He’s completely full of shit. The Tories are screwed whichever nutcase they go with.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...
- Thread starter TomandJerry
- Start date
He’s completely full of shit. The Tories are screwed whichever nutcase they go with.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 15,019
They were discussing this with glee on Richard Osman and Marina Hyde’s podcast. They get a lot wrong outside of their sphere of knowledge, but with this kind of stuff they were bang on the money.
It’s sold a fraction of what was forecast.
The advance was so large, and stores are sitting on so much stock, the publishers are going to lose a small fortune on this deal.
Good.
Ex-Tory MP Aaron Bell carried out 'brazen and drunken' sexual misconduct in parliament bar, watchdog finds
Parliament's standards commissioner found Mr Bell "abused his position of power" as an MP - and that had he remained in the Commons, he could have been suspended for a "significant period".
Dick Swiveller
Well-known member
- Sep 9, 2011
- 9,587
That falls into "Be careful what you wish for" when she got a lettuce instead.
See Boris didn’t bother combing his hair for the cenotaph this morning, disrespectful twat that he is
SkirlieWirlie
Well-known member
- Jan 6, 2024
- 199
- Oct 17, 2008
- 15,019
I miss her.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Dada.
As if the spike in inequality generated over the past 45 years isn't enough, along comes the latest leader proposing a solution to take it further still:
www.theguardian.com
Some Tories and a vocal Labour Party supporter on here will be delighted.
As if the spike in inequality generated over the past 45 years isn't enough, along comes the latest leader proposing a solution to take it further still:
Flat tax rate is an ‘attractive idea’, Kemi Badenoch says
Rule would mean a tax rise for basic ratepayers and a huge cut for higher earners if change was fiscally neutral
www.theguardian.com
Some Tories and a vocal Labour Party supporter on here will be delighted.
- Apr 5, 2014
- 26,331
That would mean that the basic rate would have to go up. There seems to be a disturbing belief among some that everyone can be a high earner and that ow earners, the cog of the economy, are somehow slackers. Covid seemed to change that a little. But perhaps we are back where we were. 1924 is calling, Mrs Badenoch.Dada.
As if the spike in inequality generated over the past 45 years isn't enough, along comes the latest leader proposing a solution to take it further still:
Flat tax rate is an ‘attractive idea’, Kemi Badenoch says
Rule would mean a tax rise for basic ratepayers and a huge cut for higher earners if change was fiscally neutral
Some Tories and a vocal Labour Party supporter on here will be delighted.
Yes, logically I support a flat rate of tax (with some adjustments for the lowest earners if the employer is unwilling to increase the basic wage so there is no impact of change). All in the same boat together, and the more you earn the more £££ you pay. In precise proportion to income.Dada.
As if the spike in inequality generated over the past 45 years isn't enough, along comes the latest leader proposing a solution to take it further still:
Flat tax rate is an ‘attractive idea’, Kemi Badenoch says
Rule would mean a tax rise for basic ratepayers and a huge cut for higher earners if change was fiscally neutral
Some Tories and a vocal Labour Party supporter on here will be delighted.
One of the benefits would be that the massed ranks of high income earners who currently pay 0% of the 60% higher rate they are supposed to pay, owing to offshore this and carefully-accounted that (for a small accountant fee of £10K each tax year) would automatically have to pay some tax for the first time ever.
If "ten quid tax" Lord Vesty were alive today he'd turn in his grave.
People who have no income as such, because they have no UK bank account, and all their wealth is earned as investment dividend, and spend only cash when undertaking transactions in the UK, owing to the clever complex architecture of their finances would, of course, need to be reigned in by the introduction of a level of financial scrutiny that has not existed in the UK.
Er, not existed since Thatcher and successors got rid of 'tiresome regulations and red tape' in order to attract overseas investments.
I am sure that a few accountants could work out a solution in a matter of hours. Cue the flight of Britain's Greats of course.
Those foreign nationals with absolutely no ecomomical activity in the UK, no sir.
Sir Sean Connery. Lady Cilla Black. Nigel Farage. Sir Jimmy Dyson. The honourable Barry Shitpeas.
Yes, true, without these great people I accept the nation would soon grind to a halt.
Back to reality, whatever Badenough will propose will contain a spider's web of checks and balances that will allow the super rich to keep the majority of their dosh. On that basis, I'm out. Better the system we know.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,945
Yes, logically I support a flat rate of tax (with some adjustments for the lowest earners if the employer is unwilling to increase the basic wage so there is no impact of change). All in the same boat together, and the more you earn the more £££ you pay. In precise proportion to income.
One of the benefits would be that the massed ranks of high income earners who currently pay 0% of the 60% higher rate they are supposed to pay, owing to offshore this and carefully-accounted that (for a small accountant fee of £10K each tax year) would automatically have to pay some tax for the first time ever.
If "ten quid tax" Lord Vesty were alive today he'd turn in his grave.
People who have no income as such, because they have no UK bank account, and all their wealth is earned as investment dividend, and spend only cash when undertaking transactions in the UK, owing to the clever complex architecture of their finances would, of course, need to be reigned in by the introduction of a level of financial scrutiny that has not existed in the UK.
Er, not existed since Thatcher and successors got rid of 'tiresome regulations and red tape' in order to attract overseas investments.
I am sure that a few accountants could work out a solution in a matter of hours. Cue the flight of Britain's Greats of course.
Those foreign nationals with absolutely no ecomomical activity in the UK, no sir.
Sir Sean Connery. Lady Cilla Black. Nigel Farage. Sir Jimmy Dyson. The honourable Barry Shitpeas.
Yes, true, without these great people I accept the nation would soon grind to a halt.
Back to reality, whatever Badenough will propose will contain a spider's web of checks and balances that will allow the super rich to keep the majority of their dosh. On that basis, I'm out. Better the system we know.
Sorry Harry (and you know we're on the same side) but a flat rate tax would suddenly bring in a sense of moral compass amongst the high earners, rich and powerful ? I'd expect that from the regular cap doffers, just like the IHT changes and Farmers having to pay far less IHT than the rest of use over 10 years, but not from you.
Unfortunately, you, me and John are in a minority
Last edited:
Machiavelli
Well-known member
It would. Although I'm sure some wisecrack will bring in the Laffer (aka Laugher) Curve. Proponents also operate on the principle that the basic rate would NOT have to go up and, if that were the case, then public services would have to be slashed. To be fair to BadEnoch, there's consistency here, as the idea of the state doing less is something that has been an ongoing feature of the values/solutions on offer.
Sorry Harry, but a flat rate tax would suddenly bring in a sense of moral compass amongst the high earners and rich ?
Sorry, but you me and John are in a minority
I don't give a f*** about the moral compass of the super rich.
They simply need to be made to pay income tax.
(with whatever lable is necessary).
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,062
not necessarily. the premise of flat tax is you roll up NI into income tax and include capital gains and even corporation tax at one rate. as NI drops off above a level, cut out many ruses with hiding or defering income, you simplify tax and reduce opportunity for avoidance. at 30%, lower earners would pay slightly less, middle and higher rates pay less but there's a higher total tax take. not seen recent numbers if it would work, and it might not add up, thats the idea. the real purpose of tax should be to cover the revenue needed, not play games with how to tax one particular group less or more.
A flat rate basically means the rich get a massive tax cut and those at the bottom have to pay a huge amount more.
No thanks. But typically Tory.
No thanks. But typically Tory.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
C'est bolleaux.
So, low earners pay "slightly less", middle and higher pay "less" but "there's a higher total tax take".
Alchemy.
It's a little like trickle-down economics.
Scrap that, it is exactly the same bolleaux as trickle-down economics.
It's been in operation in Putin's Russia for decades now. And there's no poverty there. No oligarchs either.
dsr-burnley
Well-known member
- Aug 15, 2014
- 2,683
If the rich don't pay tax, then who are these 1% of earners who pay 28% of the total income tax revenues?
The rich don't pay tax.
Do the top 1% of earners pay 28% of the tax burden? - Full Fact
There aren’t any readily available figures for what proportion of all taxes the top 1% pays. This claim is just referring to income taxes.
fullfact.org