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
-
Reading the posts and attachments, that is just about that for Nuttall being elected. Labour can sigh with relief.
The real UKIP lie deep within the ranks of the "Conservative Party." Royston Smith being one of them.
Perhaps that's that for Nuttall (I don't know whether he was ever that likely to win but predictions are a mug's game these days) but I'm not entirely sure yet. Previous attacks on Farage weren't too successful. Lots of people who aren't that interested in politics have a tendency not to give a **** about this sort of stuff.
Also worth remembering that the Labour candidate has been in trouble himself for a variety of past tweets about women.
Also worth remembering that the Labour candidate has been in trouble himself for a variety of past tweets about women.
Someone want to give these guys the bad news?
You must log in or register to see media
You gotta be ****ting me, dude. Trump paid no taxes for a decade, refuses to release his tax returns, and is cutting taxes massively on the rich. He doesn't give a crap about taxes or the working man.
His entire campaign was based simply on the fact that never having held political office and not knowing anything was a plus, because he couldn't be blamed for anything bad that has ever happened.
It's hilarious how stupid that line of reasoning is. If Trump has had the master plan to fix America, why did he sit on his ass for thirty years watching these incompetent/corrupt/whatever politicians supposedly destroy the country and do nothing about it? I mean, if that's the case, he is as culpable or more culpable than they are. I mean, he could have fixed it, but he decided to take advantage of tax loopholes to enrich himself instead.
You need to read properly and understand what I am saying.
Politicians cannot complain about someone not paying tax if the politicians never try to close loopholes that allow them to do so. That is grandstanding.
I never said Trump had any answers. I merely said that what he said to Hillary and what Banks is saying now is right.
In effect, don't keep going on telly moaning about people abusing a tax system yet never trying to change the system to stop them from doing so. If the politicians are so bothered by it (which they should be because we are) then they should be stopping it. Do they? No they talk about morals, about avoidance yet never close the loopholes.
You have decided to go off kilter on Trump when I was merely picking up on one thing he said which was correct. Hillary cannot complain about someone that is abiding by the law. If she doesn't like the law because it lets people are taking advantage of it then she should be fighting for the law to be changed.
Point me to where I said Trump had a masterplan? Point me to where I said he has been an active campaigner against politicians for thirty years?
You have said that. I merely said he is right. If the law is wrong, then change a law. It's a bit silly to complain about people that are not breaking the law. If they are doing something legal but that shouldn't be happening then change the law.
Tax loopholes are always being closed, and new ones are constantly being discovered. This is a process that keeps rafts of accountancy and legal firms in business. I'm not sure it's right to blame mainstream politicians for the fact greed and corruption are fairly commonplace human failings and are present at every level of society.
Still, it suits the alt.right (or neo-fascist) narrative to blame everything on some mythical "liberal elite" conspiracy.
Still, it suits the alt.right (or neo-fascist) narrative to blame everything on some mythical "liberal elite" conspiracy.
I'm glad that my vote is the only one that counts. It is me that keeps electing the same politicians is it?
How many different politicians do you have in your 2 houses? or is it the same as here with safe seats and politicians that have been there for years and years and only a small selection of "unsafe seats" that refresh their politicians?
It is politicians in government (from both sides) that use the very same people to write tax law that will be the ones who then advise their clients on how to use the loopholes. So yes it is politicians fault.
It is the same as all the other things. Take advice from certain lobby groups. And those lobby groups are working on behalf of the people that will then take advantage of the result. And of course the politician once finished has a job ready in waiting.
As it happens, I run a business and I'm the franchisor of that business. It means that we're ideally suited to being popped onto the Isle of Man. Get the IP licence fees for our brand (most of our income) fired to the IOM via the Netherlands and we'd pay pretty much zero tax with just a small amount of admin fees.
However, unlike Trump, Banks et al I acknowledge that our vehicles run on roads paid for by tax, we benefit from policing paid by tax and when we're ill we go to an NHS funded by tax so guess what? We pay our ****ing tax.
The avoidance rules exist but an honest, decent person doesn't have to use them. That's the problem here. These people are freeloading scum. They take all the benefits of tax but aren't prepared to stump up their share. It's not moral, whether it's in the letter of the law or not.
Vin
If only we were part of some international body that could rationalise tax laws between its members.
And another thing, in a world where money can flow (like our business's money really should) via the Netherlands to the Isle of Man to my bank account in England, who is responsible for writing the rules that stop that. Is it the UK government, the Dutch government, the EU commission or the Tynwald? As fast as one of them plugs a gap, another route (the memorable double Irish with a Dutch sandwich - as used by Google - springs to mind) will open.
What we need is a desire by people to pay their dues. To minimise tax by all means, but not avoid them.
Warren Buffett can do it, why can't Trump and the rest?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ges-trump-on-taxes-discloses-2015-return-data
Vin
What we need is a desire by people to pay their dues. To minimise tax by all means, but not avoid them.
Warren Buffett can do it, why can't Trump and the rest?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ges-trump-on-taxes-discloses-2015-return-data
Vin
Buffet only earns 11m a year? How is he the 3rd richest in the world on such a lowly income?
You don't get to play that card if you hold all politicians responsible as a class for all the ills of society. Because that's what they say, too. "I'm just one person. Don't blame me, blame the UKIP/GOP/Democrats/Green/Labour/etc. who keeps voting against me."
If politicians are the problem, then so are the voters who keep voting them in.
Politicians like Trump tell the voters that the problem is the "establishment." Some voters were stupid enough to believe that. And so they voted him in... while also re-electing just about every single "establishment" member of the GOP. Trump is going to cut taxes massively on the rich. He's not going to do jackshit for the working class.
Look at his cabinet. It's all rich people who backed his campaign. None of them are for raising taxes on the rich. He said he would "drain the swamp" but it's business as usual.
And four years from now, someone else will tell the working class that they the outside candidate and its time to boot the "establishment" fat cats out of office. And the voters will believe them again.
Yeah, that went well: https://www.theguardian.com/busines...blocked-eu-curbs-on-tax-avoidance-cables-show
I hope the public vote him out... oh, wait.
Each country has to take responsibility for its own tax regime. I vaguely recall Nigel Lawson saying the best way to stop tax avoidance by companies who move money around as you've suggested would be to replace corporation tax with a corporate sales tax.
I don't profess to understand the ins and outs of big business and tax avoidance etc, but my simplistic take on things would be to change the following.
Instead of businesses filing a tax return saying that they will pay x, y, z, based on deductions for this, that and the other, and then HMRC have to chase them for underpayment, they should pay a tax based on sales/income at a specified rate.
Then, they should submit a claim for any tax rebates, they think they are entitled to receive, and see if HMRC will wear it.
As I say, very simplistic, but as someone who is taxed at the source of payment, every month, not once a year, and who cannot haggle for a discount, I don't see why businesses should be able to.
Instead of businesses filing a tax return saying that they will pay x, y, z, based on deductions for this, that and the other, and then HMRC have to chase them for underpayment, they should pay a tax based on sales/income at a specified rate.
Then, they should submit a claim for any tax rebates, they think they are entitled to receive, and see if HMRC will wear it.
As I say, very simplistic, but as someone who is taxed at the source of payment, every month, not once a year, and who cannot haggle for a discount, I don't see why businesses should be able to.