Cable Forum
Page 9 of 20 « First 5678 9 1011121319 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   The Chronicles of Rishi (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33711430)

jfman 09-07-2023 14:03
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36155724)
I do not support what Eustice said, of course I don’t. I have no idea where he was coming from if he has been reported correctly and this is not government policy.
What Government ministers say is absolutely Government policy unless he gets a slap down from Number 10 and quick sharp. I will not be holding my breath.

Quote:
The plan is the Illegal Migration Bill, and that will remove the incentive for people to come here. The migrants will know they will be sent directly back to their country and where that would mean danger for them or where there are no alternative arrangements in place, they will be off to Rwanda.

Why would they want to cough up all that money and risk their lives to come to a country that will simply oik them out again within a week or so? It will break the model used by the people smugglers and Labour has no plan to do so.
Why not? They’re already risking their lives to cross. They’re already risking being detained.

Quote:
The Bill is not illegal as long as the appeal the government has lodged is successful. If it is not, then we will need to adjust our position vis a vis the ECHR. Then it will be legal.
Those are two almighty qualifications to whether the Bill is in fact legal. This failing Government will be long gone before it pulls the ECHR.

Quote:
I do sense, jfman, that you tend to think that existing laws and barriers can never be tackled to achieve change. But change to our immigration laws is what people want and so the government has a legitimate aspiration to put these new arrangements in place.
The Government is rubber stamping a million applications a year to live here legally. They aren’t even controlling migration among groups that they absolutely can.

Your belief in their intention, and competence, to deliver is astounding.

Sephiroth 09-07-2023 14:28
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Oddly, both OB and jfman are right!

OLD BOY 09-07-2023 14:52
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36155730)

What Government ministers say is absolutely Government policy unless he gets a slap down from Number 10 and quick sharp. I will not be holding my breath.
It’s not government policy. He clearly went off piste with that remark.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36155730)

Why not? They’re already risking their lives to cross. They’re already risking being detained.
Because there would be no point, as I’ve described.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36155730)

Those are two almighty qualifications to whether the Bill is in fact legal. This failing Government will be long gone before it pulls the ECHR.
It can be done if the will is there. The Bill will be passed this year and the ECHR will be dealt with.Nobody is suggesting that we will ditch the ECHR - that was considered and rejected.What is proposed as I understand it is a modification in respect of ECHR judgements on deporting illegal migrants.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36155730)

The Government is rubber stamping a million applications a year to live here legally. They aren’t even controlling migration among groups that they absolutely can.

Your belief in their intention, and competence, to deliver is astounding.
We at least agree that too many people are entering the country. We cannot support immigration on this scale. All our public services are under immense strain and housing is in short supply. Unfortunately, there is plenty of organised opposition to any controls on immigration and the government believes it needs to tread carefully here with an election on the horizon.

I don’t agree with that view and I think they should just go for it. I believe that would win more votes than they would lose.

Paul 09-07-2023 15:01
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36155694)
We all know what extreme right wing politics is. Don’t act dumb.
No, we dont.

jfman 09-07-2023 15:25
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36155734)
It’s not government policy. He clearly went off piste with that remark.
Wishful thinking on your part, OB. Thus far no rebuke.

Quote:
Because there would be no point, as I’ve described.
Only if they get caught.

Quote:
It can be done if the will is there. The Bill will be passed this year and the ECHR will be dealt with.Nobody is suggesting that we will ditch the ECHR - that was considered and rejected.What is proposed as I understand it is a modification in respect of ECHR judgements on deporting illegal migrants.
So many things can be done if there’s will - like reducing net migration to the tens of thousands. This Government has none. You are the English dog barking to their whistle.

Quote:
We at least agree that too many people are entering the country. We cannot support immigration on this scale. All our public services are under immense strain and housing is in short supply. Unfortunately, there is plenty of organised opposition to any controls on immigration and the government believes it needs to tread carefully here with an election on the horizon.
Yet the Government does nothing to adequately fund public services, or improve housing supply. Take off the blinkers, OB. The tiny numbers on the boats are an irrelevance.

Quote:
I don’t agree with that view and I think they should just go for it. I believe that would win more votes than they would lose.
The next Government can work it out, just like everything else.

OLD BOY 09-07-2023 16:25
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36155742)


The next Government can work it out, just like everything else.
Not if it’s a Labour government, they won’t. Labour is quite happy with all this immigration, with their obsession with having a ‘multi-cultural society’.

They will be putting up bunting on the beaches with lots of beer and sausage rolls.

jfman 09-07-2023 16:46
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36155744)
Not if it’s a Labour government, they won’t. Labour is quite happy with all this immigration, with their obsession with having a ‘multi-cultural society’.

They will be putting up bunting on the beaches with lots of beer and sausage rolls.
And what do you think the Tories are after 14 years? Tough on immigration :rofl:

Millions of people, year in year out. Even they don’t believe the lines you peddle.

Sephiroth 09-07-2023 16:50
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36155744)
Not if it’s a Labour government, they won’t. Labour is quite happy with all this immigration, with their obsession with having a ‘multi-cultural society’.

They will be putting up bunting on the beaches with lots of beer and sausage rolls.
Or falafels?

1andrew1 09-07-2023 17:12
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36155734)
It’s not government policy. He clearly went off piste with that remark.
I's pretty clear that the government is more than happy for Eustice to float the idea and to see what reaction it gets.

If it's strongly negative, he will be chastised. If not, it could well be added to the list of measures aimed at reducing some of the contributions of Brexit to the cost of living crisis.

OLD BOY 09-07-2023 19:33
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36155746)
And what do you think the Tories are after 14 years? Tough on immigration :rofl:

Millions of people, year in year out. Even they don’t believe the lines you peddle.
You wouldn’t advocate them breaking the law, would you?The law needs to change before we can stop the boats. You don’t really need me to explain that to you.

---------- Post added at 19:33 ---------- Previous post was at 19:31 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36155751)
I's pretty clear that the government is more than happy for Eustice to float the idea and to see what reaction it gets.

If it's strongly negative, he will be chastised. If not, it could well be added to the list of measures aimed at reducing some of the contributions of Brexit to the cost of living crisis.
I think that’s a misreading of the situation. The cabinet does not want to air such disagreements in public if they can avoid it. They have enough on their plates as it is.

jfman 09-07-2023 19:50
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36155758)
You wouldn’t advocate them breaking the law, would you?The law needs to change before we can stop the boats. You don’t really need me to explain that to you.
But nowhere in the migration bill that is illegal does actually stop boats.

You are hoping that people who are risking their lives to cross don’t make a calculation that they will not get caught. Those we catch now already get detained and that doesn’t stop them.

Quote:
I think that’s a misreading of the situation. The cabinet does not want to air such disagreements in public if they can avoid it. They have enough on their plates as it is.
The misreading of the situation is entirely on your part. This Government is determined to break the inflation spiral on the back of hard working people in this country. Bringing in migrant labour does exactly that without any consideration for the impact on public services and/or housing.

Pierre 09-07-2023 21:24
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36155718)
They are clearly a problem
“a” problem, not the “the” problem.

97% of immigration is totally 100% within the government’s control, yet despite promises to reduce it, it is spiralling upwards out of control.

3% is Afghans, Albanians, Eritrean’s, Libyan’s and other assorted undesirables, that could easily be reduced, if not eliminated.

It’s all within the government’s control, but they’re not doing it.

jfman 09-07-2023 22:44
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36155765)
“a” problem, not the “the” problem.

97% of immigration is totally 100% within the government’s control, yet despite promises to reduce it, it is spiralling upwards out of control.

3% is Afghans, Albanians, Eritrean’s, Libyan’s and other assorted undesirables, that could easily be reduced, if not eliminated.

It’s all within the government’s control, but they’re not doing it.
Indeed while OB feigns interest in housing and public services he completely ignores the far bigger number that’s going in the wrong direction.

I’ll pre-empt his “gotcha” that the ones we pick will be net tax payers going into work. Yes, jobs that could have been done by Brits if firms just showed some entrepreneurial spirit rather than take the lazy approach of importing workers. They won’t have brought a house with them either.

Mad Max 10-07-2023 13:00
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36155770)
Indeed while OB feigns interest in housing and public services he completely ignores the far bigger number that’s going in the wrong direction.

I’ll pre-empt his “gotcha” that the ones we pick will be net tax payers going into work. Yes, jobs that could have been done by Brits if firms just showed some entrepreneurial spirit rather than take the lazy approach of importing workers. They won’t have brought a house with them either.
Well said, and spot on.

Hugh 15-07-2023 18:51
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Ben Wallace to quit as defence secretary at next Cabinet reshuffle

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66213245

Quote:
Ben Wallace says he will resign as defence secretary at the next Cabinet reshuffle.

He told the Sunday Times he would not stand at the next general election, but ruled out leaving "prematurely" and triggering a by-election.

Mr Wallace has served as defence secretary under three different PMs and played a high-profile role in the UK's response to the war in Ukraine.

Sources told the BBC they expect the next reshuffle in September.

His Wyre and Preston North constituency is set to disappear under upcoming boundary changes and he told the newspaper he would not seek a new one.

jfman 15-07-2023 23:09
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
If anyone knows when to desert a sinking ship I’d hope it’s the defence secretary.

Pierre 15-07-2023 23:12
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36156271)
If anyone knows when to desert a sinking ship I’d hope it’s the defence secretary.
I’m sure a future at BAE systems awaits.

1andrew1 15-07-2023 23:31
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36156272)
I’m sure a future at BAE systems awaits.
Agreed.

Ms NTL 15-07-2023 23:41
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36156272)
I’m sure a future at BAE systems awaits.
Coming to us....! Farnborough ....

Hugh 16-07-2023 12:01
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Tory MP Andrew Rosindell has not attended parliament for more than a year since arrest

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/9...abe95eac8af618

Quote:
A Conservative MP has not attended parliament for more than a year after being arrested for sexual offences, misconduct in public office and more.

Andrew Rosindell, 57, has been under investigation by the Metropolitan Police since January 2020 and was formally arrested in May last year.

He denies any wrongdoing and is on police bail, which has been extended five times. He has not been charged and therefore remains innocent.

After agreeing to a request to stay away from the parliamentary estate by the Tory chief whip, he has not voted or spoken in the House of Commons since May last year. However, his constituents do not know that their MP is under investigation or that he has agreed not to attend parliament while police inquiries continue.

… According to Rosindell, 25 to 30 people took part in the vote to adopt him as their candidate. An official from party HQ and a rep for the London East area supervised the event.

A party source claimed it would have been “unlawful” to inform the participants of Rosindell’s predicament. They included officers of the local association and representatives from wards within the constituency.

TheDaddy 16-07-2023 15:59
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36156295)
Tory MP Andrew Rosindell has not attended parliament for more than a year since arrest

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/9...abe95eac8af618
I know him, I asked for his support in DBS reforms (which eventually were adopted btw) and his secretary said on more than one occasion that he was a crook, I thought she was joking :rofl:

denphone 27-07-2023 08:17
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Why Kwasi Kwarteng under the Truss premiership buried the OBR forecasts at the time of the chaotic mini Budget.

https://www.ft.com/content/355fb096-...-email:content

ianch99 06-08-2023 15:20
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
All you need to know about Sunak and the Tory priorities:

https://twitter.com/BladeoftheS/stat...24739799015424

Quote:
The revelation that Sunak has paid £1M in tax in the last 3 years 0.13% of his £720m wealth.

While the average person has paid about £45k or 14%, 100x as much.

Should open your eyes to just how much and how blatantly the rich dodge tax
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65040300

Quote:
In the last financial year alone, 2021-2022, the prime minister earned more than £1.9m in income and capital gains, according to the records.

Capital gains are taxed at 20% in the UK, while the highest income tax band is 45% on earnings over £150,000.

The records show the total UK tax he paid was:

£227,350 on total earnings of £1,018,389 in 2019/20
£393,217 on total earnings of £1,777,581 in 2020/21
£432,493 on total earnings of £1,970,992 in 2021/22

Nimesh Shah, chief executive of tax advisory firm Blick Rothenberg, pointed out that Mr Sunak only released a summary of his income and gains, rather than a traditional tax return filed with HM Revenue & Customs.

"Whilst the public knows more now than it did before the release, it doesn't show the full picture," he said.
Sunak was taxed at 22% on his earnings that he declared. Of course, what he accrued on his wealth off-shore is unknown. He’s paying tax rates that are roughly the same as the average nurse earning £37,000.

Now compare his tax rate with yours ...

Sephiroth 06-08-2023 15:51
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
@Ian

Sorry, but your last was a disgusting post. It was personal and, indeed, rabid.

Whete is the evidence that Sunak has avoided any tax he should have paid? Or is it just the envy that he is rich and most others are not?

Sunak came onto politics rich and that’s no reason not to stay rich anr reap the benefits of his past investments.

You’ve surpassed any of you other vitriolic replies.

jfman 06-08-2023 16:04
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158012)
@Ian

Sorry, but your last was a disgusting post. It was personal and, indeed, rabid.

Whete is the evidence that Sunak has avoided any tax he should have paid? Or is it just the envy that he is rich and most others are not?

Sunak came onto politics rich and that’s no reason not to stay rich anr reap the benefits of his past investments.

You’ve surpassed any of you other vitriolic replies.
If who a mere news reader is texting for pictures of them in the buff is in the public interest, then the financial interests, wealth (or otherwise) of the most important decision makers in the country is equally so.

If you are naive enough to think, against all the logic of any rational capitalism, they can place all their own interests aside for a mere two hundred grand a year (less for others) then you continue to live in la-la land.

It’s not envy to ask who this country is being run in the interests of given the greatest fall in average living standards since the war, energy companies trousering billions, banks the same, and the water companies doing the same while ploughing human excrement into our waterways while we pay for the pleasure.

The only vitriol is yours. Presumably because even you can’t defend the indefensible. You can only prevent someone from prompting you to.

Nobody accused Sunak of avoiding tax - it’s a red herring. The question is who does (and who doesn’t) pay tax and why. The revolving door between the big consultancies and the Treasury should be a warning sign to anyone.

Sephiroth 06-08-2023 16:20
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 

@John:

The two cases bear no relation to each other. Where’s your evidence that Sunak diverts attention from governing to pursue additional wealth?

The other things that you cited as being wrong in the UK are indeed wrong. That’s down to bad government as a whole not down to Sunak’s wealth.




jfman 06-08-2023 16:30
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158014)

@John:

The two cases bear no relation to each other. Where’s your evidence that Sunak diverts attention from governing to pursue additional wealth?

The other things that you cited as being wrong in the UK are indeed wrong. That’s down to bad government as a whole not down to Sunak’s wealth.

The burden should be on those in power to demonstrate they place aside their own personal interests from decision making - not the other way round.

Bad government leaves a massive cloud of incompetence where someone could reasonably hide nefarious decision making. Nobody is saying he’s sleeping at the wheel - so ‘attention diverted’ isn’t required. He could reasonably have two decisions in front of him with good and bad evidence to support both outcomes and lean more into the ones that generate personal wealth for his own interests. This could be extremely difficult to evidence - I’m certainly not making an accusation but that’s why we call for higher standards and ethics in public life - so even the appearance of being potentially grubby is avoided.

I wonder if - anywhere in the world - there’s evidence of a democratically elected politician supporting a policy or outcome where someone can directly point to it costing their own financial interests that predate their lives in politics.

ianch99 07-08-2023 11:36
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158012)
@Ian

Sorry, but your last was a disgusting post. It was personal and, indeed, rabid.

Whete is the evidence that Sunak has avoided any tax he should have paid? Or is it just the envy that he is rich and most others are not?

Sunak came onto politics rich and that’s no reason not to stay rich anr reap the benefits of his past investments.

You’ve surpassed any of you other vitriolic replies.
To the New Seph, you need to wind in the hyperbole here. Your words, disgusting and rabid, are so over the top as to be humorous

To the Old Seph, you deliberately deflect into tax evasion. I am not addressing this here, rather I am addressing the moral position of an ultra-wealthy person paying a lower effective tax rate than a nurse (or similar). Saying that the ultra-wealthy should not pay the same tax as the rest of us because the laws that were created from their sponsorship allow them to is not a cogent argument.

Sephiroth 07-08-2023 21:18
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158061)
<SNIP>

To the Old Seph, you deliberately deflect into tax evasion. I am not addressing this here, rather I am addressing the moral position of an ultra-wealthy person paying a lower effective tax rate than a nurse (or similar). Saying that the ultra-wealthy should not pay the same tax as the rest of us because the laws that were created from their sponsorship allow them to is not a cogent argument.
Yours is entirely a polemic argument that cannot be resolved.
Sunak and his wealth are facts. Same goes for any wealthy person who is not a politician and there is nor reasonable basis for attacking this.

However, you have said (or implied) that the governing party has allowed laws that favour the rich (aka Tory party donors), for example not closing tax loopholes. It would be difficult for me to refute that - the VIP scheme for Covid speaks to that.

But, for me, the choice is being governed by the Conservatives (admittedly more Thatcher and less the present muppets), or Labour who pretend to support the "masses" but is similarly (to other parties) only interested in power, which they would use to kick people who have worked hard to rise in society.

Sadly, this awful government of incompetents have blown it for the Conservatives and you will get, in part, what you wish for.

Regards - Old Seph.

Pierre 08-08-2023 05:48
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158061)
I am addressing the moral position of an ultra-wealthy person paying a lower effective tax rate than a nurse (or similar). Saying that the ultra-wealthy should not pay the same tax as the rest of us because the laws that were created from their sponsorship allow them to is not a cogent argument.
As long as it’s legal, what’s the problem?

Damien 08-08-2023 07:31
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158112)
As long as it’s legal, what’s the problem?
No one said it isn't legal, they are saying the tax system should be changed.

Pierre 08-08-2023 07:44
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
I thought Ian was suggesting it was immoral that a wealthy person should pay so little tax. I was merely highlighting that morality shouldn’t come into it. It’s ether legal or it isn’t.

As it’s legal, I see no reason to change it.

Damien 08-08-2023 09:27
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158116)
I thought Ian was suggesting it was immoral that a wealthy person should pay so little tax. I was merely highlighting that morality shouldn’t come into it. It’s ether legal or it isn’t.

As it’s legal, I see no reason to change it.
Well, people are going to pay as little as legally possible in tax. It's not immoral for someone not to overpay their taxes.

The fact it's legal is the reason to change it if you want them to pay more.

Hugh 08-08-2023 09:38
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36158121)
Well, people are going to pay as little as legally possible in tax. It's not immoral for someone not to overpay their taxes.

The fact it's legal is the reason to change it if you want them to pay more.
Actually, most of the tax avoidance cases are usually firms trying to find loopholes in existing legislation, which are later proven not to exist, thus they/their customers have to pay back the tax they tried to avoid (often with interest and/or fines)*.

So, often, they were never legal in the first place, it was just people trying it on…

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...oidance-scheme

Quote:
If you are involved in any of the tax avoidance schemes shown on this page, or recognise any of the promoters, enablers or suppliers, and are not already talking to HMRC about your tax position you should contact HMRC as soon as possible. There is more information about how to do this below. You can also report a tax avoidance scheme to HMRC.

There are other schemes, promoters, enablers and suppliers that HMRC cannot publish information about at this time. This may be because:

HMRC is gathering information about the promoter, enabler, supplier or avoidance schemes being marketed

HMRC is considering representations from a promoter, enabler or supplier
the appeal period for not withdrawing a stop notice has not ended

HMRC is not aware of the tax avoidance scheme, promoter, enabler or supplier

If a tax avoidance scheme is not shown in the list, this does not mean that the scheme works or is in any way approved by HMRC. HMRC does not approve tax avoidance schemes for use.
*this info comes from a close friend, who is a Senior Tax Partner in one of the Big Four accountancy firms, so I’m pretty sure he knows what he’s talking about

jfman 08-08-2023 10:11
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36158121)
Well, people are going to pay as little as legally possible in tax. It's not immoral for someone not to overpay their taxes.

The fact it's legal is the reason to change it if you want them to pay more.
It’s not immoral for someone to not overpay tax - I don’t think Pierre claimed it was.

However the question of who pays tax, where and when in a country does result from the morals or values that have driven policy making.

ianch99 08-08-2023 12:54
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158112)
As long as it’s legal, what’s the problem?
Just because it is legal does not make it right. Just look back into history for all the proof you need to validate this point.

But on a wider point here, those small number of people who think that they should not contribute to this society in the same way the vast majority do, specifically rely on people, like Pierre here, to parrot lines like:

- it's legal, where's the problem
- they "earned" their money, they should be able to keep it
- if we upset the rich people they will leave and we will be doomed

This line of thinking by a population groomed over the centuries is exactly what is needed to be challenged.

---------- Post added at 12:42 ---------- Previous post was at 12:34 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158116)
I thought Ian was suggesting it was immoral that a wealthy person should pay so little tax. I was merely highlighting that morality shouldn’t come into it. It’s ether legal or it isn’t.

As it’s legal, I see no reason to change it.
You misunderstand the definition of morality here:

"morality"

Quote:
principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.
The distinction between right and wrong over the years has always been a societal one based on the consensus at the time. I am confident that a significant majority of the population would agree with the proposition that an ultra wealthy individual should contribute, at a minimum, the same as a Nurse.

---------- Post added at 12:43 ---------- Previous post was at 12:42 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36158124)
It’s not immoral for someone to not overpay tax - I don’t think Pierre claimed it was.

However the question of who pays tax, where and when in a country does result from the morals or values that have driven policy making.
A good summary

---------- Post added at 12:54 ---------- Previous post was at 12:43 ----------

Here is some interesting data on UK Wealth Inequality:

https://equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-e...-inequality-uk

One of points made is this:

Quote:
By 2023, the richest 50 families in the UK held more wealth than half of the UK population, comprising 33.5 million people. If the wealth of the super rich continues to grow at the rate it has been, by 2035, the wealth of the richest 200 families will be larger than the whole UK GDP.
Is this "Moral"?

Sephiroth 08-08-2023 13:30
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 

Old Sep here:

An ultra-wealthy individual contributes fare more than a nurse.

Ian’s basic premise, as stated, is false.


Pierre 08-08-2023 14:11
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158127)
Just because it is legal does not make it right.
That’s all I was after.

I’ve just been fishing over here and I knew it wouldn’t be long before I caught what I wanted.


Now, if everyone can apply the above sentence to the Huw Edwards thread, I’d appreciate it. My work here is done.

Hugh 08-08-2023 14:18
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158136)
That’s all I was after.

I’ve just been fishing over here and I knew it wouldn’t be long before I caught what I wanted.


Now, if everyone can apply the above sentence to the Huw Edwards thread, I’d appreciate it. My work here is done.
Well, since not everyone* applied that philosophy in that thread, why should everyone do so?

*in fact, very few did…

ianch99 08-08-2023 20:38
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158133)

Old Sep here:

An ultra-wealthy individual contributes fare more than a nurse.

Ian’s basic premise, as stated, is false.

Nope, that was New Seph! Old Seph would listen to the logic of the argument and try and reason based on worked examples rather that generic, unsupported, statements.

---------- Post added at 20:38 ---------- Previous post was at 20:34 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158136)
That’s all I was after.

I’ve just been fishing over here and I knew it wouldn’t be long before I caught what I wanted.


Now, if everyone can apply the above sentence to the Huw Edwards thread, I’d appreciate it. My work here is done.
Not quite Mr Holmes. When you come back with the supporting evidence that Huw Edwards did something wrong, people might listen to you.

When you rant & rage based on an incorrect clickbait article from a Tabloid Rag then I am not surprised no one took you seriously.

Pierre 08-08-2023 21:08
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158149)
Not quite Mr Holmes. When you come back with the supporting evidence that Huw Edwards did something wrong, people might listen to you.

When you rant & rage based on an incorrect clickbait article from a Tabloid Rag then I am not surprised no one took you seriously.
I reminded of that wonderful quote again.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158127)
Just because it is legal does not make it right.

Sephiroth 08-08-2023 21:33
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158149)
Nope, that was New Seph! Old Seph would listen to the logic of the argument and try and reason based on worked examples rather that generic, unsupported, statements.

<SNIP>
Nope to you, Ian. That was Old Seph applying the logic of the bleedin' obvious.

If a nurse earns, say, £50K and an ultra-wealthy person earns £1 million in the UK, then it is bleedin' obvious that the wealthy person pays more tax than the nurse.

You accuse me of making unsupported statements - you said:

Quote:
I am confident that a significant majority of the population would agree with the proposition that an ultra wealthy individual should contribute, at a minimum, the same as a Nurse.
Show us please, where Sunak has contributed less than a nurse?

Hugh 08-08-2023 21:53
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Pretty sure Ian meant as a percentage of salary, not gross amount…

Sephiroth 08-08-2023 22:16
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36158156)
Pretty sure Ian meant as a percentage of salary, not gross amount…
Maybe he did - but he hangs onto my words so I'm right to hang on his.

Even if that is what he meant, let's analyse this. On £50K gross, a nurse would pay c. 18.5% = c. £9,200.

On £1 million gross, the rich person will have paid nearly £440,00 in tax = 44%.

So you're getting it as wrong as Ian did.

Hope that helps.

Paul 09-08-2023 00:04
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158153)
I reminded of that wonderful quote again.
If your just going to be an ass in every topic, you'll soon find you cant post in them.

Hugh 09-08-2023 08:56
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158158)
Maybe he did - but he hangs onto my words so I'm right to hang on his.

Even if that is what he meant, let's analyse this. On £50K gross, a nurse would pay c. 18.5% = c. £9,200.

On £1 million gross, the rich person will have paid nearly £440,00 in tax = 44%.

So you're getting it as wrong as Ian did.

Hope that helps.
£50k gross - tax & NI = £12,444, rate of 24.9%

https://uk.talent.com/tax-calculator...+Britain-50000

Sunak gross (over 3 years)

£4.766m gross across the three years of 2019/20, 2020/21 and 2021/22 - tax £1.053m, rate of 22%.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...-a9566211.html

Quote:
Some of the wealthiest people in the UK are paying an effective tax rate of just 20 per cent, pioneering new research has found.

Researchers from Warwick University and the London School of Economics (LSE) analysed anonymised HMRC tax returns of higher earners and found that the average person with £10m in total remuneration had an effective tax rate of just 21 per cent – less than someone on median earnings of £30,000.

And a tenth of people receiving more than £1m paid a lower rate than someone earning just £15,000.

The very rich are able to – entirely legally – reduce their taxes by structuring their affairs to take their remuneration as capital gains and corporate dividends.

ianch99 09-08-2023 09:35
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158155)
Nope to you, Ian. That was Old Seph applying the logic of the bleedin' obvious.

If a nurse earns, say, £50K and an ultra-wealthy person earns £1 million in the UK, then it is bleedin' obvious that the wealthy person pays more tax than the nurse.

You accuse me of making unsupported statements - you said:



Show us please, where Sunak has contributed less than a nurse?
(Old) Seph, of course I am talking about, as Hugh mentions, the same percentage contribution. I felt it was sort of obvious but hey ho.

I would love to give you the evidence of the Sunak's actual effective tax rate but he, like others, deliberately obfuscates this via off shore tax havens and assorted chicanery

Sephiroth 09-08-2023 19:14
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36158172)
£50k gross - tax & NI = £12,444, rate of 24.9%

https://uk.talent.com/tax-calculator...+Britain-50000

Sunak gross (over 3 years)

£4.766m gross across the three years of 2019/20, 2020/21 and 2021/22 - tax £1.053m, rate of 22%.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...-a9566211.html
There's bugger all difference between 24.9% and 22% for the purposes of this discussion.

What is the fair rate for Sunak?

ianch99 09-08-2023 19:35
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158213)
There's bugger all difference between 24.9% and 22% for the purposes of this discussion.

What is the fair rate for Sunak?
Seph, I think your are so missing the point here. I am contrasting Sunak (together with many of his kind) with a Nurse for effect. Of course, given the ultra wealth these people have, he (and they) should be paying effective tax rates nearer the upper end of the PAYE scale i.e. towards 40%

Sephiroth 09-08-2023 20:01
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158215)
Seph, I think your are so missing the point here. I am contrasting Sunak (together with many of his kind) with a Nurse for effect. Of course, given the ultra wealth these people have, he (and they) should be paying effective tax rates nearer the upper end of the PAYE scale i.e. towards 40%
I did show in my example that a person earning £1 million per annum would pay 44% in income tax. I did not take into account any tax wheezes because I believe that government should legislate properly to close down tax avoidance schemes.

I hear you say "Exactly". I further hear you think "never would a Tory government close the loopholes" and you'd prolly be right because they've done bugger all since 2010. Furthermore, I hear you think, "it's their donors that the Tories are protecting". All of the foregoing are valid criticisms.

Now I'll ruin it all: John Redwood put forward a plan a few years ago that also has merit. https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2012/0...-the-rich-pay/

Quote:
.... However, at a time of economic difficulty, when the government wishes to spend so much more than it is currently collecting in revenue, there are many cries to tax the rich more. To do this successfully you need to have a tax system which attracts more very rich people here, and which tempts rich people to invest, venture and spend in ways which trigger more tax revenue from them. The higher rates introduced by the outgoing Labour and incoming Coalition governments have led to a predictable continuing drop in revenues. Taxes on wealth and income yielded 3.5% less to August 2012 than the same period the previous year.

The USA has lower tax rates on the very rich than the UK. Top rate federal income tax is 35%, compared to 50% (plus 2% NI) here. State income tax varies from 0% to 11%. Allowing an average of around 5% means the US top tax rate is more than 10% lower than the UK one.

Despite this- or more likely because of it – the US top 1% earn 17% of all the income. More importantly , they pay 37% of all the Income Tax paid. So with lower tax rates the USA achieves the goal of getting the rich to pay much more. It also has more seriously rich people, which some will dislike and others will see as helpful to pay all that extra tax. In the US the rich pay more than twice their income level. They make an overall bigger contribution than in the UK.

Hugh 10-08-2023 10:18
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Just when you think Liz Truss’s favourite Right Wing think tank (the IEA) can’t get any more batshit-crazy, they say "hold my beer!"…

https://iea.org.uk/in-the-media/pres...cies-should-go

Quote:
“The police don’t need to be told what to do by politicians who wouldn’t have a clue about how to run a police force. Nor do they need to be rewarded with increased budgets when they underperform. They need to be put in the position of private enterprises, whose fortunes depend on how well they provide for their customers.

“Most importantly, if ACME cannot deter crime well enough, the tariffs it pays London will be so high that it will make a loss and, ultimately, go out of business. Good. The London contract can be awarded to a more proficient policing company, which might hire Acme’s police officers and put them to better use.”
Full article here

https://thecritic.co.uk/policing-a-radical-solution/

Quote:
Most importantly, if ACME cannot deter crime well enough, the tariffs it pays London will be so high that it will make a loss and, ultimately, go out of business. Good. The London contract can be awarded to a more proficient policing company, which might hire Acme’s police officers and put them to better use.

Competition between profit-seeking policing companies would lead to continual improvements in their methods. We could expect both crime rates and policing fees to fall, reducing the cost of crime to society.
<cough cough> Water Companies <cough cough>

jfman 10-08-2023 10:46
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
I look forward to the first contract going to Wagner PMC.

ianch99 10-08-2023 14:47
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158218)
I did show in my example that a person earning £1 million per annum would pay 44% in income tax. I did not take into account any tax wheezes because I believe that government should legislate properly to close down tax avoidance schemes.

I hear you say "Exactly". I further hear you think "never would a Tory government close the loopholes" and you'd prolly be right because they've done bugger all since 2010. Furthermore, I hear you think, "it's their donors that the Tories are protecting". All of the foregoing are valid criticisms.

Now I'll ruin it all: John Redwood put forward a plan a few years ago that also has merit. https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2012/0...-the-rich-pay/
Seph, I am not sure if you are doing this deliberately but you keep referring to Income Tax in your responses. You know very well that the ultra wealthy do not accrue wealth via "income", rather they use other, more tax efficient, vehicles which attract far lower tax rates, if indeed they pay tax at all.

Pierre 10-08-2023 15:24
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158264)
Seph, I am not sure if you are doing this deliberately but you keep referring to Income Tax in your responses. You know very well that the ultra wealthy do not accrue wealth via "income", rather they use other, more tax efficient, vehicles which attract far lower tax rates, if indeed they pay tax at all.
Good for them, as long as it’s legal.

ianch99 10-08-2023 15:35
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158267)
Good for them, as long as it’s legal.
Love the shilling for the ultra wealthy, such a good look :)

Sephiroth 10-08-2023 15:57
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158264)
Seph, I am not sure if you are doing this deliberately but you keep referring to Income Tax in your responses. You know very well that the ultra wealthy do not accrue wealth via "income", rather they use other, more tax efficient, vehicles which attract far lower tax rates, if indeed they pay tax at all.
Ian, the problem you've got is conflating "fair and square" in the social sense with "fair and square" in tax proportion equivalence.

Your argument boils down to "it's not fair that rich people get away with tax avoidance scheme whereas the poor nurse isn't as rich and can't get away with anything". Fair enough - you don't appear to like this wealth gap.

I was referring to income tax because, like you, I believe in a fair tax system that isn't loaded towards the rich through enabled avoidance. But I also subscribe to JR's theories ( https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2012/0...-the-rich-pay/ ) which address how taxation must also encourage investors to come to the UK.

I rather think that my stance is somewhat more rational than yours because there are adverse consequences from simply sticking it to the rich.

Hugh 10-08-2023 16:17
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158218)
I did show in my example that a person earning £1 million per annum would pay 44% in income tax. I did not take into account any tax wheezes because I believe that government should legislate properly to close down tax avoidance schemes.

I hear you say "Exactly". I further hear you think "never would a Tory government close the loopholes" and you'd prolly be right because they've done bugger all since 2010. Furthermore, I hear you think, "it's their donors that the Tories are protecting". All of the foregoing are valid criticisms.

Now I'll ruin it all: John Redwood put forward a plan a few years ago that also has merit.

Quote:
However, at a time of economic difficulty, when the government wishes to spend so much more than it is currently collecting in revenue, there are many cries to tax the rich more. To do this successfully you need to have a tax system which attracts more very rich people here, and which tempts rich people to invest, venture and spend in ways which trigger more tax revenue from them. The higher rates introduced by the outgoing Labour and incoming Coalition governments have led to a predictable continuing drop in revenues. Taxes on wealth and income yielded 3.5% less to August 2012 than the same period the previous year.

The USA has lower tax rates on the very rich than the UK. Top rate federal income tax is 35%, compared to 50% (plus 2% NI) here. State income tax varies from 0% to 11%. Allowing an average of around 5% means the US top tax rate is more than 10% lower than the UK one.

Despite this- or more likely because of it – the US top 1% earn 17% of all the income. More importantly , they pay 37% of all the Income Tax paid. So with lower tax rates the USA achieves the goal of getting the rich to pay much more. It also has more seriously rich people, which some will dislike and others will see as helpful to pay all that extra tax. In the US the rich pay more than twice their income level. They make an overall bigger contribution than in the UK.
https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2012/0...-the-rich-pay/
Person who earns £700k a year puts forward proposal to reduce his tax, without mentioning all the other additional taxes (like property tax, which is higher in most US States than the equivalent Community Charge, the fact that most small local towns in the US use the local police as a revenue service fining motorists)...

<shocked face>

Sephiroth 10-08-2023 16:43
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36158273)
Person who earns £700k a year puts forward proposal to reduce his tax, without mentioning all the other additional taxes (like property tax, which is higher in most US States than the equivalent Community Charge, the fact that most small local towns in the US use the local police as a revenue service fining motorists)...

<shocked face>
Utter red herring (highlighted red).

Hugh 10-08-2023 18:15
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Pure coincidence, I’m sure…

---------- Post added at 18:15 ---------- Previous post was at 18:01 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158275)
Utter red herring (highlighted red).
You may find this informative…

https://theconversation.com/american...as%20drawbacks.

Quote:
Americans spend more time and money filing their taxes than residents of other countries
Quote:
Other countries retain progressive systems with fewer tax brackets. For example, the U.K. currently has four tax brackets, compared with seven in the U.S.

The U.S. also has different rates for ordinary income such as wages versus income such as dividends and capital gains, which are typically taxed at lower rates – in part to spur investment and also because investment income has arguably already been taxed. But the U.S. system adds complexity because capital gains on investments held for less than a year and some dividends are not taxed at preferential rates. These different rates – from different levels and types of income – reduce the chances of getting withholding right.

The U.S. system also adds complexity with the sheer number of deductions and credits available to taxpayers. Deductions reduce the amount of taxable income you have, thereby reducing your tax liability. Say a single individual has $80,000 of wage income and $15,000 of deductions. Their taxable income is $65,000. At 2022 rates, their tax liability is $9,617. Those $15,000 of deductions saved them $3,300 in taxes.

Fortunately, there are a lot deductions. Unfortunately, taxpayers often have to jump through hoops to qualify. You can deduct gambling losses but only if you have gambling winnings, state income taxes but only up to $10,000 each year, and student loan interest but only if you make less than $85,000 or $175,000, depending on your marital status.

Further, these deductions come in different flavors: “above-the-line” deductions and “below-the-line” deductions, which themselves come in two flavors – itemized and standard. Taxpayers itemize deductions only if those amounts exceed the standard deduction. That means you might spend several hours tallying receipts for itemized charitable donations only to find you can’t deduct any of them because the total is less than your standard deduction.

Credits are another valuable element of the tax system because they reduce your tax liability dollar for dollar. Let’s go back to our single taxpayer with $65,000 in taxable income and a $9,617 tax liability before credits. A $1,000 credit – say for higher education or renewable energy – reduces their tax liability to $8,617. But credits also add complexity because they can be reduced as your income increases, and they can have extensive eligibility requirements.
Thanks, but no thanks…

Sephiroth 10-08-2023 18:51
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36158289)
Pure coincidence, I’m sure…

---------- Post added at 18:15 ---------- Previous post was at 18:01 ----------



You may find this informative…

https://theconversation.com/american...as%20drawbacks.

That isn't what JR was suggesting. He was dealing in headline comparisons and obviously wouldn't want to bring in the baggage.



Thanks, but no thanks…

TheDaddy 10-08-2023 19:53
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Obviously, when are you going to learn, the devil is always in the detail, poxy soundbite politicians, bring back the experts, I reckon the majority isn't sick of them anymore

Pierre 10-08-2023 20:33
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Is it the opinion of the class that wealthy, and not so wealthy, individuals should actively look to voluntarily pay more tax, or should the state close all the loopholes to prevent them avoiding tax?

TheDaddy 10-08-2023 23:28
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158302)
Is it the opinion of the class that wealthy, and not so wealthy, individuals should actively look to voluntarily pay more tax, or should the state close all the loopholes to prevent them avoiding tax?
Or option C, when the aggressive tax avoidance schemes are found not legal do them for evasion or at least make the penalties for the most egregious examples worth it as currently there is no reason not to chance it

ianch99 11-08-2023 09:46
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158302)
Is it the opinion of the class that wealthy, and not so wealthy, individuals should actively look to voluntarily pay more tax, or should the state close all the loopholes to prevent them avoiding tax?
So much to break down in a single sentence.

- there is no class here, just people debating opinion
- no one, from what I recall, mentioned "not so wealthy" so you are making a clear attempt to derail the argument here
- also, the term "wealthy" I think is only used by you, again to muddy the waters? I tried to be more precise and use the term "ultra wealthy" i.e. individuals who have more than £500m (-ish) in assets.
- no one mentioned they should voluntarily pay more tax, that is a dumb suggestion
- so yes, high net worth individuals should not pay an effective tax rate of less than an "average" salaried citizen. Now, we can debate what the exact figure is but you get the idea
- and finally (Esther), yes, the state should close all the loopholes to prevent them avoiding tax (offshore)

---------- Post added at 09:46 ---------- Previous post was at 09:43 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158269)
Ian, the problem you've got is conflating "fair and square" in the social sense with "fair and square" in tax proportion equivalence.

Your argument boils down to "it's not fair that rich people get away with tax avoidance scheme whereas the poor nurse isn't as rich and can't get away with anything". Fair enough - you don't appear to like this wealth gap.

I was referring to income tax because, like you, I believe in a fair tax system that isn't loaded towards the rich through enabled avoidance. But I also subscribe to JR's theories ( https://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2012/0...-the-rich-pay/ ) which address how taxation must also encourage investors to come to the UK.

I rather think that my stance is somewhat more rational than yours because there are adverse consequences from simply sticking it to the rich.
Seph, just to be clear here: I do not have a problem with the wealth gap per se, rather I have a problem with the contribution gap.

Don't forget, these people have more money that they can realistically spend in their lifetime and if they paid tax as the rate you & I pay it, they would still have more money that they can realistically spend in their lifetime.

Pierre 11-08-2023 10:00
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158332)
So much to break down in a single sentence.

- there is no class here, just people debating opinion
it was just a term, nothing to read into. You are looking to hard!

Quote:
- no one, from what I recall, mentioned "not so wealthy" so you are making a clear attempt to derail the argument here
you don’t have to be ultra-wealthy to find yourself paying a lot of tax and wishing to avoid doing so.

Quote:
- also, the term "wealthy" I think is only used by you, again to muddy the waters? I tried to be more precise and use the term "ultra wealthy" i.e. individuals who have more than £500m (-ish) in assets.
use of the word precise followed by ish. What if their assets aren’t liquid?

Quote:
- no one mentioned they should voluntarily pay more tax, that is a dumb suggestion
your asking them not to avoid paying more than they need to

ianch99 11-08-2023 10:38
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158335)
it was just a term, nothing to read into. You are looking to hard!

you don’t have to be ultra-wealthy to find yourself paying a lot of tax and wishing to avoid doing so.

use of the word precise followed by ish. What if their assets aren’t liquid?

your asking them not to avoid paying more than they need to
The net increase of wealth should be taxed. I don't care what state of sublimation their assets are in. In the same way that HMRC does not care where you money is when they send you a tax bill.

Riddle me this: what would you prefer?

- the ultra wealthy keep their billions

or

- part of their increasing wealth is used to improve your local services e.g. GPs, Hospitals, Care Homes, Council services, Libraries, Youth services, etc.

Damien 11-08-2023 10:41
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
The laws need to be changed so people pay the tax we as a society decide they should. Unless they're using illegal schemes then everyone will pay as little tax as they are legally able to for the most part, as they should.

ianch99 11-08-2023 10:46
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36158338)
The laws need to be changed so people pay the tax we as a society decide they should. Unless they're using illegal schemes then everyone will pay as little tax as they are legally able to for the most part, as they should.
And this is the essential point here. The tax laws are not made by "We, The People", rather they are made by those who have vested, outside interests and sponsors. The issue is not people not paying tax illegally, it is that that are allowed, no encouraged, to pay less tax if they are ultra-wealthy.

If you want some context and encouragement in this area, please watch The Big Short on Netflix. It is a brilliant expose of the 2008 crash and who engineered it and why.

Mr K 11-08-2023 14:04
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
BBC News - Migrants moved off barge over Legionella bacteria fears
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-66476538

Is this the most incompetent useless Govt ever? I think it is, they can't even get the xenophobic stuff right.

Could certainly be a a storyline for 'The Thick of It'. But prob. rejected as too far fetched, like the Rwanda storyline.....

jfman 11-08-2023 14:09
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36158353)
BBC News - Migrants moved off barge over Legionella bacteria fears
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-66476538

Is this the most incompetent useless Govt ever? I think it is, they can't even get the xenophobic stuff right.

Could certainly be a a storyline for 'The Thick of It'. But prob. rejected as too far fetched, like the Rwanda storyline.....
I doubt the barges will stand legal scrutiny. It’s convenient to have an excuse to get everyone off. A bit like The Hunt for Red October.

They don’t need to be a success for the Tories to get xenophobic momentum. Arguably there is more political capital in their plans being scuppered to give them more powers.

Remember despite their majority in the House of Commons this is the Scoody Doo villain Government - they’d have gotten away with it if it wasn’t for those pesky lefties, lawyers, remoaners, civil servants, etc.

Sephiroth 11-08-2023 20:53
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
OB will be onto you, John And quite right too.

Pierre 11-08-2023 23:13
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36158336)
The net increase of wealth should be taxed. I don't care what state of sublimation their assets are in.
You mean a capital gains tax? We have something like that, it’s called capital gains tax.

Quote:
In the same way that HMRC does not care where you money is when they send you a tax bill.
I totally agree that the HMRC always go after the easy guy. I’ve been through this myself.

I would urge anyone, that hits the 40% bracket, to employ the services of a financial advisor/tax consultant. They’re not that expensive and future you will get down on their knees and thank you.

There are a multitude of ways to avoid paying too much tax and maximising your capital.


Quote:
Riddle me this: what would you prefer?

- the ultra wealthy keep their billions
well if they’ve made it that’s up to them. I would hope they’re philanthropists, as many are.

or

Quote:
part of their increasing wealth is used to improve your local services e.g. GPs, Hospitals, Care Homes, Council services, Libraries, Youth services, etc.
It already is, through tax.

jfman 11-08-2023 23:49
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36158396)
OB will be onto you, John And quite right too.
I dunno Seph, I think once you are out there defending the idea of slavery, eroding workers rights, ripping up planning legislation, removing the rights of local communities to decide what types of developments they want in their area that even defending Rishi Sunak’s Government is a step too far.

Mr K 11-08-2023 23:52
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158410)
I would urge anyone, that hits the 40% bracket, to employ the services of a financial advisor/tax consultant. They’re not that expensive and future you will get down on their knees and thank you.

There are a multitude of ways to avoid paying too much tax and maximising your capital.
If ever there was a post not to vote Tory, this is it.

I'm all right Jack, the rest of you go forth and multiply.
However when I need need my backside wiping at some stage, I'll call on you, or one of those immigrants oiks.

Pierre 12-08-2023 00:14
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36158412)
If everv there was a post not to vote Tory, this is it.
Explain.

Quote:
I'm all right Jack, the rest of you go forth and multiply.
Just protecting what I have earnt for my family and what I can bequeath to them. I’m not ultra-wealthy ( to coin a term). I have worked continuously for 35yrs. (And I will have a good few more to go, no early retirement and a nice public funded pension for me) I have never had to call on social security ever. I am a net contributor to the system. I have totally done my bit. If I wish to ensure my I leave a legacy for my family so they have a start in life I didn’t have. I will do that and you can fox trott Oscar and indeed go forth and multiply yourself.

Quote:
However when I need need my backside wiping at some stage, I'll call on you, or one of those immigrants oiks.
Well I’m currently dealing with my mother-in-law’s affairs, as she has dementia. It’s very unlikely after her life’s achievements that she will have anything to give to anybody. As her savings, her house, everything will be taken in care costs. Once diagnosed, there is nothing you can do and if you try to divert funds you will be found out.

So as you’ve offered, are you’re available, to help in her care?

I’m making sure that if I fall prey to such disease, my family will not be robbed by the state.

Paul 12-08-2023 03:17
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36158412)
If ever there was a post not to vote Tory, this is it.
Do enlighten us, how so ?

Mick 12-08-2023 05:56
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36158420)
Do enlighten us, how so ?
I suppose he wants us to vote for Crooked Labour, true socialism on steroids, equal wealth for all, the misconception by the few, that all will be well, while in reality, no one will better themselves, because why should they, when so many lazy scoundrels earn the same sitting on their arses?

1andrew1 12-08-2023 07:21
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36158423)
I suppose he wants us to vote for Crooked Labour, true socialism on steroids, equal wealth for all, the misconception by the few, that all will be well, while in reality, no one will better themselves, because why should they, when so many lazy scoundrels earn the same sitting on their arses?
The Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat Parties do not advocate equal wealth for all.

I do agree with your broader comment which is presumably about Nadine Dorries. Why should civil servants go the extra mile when she's picking up £86k + for doing nothing? Sunak needs to kick her out of the Conservative Party.

Damien 12-08-2023 07:54
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36158423)
I suppose he wants us to vote for Crooked Labour, true socialism on steroids, equal wealth for all, the misconception by the few, that all will be well, while in reality, no one will better themselves, because why should they, when so many lazy scoundrels earn the same sitting on their arses?
What about current Labour makes you think they're socialist? Starmer basically refuses to commit to any progressive policy because they know there is no money to do so. New Labour wasn't socialist either. Corbyn was probably the closest in modern times.

The only real socialist thing they ever do is they typically spend more on the NHS when they come into office.

Hugh 12-08-2023 17:42
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Interesting article in the current Spectator (Tories house magazine)

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...-evisceration/

Quote:
The Tories are heading for electoral evisceration

The party now seems too impotent to address the failures that have led it here. It continues to be unable to achieve even the things it desires, opting for government by announcement rather than action. It would rather discuss the trivia which enrages its base than the pressing issues facing the country. The party would rather whinge about the things it sees holding it back – from civil servants to Just Stop Oil – than utilise anything in its power to address it.

More than that, the party has become disconnected from the future of the country it wishes to govern. The Conservatives have shrunk to an unprecedented position in the age split of their voters. Only in the over 65s do they have a plurality of support. The entire working-age electorate intends to reject them at the next election.

The figures are stark. Only around 6 per cent of under-24s intend to vote Tory, far lower than ever before. For the cohort above that, those 25-49, a group that includes working parents and those in settled careers and homes, it is less than 15 per cent. Even among those approaching retirement, the Conservatives can’t count on more than a third supporting them.

None of this should be surprising. The party offers these voters almost nothing. Neither its retail policies nor its rhetoric in any way appeals to these demographics. For the younger groups in particular, the party ignores or worsens their problems and tells them it hates them, then wonders why the feeling is mutual.
Quote:
It will be hard to win back the voters who feel let down by the Tories. The last decade or so of government has involved juggling and then disappointing a large electoral coalition. Now that coalition is coming together against them to produce a catastrophic defeat. Unless they do something to reverse this the party looks to be out of power for many years – it is simply impossible to win with deep unpopularity across all but one demographic.

It also becomes self-reinforcing. If the under-60s aren’t voting for you, they also aren’t becoming party members, officials, or candidates. Already most of the Tory selection meetings look like they are in the local nursing home. Active members are always a minority of the party, but the fewer votes it gets the more marginal, and frankly weird, that group becomes. This hampered the Tories on the return from 1997, but even then a quarter of young people were voting Tory.

Now, there is a real risk the party will age out, unable to replenish itself. With the party languishing among young people, the sorts you might expect to be the members, MPs and ministers of the 2040s probably don’t even vote Tory today.

Pierre 12-08-2023 17:59
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36158466)
Interesting article in the current Spectator (Tories house magazine)

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...-evisceration/
They will lose at the next election no question. But while the article addresses the apathy towards the Tory’s (and at present I am dis-inclined to vote for them)

But it doesn’t address where those Tory voters are going to go. Because if you think they’re all going to Labour, they’re not.

I couldn’t vote for Labour..yet, and if nothing changes, I won’t be.

Sunak has just over 12 months to try and do something to try and rescue any residual Tory support and Starmer has the same time to persuade them to Labour and both are doing nothing.

I can very well see myself not bothering next election, as no fringe parties resonate with me either.

So Labour will win, just don’t be surprised if it’s not by very much and the turnout is one of the lowest in history.

Hom3r 12-08-2023 18:24
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36158467)
They will lose at the next election no question. But while the article addresses the apathy towards the Tory’s (and at present I am dis-inclined to vote for them)

But it doesn’t address where those Tory voters are going to go. Because if you think they’re all going to Labour, they’re not.

I couldn’t vote for Labour..yet, and if nothing changes, I won’t be.

Sunak has just over 12 months to try and do something to try and rescue any residual Tory support and Starmer has the same time to persuade them to Labour and both are doing nothing.

I can very well see myself not bothering next election, as no fringe parties resonate with me either.

So Labour will win, just don’t be surprised if it’s not by very much and the turnout is one of the lowest in history.

I expect a hung parliament, I will NEVER vote Liebour ever again, Libable Dems are a joke of a party, so I will again Tory (I used to be Liebour, but Steptoe betrayed us and switch to a remainer party).


I would try KS to tell me my name, god let alone run the country

1andrew1 13-08-2023 23:39
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
1 Attachment(s)
Running the NHS seems to be a key Conservative challenge. Waiting lists since 2008 seem to have come down under Labour and risen under the Conservative-led administrations.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...3&d=1691966258

Chris 14-08-2023 08:25
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36158562)
Running the NHS seems to be a key Conservative challenge. Waiting lists since 2008 seem to have come down under Labour and risen under the Conservative-led administrations.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...3&d=1691966258
Much the same as Labour got the blame for the aftermath of the credit crunch, on the basis that they had not done more in previous years to prepare the country for a financial crash, the Tories can rightly be blamed for allowing NHS performance to be already slipping, year on year, so when the covid crisis hit it was in a far worse place than it might have been.

Hugh 21-08-2023 10:30
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
1 Attachment(s)
A letter in today's Times...

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...6&d=1692610207

1andrew1 21-08-2023 10:33
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36158963)
:D:D:D

I only wish it were not true.

Ms NTL 21-08-2023 10:41
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36158963)
a good one!:D

Sephiroth 21-08-2023 10:41
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Brilliant letter

1andrew1 21-08-2023 10:43
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
For the record, Braverman is useless and I hope someone effective replaces her in a future reshuffle.

GrimUpNorth 21-08-2023 13:02
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36158967)
For the record, Braverman is useless and I hope someone effective replaces her in a future reshuffle.
Like someone from a different party?

1andrew1 21-08-2023 13:11
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 36158970)
Like someone from a different party?
In the short-term, it will have to be someone from the same party. It's not so much that there is a big pool of available talent in the Conservative Party, it's more that anyone vaguely competent some of the time could do a better job.

jfman 21-08-2023 14:37
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Capitalism is coming for pension funds now keep playing at the roulette wheel.

According to The Times. But hey less red tape if all the money is in one pot, right?

Dingbat 21-08-2023 15:12
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36158972)
In the short-term, it will have to be someone from the same party. It's not so much that there is a big pool of available talent in the Conservative Party, it's more that anyone vaguely competent some of the time could do a better job.
Most, if not all, of the vaguely competent Tory MPs were removed from parliament some time ago as they were deemed non-believers.

Hugh 21-08-2023 15:36
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36158977)
Capitalism is coming for pension funds now keep playing at the roulette wheel.

According to The Times. But hey less red tape if all the money is in one pot, right?
Quote:
Barnett Waddingham has estimated that more than a third of FTSE 350 defined-benefit schemes were fully funded on a buyout basis as of May 31 this year
So 2/3rds aren’t…

Mr K 21-08-2023 19:56
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36158967)
For the record, Braverman is useless and I hope someone effective replaces her in a future reshuffle.
Wonder who does her staff report? And is her pay rise performance related, like her minions?
I'd recommend she join a union, quickly....

Dave42 24-08-2023 02:37
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36158967)
For the record, Braverman is useless and I hope someone effective replaces her in a future reshuffle.
Sunak needs Braverman or he loses the right wing and he will be thrown out too

Mr K 24-08-2023 08:42
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36159093)
Sunak needs Braverman or he loses the right wing and he will be thrown out too
Not sure the right wing rate Braverman anymore since it turns out she doesn't have Canute like powers to stop boats.

These nutty right wingers are all very popular until they get power, or get their way (e.g. Farage with Brexit). They are found out to be useless/have told a pack of lies.

1andrew1 24-08-2023 23:48
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
The Telegraph, sometimes seen a guide to Conservative party sentiment, urged under-50s to leave the UK.

Quote:
The historian Niall Ferguson once remarked that “if young Americans knew what was good for them, they would all be in the Tea Party”. If young British people knew what was good for them, they’d be on the next plane out of the country. Emigration is, after all, the time-honoured path to prosperity for those trapped in stagnating countries.

And the UK is not so much stagnating as it is fossilising. Fifteen years of anaemic growth mean that real wages are still below their 2008 peak – there are 30 year olds who have seen their entire working career go by without seeing meaningful growth in wages. The result is that countries we are used to thinking of as our peers are surging ahead.

Our GDP per capita, adjusted for actual purchasing power, is closer to Slovenia’s than it is to Denmark’s or Australia’s. American levels of prosperity are so far out of reach that we would need an economic Apollo mission to bridge the gap between us; the general manager of a Buc-ee’s petrol station in Texas is paid more than our Prime Minister.

Young people wanting to start families are finding things previous generations took for granted to be effectively out of reach. It’s hard not to connect this dysfunction with the birth rate reaching record lows. Fertility intentions – the number of children women want to have – have been pretty much at replacement level in Britain even as the number of children they actually have has fallen.

To the extent that it is no longer possible for many to have the family lives they dream of in Britain, that’s a pretty convincing reason to leave
https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https://www....leave-britain/

jfman 25-08-2023 08:04
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
If only they hadn’t thrown up a metaphorical Berlin Wall.

1andrew1 25-08-2023 09:26
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36159180)
If only they hadn’t thrown up a metaphorical Berlin Wall.
Can't have young folk leaving the UK too easily! Who else would wait upon our better-off older generations?

I found this quite damning:

Fifteen years of anaemic growth mean that real wages are still below their 2008 peak.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 21:25.
Page 9 of 20 « First 5678 9 1011121319 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum