Election Year or Fear!

[SithHappens]

Remember the media frenzy regarding starmers gifts last year, remember farage calling him out on it..

Wonder who has accepted the most gifts in the past year...now who could it be

[SithHappens]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c78n1dxl8wwo

The way Reform shed MPs there is more chance of them having no MPs by the next election than Starmer not making 5 years.

Got to be 30p next surely.

[Trickytreesreds]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c78n1dxl8wwo

The way Reform shed MPs there is more chance of them having no MPs by the next election than Starmer not making 5 years.

Got to be 30p next surely.

Clutching at straws Sith. Still lead the pols.
Meanwhile-
LAMMY - Has just given ?94.5 MILLION of U.K. taxpayers money to Syria! ? whilst becoming best friends. Even though Christians are still being butchered there
Apparently. we have absolutely no money at all . Though if its now a safer country, will Starmer follow Germany/Austria and start returning them from the UK . Will he automatically block every Syrian on the boats trying to claim asylum? I doubt it very much.

Asylum hotels- asylum claimants, working at just eat, Deliveroo etc. Not one has had their asylum claim ripped up and the hotels themselves have been exposed as running illegal side businesses from these government contract sites. Its off the charts and the silence is deafening https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF8h...=YorkshireRose

So its one year in power, and Labour/Starmer have plummeted even further. YOUGOV have the general public at 65% wanting them out and labelling them worse than the Tories.
Every little thing they do, gets folks backs up more and despite your best efforts sith, there is no hiding it.
Up to date, we've had assaults on pensioners/the sick/the disabled/farmers/schools/small-medium businesses and the most tax (more to come) payments ever, records being smashed of illegal boat crossings by economic migrants. So much for smash the gangs

Gaslight all you like, there's no hiding that and I haven't included all the personal gaffes

[Trickytreesreds]

Special mention needs adding to Labours former champion and closet Jew hater Corbyn and the other activist Sultana
Seems he's now forging a breakaway far left party, which will no doubt attract disgruntled Labour Marxists, as well as suck up the Muslim vote they have pampered to for so long. Big holes appearing fast. Sectarian politics being forged more and more.
His recruitment might be interesting though
'Regrettably with Robert Mugabe, Idi Amin and Gerry Adams unavailable, Corbyn will need to be more creative in terms of his shadow cabinet. Rumours are that he is in discussion with Ayatollah Khamenei – Minister for Women and Equalities, keen to relocate, as well as Salman Abedi (Home Secretary) and Anjem Choudary (Foreign Secretary), both of whom are willing to ‘work from home’.'

[Trickytreesreds]

There is an opinion that we should tax the rich to the maximum. Bleed them dry. Well it seems they have answer to that. Unfortunately, these are the people that start businesses and pump it into local economies, except when it doesn't pay to be here anymore.

[MadAmster]

There is an opinion that we should tax the rich to the maximum. Bleed them dry. Well it seems they have answer to that. Unfortunately, these are the people that start businesses and pump it into local economies, except when it doesn't pay to be here anymore.

We shouldn't "bleed them dry", far from it and I'm one of those who believe they should pay more than they do. The top 10% of individuals, the large companies, the multinationals can all afford to pay more than they do. In many cases they pay a smaller % of income/profit/whatever than someone on the average wage does. Make them pay more but not to the extent that they'll emigrate or move HQ to avoid UK tax.

We could start with closing all the loopholes people and businesses exploit to get out of paying as much, and in some cases any, tax.

Stop tax avoidance and evasion.

If we still aren't getting sufficient in in tax to cover outgoings, raise tax % on those with the broadest shoulders so that their tax burden is closer to the % "ordinary folk" pay.

Bleeding them dry would backfire. For no other reason than that those with money and businesses can, and would, move if "bled dry". However, more frequent visits to the Blood Transfusion Service shouldn't be an issue, unless they are ultra greedy.

Parallel to the above, we should also be looking at benefit fraud but should always remember that benefit fraud is about 1/10th of tax evasion/avoidance.

Those that can afford to pay more, should. Those that can't, shouldn't.

As I've written before, on many an occasion, decrease the tax burden on the poorer 60% or 70%. Up it on the richest 10% and big business. They'll suffer short term "pain" and might have to postpone buying their 5th yacht or whatever but the extra the poorer get will be spent on goods and services, increasing profits and dividends, creating jobs and gathering yet more tax from the bigger profits, dividends and the wages from the jobs created as well as a reduction in dole, Universal Credit and other benefits...

[ramAnag]

We shouldn't "bleed them dry", far from it and I'm one of those who believe they should pay more than they do. The top 10% of individuals, the large companies, the multinationals can all afford to pay more than they do. In many cases they pay a smaller % of income/profit/whatever than someone on the average wage does. Make them pay more but not to the extent that they'll emigrate or move HQ to avoid UK tax.

We could start with closing all the loopholes people and businesses exploit to get out of paying as much, and in some cases any, tax.

Stop tax avoidance and evasion.

If we still aren't getting sufficient in in tax to cover outgoings, raise tax % on those with the broadest shoulders so that their tax burden is closer to the % "ordinary folk" pay.

Bleeding them dry would backfire. For no other reason than that those with money and businesses can, and would, move if "bled dry". However, more frequent visits to the Blood Transfusion Service shouldn't be an issue, unless they are ultra greedy.

Parallel to the above, we should also be looking at benefit fraud but should always remember that benefit fraud is about 1/10th of tax evasion/avoidance.

Those that can afford to pay more, should. Those that can't, shouldn't.

As I've written before, on many an occasion, decrease the tax burden on the poorer 60% or 70%. Up it on the richest 10% and big business. They'll suffer short term "pain" and might have to postpone buying their 5th yacht or whatever but the extra the poorer get will be spent on goods and services, increasing profits and dividends, creating jobs and gathering yet more tax from the bigger profits, dividends and the wages from the jobs created as well as a reduction in dole, Universal Credit and other benefits...

Thought about writing much the same, MA, but then thought it would be a waste of time.

What you are suggesting is just common sense and decency. I agree entirely, but some will choose to interpret it as bleeding the rich dry which no one on here has ever advocated.

[swaledale]

We shouldn't "bleed them dry", far from it and I'm one of those who believe they should pay more than they do. The top 10% of individuals, the large companies, the multinationals can all afford to pay more than they do. In many cases they pay a smaller % of income/profit/whatever than someone on the average wage does. Make them pay more but not to the extent that they'll emigrate or move HQ to avoid UK tax.

We could start with closing all the loopholes people and businesses exploit to get out of paying as much, and in some cases any, tax.

Stop tax avoidance and evasion.

If we still aren't getting sufficient in in tax to cover outgoings, raise tax % on those with the broadest shoulders so that their tax burden is closer to the % "ordinary folk" pay.

Bleeding them dry would backfire. For no other reason than that those with money and businesses can, and would, move if "bled dry". However, more frequent visits to the Blood Transfusion Service shouldn't be an issue, unless they are ultra greedy.

Parallel to the above, we should also be looking at benefit fraud but should always remember that benefit fraud is about 1/10th of tax evasion/avoidance.

Those that can afford to pay more, should. Those that can't, shouldn't.

As I've written before, on many an occasion, decrease the tax burden on the poorer 60% or 70%. Up it on the richest 10% and big business. They'll suffer short term "pain" and might have to postpone buying their 5th yacht or whatever but the extra the poorer get will be spent on goods and services, increasing profits and dividends, creating jobs and gathering yet more tax from the bigger profits, dividends and the wages from the jobs created as well as a reduction in dole, Universal Credit and other benefits...

Indeed and this myth that the very rich will leave the country if taxed more is just that, one perpetrated funnily enough by the very rich through the media which some own. Oh but quelle surprise, these very rich people moaning, already live in tax havens, or have their money squirreled away in tax havens.

As has been pointed out very often, a significant majority of people in the upper wealth bracket, wouldn't move because they like living in the UK, have family ties and appreciate its a safe place to live and do business. Again as has been pointed out before Scandinavian countries like for instance Norway ahve high tax rates yet their economy hasn't suffered. What we are talking about is fair not punitive tax rates and a clamp down on tax avoidance schemes.


There certainly needs to be a change of law concerning the operation of businesses that are headquartered elsewhere for tax reasons, on the ownership of companies whereby they are registered in places like the Isle of Man etc. I'd personally prohibit them from operating in the UK. Then theres the question of certain banks in overseas territories that are at best opaque as to where the funds originate from and who earns what.

[Trickytreesreds]

Over to you Starmer. Considering your previous job and then calling for LC to be arrested with all the far right (lol) for naughty words. Explain this sort of crap to me please, that you allow our judiciary to keep doing. Your hard line stance that was totally wrong during those riots, makes a mockery of your sense of justice


This guy sums it up, with the anger simmering away

https://m.facebook.com/groups/641507174698114/permalink/1161459356036224/?

[MadAmster]

He doesn't want to hear it's up to the judges but, despite the judge in the LC case having been swayed by government outpourings, IT IS UP TO THEM.

There are some discrepancies in sentencing but, in the main, they are reasonable and proportionate.

LC got way too much time, IMO.

The bloke who mowed down the 5 year old on a scooter may have had 21 previous convictions but what were they for? If none of them are driving offences they are not, IMO, relevant to the sentence he was given. He could be a thief, a burglar, a football hooligan, whatever. GBH isn't relevant to a Road Traffic Accident. What were the circumstances? We don't know. If it's not his first motoring offence then those should have been taken into account. Having now seen the video, I think the sentence handed down is roughly in line with what would have been given in the Netherlands, however, we are notoriously weak on jail sentences for motoring offences. Over the limit? First time an 8 to 16 hour ban, basically enough to give you time to sober up, unless of course you're absolutely legless.

However, released after 2.5 months served from a 14 month sentence (that was too low considering what happened AND he drove off without checking on the child) is a mere 17.8% of time served. That is utterly wrong.

[ramAnag]

One thing that I did expect to have been resolved via the election of a new Labour government was the Post Office scandal. After the TV programme of 18(?) or so months ago and the almost immediate elevation of Alan Bates to a ‘Sir’ I imagined these falsely accused individuals would have been home and dry by now. How wrong can you be?

It seems that the only winners are the ‘legal eagles’ involved and that, just like the contaminated blood scandal, the victims’ wait goes on and on.

Think it took 27 years to reach an eventual conclusion over Hillsborough. How can that be? Let’s hope the outcome of investigation into the seemingly ridiculous length of such public enquiries doesn’t depend on a…public enquiry.

[MadAmster]

rA, INQUIRY.

[Geoff Parkstone]

No votes in it, just a small pool of wronged post office "managers" likely owed a not insignificant amount of compensation to come out of Reeves' growing budget blackhole

[Andy_Faber]

One thing that I did expect to have been resolved via the election of a new Labour government was the Post Office scandal. After the TV programme of 18(?) or so months ago and the almost immediate elevation of Alan Bates to a ‘Sir’ I imagined these falsely accused individuals would have been home and dry by now. How wrong can you be?

It seems that the only winners are the ‘legal eagles’ involved and that, just like the contaminated blood scandal, the victims’ wait goes on and on.

Think it took 27 years to reach an eventual conclusion over Hillsborough. How can that be? Let’s hope the outcome of investigation into the seemingly ridiculous length of such public enquiries doesn’t depend on a…public enquiry.

Agreed, the overarching ‘national shame’ is not just the occurrence of these scandals individually but HMG(s) and other ‘powers that be’s reluctance/inability to bring them to a conclusion

[ramAnag]

rA, INQUIRY.

Mea culpa. Apologies, you’re quite right.