Newsnight: Quantitative Easing

SGE1

Conrad wrote: »

SGE1 wrote: »

1) It's "embarrass", not "embarress"
/quote]


There's nowt more emborasang than a finger wagging spell check nazi:T

Right.. so I correct someone's spelling, and you call me a Nazi?

You're right, I'm sorry, how unreasonable of me.

SGE1

michaels wrote: »

Dredging up the tax arguement, the K tax has built in redistribution via 'tax credits' which is basically an accounting scam to suggest that the state takes less of our money - if it was taken as tax and paid out as a benefit it would count as govt spending

Why should it be considered as gov't spending? After all, er, it isn't "spending", it's redistribution. You may not like the redistribution, but to call it a "scam" is a laughable.

SGE1

Really2 wrote: »

Now you are talking out of your @ss they are mostly staggered and you know it, it is on your nice link.:rolleyes: (Notice i said no matter the size earlier)
It is not a random tangent do you think a company does not reclaim the cost of corporate tax through good you purchase.:rolleyes:

You realy need to switch on to what taxes are and how you pay them directly or indirectly (like I said earlier)

Now can you stop throwing your toys out or someone could fall over them;)

PS out of those countries also compare the ones with high corporate tax and their peronal tax then see where we come.

I really don't understand you. Please help me, and tell me

1) What is staggered? What are you referring to?
2) When did I allegedly suggest that a company doesn't "reclaim the cost of corporate tax through goods you purchase"?
3) When have I suggested that taxes are only paid directly? As far as I can see, I've dealt with your recurring point several times, but you keep coming back with the same argument.

Really2

SGE1 wrote: »

I really don't understand you. Please help me, and tell me

1) What is staggered? What are you referring to?
2) When did I allegedly suggest that a company doesn't "reclaim the cost of corporate tax through goods you purchase"?
3) When have I suggested that taxes are only paid directly? As far as I can see, I've dealt with your recurring point several times, but you keep coming back with the same argument.

1) You know 0 to 50% etc, (well you should do)
2) Yawn,
3) Hello i think that may be you.

You know your link only shows some of the tax we pay. Shake your head, have some smelling salts and leave it.;)

SGE1

Really2 wrote: »

1) You know 0 to 50% etc, (well you should do)
2) Yawn,
3) Hello i think that may be you.

You know your link only shows some of the tax we pay. Shake your head, have some smelling salts and leave it.;)

1) OK, so you mean taxes. Yes, they are generally staggered, and good thing too.
2) What an interesting contribution you make there
3) And finally, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Yes, I think it best to leave it there, I have trouble understanding you, and evidently you haven't listened to a word I've said/written, I shall direct my rants elsewhere now.

Really2

SGE1 wrote: »

1) OK, so you mean taxes. Yes, they are generally staggered, and good thing too.
2) What an interesting contribution you make there
3) And finally, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Yes, I think it best to leave it there, I have trouble understanding you, and evidently you haven't listened to a word I've said/written, I shall direct my rants elsewhere now.

Well it is hard to get your point across to someone as blinked as yourself.(PS I know what that is a dig at keyboard warrior:rolleyes: )
Good try to enforce it on someone who does not know what taxes we pay in this country.
You may have some luck then, but there will not be many on this board.

SGE1

Really2 wrote: »

(PS I know what that is a dig at keyboard warrior

Again, I'm sorry, but what language are you speaking??

Really2 wrote: »

Good try to enforce it on somone who does not know what taxes we pay in this country.
You may have some luck then, but there will not be many on this board.

And again, you miss the whole frickin point. I'm not talking about the tax burden in the country, or making any judgement on whether it's high or low in absolute terms - I'm just saying that we're not in the dire position the Daily Mail would have us think, which is clear when comparing the tax burden throughout the world. That's it, it's pretty bloody simple, yet you've come back to me with endless posts about the burden being 38p to the pound, council tax, and endless nonsense which shows that you're somehow convinced that what I'm saying isn't a fact.

Please believe me when I say I am not trying to change your mind (clearly, it's beyond repair), I was just providing factual information that people should be aware of before they go on rants about how they hate the Government and how everything is so awful here. If people want to hate the Government and moan about taxes, that's fine - but they should be able reach that decision in an informed way, and therefore acknowledge that if they believe the tax burden to be too high in this country, they must also believe it to be too high in many other countries in the world.

Really2

SGE1 wrote: »

Again, I'm sorry, but what language are you speaking??

Look you are thick if you do not understand that it is in English and without a spelling mistake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really2
(PS I know what that is a dig at keyboard warrior


You pulled me up on spelling before but then went on to write
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really2
You are obviously some WUM who thinks 38p in every pound is given back to the govement is low tax:rolleyes:
Trott of you are obviously claiming my wages.:rolleyes:

Do you do this:smileyhea when I say Labour.:rotfl:


You wrote.:)
And what is a WUN?

Look i have the humility (mainly because I am Dyslexic as you know) to not point out your mistakes before but now you are fair game.:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

SGE1

Really2 wrote: »

Look you are thick if you do not understand that it is in English and without a spelling mistake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really2
(PS I know what that is a dig at keyboard warrior


You pulled me up on spelling before but then went on to write
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really2
You are obviously some WUM who thinks 38p in every pound is given back to the govement is low tax:rolleyes:
Trott of you are obviously claiming my wages.:rolleyes:

Do you do this:smileyhea when I say Labour.:rotfl:


You wrote.:)
And what is a WUN?

Look i have the humility (mainly because I am Dyslexic as you know) to not point out your mistakes before but now you are fair game.:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

As a matter of fact I was not being facetious, I still have no idea what you meant by WUN, nor do I know what a keyboard warrior is. To be honest, I half expected it to be some sort of internet acronym that I hadn't come across. Apologies for not seeing through your spelling mistakes :rolleyes: If that makes me thick, then so be it.

And please, by all means, point out these mistakes of mine you've so kindly seen, but decided to keep quiet about that to spare me the embarrassment. God, what a gentlemen you are eh :rotfl:

Really2

SGE1 wrote: »

As a matter of fact I was not being facetious, I still have no idea what you meant by WUN, nor do I know what a keyboard warrior is. To be honest, I half expected it to be some sort of internet acronym that I hadn't come across. Apologies for not seeing through your spelling mistakes :rolleyes: If that makes me thick, then so be it.

And please, by all means, point out these mistakes of mine you've so kindly seen, but decided to keep quiet about that to spare me the embarrassment. God, what a gentlemen you are eh :rotfl:

Well you are the one who moans about peoples spelling then when you get pulled up on it you had a moan.:D

"mine was a key stroke error his was a spelling mistake.":rotfl:
Get over yourself, you will be right at home here.:rotfl: