¿Quien es ohnoes?




Send ohnoes a private message


Oh dear, this member hasn't provided any information yet.

ohnoes's latest forum comments


12 Aug 2012 10:44 PM:

 Woodbug, I totally agree, and it would be a win-win situation. I'd love to see it happen, not that I hold out much hope!



Thread: Another Nail in the Spanish Property Coffin

--------------------------------------
12 Aug 2012 9:52 PM:

 I don't listen to radio, so I have no idea how they speak on it, but whatever. As for WUM, I'm not the one saying we should dehumanise certain segments of the population we don't like. If people are branded as WUMs for actually speaking out against that... then, well whatever, call me what you like, I still cannot condone such actions. Anyway, to the point:

I understand at least as well as you do how the UK system works,

Then why the complaint about people getting stuff for "free" when both you and I know that isn't possible? Free =/= subsidy. 

and the fact that those on benefit (i.e. those families which live entirely on benefit) use some of the free money to buy things and so unwittingly pay something back via less obvious taxes does not mean they are contributing to the state in any meaningful way.  

1) It's not free. It is more commonly a subsidy, see above. 2) It is conditional. Indeed, the few benefits that aren't conditional (or not as strictly conditional) are those the right are most keen on defending (i.e. children benfit, winter fuel allowance, state pensions and supplements). The right have also strongly opposed making blanket trasnfer payments such as child benefits more conditional through means-testing,  a proposal I strongly supported.

The fact that people do not understand that they do not have an individual resource, and that they are paying taxes and national insurance to support the state now leads them to cry 'I have paid into the system so.....................'.     Don't tell me how it works - explain it to them.

Since you express the same sentiment yourself, I don't think it is always down to ignorance of the system, rather an ideological opposition to it (though I don't double some people genuinely believe it is an individual account system). However you don't present a credible alternative to it that is ideologically or logically consistant. Are you adovcating individual account, or absolute benefit-contribution ties? If so, explain how you envisage such a system working, and how you reconcile the inconsistancies and compromises of such a system in terms of your expressed view (as far as I understand it, correct me if I'm wrong) that no-one should recieve in state services anything beyond the amount they contribute. 

The point is that these sorts of things have been tried in the past and fail. They just don't end well, which is why most countries have moved away from them. Even Singapore - that bastion of neo-mercantile thought - is gradually shifting away from it.

 

 



Thread: BE HONEST...Would you stay in Spain if it wasn't for the weather?

--------------------------------------
12 Aug 2012 7:26 PM:

 Honestly, I'd suggest Alicante city. Nicest town on that stretch of coast, IMHO. Otherwise, Elche is nearby and a pleasent inland town.



Thread: Ideas for nice towns within an hour of Alicante Airport?

--------------------------------------
12 Aug 2012 7:22 PM:

 The problems are multi-layerd and cross-discipline, which is likely why they will not be solved. It's not just economics, it's all deeply political and nationalist.

For example, there is a relatively simple problem to the bond rates which are curretnly threatening Spain, and the junk status of Greek and Irish debt which makes it impossible for her to borrow from the open market. This would be to mutualise Euro debt accross all EU states. Also the ECB could be empowered to buy up debts from sturggling member states, getting high interest debt off their books.

BUT, because of nationalist sentiments among EU members, key states have (and will continue to) block this, and so although the economics are reasonably simple, it just won't happen for political reasons. 

As such, there are plenty of solutions, but none that will really come to the fore as long as right-wing nationalist sentiment is the dominant political chorus in Germany, Finland et. al.

Within Spain, there is actually not a huge amount Rajoy can do, and neither does he have much desire to do anything anyway. He is largely at the mercy of the ECB and the still-functioning Eurozone economies. Thankfully for Rajoy, they are largely on his side as far as flogging off state assets to his donors is concerned, but that isn't going to help the economy (in fact, it might just help push it deeper into the red). 

UNEMPLOYMENT - Not an EU priority. Can only really be addressed long time by major stimulus to manufacturing and construction. Neither Rajoy nor the EU care about this

HOUSING CRISIS - THis is an EU priority, but it would require Rajoy to massively reform the banks through forced mergers and a toxic asset scheme. He has no apetite for the first and would need to go back again, cap in hand to the EU for the second, which would make him look bad (even though it makes sence). 

BANKING REFORM - The EU is semi-interested in this, but like housing it would mean Rajoy having to take on the banks, which he has absolutely no desire to do. 

BEUREAUCRACY - Rajoy and EU both desperately want to hack away at the public sector. However, both want to do it in a different way to one that would actually address the underlying problem. Rajoy and EU both want to privatise and contract out potentially profitable parts of the public service such as public hospitals, schools and infrastructure like Correos, RENFE, ADIF and AENA. However, the main problem lies in the civil service and direct government departments wchih have stone-age administrative practices and consequently low productivity, which needs huge modernisation and reform of work processes. Not being profitable, this is unlikely to happen - though a culling of the workforce with no sigifcant changes or imrpovements to actual procedures is highly likely, which will have the sole effect of exacerbating unemployment and making the beureaucracy even slower as three people attempt to badly do the jobs previously done badly by ten people.

MIGRANT WORKERS - The crisis is has led to a lot of African and E. European workers in the south to loose their casual jobs. They are a ptoential law and order time bomb and Rajoy doesn't know what to do. The farmers want to keep them as a useful pool of labour - higher unemployment keeps down the wages and makes the workers easier to control, but the local populace resent them. The only real solution is to enforce the laws that require workers to be properly ocumented and be paid a minimum wage, but that is eaier said than done given the rampant corruption and transient nature of the workers, and bitter resistance amongst farming companies.

 

 

 

 

 



Thread: What does Europe need to sort out this mess?

--------------------------------------
12 Aug 2012 6:43 PM:

 What a load of twaddle about no body taking anything off the state unless you never pay VAT.  The problem is that the people who do get benefits pay lots of VAT on big screen televisions etc etc - and any amount of VAT is not going to cover them for a month of benefits.   Get real.

 

You misquote me. I said no one takes anything for free from the state - *everyone* takes something, and everyone old enough to spend money in a shop contributes something. Either your math or your logic is faulty, my friend. As far as VAT is concerned, the global trend in taxation since the 1970s in all major economies has been from progressive taxation on income to regressive taxation on consumption, a shift driven in large part precisely because it is hard to avoid, whilst also falling disproportionately on the lowest income group, with a negligible impact at the top. 

As I also explained, the idea of tax paid covering your share of services recieved is fallacious at best. It is impossible to calculate the value of services one consumes as an individual, because most are a common good. Furthermore, the British social security system has never functioned on an individual account model, so the assumption that is does shows a frightening lack of awarness of how the system works. If you believe it should, then good luck with transforming society into an anarcho-capitalist model, because that is the only concievable way where you can be even remotely confident that no one is getting stuff for "free" (actually, there are exceptions even in this scenario vis a vis positive externalties, as well as forementioned common goods). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Thread: BE HONEST...Would you stay in Spain if it wasn't for the weather?

--------------------------------------

Communities ohnoes has joined


ohnoes' blogs


ohnoes's rentals

ohnoes's properties for sale


Spain insurance services


This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More information here. x