Off Topic Politics Thread
- Thread starter ChilcoSaint
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
She’ll be exiled to the back benches for 6 months max and then brought back into government.
Funny (not ha, ha) how she decribes lying, then lying again.
She will be quite happy about being allowed to 'resign' and being outside this creaking administration's decline.
I muttered some time ago about how quickly we're using up politicians now. It used to be your peak as a politician was in your 50s and 60s, achieving high office after decades in junior roles, no more it seems*. While I hold most politicians on all sides in poor regard the current leaders in waiting, like Patel, are truly the most self-serving, deceitful and smug bunch ever.
*Corbyn aside !!!
The hypocrisy evident in the response to this tax "story" is incredible. Rare I resort to citing scripture, but let the one without sin and all that.
So, Mr J Public, you have never:
Paid a tradesperson in cash to avoid paying tax;
Accepted money for a favour but not declared it?
I was in a restaurant recently and asked, as I always do, whether if I put a tip on my credit card it would go to the staff. The waitress said they "preferred cash" as they paid tax on tips on credit cards. I have yet to meet a tradesperson who won't give me a "cash price".
The differences are that the likes of Lewis Hamilton are saving tax legally (if morally questionably) and, of course, the eye-watering sums of money involved. It could be argued that the tax evasion I am describing above is a function of a culture where we can all say "everyone does it" but this is a morally bankrupt position.
The whole tax system needs overall. VAT is a dreadful regressive imposition, for example. There would still be loopholes, but the current system is far too complex
I totally agree but that is the thought process of people. They jump on their high horses about these things yet when it comes to reality and they get bitten it is "you should be chasing real criminals."
Close the loopholes and then take everybody on big or small. I bet all those smalls will equal the large ones when added together. And switch all the speed cameras back on. You only get caught by them if you break the speed limit. Any complaints are invalid
The best and pretty much only way to take on the big is through public outrage, because that's one of the few tools we currently have that spreads across borders like multinationals can do and hurt them at multiple sources.
It's not hypocrisy at all its just balance. You can't take on both sides equally if one side isn't fighting.
Getting unhappy at people getting unhappy seems far more dubious to me.
It's not hypocrisy at all its just balance. You can't take on both sides equally if one side isn't fighting.
Getting unhappy at people getting unhappy seems far more dubious to me.
I totally agree but that is the thought process of people. They jump on their high horses about these things yet when it comes to reality and they get bitten it is "you should be chasing real criminals."
Close the loopholes and then take everybody on big or small. I bet all those smalls will equal the large ones when added together. And switch all the speed cameras back on. You only get caught by them if you break the speed limit. Any complaints are invalid
What I only discovered recently was that speed cameras are switched off if there are no serious accidents recorded near the camera in a certain period of time. I can see the logic, but it does seem odd. Annoying though they are, average speed cameras on motorways seem a good idea. We can all come up with reasons for an occasional burst of speed but averaging 80+ means going too damned fast overall.
As I understand the "loopholes" they are very difficult to close, so we need to change the way we pay tax. My pet hate is VAT which really hits the poor. Tax on wealth is the only fair system
Yep. It's pretty normal. Politicians raise money for themselves and their charitable organizations. Groups who would like to be associated with those politicians are would like to try to influence them in any way they can will pay top dollar. It just so happens that Bill Clinton is pretty greedy, so he charges >$500k to speak. People don't normally pay $1,000 for dinner, either. I suppose every fundraiser is part of the illumaniti conspiracy?
You know what isn't normal? Paying a husband's non-charitable foundation to influence the wife into not voting on something that any of 9 people could stop via a measly sum of $500k in order to assure world domination. Wouldn't you pay like $50m to actually get a "yes" vote?
That uranium stuff makes no sense. It never did. Bill Clinton is greedy and is not shy about taking people's money. That's not cool. It's also far from a conspiracy.
You poor soul. However things could be worse, it could be Redwood or that other lunatic, Dennis Skinner.
Think back to May 1 1997, the sun was shining, the grass was very green, the birds were singing and the nation, the UK nation was united for once in these post war years as we heralded New Labour. Don't you miss those wonderful days? The days when the UK had a strong Government and a positive leader.
To think 25 days later I ended up becoming an item with Mrs No7. Yep wonderful days for the next 3 weeks 4 days
Lost me there for a minute. I'm not claiming that wealth tax is easy. No tax is. But VAT is a dreadful tax. Funny, we used to have a "luxury tax" which was an interesting idea. Anything you didn't "need" was a luxury. Sadly women's sanitary products were declared a luxury which, amazingly, rather pissed off the feminists.
One of the issues with VAT is that the last thing we need is to put any barrier in the way of people buying goods and services. That's the capitalist argument against it. The socialist argument is that it is regressive.
Wealth tax would apply to anyone's entire holdings - so property would get thrown in with the cash, shares, jet planes etc. As an owner of two houses and several cars I would pay more than someone living in a rented bedsit and riding a bike even assuming our cash and shares were about the same (which I doubt unless this someone chooses to live in a rented bedsit and ride a bike). Simple Marxism, mate. All property is theft! It would take some working out, I get that. But isn't that why the civil service employ very clever people?
The same people that charge half a million for a speech will be on the TV the next day moaning that a drug company is charging too much for their drug. Is it not the same premise? If a drug company decides to charge so much for their drug and people will pay it?
But that would be double taxation. Most normal folks pay tax on their earnings and thus the money they buy a house with has already been taxed and thus their property has already been taxed.
You have to get people to pay tax on their income, not try and recoup it from what they buy after they avoided income tax. Wealth tax would hit the relatively poor. Grandma in her house, bought and paid for with money that was already taxed would now be hit with a hefty tax bill.
They should get rid of pension relief and charge income tax on the lot then pension paid. No tax on pension when it pays out. There needs to be a way to simplify things so that any money you earn is taxable (over the low pay thresholds and staged precentage increases) so that nothing is able to escape. Clever folks may be able to make out they are not being paid but there has to be a way to sort this out.
The system has got to be a worldwide pay where you earn with no backhanded deals. I remember years ago tennis players and golfers hinting they might boycott Wimbledon and the Open because UK tax was too high. Did we used to have a system which did precisely what I state? Namely that if you earn £100k in the UK you have to pay tax on that £100k?
And then they should get rid of the qualifier of residency. If you earn money in the UK but make sure you are only here a day short of 6 months you shouldn't get a refund unless you are still under the tax bands. So US stars that perform a few gigs in the UK before moving on to France etc must pay tax to the UK on what they earn from those few gigs in the UK.
The problem is not the tax system itself but all the little ways of gaining relief from tax.
Not then, not until the Iraq war. That was one of two of his big mistakes. The other was not to take the UK into the euro. I was convinced then, and if we could get the exchange rate to around 1.18, we should still join the euro.
He did have some very able ministers such as Robin Cook, Gordon Brown, Chris Smith, Alan Milburn, Peter Mandelson, Tony Banks, Yvette Cooper, Harriet Harman, David Blunkett. Compare the talent in that cabinet with the miserable lot we have now.
He was a regular at the restaurant I worked in in London. Caviar followed by fish and chips with Champagne. Champagne socialist was invented for him. He seemed like a nice guy though, his wife on the other hand not so nice