This is what the Tories are really like

A._Badger

carolt wrote: »

Er...no.

I didn't vote labour at the last election, nor would I now.

It's possible to strongly dislike the tories without being a Labour groupie.

Perhaps, but I can't say I noticed your string of anti-Labour postings....

A._Badger

chewmylegoff wrote: »

i think the fact that he is using his fortune to bankroll the tories in order to try to influence the outcome of general elections is far more worrying than the fact that he is legally minimising his tax bill.

Is that, essentially, any worse than being in the pocket of a union baron? Or the EU?

I'm not an Ashcroft supporter, I despise Cameron and I didn't vote for the Tories. But while people's attention is being skilfully directed toards Ashcroft, it was revealed that an even nastier piece of work, Mandelson, receives a cheque for £8,000 from the EU, for which he no longer works (in theory).

But here we are - Ashcroft is singled out by Labour's spinmeisters, furiously puffing on their dog whistles, while Mandeslon slithers away unnoticed.

chewmylegoff

A._Badger wrote: »

Is that, essentially, any worse than being in the pocket of a union baron? Or the EU?

no, but it is more of an issue than the total non-issue of his continued compliance with UK tax law.

chewmylegoff

carolt wrote: »

It is entirely another to pay NO TAX AT ALL whilst earning millions and to sit in the House of Lords for the Tory party making laws so that others who earn a fraction of what you earn will pay more tax, all the time preaching about the importance of everybody (else!) paying more tax to bail out the economy.

what information do you have which suggests that he does not or did not pay any tax at all. as a non-dom he would have still paid UK tax on any UK income and gains, and would have also paid the non-dom flat rate charge introduced by the labour party. i don't have any figures either, but i am not sure you can really say with any confidence that ashcroft has paid less tax as an absolute figure than the average UK tax payer, or whatever it is you are comparing him to.

vivatifosi

I didn't read the original article as have only just found this thread. Clicking on the link, there's now a 404 error. I wonder why the beeb took page down so quickly.

Wookster

carolt wrote: »

No, I know I absolutely wouldn't.

Would you really?

I can understand people who are hard-up and need every penny trying to use every (legal) loophole to save tax. I cannot even begin to understand why someone who is already a multi-millionaire and who doesn't need a penny of this money can do this with a clear conscience - especially after publicly stating he would do the opposite.

More than that, it really sticks in my gullet that just at the time when we are all facing cuts everywhere, are being told that we must all accept higher taxes/worse public services in order to pay for the country's deficit, that someone is denying the public purse a massive 3.4 million quid. That would save a lot of public sector jobs, pay for a lot of schools' buildings, keep libraries/hospitals open etc etc.

I'm sick of reading about all the ways that we, the ordinary taxpayers, have to tighten our belts, whilst the super-rich Tories - who are spouting this at us - suffer none of the pain they are inflicting on us themselves. Like generals in WWI, telling their soldiers to go over the top from their cushy offices far removed from the front line.

I'd like to see the Tories leading by example.

I have a feeling this 'austerity' drive is going to rather resemble the infamous 'Back to Basics' campaign of the 90s - memorable chiefly for the blatant hypocrisy of the Tories.

People don't become multi millionaires by giving it all away.

I'd be surprised if you can find a quote anywhere of Lord Ashcroft personally extolling the virtues of tax paying. The Tory party is made up of many different (and disagreeing) opinions, just like the Labour party, just like the Lib Dems and every other party.

This austerity drive is absolutely necessary and when you are retrenching £1 for every £4 you spend, the sheer scale makes it impossible to do that and please everyone.

Its very much Labour's black hole.

carolt

A._Badger wrote: »

Is that, essentially, any worse than being in the pocket of a union baron? Or the EU?

I'm not an Ashcroft supporter, I despise Cameron and I didn't vote for the Tories. But while people's attention is being skilfully directed toards Ashcroft, it was revealed that an even nastier piece of work, Mandelson, receives a cheque for £8,000 from the EU, for which he no longer works (in theory).

But here we are - Ashcroft is singled out by Labour's spinmeisters, furiously puffing on their dog whistles, while Mandeslon slithers away unnoticed.

Oh come off it - of course the 8 grand is wrong - but surely you can see a slight quantitative difference between 8 grand and over 300 million???

FYI, I posted a lot of anti-Labour posts before the election too - their policies are frankly irrelevant now, as they have no power.

Pete111

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

A little like your post.

Full of waffle & fundamentally flawed across the board.


For example:

There is only net gain if there are substantial exports to offset tax avoidance bringing in wealth. If you profit from UK sales there is no net gain or wealth generation.

You also assume that people will not spend money should one person or company not exist. Factually incorrect as we all know that if Sainsburys or Vodafone went bust tomorrow people would spend their money on another supplier.

Also your benefit worthless scum comment is interesting keeping in mind that every single penny that scum bag is given in benefits is spent in the country & stays in the economy, unlike the instant export of billions in tax dodging.

Enough? Or do you want me to continue?

No stop - enough....

I'm glad you have reassured me that rich businessmen who provide jobs and services through their ventures are all parasites and that they somehow contribute less than benefits dependant wastrels if they dare to use legal means to negate some of their large UK tax bills....

(Hint - It's the bit in bold you don't seem to be getting)

triticale

vivatifosi wrote: »

I didn't read the original article as have only just found this thread. Clicking on the link, there's now a 404 error. I wonder why the beeb took page down so quickly.

Legal reasons.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1315780/BBC-pulls-Lord-Ashcroft-Panorama-programme-schedule-11th-hour.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

(Please excuse the link to the Fail )

A._Badger

carolt wrote: »

Oh come off it - of course the 8 grand is wrong - but surely you can see a slight quantitative difference between 8 grand and over 300 million???

FYI, I posted a lot of anti-Labour posts before the election too - their policies are frankly irrelevant now, as they have no power.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that £8,000 is all Mandelson has had?

The point I'm making is that people leap to attention when Labour puffs at the Ashcroft dog whistle, completely oblivious to the rampant troughing going on elsewhere.

Whatever else, Ashcroft created a business and made money - something few MPs do. They prefer to pick the public's pockets while pretending to do it a service.

Ashcroft is hanging onto his own money. Mandelson, Kinnock, Blair, Prescott and the rest are hanging onto ours. There's a difference.