GD4ELI Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Well they are helping. They are using electricity, renting property, buying property, paying rates, gaming duty, a huge amount of NI and paying people very well. Jes' Stinks, anyone would think you lacked understanding of the egaming contribution. Two things, 1) Lack of corporation tax, tax PokerStars and they'll be off to Singapore. 2) The screw will close on offshore gambling companies, in fact it's already starting: http://www.ip-watch.org/2017/03/03/switzerland-next-line-gamble-net-blocking/ Switzerland serious about blocking such comapnies. But they are far, far better than nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 "Dear Mssrs Brown and Bell, may we remind you that the following library books are now 10 years overdue..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GD4ELI Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 "Dear Mssrs Brown and Bell, may we remind you that the following library books are now 10 years overdue..." downloadfile.jpeg Meh, IMO they were totally out of their depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted March 8, 2017 Author Share Posted March 8, 2017 http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=32354&headline=Water%20rate%20hike%20is%20no%20stealth%20tax%2C%20says%20Chief%20Minister§ionIs=news&searchyear=2017 Chief Minister ... ’When you’ve lost a third of your net income you are going to have to make savings somewhere. This again! Take a thousand lines Chief Minister; "An increased charge is NOT a saving." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarne Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 *headdesk* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Wonder how the various Depts are getting on with their directive to find £25M 'savings' in 6 weeks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted March 8, 2017 Author Share Posted March 8, 2017 Wonder how the various Depts are getting on with their directive to find £25M 'savings' in 6 weeks? On past and now current form it will be £25m increased charges. Be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GD4ELI Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Wonder how the various Depts are getting on with their directive to find £25M 'savings' in 6 weeks? Preparing adverts for consultants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gettafa Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Some Isle of Man Civil Servants see devising income streams as the equivalent of a saving. Get more money in, those bulging paypackets and pension pots have to be sourced from somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Expect more 6.5% rises on things. Even Alf Cannan didn't deny it in committee. Pull your pants down and get ready. Actually I think Alf was as confused as everyone else about which matrix should be used to define inflation. He certainly struggled towards the end of his evidence to justify one over the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted March 8, 2017 Author Share Posted March 8, 2017 Expect more 6.5% rises on things. Even Alf Cannan didn't deny it in committee. Pull your pants down and get ready. Actually I think Alf was as confused as everyone else about which matrix should be used to define inflation. He certainly struggled towards the end of his evidence to justify one over the other. Strange how they are always confused in the way that works out most convenient to them though. On an increase in charges the confusion results in a 6.4% inflation increase. On a state pension the confusion results in a 2.5% inflation increase. Just be honest and look where the real waste is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted March 8, 2017 Author Share Posted March 8, 2017 It's patently dishonest to say that this 6.4% increase is in line with inflation. They know it. Everybody knows it. It creates animosity. Why do it? Why try to justify it with such a ludicrous excuse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 It's patently dishonest to say that this 6.4% increase is in line with inflation. They know it. Everybody knows it. It creates animosity. Why do it? Why try to justify it with such a ludicrous excuse? It almost smacks to me of bare faced desperation and greed. Again, somebody needs to query what meaningful cuts and economies MUA have implemented recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 It's patently dishonest to say that this 6.4% increase is in line with inflation. They know it. Everybody knows it. It creates animosity. Why do it? Why try to justify it with such a ludicrous excuse? It's economic semantics as far as Treasury is concerned; all they're interested in is making sure there's enough to sustain an unsustainable MEA debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trumps Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 It's patently dishonest to say that this 6.4% increase is in line with inflation. They know it. Everybody knows it. It creates animosity. Why do it? Why try to justify it with such a ludicrous excuse? I believe the MUA said they were obliged to use RPI until 2019 by resolution of Tynwald, but no one has found authority for this yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.