- Thread starter
- #4,721
Melia's Shoes says millions, you say thousands, the last link states "scores"......
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
General Election 2015
- Thread starter Herr Tubthumper
- Start date
Melia's Shoes says millions, you say thousands, the last link states "scores"......
- Thread starter
- #4,722
Ernest
Stupid IDIOT
Good morning [MENTION=409]Herr Tubthumper[/MENTION]
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
So has the debate on here moved on to us worrying about people leaving?
I thought the big issue was people arriving as we're too full!?
I thought the big issue was people arriving as we're too full!?
You seem to know a lot more about this than most. To say it's 'largely voluntary' is some statement. I don't doubt you, but could you explain some of the methods to us lesser folk, and why our political parties want those options to be available to the wealthy.
- Thread starter
- #4,726
I thought the pie-chart would prove pleasing
Did you see Andrew Marr yesterday? It would appear they're feeding them Tory types way too much coffee on that show; it was Boris' turn to be scratchy and on-edge this week.
- Thread starter
- #4,727
I think he's alluding to people's employment status, income streams and tax-planning. I do not agree it is largely voluntary either; I guess he's suggesting more a case of how aggressively you pursue tax efficiency.
Yes.
It depends how easy it is to set yourself up to be tax efficient, and if it's basically an option for every high earner that wants to, regardless of their business.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
It's extremely easy to set yourself as 'tax efficient', provided you've got the money. You just need to contact people like [MENTION=12697]Steve Foster[/MENTION], who will charge a large fee (ensuring he is also within the top 1%), but make plenty more tax efficient savings for you. This is how our economy is structured these days.
- Nov 11, 2009
- 12,280
I thought the pie-chart would prove pleasing
Did you see Andrew Marr yesterday? It would appear they're feeding them Tory types way too much coffee on that show; it was Boris' turn to be scratchy and on-edge this week.
Yes, wasn't Boris spot on to brand Ed Milliband a hypocrit about Non Doms... "is this the very same Ed Milliband that sat around the cabinet table for Years and did absolutely Nothing"
So has the debate on here moved on to us worrying about people leaving?
I thought the big issue was people arriving as we're too full!?
It's the same debate, just slightly different words. Basically, lots of Tory-supporting media drivel dressed up as genuine concern about what will happen under a Labour led government. Recently we've had the media bullying the electorate into attempting to believe the Lab/SNP would ruin the country, but that's not working. (Funny how they haven't bullied the Conservatives into ruling out a UKIP coalition, by the way). So now, we're being told they will tax us to death once again.
This is my favourite example of such a media-driven crock of shìt and how it manifests itself for the gullible on here:
Marvellous stuff. If Labour say 50% tax, they obviously mean 80%.
This is a fair point and is what annoys me about Milliband and Labour. This popularist nom doms policy is going to cost the country a fair bit of money, so no wonder he didn't do anything when he was in control of the purse strings. Has he told us yet how he's going to make up the shortfall?
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Ed Milliband was only a cabinet minister for 3 years, 2 of which were after the global financial crises hit. Not sure the status of Non Doms were on the agenda just then.
- Thread starter
- #4,734
I think most saw this as either desperate clutching at straws and/avoiding the question. Given how rattled and uncomposed Boris appeared, he most likely felt the same.
Kuipers Supporters Club
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #4,736
Sometimes you have to do the right, and just, thing. And the ability of the rich and privileged to pay less tax in this manner is clearly not fair.
I won't disagree with that. So you have to ask why Labour didn't do it when they were in power.
I'll tell you why - because it would have cost the country money to abolish the Nom Dom £30k waiver. And it still will.
I won't disagree with that. So you have to ask why Labour didn't do it when they were in power.
I'll tell you why - because it would have cost the country money to abolish the Nom Dom £30k waiver. And it still will.
According to Norman Smith (BBC political spokesman) about a week ago on the Today programme (when this policy was first announced) he said that Brown (PM) and Darling (Chancellor) wanted to do this very same thing around 2009, but they did the maths and decided that net, they would lose money and so shelved the idea.
- Thread starter
- #4,739
I won't disagree with that. So you have to ask why Labour didn't do it when they were in power.
I'll tell you why - because it would have cost the country money to abolish the Nom Dom £30k waiver. And it still will.
It might well mean the UK loses some tax revenue but it's the price you pay for a fairer society. And as someone said to huge applause on one of the tv debates, if this means that some privileged bods, who are not prepared to pay their fair share of tax due to an archaic and arcane tax anomaly leave the UK then all things considered we might be better off.
Hatterlovesbrighton
something clever
So when the hard working family pays over more of their taxes to make up for the tax revenue that Labour have lost out on, the warm and fuzzy feeling of being in a fairer society will make up for not having to go on holiday or getting a better car.
I wonder how many people actually think like this.