Off Topic The Politics Thread

please log in to view this image

Brexit Party chiefs announce they will legally challenge Peterborough by-election result
BREXIT Party bosses are to legally challenge the Peterborough by-election result, it has been announced.

but you lost
get over it

voter fraud you say
dosent matter
happens every election

 

Politics & Policy
Boris Johnson’s and Jeremy Hunt’s Low-Tax Doomsday Plan
Brexit is turning into a race to the bottom on European corporation tax. Brussels should use any renewed Tory push for a trade deal as leverage.
By
Lionel Laurent
‎25‎ ‎June‎ ‎2019‎ ‎8‎:‎00‎ ‎PM

please log in to view this image

It was dubbed “Project After”: A secret emergency plan for the U.K.’s Conservative government to pull all of the economic levers at its disposal if Britain crashed out of the European Union without a deal. The ingredients included slashing taxes to woo multinationals, cutting trade tariffs, and boosting investment. The FT’s report of its existence in February didn’t come as a huge shock, given the U.K.’s public ambition to have the lowest business tax rate in the G20. But it was a sign of what Europe would have to contend with in the worst-case scenario: A race to the bottom on corporate tax with its neighbor.
It now looks like the Tories’ Brexit Doomsday plan is becoming the official policy of the two contenders to replace Theresa May as prime minister. Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt both dangled tax cuts at the weekend as they prepared the country for life after the EU, whether through a negotiated withdrawal or a no-deal Brexit. Hunt called for a reduction in British corporation tax to “Irish levels” (12.5% currently) to land an “economic jumbo jet on Europe’s doorstep.” Johnson, deflecting questions about his turbulent private life, said he would “turbocharge” the economy with cuts to business and income taxes.
This may of course just be cheap talk on the campaign trail. Tax cuts would be financially and politically difficult. The Resolution Foundation’s Torsten Bell estimates Hunt’s plan would cost the exchequer in the region of 13 billion pounds ($16.6 billion), while Johnson’s would cost about 10 billion pounds. The idea that the shortfall would be more than made up by companies and wealthy investors flocking to the U.K., especially in a no-deal scenario where the trading relationship with the EU is unresolved, looks very confident indeed. That longed-for jumbo jet might end up looking more like a single-propeller Cessna.
Still, the increasingly reckless political climate in Britain means Europe will be paying careful attention. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party is open to closer ties with the Conservatives
to ensure a no-deal Brexit, an eventuality that is winning increasing support from Brits. The “Singapore-on-Thames” low-tax, low-regulation model still seems to be very much on the table. Even Britain’s Financial Conduct Authority is hinting at deregulation.
The problem for the EU isn’t so much the overall corporate tax rate itself, but what else might accompany any cut. What if the U.K. engages in the kind of individual sweetheart deals that the EU doesn’t usually allow? Brussels has already accused Britain of offering some multinationals an “unjustified exemption” from anti-tax avoidance rules. Imagine a supercharged version of this, like the effective tax rate of 0.005% enjoyed by Apple Inc. in Ireland in 2014 (slapped down as illegal by the EU).
A buccaneering Britain would certainly create new tensions within the EU about how best to respond. A 2018 Ifo Institute working paper, modeling
the effects of a country moving from harmonized taxes to competing with its neighbors, predicted that the pressure wouldn’t be felt equally. Low-tax jurisdictions would suffer more than high-tax jurisdictions from tax competition. It’s easy to see how Ireland’s economy, where foreign-owned companies pay more than three-quarters of total corporation tax, would be vulnerable to a Britain trying to grab some of those corporate headquarters.
Whether it’s Johnson or Hunt who becomes prime minister and launches the inevitable whistle-stop tour of Europe’s capitals to push for fresh Brexit concessions, the U.K.’s commitment to fair taxation and fighting fraud should be part of the negotiations. Britain’s foot-dragging on transparency at its Crown Dependencies is one reason to be worried. Trust will be a big part of any future trade relationship, and Brussels should insist that the “jumbo jet” stays in the hangar.

 

Dearie me, they really are scraping the barrel now. Perhaps it's because Daisy will never write anything remotely as good...

 

Back to the whole Harry and Meghan thing just for one second, accounts have shown Prince Charles's estate is valued at over 1 billion quid, maybe a little perspective.

 

Sorry, I don’t get your point

 

My point is just that the amount spent by Harry and Meghan needs a little perspective in what the other royals are up to, just find the witch hunt on Meghan specifically by certain areas of the media, very unfair and very distasteful. I'm not saying whether the expenditure is justified just think the press are being a bit ****ish

 

Now I get what you are saying. Dunno if I agree that the bad press she gets is just ‘cos of her mixed race heritage (if that’s what your saying). My opinion is the press here love to big someone up.....and then find **** to shoot them down, it’s just the way those scum operate.

Luckily I hate them all with the same vigour.

 

I think it's a mix of things, her race does certainly come into play along with her nationality, also that she has a personality, thoughts of her own and has voiced them. Seen a few Diana would be spinning in her grave type comments about in the comments sections which I find very bizarre, I suspect the 'people's princess' (of who a lot is ignored and glossed over) would just be happy that her son has found someone he clearly loves. Kate seems to be universally loved by royalists, where there is a ****storm of vitriol against Megs.

Hang on am I being drawn into a non story by the press to distract from certain important stuff going on at the moment!!! Aghhh more fool me!

 

Slightly late reply this Stan, but this is all a matter of terminology. The media will call them anarchists, and the man on the Clapham omnibus will believe them to be so, even though they're not. They would, conversely, never refer to Gandhi as having been an anarchist (who was). All a case of what is good for business. The same applies to Communism - they want people to believe that countries like the USSR and North Korea were/are Communist (they weren't) - but would never refer to a Benedictine Monastery as living a Communist existence even though they do. I am not a Marxist but he was right on one thing - the dominant economic class of any society will also be the dominant intellectual class, and will be able to present the ideas of its domination as being the only normal and sensible ones around - real revolution begins with challenging this cultural hegemony - it does not start on the streets.

 

Is the vitriol about Megan because she is black or because she is an American divorcee
In most pictures of her you wouldn't know she wasn't a wasp
What happened with the last American divorcee to take a place in the royal family

 

Harry and Meghan's house improvements are predicted to cost over £3m. What puts that in perspective for me is that the average house price (not repairs) is about £200k.

The Queen has always been admired for her thrift. If Harry and Meghan decide to lead an international celebrity lifestyle (Clooney-style), funded in part by the taxpayer, it's not going to go down well

 

House prices must be dropping like a stone if the average price is 200 gs

 

William and Kate spent 4 mill only a couple of years back and no such backlash, that's the point. I'm not arguing that this isn't a stupid extravagance that doesn't need to be spent, my point is that William and Kate's expenditure is more, Prince Charles has an estate worth over a billion, yet the media have decided to make this 'important news', and questioning the motivation.

 

Good point, Kiwi - edited change!

 

£200,000k ? Is that £200 thousand thousand ??

 

I think it was right the first time! Edited back!!

 

Yes, I agree with you this far. For both the Cambridges and the Sussexes, the acid test is whether they will be conscientious, hardworking royals. It's too early to tell for both couples, so let's give them the benefit of the doubt.

For Meghan, I see the fact that she has some black heritage, and is American, as a plus. The divorcee bit doesn't bother me. The extravagant, precious lifestyle of an "A" list luvvy does worry me. She will have to curb her ways if she is to remain popular. It's not a bad lifestyle she's moved into. Princess Diana is, with some reservations, a reasonable role model.

 

That's all fine and totally reasoned, and you are spot on time will tell. I just question certain parts of the media with their continuous 'evil Meghan' stories, some aren't as intelligent as you Goldie, and just feeds into and reinforces peoples desire to hate her. For me one really positive aspect about her is she is a strong woman who has her opinions on the world and isn't scared to speak up, which as a father of daughters is a massively important thing considering the rise of the reality TV star, think the kids, regardless of sex need better role models than pretty people trying to rut each other on an island.

 

Good post, Will. As I say, it's just vital as she's involved in good works going forward, that she leans a little more to Mother Theresa than Kim Kardashian.

 

Is she such a good role model for modern woman to aspire to
She gave up her career to marry a prince
Never heard of her before she started going out with him so it might not have been much of a career but no doubt she was told she had to give it up
Not a very right on twenty first century girl in every way