Scotch Independence - the countdown

  • 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!

Should Scotland be an Independent Country?

  • Yes

  • No

Results are only viewable after voting.
VenomPD said:
What does any of that really have to do with dodging huge amounts of corporation tax though? Neither Starbucks or Google are passing any kind of saving onto consumers.
Click to expand...

People love complaining - Thomas Pikety wrote a big book complaining about the flaws in Capitalism - the whole of the Leftist world are still creaming themselves over it. The problem is he never actually gave any solutions to the problems he was highlighting (bar an unachievable global wealth tax to stop rich people/companies moving country). So how would you fix Corporation Tax dodgers ya disingenuous fanny?
 
MalteseMick said:
People love complaining - Thomas Pikety wrote a big book complaining about the flaws in Capitalism - the whole of the Leftist world are still creaming themselves over it. The problem is he never actually gave any solutions to the problems he was highlighting (bar an unachievable global wealth tax to stop rich people/companies moving country). So how would you fix Corporation Tax dodgers ya disingenuous fanny?
Click to expand...

I didn't ask what Thomas Pikety wrote Mick. I asked why Google & Starbucks dodging corporation tax was acceptable.
 
VenomPD said:
I didn't ask what Thomas Pikety wrote Mick. I asked why Google & Starbucks dodging corporation tax was acceptable.
Click to expand...

It's not, I suppose you could say that Starbucks employ 10's of thousand of UK citizens and will pay a **** load of tax and NI on their behalf. Google... they've provided us with all the porn we could ask for.

I guess the way to punish these companies is to not use their services.
 
CITIZEN SNIPS said:
It's not, I suppose you could say that Starbucks employ 10's of thousand of UK citizens and will pay a **** load of tax and NI on their behalf. Google... they've provided us with all the porn we could ask for.

I guess the way to punish these companies is to not use their services.
Click to expand...

I was just about to say some **** would come up with that ****e. Thought it would be Mick to be honest.
 
MalteseMick said:
I didn't say they were - why is AIDS in Africa acceptable?
Click to expand...

That's it quote some obscure author and speak in non-sequiturs.

You stated that these big corporations as "passing value onto customers", which I disproved by citing Google & Starbucks. Which you then followed up by talking about about "profit margins", nothing to do with either Google or Starbucks.

You might have read a lot, but you know **** all about reasoned debate and critical analysis of problem.
 
CITIZEN SNIPS said:
It's not, I suppose you could say that Starbucks employ 10's of thousand of UK citizens and will pay a **** load of tax and NI on their behalf. Google... they've provided us with all the porn we could ask for.

I guess the way to punish these companies is to not use their services.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if they employ 10k or 10 people.

You employ people and aren't afforded the same tax luxuries as these companies. Companies whose profits ultimately end up in a giant pool of corporate money which never sees the light of day in any positive way.

Capitalism doesn't need to be unfair, greedy bastards make it unfair.
 
CITIZEN SNIPS said:
It's not s**te, it's fact.

Tell us again how you're going to harmonise pay amongst individuals and get Starbucks and Google to pay CT in Salmond's Socialist Scotland.

In your own time, Julian. :emoticon-0138-think
Click to expand...

Oh, it may be factually correct but it's still a s**te state of affairs and 'we employ X number of staff' is no excuse for avoiding paying your fair share.

It's the UK Government that's created the situation whereby these companies avoid paying CT. Maybe you should ask them.
 
Whose all read Small is Beautiful by EF Schumacher?

I have <ok>

What I didn't realise until recently was that he was John Maynard Keynes protege right up until his intermediate technologies stuff pished on Keynes' cornflakes.

Anyway, if you haven't read it, do so.

I read it when I was about 20 and I'm just re-reading it just now.

Hippy economics, man <ok>
 
VenomPD said:
It doesn't matter if they employ 10k or 10 people.

You employ people and aren't afforded the same tax luxuries as these companies. Companies whose profits ultimately end up in a giant pool of corporate money which never sees the light of day in any positive way.

Capitalism doesn't need to be unfair, greedy bastards make it unfair.
Click to expand...

I agree, hence why I alluded to in post #5505

Ultimately, they should abolish CT as it's being abused by the big boys and replace it with a tax on the poorest people and vulnerable.
 
VenomPD said:
That's it quote some obscure author and speak in non-sequiturs.

You stated that these big corporations as "passing value onto customers", which I disproved by citing Google & Starbucks. Which you then followed up by talking about about "profit margins", nothing to do with either Google or Starbucks.

You might have read a lot, but you know **** all about reasoned debate and critical analysis of problem.
Click to expand...

I brought Piketty into it because everybody has been going on about him for months despite the fact he has no solutions to the problems he cites - my flaw is I would have assumed you'd know who he was and had an idea of the arguments (saving me having to repeat them) https://www.google.com/webhp?source...=UTF-8#q=site:guardian.co.uk piketty&safe=off

I addressed Google's profit margins - they are extortionate, they have a virtual monopoly and they are aggressively defending it. They are not a normal business though, they grabbed a huge amount of market share in a new industry which needs rectified (either through competition or anti-trust if they keep up their tricks). It's not easy to fix their tax dodging, which is why I challenged you to give a solution - it's not easy because they employ quite a lot of people in Ireland and outside of Piketty's suggestion of global wealth taxes it is very difficult to pin them down to take more tax when they can so easily move their operations.

I ignored Starbucks for the sake of keeping it short - I don't shop in Starbucks, I'm not sure I particularly care if they go bust tomorrow - but I've advocated getting rid of Corporation Tax before and upping minimum wage to screw the likes of Starbucks in pushing their profits into a local economy, without killing all the jobs http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/257043-38-Degrees?p=6320180&viewfull=1#post6320180 - it may not be a great solution, but I'm open to alternatives. (It won't work on Google because they already pay very high wages).
 
Royal Mail launches prime minister stamp set featuring Margaret Thatcher

You must log in or register to see images


Finally, a chance for all you Tories to lick the arse end of Maggie Thatcher (I know, they're self adhesive)
 
They're self-adhesive you absolutely sausage jockey.

Get back to making Fatty Salmonds tea you baldy ginger **** <doh>

I know you know they're self adhesive
 
Tina's Prolapsed Anus said:
Royal Mail launches prime minister stamp set featuring Margaret Thatcher

You must log in or register to see images


Finally, a chance for all you Tories to lick the arse end of Maggie Thatcher (I know, they're self adhesive)
Click to expand...

I think you will find that is incorrect.

The arse is not located behind the face and besides it is a single sided image.

Another Tarquin fail train.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back