Diane Abbott in fine form this morning...

[jonny.rainbow]

She reminds me of the SWP dickheads who used to run the NUS when I was a student. No need to explain anything because they had a monopoly on not only wisdom but also goodness. If you had the temerity to crossquestion them all you got was a load of patronising drivel. 'No compromise with the electorate' FFS. Bring Back Mr Tony. He may have done some unbelievably stupid things (like providing state funding for 'faith' schools - aka creationist/islamist/homeopathist abominations, and making up WMDs when the war was already justified by ten years of SadMan two-fingering bumbler Blix - oo er missus) but he was head and shoulder above the current shower, and would have made mince meat of May and the absolute disgrace before her who allowed the referendum without considering the possibility of losing. And.... exhale.

Abbot, though . . . . I loath her, and her lifelong opposition to private schools (apart from the one to which she sent her son). Only a complete and utter clown would appoint her to a shadow post; albeit how ethical is it to promote a former squeeze to shadow high office? Corbyn, you are a Conservative's dream opponent, and with Abbot sat next to you in your political Trabant, with her hand on your gear stick, you are on the highway to Hell, with four bald tyres and no brakes. It gives me no pleasure to say that.

Ask John Major.

 

[Hampster Gull]

She reminds me of the SWP dickheads who used to run the NUS when I was a student. No need to explain anything because they had a monopoly on not only wisdom but also goodness. If you had the temerity to crossquestion them all you got was a load of patronising drivel. 'No compromise with the electorate' FFS. Bring Back Mr Tony. He may have done some unbelievably stupid things (like providing state funding for 'faith' schools - aka creationist/islamist/homeopathist abominations, and making up WMDs when the war was already justified by ten years of SadMan two-fingering bumbler Blix - oo er missus) but he was head and shoulder above the current shower, and would have made mince meat of May and the absolute disgrace before her who allowed the referendum without considering the possibility of losing. And.... exhale.

Abbot, though . . . . I loath her, and her lifelong opposition to private schools (apart from the one to which she sent her son). Only a complete and utter clown would appoint her to a shadow post; albeit how ethical is it to promote a former squeeze to shadow high office? Corbyn, you are a Conservative's dream opponent, and with Abbot sat next to you in your political Trabant, with her hand on your gear stick, you are on the highway to Hell, with four bald tyres and no brakes. It gives me no pleasure to say that.

Spot on HWT. Great leaders tend to attract great tallent. Corbyn is not a great leader and the sambles around him reflects his talents.

 

[beorhthelm]

Removing the loopholes that companies like Amazon use is not a 5 minute job, but it's a job that I'm confident can be done.
...
That's a nice dream, but in the short and medium term is a non starter. Each country is interested in looking after its own interests, those that bring in the most tax are not going to share it.

something could be done but you've just gone and ruled out the current best, nearest hope. and you're even spotted why it wont work, its not in most country's self interest. the point is that these loopholes are generally using the deliberatly created rules to deal with taxing companies across boarders from a generation or two ago.

We can break down their cost and revenue and charge a fair tax, and if they don't like it, they can stop trading. They'd pay.

thats how we do it currently: revenue - cost = profit. tax the profit. the problem is when the location of revenue and cost are in different countries, say designed in UK, by company based in US, components manufactured in China, Taiwan and Malaysia, sold across world, its becomes rather difficult to say where the tax is due.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Can anybody, seriously and credibly, tell me on this thread how the the actual home secretary is anymore credible and less laughable than the shadow home secretary ?

 

[Triggaaar]

something could be done but you've just gone and ruled out the current best, nearest hope. and you're even spotted why it wont work, its not in most country's self interest. the point is that these loopholes are generally using the deliberatly created rules to deal with taxing companies across boarders from a generation or two ago.


thats how we do it currently: revenue - cost = profit. tax the profit. the problem is when the location of revenue and cost are in different countries, say designed in UK, by company based in US, components manufactured in China, Taiwan and Malaysia, sold across world, its becomes rather difficult to say where the tax is due.

When a company sells coffee in our coffee shops, it's not difficult to work out where the profit is made. It's not in the interests of Luxembourg to let us change the rules, but we can make our own rules. As you say, revenue - cost = profit, but we can create rules that stop companies falsely inflating the costs to hide the profit.

 

[beorhthelm]

... we can create rules that stop companies falsely inflating the costs to hide the profit.

we do, you're being drawn into popularist mis-conception of whats going on. they are applying accountancy rules, they move the profit elsewhere. you focus in on Starbucks who milked the system and i dont care for their practices, however in practice it little different to say Samsung selling handsets into the wholesale channel, they dont do so at cost, they apply considerable margin.

 

[Triggaaar]

we do

So you're saying we do.

they are applying accountancy rules, they move the profit elsewhere.

Oh, so you're saying we don't.

We can make the rules that judge what is and what isn't profit for tax purposes, and stop the loopholes (which you refer to as accountancy rules).

you focus in on Starbucks

I simply picked them as one example.

in practice it little different to say Samsung selling handsets into the wholesale channel, they dont do so at cost, they apply considerable margin.

Yes, so we'd apply the rules to them as well.

 

[m20gull]

Can anybody, seriously and credibly, tell me on this thread how the the actual home secretary is anymore credible and less laughable than the shadow home secretary ?

I sympathise but am struggling to come up with detailed examples

 

[ManOfSussex]

I sympathise but am struggling to come up with detailed examples

The graffiti gathering through Hastings though leads me to deduce that some people may know things I don't about Ms Rudd.

 

[maltaseagull]

She reminds me of the SWP dickheads who used to run the NUS when I was a student. No need to explain anything because they had a monopoly on not only wisdom but also goodness. If you had the temerity to crossquestion them all you got was a load of patronising drivel. 'No compromise with the electorate' FFS. Bring Back Mr Tony. He may have done some unbelievably stupid things (like providing state funding for 'faith' schools - aka creationist/islamist/homeopathist abominations, and making up WMDs when the war was already justified by ten years of SadMan two-fingering bumbler Blix - oo er missus) but he was head and shoulder above the current shower, and would have made mince meat of May and the absolute disgrace before her who allowed the referendum without considering the possibility of losing. And.... exhale.

Abbot, though . . . . I loath her, and her lifelong opposition to private schools (apart from the one to which she sent her son). Only a complete and utter clown would appoint her to a shadow post; albeit how ethical is it to promote a former squeeze to shadow high office? Corbyn, you are a Conservative's dream opponent, and with Abbot sat next to you in your political Trabant, with her hand on your gear stick, you are on the highway to Hell, with four bald tyres and no brakes. It gives me no pleasure to say that.

TBF so few Labour MPs seem to wanted to be in Corbyn's shadow cabinet, I suspect it was a case of "ok who wants to be Home Secretary?

One hand goes up.
OK Diane that's you sorted.

 

[m20gull]

The graffiti gathering through Hastings though leads me to deduce that some people may know things I don't about Ms Rudd.

That could be what I am missing then

 

[Buzzer]

Can anybody, seriously and credibly, tell me on this thread how the the actual home secretary is anymore credible and less laughable than the shadow home secretary ?

Yes. Because the Shadow Home Secretary is Diane Abbott. It really is that simple. She is perfect proof that the current Labour leadership exist only in within their North London bubble. She is a turn-off for traditional Labour voters let alone those whom Labour are trying to win over.

I'm sorry but you are going to have to put your political loyalties to one side here and acknowledge that she's an electoral liability and worse still not up to the job. I've said it elsewhere but you and I both know Labour should at least be on equal polling with the Tories right now. There are millions of people who don't want to vote Tory but will because the thought of Corbyn, McDonnell, Thornberry and Abbott scares them more.

Christ sake, can you imagine where the party could be now with, say, Alan Johnson or Angela Eagle as leader and Clive Lewis, as Shadow Home Secretary.

 

[Technohead]

At 31 March 2016 there were a total of 151,000 police officers operating within the United Kingdom. That is basically the same number as we had in 2003. Make of that what you will.

Depends if you put that data in the right context. Between 2003 and 2010 police officer numbers, based on full time equivalent, increased from 155,000 to 171,600 ...... an increase of about 10.7%. Since 2010 police officer numbers have decreased year on year so that there were 151,000 as at 31st March 2016, a decrease on the 2010 figure of 11.7%. Probably a more important statistic is that the number of police officers in frontline roles fell by 13% between 2010 and 2016. Make of that what you will.

 

[beorhthelm]

So you're saying we do.
Oh, so you're saying we don't.

for a pendant you dont follow what you wrote yourself: you say we can create rules to prevent falsly inflating cost to hide profit. i say we do have those rules, the issue if that they move where those profits are recorded. a company cant just say "items x cost 8 per unit" when they cost 5 per unit, they are audited and tax authorities know roughly what item x cost in the market. what they do is sell it to a foreign subsidary or to another company altogether with some margin, shifting profits to a different country.
the difference with Starbucks is they engineered their product distribution and royalty fees to maximise this shift through to a deliberatly low tax country. other companies do similar general practice as part of their general distribution model, so a rule to stamp out the excess of Starbuck would be applied to all who dont take those actions to avoid tax (or maybe they do, just been doing it so long its not fashionable to mention them).

 

[ManOfSussex]

There are millions of people who don't want to vote Tory but will because the thought of Corbyn, McDonnell, Thornberry and Abbott scares them more.

I'm almost one of them. For what it's worth Diane Abbot's mother was an immigrant and an NHS midwife, just like my late Mother was. I'm not a Labour supporter, and the Tories are as bad and that's what worries me - May is as bad as Corbyn in my opinion. If people think Theresa May and this bunch of Tories are the saviour of this country, then, really God help us....................

 

[jakarta]

Christ sake, can you imagine where the party could be now with, say, Alan Johnson or Angela Eagle as leader and Clive Lewis, as Shadow Home Secretary.

Always been said that John Smith was the best Prime Minister Labour never quite had, Alan Johnson must be very close second (& say that as a Tory). The clowns we currently have in Opposition will mean that the mediocre (and again say that as a Tory) lot currently in Government will waltz into power in June.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

She's a joke, short and simple. She's reason number two regarding why Labour are totally unelectable.

 

[Buzzer]

I'm almost one of them. For what it's worth Diane Abbot's mother was an immigrant and an NHS midwife, just like my late Mother was. I'm not a Labour supporter, and the Tories are as bad and that's what worries me - May is as bad as Corbyn in my opinion. If people think Theresa May and this bunch of Tories are the saviour of this country, then, really God help us....................

May might well be as bad but I think Corbyn is completely incompetent as a leader. He's a life-long activist and he still has that mind-set and fair play to him for that but he now has to lead and inspire a party with a very broad spread of views and with that comes the necessary evil of compromise. I think May has just muddled along. She's not been disastrous but I wouldn't say she's doing a good job either and even though I'll always be a Tory, if Labour had a leadership similar to the one I suggested I could happily go for that.

 

[ManOfSussex]

May might well be as bad but I think Corbyn is completely incompetent as a leader. He's a life-long activist and he still has that mind-set and fair play to him for that but he now has to lead and inspire a party with a very broad spread of views and with that comes the necessary evil of compromise. I think May has just muddled along. She's not been disastrous but I wouldn't say she's doing a good job either and even though I'll always be a Tory, if Labour had a leadership similar to the one I suggested I could happily go for that.

I can't argue with that mate.

 

[BadFish]

Oh no, you have to. You won't want to punch anything, you'll be too busy laughing.

The funniest part is that without decent options in opposition, you'll end up with another Tory government cutting everything and giving your money to their big business mates. "We're all doomed".