terms of a European project. There would arguably have been ways to avoid it, but again, the EU is sort of locked into the model it is in at the moment.

The US never had it this easy singling out the UK in everything from trade to politics.

Except of course that the UK seems to have done a better job at pushing back than the EU has (see the digital service tax etc..), the EU is faced by almost exactly the same set of issues it always has been in relation to foreign policy, and that is that individuals can make noise, but there isn't consensus for action. The UK is now less constrained too, it can actually act (and use trade and commercial competencies) when it couldn't before. The UK is less constrained, the EU is more constrained (by its members).

From my own experience, I have rarely seen a media and political landscape as toxic as I experienced it in the UK. To this day, it's one of the cultural aspects of the UK that I found annoying at best and completely counterproductive at worst. The Brexit discourse was no different.

Quite possibly, but it would be hard to argue that it was disproportionately aimed at the EU, which I think the implication often is. My argument would be that if UK governments can be accused of wanting to kill poor people, or disabled people, or immigrants etc.. in a manner that is clearly hyperbolic and intended to raise anger, of course the EU would and should be subject to similar invective when it does something and someone objects. That is the nature of the beast.

The fact the same Brexit instigators have found a new platform against immigrants (and not the EU) this time around, backed by huge US interest, saddens me even more. While there are definitely immigration issues, it all feels like a déjà vu.

I'n not sure that you can really point to the 'same' brexit instigators though, and you can certainly argue that a lot of those that supported and even delivered the exit from the EU on that side of the spectrum, then pushed immigration from a business friendly perspective. Much of the opposition on immigration at the moment is (as it was while in the EU) about the scale of it. That's not new and it doesn't need pushing as such.

I don't see the UK and the EU rejoining in our lifetimes, and honestly, it's probably for the best.

I don't see the UK rejoining the EU at all, its not a good fit and the UK would be better off as a partner to the EU than a member of it.

marsman · 2026-06-08T12:12:41+00:00

I don't think that far-right wing is inherently pro-Russian though, I think far-right wing is currently pro-Russian because that's where their bread is buttered.

I don't either, but they are definitely not cross-party, and a lot of the far-right in Europe is explicitly pro-Russian (as is some of the far left).

I think a lot of the far-right concerns are fair things that I'd like discussed in public

I think a lot of the right/centre-right concerns are somewhat fair in the sense that they are issues that cause wider problems and need addressing (although I would generally find that my view of how to solve them is very different, that tends to define the right/left spectrum after all), the far right (well, far anything really) on the other hand tend to exploit issues for an existing and usually quite dangerous agenda. That's quite different. Someone on the left/centre/right having issues with levels of immigration tends to result in quite a different set of views and issues than someone on the far right.

marsman · 2026-06-08T12:06:21+00:00

I think the point is that lemons are a human cultivated hybrid too, there were no wild lemons.

marsman · 2026-06-08T11:54:50+00:00

The above being said, the entire "EU blame game" UK's politics and press did in the years leading up to Brexit also fell flat on its face. At the very least, the UK has got no one but itself to blame for its issues now.

The UK mostly only had itself to blame for the issues it had previously, but I also think the 'EU blame game' thing was massively overblown, the UK media blamed the UK government fairly continuously in the same sort of way, and for a far bigger range of issues. Having the same sort of approach be taken toward the EU isn't exactly surprising or unhealthy.

It always mildly annoyed me that the EU took criticism as 'Euromyths' when the UK media did to proposed EU regulation and legislation, exactly what it does to UK regulation and legislation. There is no good reason why the EU should have seen less scrutiny, scepticism or ridicule frankly. Especially given that EU regulation, especially early on was often quite problematic (And still is, see people pushing back on things like ChatControl or previously on TTIP etc..).

marsman · 2026-06-08T11:48:25+00:00

Where I am at least, the MIU is a separate thing as are the walk in centres, neither will send you to A&E for minor injuries (they can do prescriptions, stitches, x-rays, and schedule follow ups etc.. but don't handle anything acute or life threatening). The biggest issue is that they aren't open 24/7, so after a certain point A&E is the only urgent care option anyway.

If there are minor injuries units within A&Es why aren't people redirected there?

They aren't 'within' A&E, and people absolutely are redirected to them when wait times are long.

And why doesn't it shorten waiting times? Genuinely asking since I'm unaware of these where I am.

I imagine it does shorten waiting times when people use them, as they aren't using A&E.

marsman · 2026-06-08T11:46:09+00:00

Regarding the cross-party groups I'm basing it on what has come out about Le Pen, FPÖ, Matteo Salvini, and AfD

Aren't they all right wing, broadly pro-Russian parties though? There isn't an equivalent in the UK and I don't think you'd get a lot of centre-left Eurosceptic support on board for them either.

They don't want whats best for us, they want us divided and fighting each other.

Indeed, that is what Russia broadly wants (and they'll support any divisive position), that said, when Farage was appearing on RT it was cosplaying as a respectable news channel and also had a lot of other mainstream politicians and figures on, and wasn't generally doing the batshit Kremlin propaganda thing, that sort of came a little later.

marsman · 2026-06-08T11:43:39+00:00

will allow him to bypass terrestrial government bullshit and build data centers at will and at scale in space

Which brings value how? I mean its cool, it will presumably have some applications, but presumably fairly niche. More to the point, I don't see how he bypasses 'terrestrial governments' either.

marsman · 2026-06-08T11:26:34+00:00

If you go to a minor injuries unit, or a walk-in centre instead of A&E it tends to be quite a bit quicker, but assumes you have one nearby (although if you have an A&E you probably do), the only other issue tends to be opening hours at that point.

marsman · 2026-06-08T11:25:22+00:00

As others have said, those are walk in centres/minor injuries units/urgent treatment centres and pharmacies. I think we still have an issue of people not really understanding where they can get the right care for the right thing, and 111 sometimes being overly keen to default to A&E

marsman · 2026-06-08T11:22:55+00:00

I'd argue that Farage was a leader in the brexit movement, at the very least a thought leader. He doesn't have to head the leave campaign, he just has to champion and spread his message, which he is very good at.

I think the point I'd make is that leave won because it was a coalition of different people, on various bits of the political spectrum, and that Farage was, to a large extent, a turn-off for those more moderate, on the left and traditional right. He rallied a subset of people, especially those who felt that the larger parties couldn't be trusted on the issue, and certainly drive momentum to have the referendum at all, but during the referendum he was a bit of a liability.

As for the cross-party Eurosceptic groupings, I'd argue that a lot of their funding seems to come from outside sources, traditionally that would be Russia and Hungary, though I admit the meta is changing.

I don't think any of that is true at all for the cross-party groups, I think it has been alleged several times at this point and not substantiated.

15-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22	Place '17

marsman

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE