observer Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 The LibDems are now arguing for tax cuts, albeit for the less well off, whilst increasing the tax take from the rich - fair enough. BUT; rather than releasing more cash for (some would argue) the feckless to spend on fags, booze and junk food; would it not be preferable if Government used the money to subsidise those essentials in life to ALL - such as:- healthy food, cheap public transport, cheap rented housing, school uniforms etc; thus making such needs affordable to all, whilst allowing negatives to become more expensive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted September 18, 2008 Report Share Posted September 18, 2008 would it not be preferable if Government used the money to subsidise those essentials in life to ALL - such as:- healthy food, cheap public transport, cheap rented housing, school uniforms etc; thus making such needs affordable to all, whilst allowing negatives to become more expensive? You can't do that!!! That's problem solving. What would they do to fill their time, if they couldn't shuffle paper and problems. there would be no need for wasteful meetings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 18, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 18, 2008 Notice rents are relatively expensive nowadays, given that the place will never be owned; perhaps it would help the less well off if housing were subsidised, plus energy costs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.