Thatcher Dies

  • 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
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Jimmy Squarefoot said:
This is the problem I have. My issue isn't necessarily the system itself - it's the attitudes of certain individuals who abuse the system.

The benefit scroungers and big companies who avoid taxes - they do it because they can get away with it.

However, the leaders of these banks and other big companies employ a lot of people in this country. Therefore, the money goes back into the economy. They are contributing to society in some way. Unfortunately, if we choose to chase up these tax liabilities, the companies will simply move out of the UK thus increasing unemployment and less disposable income to people to spend and pump back into the company.

How are these illegal immigrants, and benefit scroungers helping society? Simply put - they're not so I rather tackle them first.

Not ideal, and I don't agree with it at all as I feel everyone should be paying taxes.
Click to expand...

And that, Jimmy, is human nature sadly. Any 'system' that is adopted should be as fair as possible for the vast majority of the population. Whatever the system is, be it taxation or benefits, there will always be people that will abuse it.
 
Red Hadron Collider said:
You weren't going of-topic as her shadow still looms large over current politics <ok>
Click to expand...

Fair enough <ok>



astroturfnaut said:
For every poor person who abuses the benefit system so they can afford to eat the public lose about £10 a week.

For every rich person who abuses the tax system so they can afford another luxury (or now more commonly, just hoarding the money in a bank account) the public loses about £100 a week.

I have no problem with people wanting to tighten up the benefits system, but how about first of all we address that fact that multi-billion pound companies like Amazon and Starbucks aren't paying any tax at all?
Click to expand...

I agree that there are bigger problems than people taking advantage of benefits too, just highlighting that that is what people see and get pissed off about <ok>
 
astroturfnaut said:
Not true. You can give money small local companies who pay taxes and put their money in the UK economy, but multi-national companies such as Amazon pay zero tax and move all their money to foreign tax havens while employing the minimum number of UK workers possible due to their economy of scale.

"Illegal immigrants" work doing the jobs that many UK people are unwilling to do.

Even if you taxed every single "scrounger" and "immigrant" 100% you would recoup 1000 times less money than by just making companies pay the tax they would be legally required to do so if not for loopholes which the government does nothing about.
Click to expand...

Off topic : with Amazon it's due to where the distribution comes from, this is how they have always got around paying VAT anyway. However more recent changes are trying to put a stop to this. As far as I'm aware the government are trying to stop such tax havens but it can't happen over night.

I'm not defending them at all though as I hate the Torries.
 
Gerrez said:
It is going off topic because the thread is about Thatcher, not current politics <ok>

I often get into arguments regarding the people I have highlighted. People moan about them and have a dig at them because they see these individuals as the problem within society. I don't blame these people though, they are making best use of a ****ed up system. As long as they don't rub it in my face (happened a couple of times and neither of them have said a word about it to me again <laugh>) then good look to them.

For the record, when I finished school, I couldn't get work and was on benefits for two years without having contributed to the system. There are two ways of looking at this: I have since more than paid it back or that my parents paid enough in over the years to cover the claims I made.

As I said above though, how do you manage between the people that need support and the people taking the piss?
Click to expand...

Well the first way is to provide enough "decent" jobs so that everyone has access to work and there's no easy excuses for the very few feckless ****ers out there. Easier said than done granted but certainly a more worthy goal than just having an economy based in Londons financial district.

Like I said the big issue here isn't a few feckless layabouts it's the system that allows a handful of men to take billions out of the economy unchecked. What exactly are we doing about them?

...And any talk of politics/economics today is very on topic for a thread about Thatcher <ok>
 
In the many many arguments over football players being paid too much, I always used to add the argument that they are also contributing a lot to the system. However, I suspect they all have creative accountants and, in reality, only pay a small proportion of what they should.
 
Gerrez said:
In the many many arguments over football players being paid too much, I always used to add the argument that they are also contributing a lot to the system. However, I suspect they all have creative accountants and, in reality, only pay a small proportion of what they should.
Click to expand...

Almost certainly.
 
Just heard that MPs can claim up to £3,750 in travel costs to pay tribute to Margaret Thatcher in parliament.....WTF??
 
Gerrez said:
In the many many arguments over football players being paid too much, I always used to add the argument that they are also contributing a lot to the system. However, I suspect they all have creative accountants and, in reality, only pay a small proportion of what they should.
Click to expand...

That's not just footballers (we do act for some footballers ) but anyone with money. If the loopholes and schemes are avaialbe then we are duty bound to save our clients money / tax whenever possible.
 
Gerrez said:
Just heard that MPs can claim up to £3,750 in travel costs to pay tribute to Margaret Thatcher in parliament.....WTF??
Click to expand...

A ****ing joke.

We pay for some snivelling Tory to fly back (Business class of course )early off his Easter jollies, so that he can engage in the hastily arranged Thatcher fawning competition in Parliament. You couldn't make it up.

Sychophantic creeps the lot of 'em.
 
I see they are considering a statue of the old **** in Trafalgar Square <doh> Guess it'll give me somewhere to take a leak next time we're in London :)

I had to laugh when some blurt on the news last night was talking about the "government" paying for her funeral. Had visions of Cameron organising a whip round <laugh> I think Murdoch should foot the bill for it personally <ok>
 
I'm more concerned with this weekend. I reckon a minutes silence will try to be enforced which obviously a lot of people will object to. However, there will also be respect paid to remember Hillsborough this weekend and I see the powers that be trying to merge the two. This would obviously not be acceptable and I'd proposed chanting "Justice for the 96" rather than participating in a silence and, if they chose to go this route, a minute applause.
 
Gerrez said:
I'm more concerned with this weekend. I reckon a minutes silence will try to be enforced which obviously a lot of people will object to. However, there will also be respect paid to remember Hillsborough this weekend and I see the powers that be trying to merge the two. This would obviously not be acceptable and I'd proposed chanting "Justice for the 96" rather than participating in a silence and, if they chose to go this route, a minute applause.
Click to expand...

Discussed this briefly last night in the other Thatch thread. I think a JFT96 chant would be a good idea- a silence claiming to be for them and Thatcher combined would be a huge insult.
 
Gerrez said:
I'm more concerned with this weekend. I reckon a minutes silence will try to be enforced which obviously a lot of people will object to. However, there will also be respect paid to remember Hillsborough this weekend and I see the powers that be trying to merge the two. This would obviously not be acceptable and I'd proposed chanting "Justice for the 96" rather than participating in a silence and, if they chose to go this route, a minute applause.
Click to expand...

I've commented on this somewhere in relation to the Reading game. If they run them concurrently, there will be trouble at a number of grounds. By trouble, I mean the 96 won't get the respect they deserve via the minute's silence as the crowd will kick off about Thatcher. Interfering from beyond the grave <doh>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back