thetrees

What a remarkable statement!

If it is several years it is very good. It means that the investigators are working from the back forward, and therefore there could be plenty more to come.

And just think of all those HMRC employees now paying 40% tax because of their big bonuses!

You can try and paint the governments utter utter unwillingness to make big business pay their dues to society in as good a light as you like. It don't wash with me I'm afraid.

How could my pointing out the obvious error of your statement be translated into me trying to 'paint the government in a good light'?

You have moved from making remarkable statements to ridiculous statements.

What a remarkable statement!

If it is several years it is very good. It means that the investigators are working from the back forward, and therefore there could be plenty more to come.

And just think of all those HMRC employees now paying 40% tax because of their big bonuses!

Photo Organising software = what are most people using these days. Irealised I have quite a few installed and its become a mess

Can I put my hand up as well?

As a Mac user, I find iPhoto and its big brother Aperture very good for editing, but crap for organising.

Any tips for organising photos on a Mac?

Love this one too:

 

The 118 watch

 

 

Googling this Tevfik Arif guy I'm seeing lots of stuff about Hedge Funds which is apparently what the Americans involved in the consortium looking to takeover sha are involved with. So wouldn't be surprised if he's somehow involved with that.

 

I know that's a pretty random leap but just read something else to make me think about it.

 not at all random.

The 'noses are for sale and likely to be pinched for low money.

If the Villa are 'pinched', it will probably be in excess of £180m.

If someone wants to have a football club to play with and maybe make something happen, the 'noses are a cheap shot and definitely fall within a lot more people's budget.

 

 

No chance of getting a name on that plane I bet?

 

Edit:

 

He is London based now by the way, not sure if that means he wouldn't own a Turkish private jet?

 

Private charter.

Quite often jets are owned by people and run on the operating licence of a charter company, but equally this aircraft could be chartered by many different people at any given time. There is no way of telling actual ownership in this case.

I couldn't link it previously, which is why I didn't mention it, but this would be the kind of aircraft that the named person would use.

Already a ukip recently elected councillor has been suspended because of homophobic and racist tweets . A racist party with bigot supporters

 Oh Ian, for an intelligent guy and sometime erudite debater, you can appear to generalise at times.

Most people that you would call 'racists' and 'bigots' are just normal people who, if engaged in normal debate, could so easily learn how moderate they really are.

But with the continuous and constant default use of the 'R' word at the slightest hint of disquiet, these people are left with no chance.

Shouting people down and jumping on them at the first opportunity is the easiest way to maintain and further create divisions in our society. Engaging with people in intelligent and sensible debate is a far better way of improving things for all.

When you cut away the cheering kids, there are plenty of sensible political debaters on this forum, and generally you are one of them.

You also rollicked me earlier for using a label, which wasn't actually mine

Googling this Tevfik Arif guy I'm seeing lots of stuff about Hedge Funds which is apparently what the Americans involved in the consortium looking to takeover sha are involved with. So wouldn't be surprised if he's somehow involved with that.

 

I know that's a pretty random leap but just read something else to make me think about it.

 not at all random.

The 'noses are for sale and likely to be pinched for low money.

If the Villa are 'pinched', it will probably be in excess of £180m.

If someone wants to have a football club to play with and maybe make something happen, the 'noses are a cheap shot and definitely fall within a lot more people's budget.

 

 

 

I hope I'm wrong on this one, but this is my theory anyway:

I suspect that Randy has got sick of all the pelters he's been getting about being an awful owner. Lots of fans saying that he should bugger off and sell us to a billionaire.

He knew it would be inevitable that many would be calling for Paul Lamberts head after such a dissapointing season. He would be put under pressure to get rid of the manager when the he had done nothing wrong in his eyes. Remember the restrictions the manager has been working within regards players salaries etc. It's no wonder many of the players are struggling. Quality players play consistently well, that is the big difference with many of our players. They have their good games but more bad than good.

This I believe is Randy Lerner saying " OK, lets see who will come in and is prepared to pay £200 million for the club and then invest millions with no realsitic chance of getting that money back".

It's time to wake up and smell the coffee, this is the real world and the Oligaths and Shelks are few and far between. We could be lucky, but as sad as it sounds this is a wake up call to where we are. A club that is operating on a budget and any progress will be slow.

 

A lot people seized on the fact that his statement had an element of 'goodbye' in it - with a sale starting to look some way off - I'm just wondering has he washed his hands of us ? - Like the Randy Lerner years were 2006-2014 - Whatever happens now isn't on his watch. Also looking at the prices that championship clubs go for, why would pay £200m for Aston Villa. 

I know Reading have debts which need to be paid - but the bidding price is £1 !!!!1 - buy that ...£30m on players  - would give you a decent crack at promotion - perhaps another £40 to keep them in the prem. Where as Aston Villa is £200m  - £30m to stay in the prem - perhaps £70-80m to make us competitive.

 

It would seem to me the value for money thing to do is to buy an ailing championship club.. 

 

 

That's why £200m is far too much for us as we stand at the moment. 4 years ago maybe £200m was possible but not now.

 

 

Where is everyone getting this 200mil price tag from? Far as i'm aware it was only reported in the papers and lets face it, what have they got right lately? They prob know just as much as us.

 

200mil price tag is pure speculation.

 

The company is capitalised at £223m, so that is the indicator.

I actually think the media reaction to the latest council elect results is the most biased reporting of an election I've ever seen in a UK election. Lets examine some facts as portrayed in the media

Labour did badly. Did they? Overall gains of some 330 seats. They now have 5 more councils than previously and took some previously Tory councils to no overall control.

UKIP did well. Did they? They won less seats than even the Lib Dems managed and the Lib Dems might as well be lead by Fred West right now, he'd be no less popular than Clegg. Their share of the vote decreased from 22% last time to 17% this time at an election that was at the same time as the Euro elections so you'd think they'd be in a fine position to take advantage of this but no, their % percentage of the vote went down by 5% of the overall vote, they control zero councils and any chance of power they have will be as minor coalition partners in Tory dominated No Overall control councils

Only London rejected UKIP. Really? Won Zero seats in Liverpool, Manchester, Preston, Newcastle, Gateshead, Sunderland and plenty of other places, I think they won one seat in the West Midlands. I think London elected more kippers than those places

UKIP are as much of as threat to Labour as the Tories, where on earth does the basis of that insidious load of testes come from? It bears no analysis whatsoever

And what about the Greens? They reinforced the council they run in Brighton, won more seats elsewhere and are even the official opposition in Liverpool and a few other places, yet they are totally ignored?

To be honest the media reaction across the board from left to right, from Murdoch and Rothermere to the Guardian, has been the biggest load of crap I've ever read, it has no basis in truth. It doesn't stand up to any analysis

Don't believe a word you read in the papers, when they can spin election results so that people think the opposite happened then you know this country is up the creek without a paddle

That was the biggest load of crap I've read

I thought it was spot on.

I don't know whether it was completely accurate*, because I no longer read any newspapers.

*small edit-not questioning the accuracy. Given the past contributions of the OP I can assume that it is completely accurate, but cannot make that judgement myself.

I have the good fortune (IMO) to have worked all over the world with a very high % of it in and / or with European colleagues. My work week involves dealing with people from Europe on a daily basis and I always find it interesting to understand a bit more of the culture of each of the areas - note use Germany as an example where you cannot say that all of it acts in the same way hence the reference to area rather than the artificial borders that are countries.

 

Religion pays a big part for example when I am dealing with customers and colleagues in the US, especially the south. In Israel, religion is obviously a key part of that state and you have to understand this. Italy has this catholic stance for obvious reasons. Russian customers and colleagues have a totally different way of working (this in Moscow certainly).

 

The point is we concentrate far too much on grouping people into categories without understanding the circumstances that motivate their lives and the areas they live in

That pretty much describes my working life and view so, as is the case from time to time, we are in agreement.

Except that you appear to be a headlong into an EU federal state type of guy, and I am pro-EEC but anti-EU.

One of my best life friendships (with a Frenchman) has its roots in a strong debate, which became semi-public, about EU expansionism that long pre-dated UKIP and Mr Farage coming into the public eye.

Our MP is just there to cut ribbons. My parents have been to see him about a problem in the past and he wasn't interested, barely listened and ultimately was just didn't do anything.

 

Same thing when my cousin and her husband went to see him about a problem they were having.

 

But being deep in the heart of Tory country, he doesn't have to do anything to get votes.

My local MP was an ambitious Tory, and probably still is, although currently on an 'ambition break' , owing to a well reported altercation with a couple of policemen.

As a person he isn't really my cup of tea, but he is an excellent constituency MP, and was so when his career was still on the rise.

And he doesn't really need the votes either.

 

I've mentioned it previously but my local MP has worked really hard on a couple of causes close to my heart and has used his connections to get us access to legal advice and barristers we couldn't possibly have known about let alone afford. He turns up all over town genuinely getting involved in lots of community stuff and getting his mugshot in the free papers etc.. He also turns up at events with his laptop and gooseberry letting people know he's working - but accessible. All very commendable.

 

But if I vote for him, he's a tory and they potentially get in again.

 

Luckily for me a good friend I trust completely is standing so I can vote for him instead. But he doesn't stand a chance of winning, so have I wasted my vote?

That's a shame, and a sad indictment of the big party political system. Clearly your MP has worked hard for his constituents, positively affecting issues that are close to your heart, and is deserving of your vote. The fact that party system stops you from doing so is another small example of how good politicians, people who can work to make a difference to our country, are sacrificed for potentially bad politicians, of which we have more than our fair share.

I understand, and I don't blame you, but I think that it is sad.

Mart - your quoting of Jack Straw is taking things massively out of context - something that the right wing have consistently done IMO.

 

The whole thing re multi country business and its placement needs is more freedom against the artificial borders that surround europe. I think it was Lawrence who compared the EU as a Superstate earlier but surely that is exactly what the world is about these days. China, the US, Russia,India etc are superstates. Have you ever worked or lived in Europe? Mass migration of you want to label it happens all of the time - how many French people work in Belgium for example? What about Spaniards in Portugal and vice versa. There are no border controls and the only give away you have is that number plates change colour. What about the Irish working in the UK, should they be "sent home"?

 

Apologies if this comes across wrong but you talking about immigrants when you don't live in the UK remind me of the comments I saw over the last couple of days from UKIP supporters based in Malaga !  - this goes back to economics and the reality still exists that immigration, welfare etc shrink into insignificance against elements like Tax evasion and avoidance

My reference of the EU superstate is, in my mind at least, nothing to do with immigration, it is about the political, territorial expansionism being carried out by a handful of ambitious, some unelected, people. Blitzkrieg without bullets.

My 'defence' of UKIP, a party of which I know little, and of which there may be little to know, is purely because they provoke discussion, nothing less. By doing so they encourage the parties that will ultimately gain power to engage with people on such issues, rather than just running and hiding behind the 'R' word.

Personally I am pro-immigration, and always have been.

To have people on this forum, capable of operating a modern piece of i.t. kit and capable of writing a passable message in written english yet still saying they wouldn't vote Labour because regardless of policies the leader looks like a wally in selected photos......well it's grim.

 

To be fair, it's not as grim as people saying that they WOULD vote for Labour for any reason whatsoever.

I know you are joking Mart but has there ever been anyone who said that? I remember Tony once stating he would rather be dead than vote Red and I know that from your Tax avoidance non UK residence you favour the Tory party :-)

 

Surely the whole point being raised is evaluating what the political parties are claiming to stand for, what chance of them delivering on those policies that you agree with etc. I know I certainly look at what they all claim they will do and have yet to find any time that Labour did not tick most of the boxes for me and what concerns me.

 

It's certainly saddening and depressing when you see people on FB for example peddling some of the crap from "groups" like that Britain First and the like and then believing it to be real, when a quick google search shows it to be typically right wing racist bile.

Interesting Ian, as I encountered one of those Red Labour FB thingys that was basically trying to discredit and misrepresent UKIP. This was being spread by a teacher relative and her mates, all of whom are constant nomads and presently enjoying a tax free existence in Saudi Arabia. When asked whether they would like to submit a fair proportion of their income to HMRC, they all went very quiet.

Not very social for socialists, I thought

I think UKIP do a fine job of discrediting themselves without the need for any opposition to them doing so - and really do we need the stupidity of labels like Red this etc? - the whole Red Ed thing is such a nonsense and adds nothing to any debate or setting of credibility.  How did you know they were Socialist's by the way? Being a socialist can mean many things to many people most of them different much in the same was as I could label a few Fascists etc. (Edit: before anyone comments about my use of Gideon - despite it was his given name I have it on very good authority that some in the Gvmt departments call him that also to wind him up :-) )

 

Facebook as a political tool and to a lesser degree the other social media outlets due to them limiting the content, is now becoming a very dangerous thing.

The 'Red Labour' tag belonged to the school teacher FB poster., not me. I just assumed it was one of those tags used to define the difference between 'New' Labour and a more traditional alternative, having been informed by many on here that 'New' Labour aren't socialist.

Being related to one of the discussers/sympathisers, I am privy to the fact that she is, indeed, a socialist. As the discussion was one of cosy agreement, I assumed that others were same.

Beyond Blair and Brown being liars and criminals, I don't really do tags.

I entirely agree with you about the dangers of Facebook, which I would extend to Twitter and social media in general.

To have people on this forum, capable of operating a modern piece of i.t. kit and capable of writing a passable message in written english yet still saying they wouldn't vote Labour because regardless of policies the leader looks like a wally in selected photos......well it's grim.

 

To be fair, it's not as grim as people saying that they WOULD vote for Labour for any reason whatsoever.

I know you are joking Mart but has there ever been anyone who said that? I remember Tony once stating he would rather be dead than vote Red and I know that from your Tax avoidance non UK residence you favour the Tory party :-)

 

Surely the whole point being raised is evaluating what the political parties are claiming to stand for, what chance of them delivering on those policies that you agree with etc. I know I certainly look at what they all claim they will do and have yet to find any time that Labour did not tick most of the boxes for me and what concerns me.

 

It's certainly saddening and depressing when you see people on FB for example peddling some of the crap from "groups" like that Britain First and the like and then believing it to be real, when a quick google search shows it to be typically right wing racist bile.

Interesting Ian, as I encountered one of those Red Labour FB thingys that was basically trying to discredit and misrepresent UKIP. This was being spread by a teacher relative and her mates, all of whom are constant nomads and presently enjoying a tax free existence in Saudi Arabia. When asked whether they would like to submit a fair proportion of their income to HMRC, they all went very quiet.

Not very social for socialists, I thought

How many Polish-born people have settled in the UK in the last 10 years, half a million or so?  Has that had an effect on the country in terms of unemployment, wages and public services etc?  Makeminvilla makes some good points.  Because people are afraid to discuss those sorts of questions, UKIP are filling the information void, very successfully.  And whether that migration has had a positive effect, or a negative effect, it happened without the people of the UK having much of a say in it.  That's also where they're making capital.

I visit Poland regularly, and most people that I speak to think that there are some 5m out of the country, with around 800k in the UK.

Without cross-border immigration certain industries in our country would be stuffed, but then that would potentially make the job market more competitive, thus pushing wages up towards the 'living wage' so coveted by some of our left thinkers.

In the end the Blair regime did not think things through on open borders or 'multi-cultural Britain' which is probably why UKIP has better established itself than it could have hoped.

They will disappear though, as we lapse back into the Labour/Tory see-saw.

There is no policy to read up on though. Farage basically said their most recent manifesto doesn't reflect their party, and they haven't announced policies to replace it.

I am not sure that any party has a policy for the next General Election yet. That is why I am happy to wait.

Embarrassed to say my local council is now UKIP. I'm living amongst **** idiots.

I personally see UKIP as a slightly legitimized BNP. You see the same people on facebook who'd champion them, now doing so with UKIP. It sickens me that the media continually give UKIP a mouthpiece regarding immigration and Europe and fail to air any other policies which will affect our day to day living. Harder questions need to be asked.

I am very sorry to break this to you, but the BNP are perfectly legitimate in our democracy.

I am not a student of UKIP policy, as I have not considered voting for them as yet, but my take on them is that they are anti the EU superstate, and anti open borders EU immigration.

Maybe the left take that UKIP's anti open borders immigration is also anti-immigration full stop is correct. Or maybe it suits the left agenda to peddle that line.

I shall read up on them prior to the next General Election, but there is plenty of time for that yet.

I just tweeted an ex work colleague of mine who is now something like youth team kit manager at the scum and asked him about a potential announcement today, he's never heard of Bob Rich but has been told that something is nearly done, that's all he's told me.

I cannot see any seriously wealthy foreign investor buying 24% of Small Heath.

I can only see 'fans' like Paladini buying in, in the hope that they can find the other shareholders and prise further shares out of them.

Birmingham shares suspended on the HK exchange today suggesting the club has been sold

Perhaps those lawyers in private Jets at BHX were nothing to do with us ?

Lawyer plane left yesterday, down to Luton.

It has gone on to Naples this morning, so looking unlikely to be Villa related after all.

Sorry!

Beyond 'get out of Europe', beyond 'immigration control', what are UKIP's policies? On available evidence, more of the same. It's basically the euro sceptic wing of the Tory party.

Different shyster, same old shit with a more noticeable undercurrent of racism and a bit more homophobia thrown in (that's where the far right parallels are drawn).

Will UKIP offer a living wage? No. So whilst they're twitting about, arguing about some or other shit, the only party offering me a pay rise that I deserve are the Green Party - now I'll vote for that.

I honestly believe that self-interest is the only legitimate reason to vote for any party.

I don't. But a hell of a lot of people do. Unfortunately the Green Party need to start promoting policies such as the living wage more aggressively towards that mentality.

Even voting to feel better about yourself can be classed as self interest.

Indeed. Those darn French, with their healthcare and low tuition fees! Crazy socialists!

You forgot their ridiculous and outrageous employment laws.

Only on VT can someone express a view that is ill informed and highly offensive and the argument turns to pedantics over the correct word

Go visit the Muslim world RV , they don't have 2 heads and they aren't trying to take over the world...

You seem to be confusing the views of a few extremists as policy that would be like saying the KKK are the view of Christians the world over

Yeah there are areas of Islam that are from the Stone Age and also hypercritical but again they don't corner the market in that regard either

Nearly a like from me Tony, except for the opener, which to me should have read 'is ill informed and *appears* highly offensive'

The OP is someone who holds a generally amiable stance across his contributions to VT and has alluded to his not being the most educated person in the past, yet he remains a colourful and worthwhile contributor.

By delving into such off topic threads RV demonstrates a desire to contribute and learn, and there are plenty of perhaps better educated political contributors of all areas of the political spectrum on here that can assist him, and the many of us who are prepared to listen and learn, in forming and refining our own views.