I think this is an excellent policy, and a long time coming. This is done overseas with good effect. While I don’t think it’s a magic bullet, it is definitely a step in the right direction.

  • RangelusOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’ve been to many countries where this policy exists, and there has never been an issue that I’ve seen. But perhaps your experiences trump mine, so let’s try something else.

    If there are countries where this policy causes no problems, and also ones where there are issues, perhaps the difference comes down to implementation? If so, why are you so quick to dismiss this policy as ‘too difficult’ and ‘fraught with problems’ when it does not need to be either of these things? Could it be that you just love to hate on anything Labour does? Or perhaps it is, as I said before, that you (like so many here) will dismiss any change if it does not appear a perfect solution.

    • Ilovethebomb
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Where are these countries where it has been implemented with no issues?

        • Ilovethebomb
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          You mean apart from the multiple court cases over GST classifications I linked you to in another thread?

          • RangelusOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            None of which were related to food. No-one is arguing that we want to completely copy the tax code of other countries, or that we want to use implementations that have proven difficult. All they want to do is zero-rate produce. Just that, nothing else. The only example you can find is the one from the UK. I know of one other case in Australia btw. But just because it has happened in a couple of other countries doesn’t mean it needs to here. Giving up on positive change because of the slight risk of potential litigation down the road is stupid.

            • Ilovethebomb
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              You do understand that this is just one example of the side effects of this, and even in a best case scenario, this will result in more admin costs.

              You do understand that, right?

              • RangelusOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Of course I do. I just disagree with the conclusion to draw from this.

                Thank you for implying in stupid because I disagree with you though.

                • Ilovethebomb
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Disagreeing with me is fine, people do it all the time.

                  Being unable to comprehend the very point I’m making, on the other hand…

                  • RangelusOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    I comprehend it just fine. I just think you’re wrong.