Outrage - Tory Tax Dodger costs Taxpayers Millions - The Times

whathavewedone

Hmmm, bit rich of the Labour party to attempt to get capital out of this given that

(a) it's perfectly lawful

(b) he is not an important person and

(c) large numbers of Labour MPs and cabinet ministers (indeed even the Chancellor of the Exchequer) have been caught out doing things in order to minimise the amount of tax they have to pay, especially Capital Gains Tax

(d) He's going to pay ordinary tax as of next year.

lostinrates

pipkin71 wrote: »

I do agree with you that, if someone is using the system to their advantage, but not breaking the law, then it is the system that needs addressing. However, when someone on benefits is legally using the system, why are they called some awful derogatory names, but at the other end of the spectrum, someone who is legally doing all they can to minimise their tax bill, seems to be applauded at times?

I can only speak for myself and my interpretation of this and the other thread you made comaprison too, and what I see more is a problem with the system, and I think the majority of posting was about that. Where a contributor raised for example, an alterntive experience (sleeping six to a room) it was the relevence of he system I brought to it, not any reference to the personalities/ any moral superiority of a lesser claiming family.


ETA: actually further to this it is not true to say these people aren't called pretty awful names, and spoken about derogatorily. AIUI you were implying he had commited tax fraud...thats pretty derogatorily if he has not and has played the system. And lots worse is heard about ''the rich'' here.

LizEstelle

ben500 wrote: »

This headline is misleading, when you read on you see it only works out at 520k each, don't forget there are a lot of millionaires in the cabinet to share with.

Oh, I see... any occasional headline from the the non-feudal press which shows Tories up to their usual troughing is 'misleading' whereas the daily, toxic, nonstop pouring of bile upon the government by the Sunmail comics goes without comment..?

I'm afraid that deserves a 'misleading' repeat:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/11/25/old-pals-tax-115875-21848294/

whathavewedone

What are you ranting about? You have the BBC (which most people perceive to be unbiased and take seriously unlike the Sun or the much maligned Daily Mail) to ramp up anything that shows Brown and the Labour party in a less dire light, either spin or ignore a lot of the bad stuff and massively ramp up the smallest anti tory story.

If the tories were in power they would have been forced by the BBC to call an election by now. Take expenses, Radio 2 played Anthony Steen over and over again, went on and on about duck houses and moats but when it came to Labour's awful weeks the phone in asked "If you had the opportunity to fiddle your expenses would you do it?". No nasty reminders about the events of the week, claims for mortgages paid off long ago etc. At the end of the phone in, Jeremy Vine remarked in amazement how strange it was that when they put the question that way, MPs got a much less hostile response.

Similarly, the Julie Kirkbride thing got maximum airtime on the Beeb yet the scandal with Baroness Scotland was played down. If it was down to the Beeb you'd be forgiven for thinking that Draper/Mcbride wasn't a big deal. I'm sure they would have brushed Ghurkagate under the carpet too if it wasn't for Joanna Lumley making it absolutely impossible.

I'm more and more inclined to think that Labour will get a fourth term - not with a working majority and possibly in coalition with the Libdems. I actually think this would be a good thing because a lot of chickens will come home to roost after the election and it should be Labour who has to deal with it. Hopefully there would be a vote of no confidence in a matter of months and Labour would be out of power for a long long time. A far better scenario than the tories getting in for 4 years, having to make unpopular decisions to clear up the mess and letting Labour back in.

carolt

No, the Tories will win.

Don't like it, but it will happen.

kabayiri

Is it possible to be both fair and greedy?

I want the stoopid extreme cases of HB excess to be knocked on the head. It's a waste of money.

I want more tax money from the rich people too. Many of them will have done very well over the recent credit bubble, so they can spare a reasonable chunk. I dont discriminate here between rich Tories or rich NuLab types. Both can pay.

I want the large corporations to pay their share of Corporation Tax too. If a small enterprise can succeed whilst paying it's share, then so can you BARCLAYS, with your 300+ offshore companies (and rising).

But the real reason I want more money from all the above?
It's because if they don't cough up, Joe Middleman here, will be squeezed even more, until the pips squeak.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

pipkin71 wrote: »

Pages of bile about the benefit claimant, even though they are legally claiming, but no issue with tax fraud :rolleyes:

I don't get it either? It's really tough being born in to poverty and despite what what many posters here say, really hard to escape from. Yet there are pages and pages of hate attacking them.

Meanwhile back in Richmond, Kensington and Chelesa the richest 1% own 70% of the wealth and pay no tax and yet that's ok.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

people hate those that are poorer than them more than those that are richer than them imo because they identify with those richer than them because subconsciously they think they are sort of like them and will also be richer one day

That's a very interesting observation imho.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

lostinrates wrote: »

Actully, in both cases surely the system is wrong (s I think the mjority re saying) than the individual....

True. But why do people get angrier about benefits than toffs paying zilch in tax when they clearly are resident in the UK?

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

Also rich people are wealth-creators that literally generate money out of their bodies and if they emigrated they would take their money with them and then what would we do?

I was watching Warren Buffet being interviewed by Charlie Rose on Bloomberg. He said it was ridiculous that he paid tax at a rate less than his cleaner! You have to agree that he's got a point.