tonyh29 Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 well the metro, had a poll today and 93% think Myleene would be a better PM than EdI think that says much more about the electorate than 'Ed'. Ordinarily yes but in this instance I think the electorate have spoken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 well the metro, had a poll today and 93% think Myleene would be a better PM than EdThe Metro... you pay for what you get with that rag.Ed had soared to 17 % I suspect Ajax has been multi voting Don't you work in the financial industry Tony? You're not very good at this are you No I don't I thought you worked for Credit Suisse?Not since 2002 Fair enough, just as well I suppose I was in IT for the record No way anyone would let someone with my numeracy skills anywhere near money ... Other than a job in the chancellery of course 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 It would be good if "the rich" left the country. You need to appreciate that they don't create wealth, they suck it up from others; we don't need them to survive, we would do far better without them. Don't believe the self-serving propaganda from the crappy media which, coincidentally, they own, which tells us how great they are. With all due respect peter thats abit of a ignorant view. generalising all rich by saying they suck it from others is like we saying all poor people didnt work hard enough or are too lazy hence why they are not rich. It simply is not true. i know various wealthy people who are wealthy and did it all themselves. I dont understand how you can honestly suggest that we would be better without them. if they all went then who do the government tax? the poor who have no money or the middle class who will then be as poor as the people at the bottom. Your logic makes no sense. You would have a country that wont have any money to fund NHS, fix roads or run the country. obviously it isnt just the rich that pay in but their money helps the economy right or wrong thats the way it is 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Ordinarily yes but in this instance I think the electorate have spoken They've probably pointed at a reduced price box of Milk Tray and forced out, "Uuuugh." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Regarding the London tax , if you can defer it until you die ( or sell up) , how is that going to save the NHS in the short term ... Serious point, Tony. Neither money, nor government spending power, comes from collecting taxes. Once you grasp that, other things become clear. If you don't get it, then other things about wealth, governments, and how we share resources, will become quite obscure, as intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 i know various wealthy people who are wealthy and did it all themselves.No one ever, ever, ever, did things 'all themselves'.I dont understand how you can honestly suggest that we would be better without them. if they all went then who do the government tax? ...That's a very simplistic way of looking at taxing, company ownership, 'wealth creation' (for what that is worth), & so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 Miliband given a roasting on TV today it seems ... Paxman , nope ... the political heavyweight that is Myleene Klass "Is that your only option? You may as well just tax me on this glass of water. You can't just point at things and tax them." .... quality It was an ignorant, self-interested rant. £2m buys you a garage? You should get out more, Myleene, out of Knightsbridge I mean. What I found a bit sad was Miliband appearing to calculate whether to slap down her pompous, trite pile of arsewipe, or if her apparent popularity dictated that a more discreet response was better. Perhaps he had a flashback to the time he avoided inheritance tax on his dad's house by means of a deed of variation, and was dumbstruck by the hypocrisy of it all. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 Regarding the London tax , if you can defer it until you die ( or sell up) , how is that going to save the NHS in the short term ...Serious point, Tony. Neither money, nor government spending power, comes from collecting taxes.Once you grasp that, other things become clear.If you don't get it, then other things about wealth, governments, and how we share resources, will become quite obscure, as intended.Great news, so we can just stop all this talk about tax avoidance, as it wouldn't seem to matter in that case. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 i know various wealthy people who are wealthy and did it all themselves. No one ever, ever, ever, did things 'all themselves'. I dont understand how you can honestly suggest that we would be better without them. if they all went then who do the government tax? ... That's a very simplistic way of looking at taxing, company ownership, 'wealth creation' (for what that is worth), & so on. my brother did. in 1973 he was working for the MEB he resigned and took out a loan to hire an Articulated Lorry and Driver, covered the costs himself and brought back about a million candles and then sold them to the co-op woollies and the rest. Mom went ballistic , Dad said well done son, He bought a house, a new car and never really had to work again. But he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 i know various wealthy people who are wealthy and did it all themselves.No one ever, ever, ever, did things 'all themselves'. . That's not true ... Unless the lingerie section of the Freemans catalogue counts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 i know various wealthy people who are wealthy and did it all themselves. No one ever, ever, ever, did things 'all themselves'. I dont understand how you can honestly suggest that we would be better without them. if they all went then who do the government tax? ...That's a very simplistic way of looking at taxing, company ownership, 'wealth creation' (for what that is worth), & so on. my brother did. in 1973 he was working for the MEB he resigned and took out a loan to hire an Articulated Lorry and Driver, covered the costs himself and brought back about a million candles and then sold them to the co-op woollies and the rest. Mom went ballistic , Dad said well done son, He bought a house, a new car and never really had to work again. But he did. Unless he made the candles with his ear wax then I'm with snowy on this one 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 my brother did. in 1973 he was working for the MEB he resigned and took out a loan to hire an Articulated Lorry and Driver, covered the costs himself and brought back about a million candles and then sold them to the co-op woollies and the rest. Mom went ballistic , Dad said well done son, He bought a house, a new car and never really had to work again. But he did.So, someone loaned him some money.You didn't flesh this out but: he went abroad and returned (he used public roads - tarmac, lighting, &c.; a ferry; foreign roads) and sold the goods that he had used a loan from someone else to buy. He made a profit.Excellent.If you think that he did this 'all himself' then you're **** crackers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 I thought roads were taxed so he had to pay for them including lighting and tarmac,and therefore are free to all users. He had to pay for his ferry, his driver, the petrol and taxes on that, his own transport costs to make deals. I'm struggling to think how you can't think he did it all on his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 my brother did. in 1973 he was working for the MEB he resigned and took out a loan to hire an Articulated Lorry and Driver, covered the costs himself and brought back about a million candles and then sold them to the co-op woollies and the rest. Mom went ballistic , Dad said well done son, He bought a house, a new car and never really had to work again. But he did.So, someone loaned him some money.You didn't flesh this out but: he went abroad and returned (he used public roads - tarmac, lighting, &c.; a ferry; foreign roads) and sold the goods that he had used a loan from someone else to buy. He made a profit.Excellent.If you think that he did this 'all himself' then you're **** crackers.That's getting more than a little bit pedantic. Clearly the person concerned isn't the sole inhabitant of a distant android, or the only survivor of the zombie apocalypse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 well the metro, had a poll today and 93% think Myleene would be a better PM than Ed The Metro... you pay for what you get with that rag. Don't you keep banging on about how food banks are for the needy because the Tory Government made cuts. Are you suggesting the poor can afford newspapers but not food? Unless of course you don't think the poor should have access to free newspapers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 Clearly the person concerned isn't the sole inhabitant of a distant android, or the only survivor of the zombie apocalypse.Indeed. None of us are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 Ed has no wit. I demand a PM with wit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 19, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 19, 2014 Yes let all the rich leave the country so then who do we tax, the poor? oh........Thats exactly what has been happening. The Tories have unshockingly made the rich richer and the poor poorer 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 well the metro, had a poll today and 93% think Myleene would be a better PM than Ed The Metro... you pay for what you get with that rag. Don't you keep banging on about how food banks are for the needy because the Tory Government made cuts. Are you suggesting the poor can afford newspapers but not food? Unless of course you don't think the poor should have access to free newspapers Great analysis! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 Yes let all the rich leave the country so then who do we tax, the poor? oh........ Thats exactly what has been happening. The Tories have unshockingly made the rich richer and the poor poorer Isn't it traditional to show examples when making these sorts of claims ? I'm sure you are right but I'd like to see the data and how it's reached The mirror (of course ) have this headline on their website but the small print after the headline says "before taxes and benefits" suggesting that after tax is deducted and benefits added that the answer might be different ? It would also be interesting to know if this phenomenon is new I.e how was it under previous governments and is it unique to the UK and the tories or is in fact a global trend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts