UK General Election

As the election campaigns are well underway, and you are supposed to vote for who represents your interests maybe there should be a discussion on whether any of the parties are more or less likely to help our industry/hobby in any way.

Personally i feel that the current government have imposed tighter restrictions on all aspects of our lives. The SVA was restrictive, but, in all honesty probably did a lot to raise the standards within the industry. I'm not at all convinced that the IVA is going to improve standards enough to negate the impact it appears to be having on builders confidence.

I don't like feeling that every aspect of life is over governed by rules and taxes. The current government seem intent on controlling everything to the nth degree, whereas life has to have some flexibility.

Cars are not a vote winner in any way, dirty etc. But kit cars have a very low carbon foot print because of the recycling of components. Does any politician realise this and is prepared to defend the industry if the issue was to come up?
 
That's why guys like Al Wohlstrom and myself took a conservative position with the US health care issue. The US president is using the UK model as his model to reshape the US Government.

I am not a fan of excessive government. I would appear that those micro manager type guys are control freaks, afraid of the electorate. If the electorate was represented, the ruling elite would have no problems with the voting public.
 
It's so frustrating. Trying to run a business in the UK is a nightmare. There is so much unfairness to get through and in a industry like this where our customers are building cars for a hobby as and when they can afford it the red tape is doubly restrictive.

I have a business rates bill to pay at the moment and i spoke with the local council and asked what i am paying for. It's nothing. I am just paying a tax and getting no services etc at all for that money. Its a farm building with no heating, no water, no waste etc. So the council are taxing me for priviledge of running a business in it's area, it's not even means tested. I get a reduction because its a rural business unit, but, its not governed by whether the business makes enough to be able to afford it etc. It does't help you expand and employ people, at a time when unemployment is high.

There is zero support or flexibility in our system. Everything is taxed and regulated to such a high extent. You have to have nothing and throw yourself at the mercy of the state before you can be heard and helped.

The state needs taxes, but, i would like to see some honesty and transparency about how its collected and where it is going. I don't want to be paying business rates for nothing, and petrol taxes to pay for Hospitals. I'd rather pay more income tax and be told its for local services, and the petrol tax pays for the damage cars do to the environment and roads. Even if we pay the same amount overall, isn't it fairer that we are paying directly for what we using and that way if we can't afford something we can control how much we use it within reason.
 
We're all doing our best to throw them out!
Let's hope the next lot honour their promise to bring government nearer to local level - then we can make a noise about the value of replica companies, the contribution their products make to recycling and their low carbon footprints of rarely more than 3,000 miles a year.
I have personal experience of writing to David Cameron; I received a prompt, courteous and constructive reply.
Unfortunately, the man on the Clapham omnibus has little interest beyond the end of his nose, and which doesn't affect his social security payments. If the price of lots of lovely dosh for no work is centralised, top-down government, why should he care?
Tony
 
I decided to break it down to a single issue, and this is it for me:-

If we forget about issues such as taxation, government spending etc as we can all argue until we are blue in the face as to who is the fairest etc, then I will vote for the party that I choose because of one reason and one reson only: -

The current government seeks to control us COMPLETELY. It considers us to be it's willful children who need looking after. EVERYTHING that they legislate is done so for the lowest common denominator. No part of our lives is left alone, and self determination is HEAVILY frowned upon. They seek to dominate our every move, and if there is a gap in legislation that allows us to be free in any way, then new legislation is created.

This is the Nanny State at it's worst, grown from thirteen years in government, it has become a monster, a self fulfilling prophecy.

The guys I will be voting for want none of this (or at least a lot less of it).
I want to be free to fuck up on my own every now and then. So do our younger generations. Bollocks to "nobody ever loses at Sports Day at school." People need to lose occasionally. It gives perspective, so that when we DO win, it actually means something.

Oh, and the Liberal Democrats can sod off too :)

Just my humble opinion.

Graham.
 
This is brilliant, check this out (apologies if it's old, I just received it via email) :-

> Here's another take on the tax situation:
>
> Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten
> comes
>
> to £100..
>
> If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like
>
>
> this...
>
> The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
>
> The fifth would pay £1.
>
> The sixth would pay £3.
>
> The seventh would pay £7..
>
> The eighth would pay £12.
>
> The ninth would pay £18.
>
> The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.
>
> So, that's what they decided to do..
>
> The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the
>
> arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.
>
> "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the
> cost
>
> of your daily beer by £20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.
>
> The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.
>
> So the first four men were unaffected.
>
> They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The
> paying
>
> customers?
>
> How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair
>
> share?
>
> They realised that £20 divided by six is £3.33. But if they subtracted that
>
> from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end
> up
>
> being paid to drink his beer.
>
> So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill
> by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax
> system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he
> suggested that each should now pay.
>
> And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
>
> The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33% saving).
>
> The seventh now paid £5 instead of £7 (28% saving).
>
> The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% saving).
>
> The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% saving).
>
> The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% saving).
>
> Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to
>
> drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their
>
> savings.
>
> "I only got a pound out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man.
>
> He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got £10!"
>
> "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a pound too.
> It's
>
> unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
>
> "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I
> got
>
> only £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
>
> "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get
> anything
>
> at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
>
> The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
>
> The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down
>
>
> and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they
>
>
> discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of
>
>
> them for even half of the bill!
>
> And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our
> tax
>
> system works.
>
> The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most
> benefit from a tax reduction.
>
> Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show
> up
>
> anymore.
>
> In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is
> somewhat
>
> friendlier.
>
> David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
>
> Professor of Economics.
>
> For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
>
> For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

 

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Supporter
Gonorrhea Lectim

The Center for Disease Control has issued a warning about a new virulent
Strain of this old disease.

The disease is called Gonorrhea Lectim. It's pronounced "Gonna re-elect 'im."

The disease is contracted through dangerous and high risk behavior
Involving putting your cranium up your rectum.

Many victims contracted it in 2008 ..... But now most people after having
Been infected for the past 1-2 years are starting to realize how
Destructive this sickness is. It's sad because it is so easily cured with
A new procedure just coming on the market called Vo-tem-out!

You take the first dose/step in 2010and the second dosage in 2012 and
Simply don't engage in such behavior again, otherwise it could become
Permanent and eventually wipe out all life as we know it.

P.S. Dates may not be correct for the U.K. election but the sentiment is.
 
Top