tonyh29 Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 meregreen, on 25 Sept 2013 - 5:42 PM, said: tonyh29, on 25 Sept 2013 - 5:32 PM, said: meregreen, on 25 Sept 2013 - 5:28 PM, said:meregreen, on 25 Sept 2013 - 5:28 PM, said: tonyh29, on 25 Sept 2013 - 12:04 AM, said:tonyh29, on 25 Sept 2013 - 12:04 AM, said: snowychap, on 25 Sept 2013 - 12:00 AM, said:snowychap, on 25 Sept 2013 - 12:00 AM, said: tonyh29, on 24 Sept 2013 - 11:47 PM, said:tonyh29, on 24 Sept 2013 - 11:47 PM, said: Karl Marx ... Right I'm off to the piss you off thread Don't diss the great man! (That doesn't mean you have to be a Marxist or even agree with his observations). Meh another wealthy socialist So if you are wealthy , are you not allowed to have a social conscience, and work for a fairer distribution of said wealth. To my way of thinking, anyone who personally stands to lose financially by changing the society we live in in order to benefit others, is someone with far a higher moral base than those who simply advocate looking after their own social class. it was a private joke ( all be it in public) with snowy but to answer your question , having seen communism / socialism at work I'd say those people making the changes didn't / don't appear to have been losing out financially or distributed the wealth If you consider every despotic corrupt regime in the world as your template, then yes , there are those who work the system , be they of the left or right. However, my point is that for a rich man to advocate tax rises for the wealthy, he is motivated by more than the self interest of his class, that I find admirable, not something to be mocked in this rather cyniclal world in which we live. or he's already got his accountant to hide his money away in tax loopholes and offshore accounts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meregreen Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 There's that cynical world poking its nose in again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 ...even if his sons then changed his will to avoid tax...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meregreen Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 ...even if his sons then changed his will to avoid tax...... Two cynics. I'm outnumbered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 ...even if his sons then changed his will to avoid tax...... Two cynics. I'm outnumbered. sorry .. you can blame snowy because .. ah no sod it we don't need a because Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 25, 2013 Author Moderator Share Posted September 25, 2013 ...even if his sons then changed his will to avoid tax......Mother possibly? As she was main beneficiary, still don't see how it avoids tax though, whole estate is taxable not individual gains, so I'm not disputing what you say but I am a little confused how what you're suggesting is possible.It is also interesting that the 60/20/20 split between the three is roughly similar to what the State would have decided had he died intestate and there been a dispute over who got what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 Ralph Miliband A Polish Jewish Marxist who fled to England during WW2, refused to fight... Where's that from? Are The Indie wrong when they write: As a teenager, Miliband was liable for military service, and for some reason wanted to join the Navy, which he did, with Laski's help. He took part in the D-Day landings, in the liberation of Crete, and was aboard the first Allied ship to sail into Athens in October 1944. Well that was a rather epic fail on my part. I'd read somewhere before that he was a conscientious objector, apparently not. Although I still think it's fair to say he wasn't enamoured with his refuge. From his wiki page: He wrote in his diary shortly after arriving in England: "The Englishman is a rabid nationalist. They are perhaps the most nationalist people in the world...When you hear the English talk of this war you sometimes almost want them to lose it to show them how things are. Not quite sure why he'd expect anything else attitude wise at a time when Britain was the last hold out against Nazi tyranny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 (edited) ...even if his sons then changed his will to avoid tax...... Mother possibly? As she was main beneficiary, still don't see how it avoids tax though, whole estate is taxable not individual gains, so I'm not disputing what you say but I am a little confused how what you're suggesting is possible. It is also interesting that the 60/20/20 split between the three is roughly similar to what the State would have decided had he died intestate and there been a dispute over who got what. Transfers between husband and wife are exempt, so if he'd left stuff above the exemption threshold to anyone other than her, it would be liable for IHT. Edited September 25, 2013 by Risso Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 ...even if his sons then changed his will to avoid tax...... Mother possibly? As she was main beneficiary, still don't see how it avoids tax though, whole estate is taxable not individual gains, so I'm not disputing what you say but I am a little confused how what you're suggesting is possible. It is also interesting that the 60/20/20 split between the three is roughly similar to what the State would have decided had he died intestate and there been a dispute over who got what. Transfers between husband and wife are exempt, so if he'd left stuff above the exemption threshold to anyone other than her, it would be liable for IHT. And the will was originally leaving the house to her, so no IHT? This is not my area, so please help if I'm misunderstanding, but if he'd left the house 50-50 to the brothers and they changed it to this arrangement, you could read it as trying to avoid IHT if the change brought it below the threshold, but in this instance, IHT wasn't payable to begin with? Isn't it common for husbands or wives to leave the property to each other, but then after death the family starts to rethink living arrangements, the surviving spouse may not want to carry on living somewhere which now feels too big, and so they change ownership arrangements accordingly? I don't know whether they were trying to dodge tax/engage in tax planning (delete as appropriate), but it seems to me that the tory press is busting a blood vessel to find some dirt on Ed Miliband, and in the absence of anything real (like his brother's sanctioning of illegal rendition flights to have people tortured, as Snowy mentioned), they're grabbing at this. It feels like there's nothing there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 ... Britain was the last hold out against Nazi tyranny. This Christian Democrat tyranny is much nicer, but I can't help feeling the Nazis were snappier dressers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 Although I still think it's fair to say he wasn't enamoured with his refuge. From his wiki page: He wrote in his diary shortly after arriving in England: "The Englishman is a rabid nationalist. They are perhaps the most nationalist people in the world...When you hear the English talk of this war you sometimes almost want them to lose it to show them how things are. Not quite sure why he'd expect anything else attitude wise at a time when Britain was the last hold out against Nazi tyranny. Should he voice no criticism of the country that became his refuge? Do we expect refugees to clutch their cap in the hands while thanking us profusely at every turn for the rest of their lives? I don't. I don't think we give refuge in order to give ourselves the shallow satisfaction of people acting like peasants before the lord of the manor. It would be nice if they didn't plot against us and try to kill us, but I think we give refuge because it's the right thing to do, not in anticipation of effusive thanks. His criticism is a fair one, and our extreme and knee-jerk nationalism wasn't a product of the war, it had been a standing joke for many years before that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 where did you find out it was a standard joke, I cant find any reference. I'm reading lots of History and keen to find out stuff like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 Interesting that Ralph stayed in the country he seemed to have contempt for after the war ... If Ed becomes PM in 2015 we will all be wishing he had left Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 where did you find out it was a standard joke, I cant find any reference. I'm reading lots of History and keen to find out stuff like this. It will probably be on twitter and thus credible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 Laughing out loud at the quite feeble attempts by the right (and in some cases far right) supporters on VT to somehow link wealth and social conscience as being mutually exclusive. Also the quite weak and pathetic attempts to try and discredit Milliband with references to his father. Honestly if you did not know better you would think that certain people are getting somewhat desperate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 Ralph Miliband A Polish Jewish Marxist who fled to England during WW2, refused to fight and instead focused on bringing down the very system that provided his family with succour - the alternative being certain death in a concentration camp for ticking the top 3 "burn him" boxes on the 3rd Reich's check list. Top bloke. Best post ever - if only for factual inaccuracy prompted by bigotry - excellent - love it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 And the will was originally leaving the house to her, so no IHT? This is not my area, so please help if I'm misunderstanding, but if he'd left the house 50-50 to the brothers and they changed it to this arrangement, you could read it as trying to avoid IHT if the change brought it below the threshold, but in this instance, IHT wasn't payable to begin with? Isn't it common for husbands or wives to leave the property to each other, but then after death the family starts to rethink living arrangements, the surviving spouse may not want to carry on living somewhere which now feels too big, and so they change ownership arrangements accordingly? I don't know whether they were trying to dodge tax/engage in tax planning (delete as appropriate), but it seems to me that the tory press is busting a blood vessel to find some dirt on Ed Miliband, and in the absence of anything real (like his brother's sanctioning of illegal rendition flights to have people tortured, as Snowy mentioned), they're grabbing at this. It feels like there's nothing there. The reports all say that they reduced their liability to IHT, so I think it was more likely that she wasn't the sole beneficiary to begin with, but without seeing the full details of the estate it's hard to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 Re wealth and looking after "your own" interesting to read this re Gideon (still cracks me up the name change) http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/25/osborne-bankers-bonuses-eu-cap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 Honestly if you did not know better you would think that certain people are getting somewhat desperate The Tory Party conference rolls into Manchester on Sunday and we will see desperation aplenty as they try to brainwash the gullible right wing nut jobs that their policies are working. I am sure a few on here have their knobs out ready and waiting for it to begin and a box of tissues close by. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted September 25, 2013 Share Posted September 25, 2013 I don't think anyone actually likes them, it's just that some feel that they're more competent than the obvious alternatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts