They’re both bad options, and it would be the best case scenario if neither ran, but I’d rather have Biden for the simple reason that he appears to be guided by the people around him to some degree, whereas Trump seems to do what he wants to do and to hell with the consequences.
He seems to need to be guided from room to room, hardly what you want in a person with actual executive power.
To be fair to his first term he tended to do what he had said he was going to do, which came as something of a shock to those used to politicians.
I agree in the ideal world neither would run and they would have a candidate who was younger than Sputnik. But in the real world the only reason to vote for Biden is that he isn’t Trump. (Which many would see as reason enough, but I don’t see undecided voters going down that route).
2 Likes
Politicians from my thinking rely on donors etc so they will always take the money and make things better for the money people. Now look at us, the average everyday person.
There is a NHS waiting list of months, why is that? what do we need to do to reduce that wait? Money is the answer, so where is the biggest drain of money, do we need to be spending that much? Can we reduce that? Taxes are always mentioned, why do the well off pay less tax, does the trickle down economy thinking work?
I’ve seen a few of the rich list having to pay out ex’s etc, which has dented their billions yet they have recovered thankfully and can still live in their various houses not having to worry bout being able to put the heating on.
Was there ever a time when the UK was taxing the wealthy and not crippling the poor into debt. What changed and why did it change?
Look at us mere peasants who many live from payment to payment, be that wages or benefits. Cost of living goes up, tesco makes record profits yet we are paying more for items that have shrunk.
I will never trust a politician because they promise to do one thing and do not do it, or they start off with good intention only to do a 180.
I didn’t do a politics GCSE so I might be talking out my derriere about things here. So class it as an uneducated rant and Carry On…
My American friends are worried about what will come from this attempt, they dread the next few weeks and months, no doubt more Twump merch will be seen worn on our screens by the “Poorly Educated” as Twump calls them who are blinded because they think he is gods gift after seeing comments like “Trump is covered in the blood of Jesus Christ”
Stop the world, I’d like to get off please
Higher rate taxpayers in the UK contribute a significant portion of the total tax revenue. As of the latest data:
- The top 1% of income taxpayers, who have gross incomes over approximately £164,000, contribute about 27% of all income tax receipts.
- The top 10% of income taxpayers, with incomes over roughly £54,000, pay around 59% of the income tax revenue.
- In contrast, the bottom half of income taxpayers account for less than 10% of income tax receipts oai_citation:1,Income tax explained | IFS Taxlab oai_citation:2,Tax revenues: where does the money come from and what are the next government’s challenges? | Institute for Fiscal Studies.
This demonstrates the progressive nature of the UK income tax system, where higher earners contribute a larger share of the tax revenue.
2 Likes
As they should, because maintaining a safe and prosperous nation state requires significant money from people whose safe jobs exist thanks to a good education, health, and security system.
People who barely have enough to have stability shouldn’t be paying much.
Add to that the fact that the less you have, the greater impact money can have for you. Eventually, more money just means buying up assets like houses that other people need. The wealth gap grows and poorer people get less and less.
America had its day. It became great with the richest paying very high levels of tax on money above a certain level.
Now we need wealth taxes, to tackle intergenerational wealth. Our labour should not be taxed more than invested money.
On that logic why invest here? Inter generational wealth is why we work as hard as we do, so that our children will be better off than we were.
1 Like
Taxes & national fiscal status / protocols is rather off topic.
There has to be a fair balance of proportional taxation against those who can afford it to help finance fiscal policy / support services / assist those who can’t afford taxes.
Go too far & you lose those high income payers who b*gger off to another country. For example, not that from from England, there are concerns about these taxation policies.
Flat rate taxation is seen as the answer for some countries (with very different economic structures), but may not necessarily work as expected.
Not easy with our complex tax system, allowances, etc. Squeeze hard on one area = generate an issue elsewhere?
Tbf it took a long while for Brexit to sink in…and still hasn’t for some!
Afterthe shock of the news strick i got thinking how did Trump get away so lightly?
A moving target? Or a shooter not allowing for windage? Then i realised how that’s such a shooting coach’s response snd wondered if i need a long talk with myself! 
1 Like
I had the same initial response, given the number of rounds fired.
Not sure on the distance though?
Pretty sure the news said 150 yards
1 Like
Did they say weapon type/calibre?
Going by the wiz’s rather than the crack assuming sub sonic so thinking .223 CF probably a hunting round.
Must have been inexperienced with weapons to have not scored a fatal shot at that range.
1 Like
Maybe he only completed trained shot on the air rifle
1 Like
Based on where he was hit the shooter was going for a head shot, that’s not easy at that range, especially when you consider the stress/adrenaline.
Some reports say an AR type, but the FBI have refused to say yet.
Lots of potential reasons.
AR15 style rifle with iron sights, probably not zeroed to him (his father’s rifle according to media reports), shooting “downhill” & probably not waiting in the aim for 10-15 secs to get a steady shot (visibility to Secret Service snipers). Bog standard commercial ammo rather than target rifle competition grade (or home loads).
Going back to running ranges for Service personnel, shooting at 100 yds for the first time for them with L85 as it was then - a 4” group at 25 yds would of course equate to 16” at 100 yds. Quite a few on their first shoot at a Fig 11 wouldn’t get a shot on tgt from 10 rds!! Some of that was down to a poor zero at 25 yds, the rest related to inexperience at shooting over 25 yds / poor marksmanship principles.
43% of the UK pay no income tax. As someone who receives a state and NHS pension, I pay tax each month.
1 Like
This is the exact reason that Police Officers aim centre mass most of the time and why TV rubbish like shooting a gun out of someone’s hand is so ridiculous. So many variables are in play.
1 Like
Doesn’t everyone aim centre mass, at least for the initial shots?
The public expectation is generally different though, it’s the outcry every time when someone gets shot.
2 Likes