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
-
We already have that. It's called VAT and passed on to the consumer at the end point.
What needs to happen is that loopholes are closed. And if you are running a business in the UK that you pay the taxes in this country. It is ridiculous that Starbucks can pay way over the market value for their stock to their (one man) office in Amsterdam and then announce they make no profit here. It isn't rocket science and there is already legislation (in the EU and the UK) that is supposed to deal with accounting that does not pay "fair market value" for things.
As a self employed person I could charge myself all of my profits as rent, thus wiping out my profits however I can't because you can only charge fair market value. If I were to put my tax return in each year saying "no profit again" it would not be brushed off as "OK, fair enough, nothing to see here."
The globalists are playing the game, the politicians are happy to leave the loopholes there, the EU are happy to defend it or ignore it and the globalists are the winners.
And then we are made to feel grateful that the big corps have a moral awakening and actually decide to pay a few pennies in the pound tax to save some face. Doesn't wash despite George Osborne's defence.
It would also help if the chair of the select committee that is supposed to be tackling tax dodging is not one herself.
Because most of his money is in stock holdings which he has generated a massive paper profit on because he's the greatest investor of all time.
He pays the taxes on his holdings as he cashes out and converts them to income. That's not a tax dodge. That's how income taxes work.
The guy has zero class. It's a wonder Jon Sopel didn't tell him to **** off.
I'm replying because I want to "like" the fact that you've brought it up but I can't bring myself to click "like".
I'd like to say that he's an idiot but he's not. This is all part of the same deliberate effort to undermine totally any news organisation that isn't mindlessly telling their customers that he's a demigod. Once he's done that, once he's utterly destroyed any faith the public had in organisations like the CNN/ABC/BBC, he'll be able to do ANYTHING he wants and his supporters will hear no-one telling them what the world thinks of |Trump. Dangerous guy. Bad hombre. Bad dude. Very bad.
Vin
Last edited:
At this point, I'm fairly convinced that Trump is mostly just thin-skinned and lashing out emotionally. He wanted to be President, he just doesn't want to actually run the country. The way he is acting now is the way was when he ran, and indeed the way he has been his whole life.
I don't know that I'd say he's an idiot, but he's a lot more Chauncey Gardiner than a real political threat. Bannon, Miller, and some others are the scary ones. They are the ones with the grand plan. Trump's just their tool.
Trump is the definition of the political loose cannon. You just don't know what he will stoop to next.
He's like a two year old throwing a tantrum.
If it's possible to be dispassionate about the fact that the President of the world's largest democracy is a blustering arse, history is now presenting us with a fascinating insight into the effectiveness of the U.S.A's written Constitution.
With what now looks like extraordinary foresight, the founding fathers specifically designed a system of government intended to protect the population from just the sort of elected despot Trump is trying to be.
So far, the constitution appears to be winning; which is quite reassuring.
If it's possible to be dispassionate about the fact that the President of the world's largest democracy is a blustering arse, history is now presenting us with a fascinating insight into the effectiveness of the U.S.A's written Constitution.
With what now looks like extraordinary foresight, the founding fathers specifically designed a system of government intended to protect the population from just the sort of elected despot Trump is trying to be.
So far, the constitution appears to be winning; which is quite reassuring.
Here's the "survey" his campaign* just released:
https://action.donaldjtrump.com/mainstream-media-accountability-survey/
If that poll had any more of a push to it, it'd be grounds for assault charges.
*Yes, campaign. He filed his paperwork for the 2020 election on his first day in office, and is holding a campaign rally this weekend.
I'm a bit tempted to do the questionnaire myself, but I don't fancy running the risk of being carted off to some dark room and beaten up, with the full backing of our own government.
Indeed he did. And a podcast I listen to from the USA is deeply concerned about that. They are a non-profit educational foundation and there are strict rules about what they can say about politicians. Their lawyers are currently checking out the rules because the fact that he's (sort of, kind of, the rules are slightly unclear) a candidate greatly affects what they can say about him.
This is another reason why I'm less convinced that he's just lashing out when he does what he does. I think this is all very planned. Possibly not by him but by the team behind him.
Vin
Last edited:
Why is Tony Blair coming out at this late hour in support of a campaign to avoid Brexit ? Why wasn`t he so vocal months ago ??
If you repeat a lie often enough, it will eventually be accepted as the truth.
It continually happens in politics.
And like a two year old who, after he throws a tantrum and gets what he wants, he realises that he doesn't actually want it, or know what to do with it.
He was seen as too toxic to be associated with the remain campaign before the referendum. It's only now that Theresa's gang of four is clearly driving as fast as they can towards the insane precipice of as hard a Brexit as they can manage that he's being seen as worth a punt.
Vin
For the same reason that Farage and Leave.eu were kept away from the main campaign for leave. Blair is as toxic to the "pro" side as Farage was to the "leave" side.
It was almost certainly made clear to him before the referendum that his contribution would be counterproductive. Whether it's fair or not, an endorsement from Tony Blair is pretty much the kiss of death to any political campaign. I'm not sure why he thinks people will listen to him now, but perhaps he thinks he has to try.
