Cameron Tax Dodger

Tromking

Mistermeaner wrote: »

You should keep working until 67 at least or society will suffer. The nation can't afford for you to retire at 60.

Society may have it suck it up!
Me and 'Call Me Dave' reserve the right to access our public sector pensions when it suits. It does mean that high earning 'young-uns' like you will have to pay the requisite amount of income tax though.:)

Mistermeaner

Another Moby; purely out for themselves.

Mistermeaner

Why are the likes of trom and Moby so quick to bite the hand that feeds them?

They admit their complete self interest and acknowledge their complete dependence on the hardworking wealth generation of the private sector to fund their life style choices so why are they so bitter towards the industrious go getters that enable it all for them.

Its a very strange stance. I guess a bit like spoilt teenagers who grow into adults and never leave home. They don't have a clue where the money comes from as long as it keeps coming (to them) they are fine.

Tromking

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Why are the likes of trom and Moby so quick to bite the hand that feeds them?

They admit their complete self interest and acknowledge their complete dependence on the hardworking wealth generation of the private sector to fund their life style choices so why are they so bitter towards the industrious go getters that enable it all for them.

Its a very strange stance. I guess a bit like spoilt teenagers who grow into adults and never leave home. They don't have a clue where the money comes from as long as it keeps coming (to them) they are fine.

That`s a strange extrapolation to make about people who as employees of the state are only expecting to get a fair remuneration for their efforts. You do understand that the state is required to carry out certain things and employ people to do it? It may irritate you greatly, but Nurses and Paramedics come at a cost. Even as an "industrious go-getter" <snigger> you shouldn't expect too much gratitude, public sector workers are like any other worker, they offer their labour to an employer for a monetary reward in return. It`s not their fault that their employer funds that reward from the Exchequer.

chewmylegoff

Moby wrote: »

So you'd thought you'd come home and jumble the words up a bit but say the same thing again.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/apr/14/uk-under-pressure-from-eu-states-over-beneficial-ownership-secrecy
How much longer are you going to be able to defend such dishonest practices.;)

Whilst setting up a complex offshore structure for the purposes of concealing its ultimate beneficial ownership can obviously be dishonest if you do so to evade taxes, that isn't what Cameron did, is it?

It would be rather stupid to spend ££££ on setting up such an arrangement so that you could use it to hide your income from the taxman, only to then declare all of the income from the trust on your tax return and pay tax on it.

In any event, Cameron didn't do any of that anyway, he just bought shares in a fund and there was no concealment of his ownership f those shares. The only person we have established to have concealed anything so far is Corbyn who materially understated his income on his tax return.

I think you're just trolling anyway. You've now revealed you have a SIPP, I wouldn't be surprised if the next thing you claim is that you have some offshore investments in it.

princeofpounds

Pretty much anyone who has a sipp is going to have offshore funds. Most open-ended funds (unit trusts, etfs etc) are offshore (luxembourg, Dublin).

Investment trusts, like the one Cameron owned a stake in, are actually a much less common investment product these days, although they are the forerunners of the open-ended mutual fund.

And to correct my earlier post, it was two thirds onshore, one third offshore.

BobQ

Mistermeaner wrote: »

You are still ignoring the options you have to keep working for the greater benefit of society.

I believe you have proved yourself to be a hypocrite.

What is hypocritical about retiring when you can afford to do so?

I think part of the problem these days is that those who can afford to retire are made to feel guilty about it, but if you are employed your retirement creates a job opportunity for younger people.

Life has never been fair and many people try to make it more unfair. But by whatever acts of chance it is wrong to blame people for making choices when they had to do so: A public sector pension and a lower salary vs a better paid private sector job with a lower pension vs a well paid private sector salary with a good pension. You cannot tell how life pans out.

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

you are a natural conservative : self interested, pragmatic, ignorant and proud of it and a bit self deluded.
nothing wrong with anything there

What do you fo for a living Clapton?

BobQ

Mistermeaner wrote: »

You should keep working until 67 at least or society will suffer. The nation can't afford for you to retire at 60.

The nation has provided him with a pension scheme that enables him to draw a pension at 60 from a job that involves dealing with all the dross of society. If the nation cannot afford it then they should have said so.

Besides if he carries on working till 67 he will build up an even bigger pension.

CLAPTON

BobQ wrote: »

What is hypocritical about retiring when you can afford to do so?

I think part of the problem these days is that those who can afford to retire are made to feel guilty about it, but if you are employed your retirement creates a job opportunity for younger people.

Life has never been fair and many people try to make it more unfair. But by whatever acts of chance it is wrong to blame people for making choices when they had to do so: A public sector pension and a lower salary vs a better paid private sector job with a lower pension vs a well paid private sector salary with a good pension. You cannot tell how life pans out.

why do we want to create a job opportunity for a younger worker?

don't you know the UK is facing a huge worker shortage which is one of the main reasons we must stay in the EU and receive unlimited EU migrants. All the economically literate people on the board know this is true because of the upward pressure on wages (supply and demand determines the price etc) so everybody except Moby and Tom are getting huge pay increases.