Brexit, for once some facts.

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,619
I agreed with much of what was in Tim Stanley's article but there's a couple of points I'd pick up on:

if the super-rich have to fling open their accounts to the rest of the world, you and I will have to do the same, too. The only tax haven a poor man like me is ever likely to use is the spot under my mattress. But that’s not the point: privacy is a principle that’s worth losing a bit of tax income to protect.
The trouble witn privacy is that it's all too easy for it to be seen as secrecy to hide something, creating rumour. In my management career I always made public my salary and bonuses, despite those always being a large multiple of what my employees earned. For a specific example after the end of my first full year in a new job I showed my yard staff my P60 of earnings for the year. The immediate reaction from one was "You deserve it Ton" (my first name is Tony), The only thing that concerned the others was the amount of tax I had deducted, which was around eight times the whole amount each earned in the same year. Their opinion, it was disgusting and unfair that I lost that much. It illustrates that if everything is transparently out in the open the status quo is more readily accepted.

We are led to believe that the rich have too much power and influence, but they cannot compete with a state that increasingly has both the technology and the will to examine and regulate every aspect of our lives.
There are two flaws in this contention. The first is the ability of the rich to keep money wherever they like, often hidden and avoiding all or part of the taxes the rest of us pay.

The second is that as part of the rich, those running the state don't use the resources available against their own.

It's only the great unwashed, as we used to be contemptuously called, who suffer all of the increasing state control.
.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,619
I’m not convinced that the fact that the Conservatives lost their majority was down to Brexit. May is not a likeable personality, possesses an unattractive smugness, is stubborn, a poor listener, a bad communicator and has the appearance of something constructed from the sweepings up off an autopsy room floor. They will only ever become increasingly unpopular whilst-ever that thing is their leader.
I totally agree, May's appointment was a real own goal. The Remainer dissatisfaction was certainly not the sole cause of their loss of majority, but I'm quite sure it helped considerably since so many of us were angered by the Tories even offering the referendum.
.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and tillson

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,619
Labour are part of the problem not the cure at the moment.
The simple fact is the issue of remain or leave has torn the major parties apart, making strange bedfellows of some and odd enemies of others.
Agreed, it's one hell of a governmental shambles. Thank goodness the mainland EU countries are united on the subject of Brexit, they all think it's a stupid own goal.
.
 
KTM
So the biggest decision our country has probably ever faced and as yet the Labour party and or Corbyn have yet to make a decision over it ? It simply amazes me that remainers see that as acceptable. How on earth can anyone decide to support labour when they take this stance ?
It is,as you said. Simple, every other person in country knows but both our opposition party and its leader are at best being guarded...at worst full of indecision and what's more to point leaving remainers unsure of wether they have representation or not. Labour are part of the problem not the cure at the moment.
The simple fact is the issue of remain or leave has torn the major parties apart, making strange bedfellows of some and odd enemies of others.
They've made a decision, they want to remain, however the country voted to leave, so now they have to play the game.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and flecc

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
They've made a decision, they want to remain, however the country voted to leave, so now they have to play the game.
They didn't vote KTM so how did you arrive at that ? Personally think if Labour did support remaining it may well pacify rhe situation. At least remainers would have a policy to work towards and support if a another GE was called..????
 
They didn't vote KTM so how did you arrive at that ? Personally think if Labour did support remaining it may well pacify rhe situation. At least remainers would have a policy to work towards and support if a another GE was called..????
They did actually, at the 2016 conference in Liverpool. It helps if you keep track of these things.

"LABOUR members still want to block Brexit and have voted unanimously in favour of a motion which backs having a second EU referendum."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1863431/labour-shows-it-still-has-not-accepted-brexit-as-it-votes-in-favour-of-having-second-eu-referendum-at-party-conference/
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and flecc

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
They did actually, at the 2016 conference in Liverpool. It helps if you keep track of these things.

"LABOUR members still want to block Brexit and have voted unanimously in favour of a motion which backs having a second EU referendum."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1863431/labour-shows-it-still-has-not-accepted-brexit-as-it-votes-in-favour-of-having-second-eu-referendum-at-party-conference/
KTM
Have a look at their more recent ( September. 2017) conference. They have not reached a decision supporting leaving or remaining, only support for a transitional deal for leaving..??? ( which is sort of contrary to their 2016 result of supporting remain)
 
A letter to your MP... if you want to use it.

Dear MP,

When people voted in the EU referendum last year, little was known about what a future deal with the European Union would look like.

16 months on, it is now very unlikely that any deal will be able to provide the same easy terms of trade and commerce with our most prosperous neighbour.

This is why I believe you, as my MP, should have a meaningful vote on the deal struck with the EU and why everyone in the country should also then be entitled to a Vote on the Deal.

I urge you therefore, by November 9th, to add your name to four amendments to the EU Withdrawal Bill.

• Amendment 7: ensures that Parliament has a vote on the Deal. This is an amendment tabled by Conservative MP Dominic Grieve. It has cross-party support.

• Amendment 120: provides for a referendum on the Deal before we leave the EU.

• Amendment 124: ensures that any deal negotiated by the Government must keep Britain in the Single Market.

• Amendment 131: preserves the rights of EU Citizens after Brexit.

I also want the Government to provide a guarantee that, whatever happens, EU citizens in the UK will be protected after Brexit and that we will stay in the Single Market. This is why I want you to sign amendment 124 and amendment 131 too.

I look forward to receiving confirmation that you have signed these amendments or your explanation if you are unable to or unwilling to.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,391
16,885
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
The trouble witn privacy is that it's all too easy for it to be seen as secrecy to hide something, creating rumour.
As Panorama explained, if I want to avoid paying 45% tax, I get part of my income paid to a shell company in a tax haven, the shell company is owned by a 'blind' trust, which uses the money to loan it back to me at zero interest. Thus, I would only pay tax on the part that is paid into my UK company or directly to me.
The Paradise Papers show the extend to which the super rich of this country use 'blind' trusts to squirrel away their wealth, and in probably the majority of cases, avoid paying taxes on earned income and capital gains.
Back in the old days when there were exchange controls, the problem wasn't big but now, you can buy online a ready made trust and limited companies in any tax haven you want so paying tax becomes optional for the super rich.
 
Google Labour conference 2017...I,ve no axe to grind either way..Personally would prefer Labour to have supported remain beffore the last election...we,d have a better idea of level of support had they done so.
I don;t need to google it, I research my posts before I post them, so I know there was no vote at the 2017 conference. Labour members have not have had the chance to vote since the vote I quoted, so that's the last one that stands on the opinion of labour members.

So what you're talking about is the position of the party, which is as I've said. Respecting the will of the people whilst, the leader and the members want to remain.

I'd suggest and I welcome you to prove me wrong.

Labour are hoping the Tories cock it up badly before we actually leave.

They can therefore get what they want. Get into power whilst staying in the EU with a mandate to change it from the inside.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and flecc

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
KTM
So the biggest decision our country has probably ever faced and as yet the Labour party and or Corbyn have yet to make a decision over it ? It simply amazes me that remainers see that as acceptable. How on earth can anyone decide to support labour when they take this stance ?
It is,as you said. Simple, every other person in country knows but both our opposition party and its leader are at best being guarded...at worst full of indecision and what's more to point leaving remainers unsure of wether they have representation or not. Labour are part of the problem not the cure at the moment.
The simple fact is the issue of remain or leave has torn the major parties apart, making strange bedfellows of some and odd enemies of others.
Steady there, you are in real danger of getting an approval tick from me..
Darn it have one, and don't let it happen again.
 

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
I don;t need to google it, I research my posts before I post them, so I know there was no vote at the 2017 conference. Labour members have not have had the chance to vote since the vote I quoted, so that's the last one that stands on the opinion of labour members.

So what you're talking about is the position of the party, which is as I've said. Respecting the will of the people whilst, the leader and the members want to remain.

I'd suggest and I welcome you to prove me wrong.

Labour are hoping the Tories cock it up badly before we actually leave.

They can therefore get what they want. Get into power whilst staying in the EU with a mandate to change it from the inside.
Yes, the quote I put in actually said no vote was allowed on Brexit/ Remain even though one had been requested. They did , however, agree to support the 4 year interim arrangement for LEAVING...
So how is that a support for remain . You must be only person in country arguing Labours stance on all this is simple. It is not. Blair and Benn still have support, Benn was eurosceptic but Blair is rallying ( or was) for remain. Corbyn says he wouldn't support leave ( in another referendum) but his actions do so now.. Corbyn has yet to decide his overall policy, he has stated in past he could never achieve change he wants within eu.Labour's stance is in coherent and lacks unity.( sort of like Governments)
 
Last edited:

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
Yes, the quote I put in actually said no vote was allowed on Brexit/ Remain even though one had been requested. They did , however, agree to support the 4 year interim arrangement for LEAVING...
So how is that a support for remain . You must be only person in country arguing Labours stance on all this is simple. It is not. Blair and Benn still have support, Benn was eurosceptic but Blair is rallying ( or was) for remain. Corbyn says he wouldn't support leave ( in another referendum) but his actions do so now.. Corbyn has yet to decide his overall policy, he has stated in past he could never achieve change he wants within eu.Labour's stance is in coherent and lacks unity.( sort of like Governments)
I have to agree with you.. it appears incoherent.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: PeterL and Zlatan

PeterL

Esteemed Pedelecer
Aug 19, 2017
998
172
Dundee
As Panorama explained, if I want to avoid paying 45% tax, I get part of my income paid to a shell company in a tax haven, the shell company is owned by a 'blind' trust, which uses the money to loan it back to me at zero interest. Thus, I would only pay tax on the part that is paid into my UK company or directly to me.
The Paradise Papers show the extend to which the super rich of this country use 'blind' trusts to squirrel away their wealth, and in probably the majority of cases, avoid paying taxes on earned income and capital gains.
Back in the old days when there were exchange controls, the problem wasn't big but now, you can buy online a ready made trust and limited companies in any tax haven you want so paying tax becomes optional for the super rich.
I'm sure that the Government are already on the case. Perhaps it won't satisfy everyone but there is a requirement for company transparency to come fairly soon, if not already in place. US nationals are generally completely sown up by the IRS with all bank accounts, including foreign ones required to furnish details to them. That of course is individuals, so quite how the multi-nationals work is beyond my knowledge - perhaps this Paradise revelations will explain further.
 
Last edited:

PeterL

Esteemed Pedelecer
Aug 19, 2017
998
172
Dundee
Agreed, it's one hell of a governmental shambles. Thank goodness the mainland EU countries are united on the subject of Brexit, they all think it's a stupid own goal.
.
There's a parallel here - can you image trying to get the contributors to this thread running the country / Brexit - perhaps John Wayne is the answer? Not so sure that the other 27 are united, but if I were them I can see the sense in waiting and watching.
 

Advertisers