If you were creating a government...

[jambutty]

I will donate 10% of my weekly income to a charity if you will do the same.

Maybe Xmas has come early for you Cyfr and you’ve been sampling the falling down water and you cannot comprehend that ‘weekly income’ means income coming in each week. The heating allowance is an annual allowance.

However, yes, I will include the £200 heating allowance – that is £3.85 per week providing that the challenged will also include any annual bonuses that they might receive.

A few years ago I wrote to Gordon Brown making the same challenge/offer. The response was conspicuous by its absence. In fact over the years I have written to numerous celebrities making the same challenge but not one even had the decency to respond.

The point is that some people are happy to receive wage increases in percentages but when it comes to paying out in a percentage of their income the shutters come down and they don’t want to know.

[bullseyebarb]

Originally Posted by Cyfr

Currently every single MP has a choice. The whips help influence a vote, but an MP is not forced to follow what they say.

I think we will have to disagree on the matter of stronger parliament as I don't believe a system of gridlock where a lot of legislation isn't passed helps stabilise a government or keep it together.

The less legislation the better, since it invariably infringes upon freedom and the rights of the people. Personally, I love gridlock. Better no law than a bad one. The best days are those when Congress is on recess.

[bullseyebarb]

Originally Posted by cashman

they have "created a government" in iraq,that is us and the yanks, is it now a better place?

Iraqis wrote their own Constitution and the people voted for it. It will undoubtedly be amended in the years to come, as such documents generally are. This is an experiment in democratic governance for them - a starting point, not the finished product. If they can only hang in there, yes, Iraq will be a much better place one of these days.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by bullseyebarb

The less legislation the better, since it invariably infringes upon freedom and the rights of the people. Personally, I love gridlock. Better no law than a bad one. The best days are those when Congress is on recess.

Couldn’t agree more!

It seems like Neil – the quiet and shy member and Cyfr who also disagrees with my argument about percentages have opted out of accepting my challenge.

I don’t suppose it would have anything to do with the fact that they would pay more cash than me. Nah! They’ve just forgotten about the challenge, being Xmas and all and intend to take it up in the New Year.

Methinks that I will wait a long while for an acceptance from either.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by jambutty

Maybe Xmas has come early for you Cyfr and you’ve been sampling the falling down water and you cannot comprehend that ‘weekly income’ means income coming in each week. The heating allowance is an annual allowance.

However, yes, I will include the £200 heating allowance – that is £3.85 per week providing that the challenged will also include any annual bonuses that they might receive.

A few years ago I wrote to Gordon Brown making the same challenge/offer. The response was conspicuous by its absence. In fact over the years I have written to numerous celebrities making the same challenge but not one even had the decency to respond.

The point is that some people are happy to receive wage increases in percentages but when it comes to paying out in a percentage of their income the shutters come down and they don’t want to know.

Perhaps you should start at a standard figure and then raise it based upon a percentage year on year. Which would be more accurate as to what we're debating about. Then the person with the larger income will be donateing more and more to chairty as their wage permits, but from a percentage of the original amount, not based upon salary.

Actualy im not entirely sure what im trying to say. I think im trying to say 'lets donate X amount to charity then increase it by a percent in terms of our income.

Anyhow, under your current idea I would be paying charity £3 a week Jambutty. Which is based upon me getting EMA, which I don't get very often because I neglect to attend 'Sitting in the library'.

[jambutty]

Unless I have it wrong Cyfr that EMA that you get is a weekly allowance and not an earned income. But if we were to count it then yes you would only have to pay £3. However I wasn’t suggesting a regular weekly donation just a one off.

[andrewb]

Well no its not earned unless you count getting an education as working (haha) but I was just taking 'income' as the figure to work it out from.

I'd be happy to donate it to charity.