Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
drchaos wrote:Gladiator wrote:drchaos wrote:dude2014 wrote:Their plan - plain and simple: Pauperise all of us.
When oil goes up the amount Petrotrin pays for same will go up. So what the firetruck you think we will pay for any type of fuel? It will cost more and when oil goes down we will still be paying the old price or the increased price. Who pocket do you think that will go in?
Come on think before you post, but then again is de old talk forum - No sense, cents or good scent will prevail herein ............
Pause for a second ... The current regime has talked about removal of subsidies and moving fuel prices towards its market price. To me that means when the Oil price is high then fuel prices are high and when oil prices are low then fuel prices are low.
What you are saying is they are looking at price fixing. If they do price fix next year 2018 when the oil price is still low it would mean when the price goes up we will still be paying low prices.
Also they are not "pauperising" us. They are weaning us off subsidies which will make us more competitive on a global scale.
Never see someone so eager to pay more for something, i bet you cant wait to pay your property tax too.... sad day in a country when the politicians convince their supporters that they making things better by taking more and more from them.
Increasing fuel prices to what we supposed to be paying is different from "taking more and more".
I think we should be paying property tax but not in its current form. The valuation on rental is subjective and leaves the door open to corruption. The money should also not go to a consolidated government fund but instead there should be a frame work for the money to be spent in the local area.
You know you don't have to be in total opposition to everything the opposing party does, you can see the good and bad in things.
desifemlove wrote:http://oilprice.com/commodity-price-charts?1&page=chart&sym=CB*1
good news for dr. rowley.
drchaos wrote:matr1x wrote:Funny, all the talk about weaning population off subsidies, all the while the riches pay very little, and all sorts of underground deals being made.
Isn't this what they do? Convince you they are saving you while slitting your throat
Well this is not technically true. The rich in this country do actually pay quite alot.
Consumption by the rich is higher and therefore the state benefits way more from the rich rather than the poor.
Earnings by the rich is also higher and therefore their income tax is higher (some do cheat just like some people in the lower classes but this is not an excuse to demonize the rich).
When the water, electricity and gas subsidies are completely removed this will rake in way more money from the rich vs the poor.
As these are items consumed in much higher quantities by the rich vs the lower classes.
It has been a known fact quite a while now that it is actually the rich that benefit more from the fuel subsidies than the poorer classes do.
drchaos wrote:Sell Petrotin and CAL and the savings every year would probably more than make up for the money they hope to gain from this property tax.
Gladiator wrote:drchaos wrote:Sell Petrotin and CAL and the savings every year would probably more than make up for the money they hope to gain from this property tax.
Finally you talking some sense...
drchaos wrote:Gladiator wrote:drchaos wrote:Sell Petrotin and CAL and the savings every year would probably more than make up for the money they hope to gain from this property tax.
Finally you talking some sense...
Like you did'nt read anything I say before
matr1x wrote:How do tobagonians feel about sandals?
The_Honourable wrote:Camille: Sandals plan still on
“This initiative will also create more jobs than a normal hotel resort, since it focuses on medical tourism as well as retirees. There’ll be jobs for doctors, nurses, specialist medical practitioners. Also, T&T has an ageing population —this caters to that need.
16 cycles wrote:The_Honourable wrote:Camille: Sandals plan still on
“This initiative will also create more jobs than a normal hotel resort, since it focuses on medical tourism as well as retirees. There’ll be jobs for doctors, nurses, specialist medical practitioners. Also, T&T has an ageing population —this caters to that need.
thought there was a shortage that's preventing the opening of the couva hospital??
rspann wrote:Satan correcting sin. The company is CAL- ok?
eliteauto wrote:16 cycles wrote:The_Honourable wrote:Camille: Sandals plan still on
“This initiative will also create more jobs than a normal hotel resort, since it focuses on medical tourism as well as retirees. There’ll be jobs for doctors, nurses, specialist medical practitioners. Also, T&T has an ageing population —this caters to that need.
thought there was a shortage that's preventing the opening of the couva hospital??
Private enterprise isn't State, isn't that why the Gov't is exploring the possibility of a Private-Public-Partnership for the Couva Hospital?
IMO the CLF option would redound to greater benefit of Tobago and Tobagonians that the Sandals project.
sMASH wrote:NO FRACKIN SMELTER!!!!!!!!!!!
RedVEVO wrote:These Private-Public Partnerships do not work - in Trinidad
There is always inference by the Gov't.
If Couva Hospital is private . Children will benefit .
Just let Gov't pay the insurance bill for the free services .
Monkey Man wrote:i think a litter of puppies will run the country better yes....
88sins wrote:RedVEVO wrote:These Private-Public Partnerships do not work - in Trinidad
There is always inference by the Gov't.
If Couva Hospital is private . Children will benefit .
Just let Gov't pay the insurance bill for the free services .
so who you getting to build a new private hospital in Couva? or you want the state to rent the hospital to a private companies & citizens pay an arm & a leg & a liver through the nose for medical care?I wonder if you got any idea about the cost of drugs or theater time in a private hospital, or even the cost of a semi private room/day. If that ever happens, the only ppl that'll benefit would be the doctors/shareholders that leased the hospital & politicians. nobody else.
& if the state pays for the insurance for the services, you feel that go be any better? Keep in mind, that insurance companies HATE to pay out on claims, & look for all sorts of means to justify what they don't feel to pay. So when they refuse to settle a claim, or pay short, it's the taxpayer patient who's gonna be liable for the balance, the same taxpayer patient whose tax dollars went into building that hospital he cant afford to go to, who's being conned by the insurance he's paying for via taxes.
Still feel its a good idea?
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 224 guests