Buy British and save the economy, urges Sir Alan Suger

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:04 am

As someone who made his fortune selling computers and electronics largely made abroad so they were cheap to make this is really taking the ****.

Buy British and save the economy, urges Sir Alan Suger - mirror.co.uk

Victoria · Post by **Victoria** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:13 am

Define buying British.

When I went to buy a new fridge years ago I asked to buy British and the man in the shop asked me

'do you want a fridge thats made in Britain by British people but in a factory owned by a foreign company , or do you want a fridge made by a British company registered in Britain that makes the stuff abroad using foreign labour'?

Then again if you are lucky maybe you can buy something made in Britain by a British company running a sweat shop on the north circular !

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 7:42 am

Alan Sugar is a wanker.

I am not disputing his achievements but since all 'The Apprentice' nonsense, he believe's he's some kind of guru that our government need to consult along with that other wanker 'Jamie Oliver'.

He has become far too swollen headed and needs to take a step back.

I can't be arssed at the present to go into the politics of it but basically, our country would soon bankrupt it'self if we took his advice.

A large % of our population is on lower incomes or benifit and simply can not survive buying infated British merchandise over cheap Chinese imports. I'd like to see Sugar telling this to a cash strapped family trying to give their kids a decent christmas.

What a Tosser?????:-5:-5

along-for-the-ride · Post by **along-for-the-ride** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 6:00 am

We are advised the same thing here in the States to "Buy American." the key word now is "buy."

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:13 am

along-for-the-ride;1111119 wrote: We are advised the same thing here in the States to "Buy American." the key word now is "buy."

Yes, buy buy buy.

I don't know if your familiar with this man but he's a moron. If it were a respectable politician trlling us this, i may listen but this man has become one of the wealthiest men in Britain, fair enough, but now thinks the British Public needs his advice :-5:-5

Carolly · Post by **Carolly** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:48 am

oscar;1111164 wrote: Yes, buy buy buy.

I don't know if your familiar with this man but he's a moron. If it were a respectable politician trlling us this, i may listen but this man has become one of the wealthiest men in Britain, fair enough, but now thinks the British Public needs his advice :-5:-5There isn't any though and unlike many with his sort of money... he started with FA.....boiling beetroot in the EastEnd to make a few bob when he was younger.Say what you like about this man but he was an East End boy that made good that came up from nowhere and regardless of anything he may say or do now I have respect for people that do that.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:56 am

Carolly;1111172 wrote: There isn't any though and unlike many with his sort of money... he started with FA.....boiling beetroot in the EastEnd to make a few bob when he was younger.Say what you like about this man but he was an East End boy that made good that came up from nowhere and regardless of anything he may say or do now I have respect for people that do that.

As i said in my first post, i don't disagree with his achievements. My father started with FA after the war. He did not then try to tell the country how to live their live's. Sugar has become a self-obssessed ego maniac the same as 'Jamie Oliver'.

In any case, the man is a fool. For the country to survive, we need to export. We simply do not produce enough in our country to satisfy the population should every citizen suddenly start buying British only. It's un-sustainable. We would very soon find ourselves in a poition where goods became scarce and don't forget that if we did have have this scenario, british manufacturers would immediately take advantage and increase the mark up and their profits costing us more dearly for those British goods.

Carolly · Post by **Carolly** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:58 am

oscar;1111176 wrote: As i said in my first post, i don't disagree with his achievements. My father started with FA after the war. He did not then try to tell the country how to live their live's. Sugar has become a self-obssessed ego maniac the same as 'Jamie Oliver'.

In any case, the man is a fool. For the country to survive, we need to export. We simply do not produce enough in our country to satisfy the population should every citizen suddenly start buying British only. It's un-sustainable. We would very soon find ourselves in a poition where goods became scarce and don't forget that if we did have have this scenario, british manufacturers would immediately take advantage and increase the mark up and their profits costing us more dearly for those British goods.
A fool????I think not.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:04 am

Carolly;1111177 wrote: A fool????I think not.

Sorry, i should have used the word..Hypocrite. This wise advice is coming from a man who has made a large proportion of his emire exporting abroad. Now, he's trying to tell us to buy British :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Carolly · Post by **Carolly** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:20 am

oscar;1111183 wrote: Sorry, i should have used the word..Hypocrite. This wise advice is coming from a man who has made a large proportion of his emire exporting abroad. Now, he's trying to tell us to buy British :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:Im not getting involved in that agrument as thats not why I came on here:D.........anyway I use many wholesalers and I have trouble finding anything that is British FGS:-5

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:35 am

Carolly;1111196 wrote: Im not getting involved in that agrument as thats not why I came on here:D.........anyway I use many wholesalers and I have trouble finding anything that is British FGS:-5

That is the whole point of the ridiculous statement from Sugar. As a country we need to export. If we don't, we dry up and become bankrupt. British output is not enough to sustain the entire country even if we took his advice.

Then try telling a hard up mum on benifit that rather than buy that toy at £2.99 from China.. She would be much better off paying £10.99 for the exact same toy from GB. It's never going to happen unless every one of us has enough money in the bank to not care about what we are paying.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:52 am

I quite like Alan Sugar:D is it possible that he didnt take it upon himself to make that statement but was asked his opinion? granted we can agree or disagree with his opinion,,but i suppose he is entitled to it however daft we may think it to be. Anyway i like him, and i like the Apprentice:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl( i always secretly thik oh god even i could do a better job than some of them:rolleyes:):D

Carolly · Post by **Carolly** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 12:14 pm

kazalala;1111370 wrote: I quite like Alan Sugar:D is it possible that he didnt take it upon himself to make that statement but was asked his opinion? granted we can agree or disagree with his opinion,,but i suppose he is entitled to it however daft we may think it to be. Anyway i like him, and i like the Apprentice:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl( i always secretly thik oh god even i could do a better job than some of them:rolleyes:):DI was shocked to hear he was married to a girl called Ann Simmons and she came from the same area I used to live when I was a young child before I moved to the East End .....and my best friend at the time was called.........Ann Simmons.

Carolly · Post by **Carolly** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 12:20 pm

JAB;1111394 wrote: Name-dropper.

;)To true:yh_rotfl and he lives round the corner at Chigwell where a business friend of mine lives.....dont make me any richer though:-5:-5;):D

Carolly · Post by **Carolly** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 12:26 pm

JAB;1111406 wrote: I hear ya. I live 30 mins from the White House - it doesn't get me any closer to a dinner invite either! :wah:Go and mention me name..........he wont have a bleedin clue what yer talking about but may amuse him:wah::D;)

Carolly · Post by **Carolly** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 12:28 pm

Sorry GMC as we are going off track here so I will leave you to your debate;):driving:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:31 pm

gmc;1110396 wrote: As someone who made his fortune selling computers and electronics largely made abroad so they were cheap to make this is really taking the ****.

Buy British and save the economy, urges Sir Alan Suger - mirror.co.uk

Quite right 'auld yin' my bearded Scottish friend.

Most of his industry was made abroad simply because labour is cheaper. Now he's got the nerve to tell us different. What a ****?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:45 pm

JAB;1111390 wrote: Seriously? I'm no economist but I would think that putting all those that are out of work 'to work' manufacturing the goods a country consumes could be a solution. Only buy out of country those items that you yourselves can't produce

We would put all those out of work 'to work' manufacturing the goods a country consumes if we had the assets to put them to work in.

Most if not all British assets were sold under Carolly's Conservative government and Margret Thatcher.

This present government is still investing the billions into the country to right what she did to our country.

Carolly · Post by **Carolly** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:51 pm

oscar;1111905 wrote: We would put all those out of work 'to work' manufacturing the goods a country consumes if we had the assets to put them to work in.

Most if not all British assets were sold under Carolly's Conservative government and Margret Thatcher.

This present government is still investing the billions into the country to right what she did to our country.Excuse me madam I am NOT a Conservative and I have NEVER said I was.For the record all parties are lying cheating toerags and THAT I do say.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 5:16 pm

JAB;1111918 wrote: 'Twould seem that we humans make life more difficult for ourselves then is necessary. In the US, we have Unemployment Compensation for a limited period of time for those that are out of work. Is there something comparable in the UK?

We have a benifit system that allows anyone out of work to compensation and an un-limited time of benifit where their interest on their mortgage is paid and council tax plus living costs. They can draw this indefinately. We also have 'Family Credit' and 'Income Support' which is where some-one having to take a much lower paid job, has their wages topped up to the average wage by the government. There is no limitation period on any benifits. We also have another scheme where if some-one has to return to work after a long period out, the government make a payment of up to £2,000 to buy suitable clothing etc.

All of these extra's were brought in under the Labour government.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 5:17 pm

Carolly;1111910 wrote: Excuse me madam I am NOT a Conservative and I have NEVER said I was.For the record all parties are lying cheating toerags and THAT I do say.

;);););)

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 5:48 pm

JAB;1111934 wrote: Is this all 'free of charge' to the recipient? This has long been a sore point with me here in the US. Temporary aid, yes. But I feel the individual should give back in some form for the benefits they receive,

Yes and No.

Anyone during the time they are in work pays a 'National Insurence Stamp' This depends on the size of your salery so lower paid workers pay far less. The cost of the stamp is taken from your wages weekly or monthly. This pays for a completely free health care system and compensation and un-limited term of benifit should you lose your job.

However, You have people who never have a job in their lives, due to being disabled, an immigrant or any reason. Although they may never have paid a penny into the system, they are entitled to the same benifits and free health care the same as some-one who works. No-one is refused as under British law, it is their right to claim.

We also have 'Child benifit'. This is paid to any parent regardless of their income. Even the highest bracket income's are paid this benifit weekly or monthly for children until they are 16 yrs old. Any child now born is also paid a one off payment of £1,000 to start a savings account.

For those working, the cost of the NHS stamp is minimal to income. Even for the un-employed, no-one is turned away and all get the same treatment regardless of income or stature.

I believe it is the fairest system in the West. We also have 'pension credit' where if some-one has not worked and does not have a private pension, their benifit is increased when they reach 60 years old. They also then recieve a cold weather payment of £250 in the winter to help with fuel bills. Our pensioners woke up this morning to a nice surprise. the government having already paid out the cold weather payment has credited all pensioners accounts with another £25 as it has been exceptionally cold here. :-6

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:32 pm

JAB;1112009 wrote: Well, now. I find this all very interesting as I've never had it explained to me before.

Here in the US, each employee pays a Social Security tax of 6.2% of their earnings. This is intended to not only fund the benefits currently paid out to retirees but to also add to one's own 'bank' of funds when they retire themselves. Each employee also pays 1.45% in Medicare tax which is intended to fund medical care for retirees and others that may eligible under certain provisions. Each company doing business also pays the same proportionate matching amount along with an unemployment tax (the percentage differs by state) intended to provide benefits for those that are obviously unemployed.

All well and good. However....the Soc Sec fund is being drained more then is being contributed because of the generation that is currently retiring in greater and greater numbers.

I don't have a problem so much with the SS fund but I would like to see those that receive unemployment give something back.

That's the first time i have really understood the system in the US. Your social security tax is around the same % as our NHS stamp.

We have the same kind of thing here with workers resenting paying in and people who have never worked in their life getting the same treatment. We also have a large % of elderly which also takes a large proportion of the hospital beds.

I don't look at it in this way but it's true that we have people who see the generous benifit system as a life-style and not a saftey net. Of course that's not fair on workers but i am actually quite proud of a country that strives to eliminate poverty and the class system.

I think the key here in Britain has to be the constant investment into the health system and benifit system by the government. Some would argue that it is the tax payers money that is being invested but all the time there is investment, we create more jobs, there creating more working tax payers. Due to investment into the system we are not bleeding the reserves dry.

I agree that the unemployed could do something to earn their benifit and many do that with voluntary schemes but of course, you will always have the 'scroungers'.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:16 pm

JAB;1112027 wrote: Without a doubt.

One more thing to add - the amt paid out in SS tax is capped at $106,800 in 2009. Once you reach that amt in earnings, you no longer have to pay SS tax for the remainder of the year. One thing that has been suggested to shore up the SS funds is to remove the cap and have folks pay for the entire year. I can see the validity in that argument as those that have more can pay more.

Yes, it's a good system. We also have tax brackets that you pay dependent on your income. It's only sense that the guy who sweeps floors in McCDonalds is not going to pay as much tax or NHS stamp as the city banker or wanker as we call them here. Our tax system seems to be the reverse of yours where we have an amount you can earn depending on yearly income where you don't pay anything until you are over that limit. Some-one working a few hours a week would not even be taxed at all.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:35 pm

JAB;1112035 wrote: That might be true here for Federal or state taxes but everybody pays SS tax up to the aforementioned limit plus everybody pays Medicare no matter what you earn.

That's where we differ. Your medicare is our National Health Service and your stamp or your earnings related rate is based on how much you earn. As i said, lower income workers would pay far less than higher paid workers yet recieve exactly the same care.