Ha! Gabbard says she can't say much because there's a lawsuit, which I guess will last precisely long enough for this to have blown over and for people to have forgotten.
Nope.. I reckon The Atlantic will drip feed more tomorrow. The lies from Trump will not work. I thought The Atlantic was probably overatating the case yesterday. Today is far more serious.
Sadly I really don’t think it is. They have too big a majority and they will just sweep under the carpet. Most MAGA idiots will think it’s nothing. I know the government comes across as idiotic and crass but I think there’s something very insidious happening in the background. They are not all idiots
One thing for certain. This is far more interesting and compelling than any discussion about the Saints
The best hope for the world, is that they actually are. And the evidence so far points toward idiots everywhere. Reminds me of a boss I had years ago, who used to throw his hands up in despair and say "I'm surroundeed by c**ts!"
Right now, Ratcliffe is explaining how foreign aid is used by China and Russia to manipulate and control populations. This is the nation that cut all foreign aid.
Nail on head. At first glance I agreed with Os post. At first glance. Once you think about it Archer's is fairer. Earning £150k is a good income and yes, heavily taxed. I agree to tax no more on income, but on the wealth that contributes nothing like multiple homes. There is an argument that the rich will leave, but I think that is more on income tax than other taxes.
Just to repeat once again, the rich and poor pay the exact same tax on the exact same income. The more you earn, the more the extra money you earn is taxed. There is no benefit to working hard and being poor.
Gary Stevenson’s main point on taxing assets is that the more things, the more houses, the more land the super-rich own, the less there is to go round. The assets of the nation are eventually priced out of the range of ordinary people. So taxing assets directly helps ordinary people because it discourages the hoarding of assets and eventually will lower property prices.
Not so long ago I posted a video by Trevor Noah explaining how shares aren’t taxed until they are sold as, until they are sold, they aren’t actually money. Yet the shares can be counted as money when used as collateral to borrow money to buy businesses, just as Musk did when he bought Twitter on the strength of his Tesla shares. Surely there must be an argument for shares being taxed when they can be used in this manner, or am I just being economically naive? With regards to the Uk economy I would happily support a 2% wealth tax on anything above £10 million and I would include the value of shares when determining wealth.
Republicans really trying to whitewash this now. Would knowing your country is going to be bombed in 2 hours affect your ability to prepare for that attack? Nahhhhhhh.
And in a funny sort of way boosts the economy as the richer will have more income to spend on services or items and on the economy rather than having to spend a wedge on another house. I know what i mean, but reading it back i havent explained it
It’s worth bearing in mind that the Spring Statement is essentially a spending review. November’s Budget is when tax raises will next be under consideration.
I find it shocking that most of the public would like to see some kind of taxation increase aimed at the wealthy but that Labour seem committed to more austerity politics.
Well where are the taxes? As someone said on Question Time last week, the country needs something radical and we are getting ploddingly pedestrian policies.
The taxes come in the budget. In November. You may remember the inheritance tax uproar from the last budget, when Jeremy Clarkson and the Daily Mail allied themselves with the poor downtrodden landed gentry.
