What makes me laugh

and i was simply pointing out that "rich" people have a lot more to lose and are far less financially secure than "poor" people

---------- Post added at 16:48 ---------- Previous post was at 16:47 ----------

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

but you know full well some wont

I do ,there is no helping some people

Originally Posted by martyh

and i was simply pointing out that "rich" people have a lot more to lose and are far less financially secure than "poor" people

---------- Post added at 16:48 ---------- Previous post was at 16:47 ----------



I do ,there is no helping some people

Oh yes I do realise that also. I know a family where the Patriarch is a Chemist and worth a hell of a lot of money. Hi wife is an alcoholic his some is mentally ill but his daughter is fine. Just shows being rich does not equate to happiness it just helps lol

[Arthurgray50@blu]

The rich will always be protected by the Tories, its where they get donations from.

I worked for a guy for three years, and he was always doing something to pay less tax, he expected us to work all hours of the day to make him money, after two years he made so much money he moved to a little manasion in Kent and treated us like crap.

Whta this government have to do in the budget is make it even all over, there are loads of people out there that are on £80.000 per year and more, yes they do run businesses but they also get perks from the government to take on staff and pay less tax, while the workforce get hit with high proces.

Onlt recently we found that many famous people have off shore accounts to avoid paying tax, but you get Joe Bloggs and hes found out - gets 6 months in the klink.

Tell me a rich man that donates to labour and pays full tax.

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

The rich will always be protected by the Tories, its where they get donations from.
.

The rich don't get protected as such they are valued and encouraged because they provide all the work for you and me to do so we can buy stuff

I worked for a guy for three years, and he was always doing something to pay less tax, he expected us to work all hours of the day to make him money, after two years he made so much money he moved to a little manasion in Kent and treated us like crap.

So do i ,i take every legal means at my disposal to pay less tax as do you and every other worker in the country

Tell me a rich man that donates to labour and pays full tax.

OK then ,how about these

: Dr Chai Patel, founder of Priory Clinics, who was nominated for a peerage which was blocked by the House of Lords Appointments Commission, lent £1.5 million;

Sir David Garrard, a property developer, who lent £2.3 million. Both Sir David's and Mr Townsley's nominations for seats in the House of Lords were also blocked by the commission;

Andrew Rosenfeld, who was a partner of Sir David in London property group Minerva, lent Labour £1 million;

Rod Aldridge, who lent £1 million, is the chief executive of IT technology giant Capita;

:: Richard Caring, the clothing tycoon and owner of the fashionable Ivy restaurant, who is worth a reported £300 million, lent the party £2 million;


:: Gordon Crawford, founder of London Bridge Software, who is reported to have made a personal fortune of more than £1 billion from banking and credit management software, lent the party £500,000;


:: Professor Sir Christopher Evans, the founder and chairman of Merlin Biosciences Ltd, lent £1 million;


:: Nigel Morris, the co-founder and former president of Capital One Financial Corporation and a governor of the London Business School, lent the party £1 million;


:: Sir Gulam Noon, the curry tycoon who helped make chicken tikka masala Britain's favourite dish, lent £250,000;


:: Derek Tullett, a veteran City figure and founder of the money-broking firm which bore his name and was bought by Collins Stewart Tullett in 2003, lent £400,000;


:: Lord Sainsbury, the science minister and member of the Sainsburys supermarket dynasty who is thought to have donated more than £6 million to Labour since 2002, lent £2 million.


All of whom pay exactly the right amount of tax demanded by HMRC 'cos if they didn't they would be in jail or prosecuted for tax evasion.

Arthur seriously some of the points you think your making are absolutely stupid it was a labour chancellor that exalted the city of London, it was a labour government that laid the foundation for the crash to hit us as hard because they relaxed regulatory powers so much in the financial sector. Also to say no rich person donates to labour honestly have you totally forgotten the term "champagne socialist" trust me Arthur i know some think we do but it isn't claimants that drink champagne it's .... people, go on arthur i know saying it in the context of labour will be hard but you can do it.

Tell you something I respect Arthur not because of his posts but because he has stones after all the grief he gets he still posts. . Fair play to ya Arthur

He is entitled to his own opinions, but not his own facts.....

'Truthiness' doesn't work here....

Ive took my view up unofficially with someone I feel can have an open mind on this issue. I know my view means little

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

Harassment is against the sites T&C and by God Arthur gets Harassed every time he is on the site

no he does not ,he gets corrected or disagreed with the same as anyone else.
What is really frustrating is that he spouts a load of waffle and refuses to back any of his claims up with facts or even a sensible argument ,it's like debating with a dinosaur in the local working mans club

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Rob

For all those who seem to claim the poor are being hit hardest at the expense of the rich perhaps you should check this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21740450 That graph is quite striking. Yes those on low incomes are being hit, mostly due to the welfare system changes, but it's clear those on big incomes are taking a major share. Only problem is those on big incomes, compared to the the numbers on welfare is quite disproportionate so raising money from the rich alone won't cut it (and perhaps some are good at avoidance schemes)

Blaming the previous government is par for the course. Labour undoubtedly went on a spending spree, most of that covered by borrowing. The effects of the repayments of that borrowing take a while to come through so now we see borrowing to pay off repayments, i.e. the money can't fund anything new, just old cost. It's why spending for the sake of it doesn't work other than in the short term.

The thing is that if a rich person loses 8% of their income, it will be annoying, yes, but nothing more. If a poor person (whether on benefits or not) loses 5% of their income it might mean the difference between them buying new clothes or not, and in extreme conditions can mean the difference between the poor having food and heating.

Originally Posted by martyh

no he does not ,he gets corrected or disagreed with the same as anyone else.
What is really frustrating is that he spouts a load of waffle and refuses to back any of his claims up with facts or even a sensible argument ,it's like debating with a dinosaur in the local working mans club

well I deleted my post due to me taking it up in an unofficial capacity with a team member its upto you if you leave the post up or not just making the point I deleted it as I do not want to be seen as a trouble maker and just get banned

Originally Posted by Stuart

The thing is that if a rich person loses 8% of their income, it will be annoying, yes, but nothing more. If a poor person (whether on benefits or not) loses 5% of their income it might mean the difference between them buying new clothes or not, and in extreme conditions can mean the difference between the poor having food and heating.

thing is though grabbing cash off rich people because they have more either through the luck of the draw or because they have worked hard and used good business sense simply discourages those people to invest in this country or they simply move away taking the money we need to be spent here with them

[mertle]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Arthur seriously some of the points you think your making are absolutely stupid it was a labour chancellor that exalted the city of London, it was a labour government that laid the foundation for the crash to hit us as hard because they relaxed regulatory powers so much in the financial sector. Also to say no rich person donates to labour honestly have you totally forgotten the term "champagne socialist" trust me Arthur i know some think we do but it isn't claimants that drink champagne it's .... people, go on arthur i know saying it in the context of labour will be hard but you can do it.

not forgetting selling the gold which weakened us.

Now its got me thinking are we too critical those who make decisions some polititians not brightest at best of times. Certainly often not experts in the field they given rely others helping who in the know. Take osbourne are these moves osbournes or lobbyist/advisors either for vested interest or bad advice.

Was Labour pressed to sell gold for the gain others. Was the relaxing regulations the bankers telling it was good thing had a greedy motive.

Simply are the governments really the people in charge or puppets for others to push those policies to gain. With threats of removal party funds if they dont play by there rules.

Do we need major overhaul the way governments work.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by martyh

The rich don't get protected as such they are valued and encouraged because they provide all the work for you and me to do so we can buy stuff



So do i ,i take every legal means at my disposal to pay less tax as do you and every other worker in the country



OK then ,how about these

: Dr Chai Patel, founder of Priory Clinics, who was nominated for a peerage which was blocked by the House of Lords Appointments Commission, lent £1.5 million;

Sir David Garrard, a property developer, who lent £2.3 million. Both Sir David's and Mr Townsley's nominations for seats in the House of Lords were also blocked by the commission;

Andrew Rosenfeld, who was a partner of Sir David in London property group Minerva, lent Labour £1 million;

Rod Aldridge, who lent £1 million, is the chief executive of IT technology giant Capita;

:: Richard Caring, the clothing tycoon and owner of the fashionable Ivy restaurant, who is worth a reported £300 million, lent the party £2 million;


:: Gordon Crawford, founder of London Bridge Software, who is reported to have made a personal fortune of more than £1 billion from banking and credit management software, lent the party £500,000;


:: Professor Sir Christopher Evans, the founder and chairman of Merlin Biosciences Ltd, lent £1 million;


:: Nigel Morris, the co-founder and former president of Capital One Financial Corporation and a governor of the London Business School, lent the party £1 million;


:: Sir Gulam Noon, the curry tycoon who helped make chicken tikka masala Britain's favourite dish, lent £250,000;


:: Derek Tullett, a veteran City figure and founder of the money-broking firm which bore his name and was bought by Collins Stewart Tullett in 2003, lent £400,000;


:: Lord Sainsbury, the science minister and member of the Sainsburys supermarket dynasty who is thought to have donated more than £6 million to Labour since 2002, lent £2 million.


All of whom pay exactly the right amount of tax demanded by HMRC 'cos if they didn't they would be in jail or prosecuted for tax evasion.

I hope you're not expecting Arthur to change his own unique view of reality...

Originally Posted by Osem

I hope you're not expecting Arthur to change his own unique view of reality...

was kinda hopin'